Salt Lake City: Official Development News Thread - Part 5

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

I couldn't be more ecstatic about this.

Brewvies is great, but they shouldn't hold a monopoly on serving alcohol at the theaters.

I don't think Brewvies should be worried at all. For one, Megaplex will certainly never serve alcohol, so that's half of the movie business in Utah already that won't compete with them, including the closest theater to them (Gateway). Cinemark may, but with the way Utah liquor laws work, it would take them a long time to get a liquor license, and even if they do, there's no guarantee they would get a license for every theater. And considering Utah's bizarre liquor laws anyway, they may just decide it's not worth it.

Other theaters serving alcohol probably wouldn't take much business away from Brewviews anyway. For one, Brewvies is a bar - people go there not just to drink at a movie, but to have an adult-friendly experience, and to have a bar-like experience with a movie. You can finish up the movie and play pool, for example, or hang out on the patio and drink like you would at any other bar. And you don't have to worry about people bringing their kids. People probably wouldn't skip Brewvies for somewhere else. It would just get more people to drink at movies, because most people aren't going to go that far out of their way just to get a drink with their movie, but they might get one if it's convenient for them to do so.

Even if the Broadway and Tower theaters start selling alcohol, that probably wouldn't affect much, because they show very different kinds of movies.

Their biggest concern would be if another bar theater opened, which would be difficult because the start-up costs for a movie theater are insanely high.

First of all Megaplex has 15 locations in the state of Utah. Cinemark has 16 Locations with 2 more on the way, AMC has 3, Reagle has 1, plus all the independent operators. So 1/4th is probably more accurate. They are the second biggest operator in Utah after Cinemark.

Second... Why do you think Megaplex wouldn’t sell alcohol? Megaplex is operated by the same company who operates Vivint Arena and Smith’s Ballpark...and they serve alcohol at both of thoes locations. Megaplex is slow to react to market standards... but they do.

The theater at gateway is operated by Megaplex but owned by the mall (in fact Cinemark was originally going to operate it). I actually predict that the new owners of the mall will not renew the contract with Megaplex... unless they are willing to bring their amenities up to modern standards, witch they seem unlikely to do.

There has also been 1 or 2 developers over the past several years with interested in installing a theater in central downtown... it could be operated by Cinemark, AMC, Reagle, or even Megaplex if they leave Gateway.

Megaplex is not as clean cut operator like you might think. They did ruthless things to push the independent operators out (Trolly Corner for example) while at the same time they intentionally incur fines in order to do things that hurt the bigger operators. Megaplex has really poor ethics and their theaters are becoming very outdated compared to the competition. I honestly think they will be bought out by one of the big 3 within the next 5 years. Cinemark would be my best guess.

[bob rulz]

Originally Posted by ajiuO

First of all Megaplex has 15 locations in the state of Utah. Cinemark has 16 Locations with 2 more on the way, AMC has 3, Reagle has 1, plus all the independent operators. So 1/4th is probably more accurate. They are the second biggest operator in Utah after Cinemark.

In terms of ticket sales/revenue, they are undoubtedly more than 1/4. Maybe not quite 1/2, but I was generalizing. Especially in the Salt Lake Valley. Point is, it's a significant number.

Second... Why do you think Megaplex wouldn’t sell alcohol? Megaplex is operated by the same company who operates Vivint Arena and Smith’s Ballpark...and they serve alcohol at both of thoes locations. Megaplex is slow to react to market standards... but they do.

Serving alcohol at sporting events =/= serving alcohol at movies. Sporting venues HAVE to serve alcohol. Not literally, but you understand what I mean. Movies do not. If other theaters begin serving alcohol and Megaplex is clearly losing business, then and only then will they do so. We are talking about the company who would refuse to show certain movies. They probably stopped doing that because it was horrible PR and gave a lot of business to their competitors, but not serving alcohol wouldn't be nearly as contentious. Point is, until there was clear evidence it was hurting their bottom line, they wouldn't do it. The evidence that not serving alcohol at sporting events would hurt their bottom line is clear and obvious. At movie theaters, I don't think it matters.

The theater at gateway is operated by Megaplex but owned by the mall (in fact Cinemark was originally going to operate it). I actually predict that the new owners of the mall will not renew the contract with Megaplex... unless they are willing to bring their amenities up to modern standards, witch they seem unlikely to do.

Unless you've heard something from a reliable source, this is pure speculation.

There has also been 1 or 2 developers over the past several years with interested in installing a theater in central downtown... it could be operated by Cinemark, AMC, Reagle, or even Megaplex if they leave Gateway.

I've heard this rumor for a long time. It could happen, but it may not, and there's no concrete plans to do so yet.

Megaplex is not as clean cut operator like you might think. They did ruthless things to push the independent operators out (Trolly Corner for example) while at the same time they intentionally incur fines in order to do things that hurt the bigger operators. Megaplex has really poor ethics and their theaters are becoming very outdated compared to the competition. I honestly think they will be bought out by one of the big 3 within the next 5 years. Cinemark would be my best guess.

Oh I don't deny by any means that Megaplex engages in poor business practices. But that does not in any way mean they're going to sell to a bigger company. Of course it's possible, but Megaplex still has some of the busiest movie theaters in the state, if not the country (Jordan Commons, The District, etc), business practices be damned. Do you think Megaplex is doing anything that the big movie theater chains aren't doing? I worked for Cinemark, and I have several friends who have worked for Megaplex. Their levels of poor employee treatment, shameless cost-cutting, and general shadiness are comparable.

Also Cinemark buying Megaplex would probably be blocked by the courts because it would essentially turn the movie theater industry in Utah into a monopoly. Or they could buy some Megaplex locations but have to sell off others. More than likely they would be bought by someone who wants to get a bigger foothold into the market, like AMC or Regal. That's even assuming Megaplex does sell.....which is, again, pure speculation.

Either way, none of this changes my argument for why Brewvies has nothing to worry about, even if other theaters start serving alcohol. The point of Brewvies is not just that they serve alcohol, but that you can get a different experience watching a movie, and that won't go away.

[flyinpenguin]

I would love it if someone better would buy Megaplex. Would need to be Regal or AMC. I cannot stand the amount of advertising they plaster all over the theater. It does seem to have gotten slightly better recently. Zero rez rugs as you enter. Certain theaters with sponsored names. (although the Washake sponsorship seems to have soured that idea) And it's not any cheaper to see a movie there, and have to subject myself to all that extra advertising. I like the AMC in West Jordan which was my favorite until Regal opened. Every seat is a recliner and has a tray table.

It seems that Megaplex will soon have to invest a considerable amount to upgrade to match what AMC and Regal are offering in the market.

Originally Posted by bob rulz

In terms of ticket sales/revenue, they are undoubtedly more than 1/4. Maybe not quite 1/2, but I was generalizing. Especially in the Salt Lake Valley. Point is, it's a significant number.



Serving alcohol at sporting events =/= serving alcohol at movies. Sporting venues HAVE to serve alcohol. Not literally, but you understand what I mean. Movies do not. If other theaters begin serving alcohol and Megaplex is clearly losing business, then and only then will they do so. We are talking about the company who would refuse to show certain movies. They probably stopped doing that because it was horrible PR and gave a lot of business to their competitors, but not serving alcohol wouldn't be nearly as contentious. Point is, until there was clear evidence it was hurting their bottom line, they wouldn't do it. The evidence that not serving alcohol at sporting events would hurt their bottom line is clear and obvious. At movie theaters, I don't think it matters.



Unless you've heard something from a reliable source, this is pure speculation.



I've heard this rumor for a long time. It could happen, but it may not, and there's no concrete plans to do so yet.



Oh I don't deny by any means that Megaplex engages in poor business practices. But that does not in any way mean they're going to sell to a bigger company. Of course it's possible, but Megaplex still has some of the busiest movie theaters in the state, if not the country (Jordan Commons, The District, etc), business practices be damned. Do you think Megaplex is doing anything that the big movie theater chains aren't doing? I worked for Cinemark, and I have several friends who have worked for Megaplex. Their levels of poor employee treatment, shameless cost-cutting, and general shadiness are comparable.

Also Cinemark buying Megaplex would probably be blocked by the courts because it would essentially turn the movie theater industry in Utah into a monopoly. Or they could buy some Megaplex locations but have to sell off others. More than likely they would be bought by someone who wants to get a bigger foothold into the market, like AMC or Regal. That's even assuming Megaplex does sell.....which is, again, pure speculation.

Either way, none of this changes my argument for why Brewvies has nothing to worry about, even if other theaters start serving alcohol. The point of Brewvies is not just that they serve alcohol, but that you can get a different experience watching a movie, and that won't go away.

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by flyinpenguin

I would love it if someone better would buy Megaplex. Would need to be Regal or AMC. I cannot stand the amount of advertising they plaster all over the theater. It does seem to have gotten slightly better recently. Zero rez rugs as you enter. Certain theaters with sponsored names. (although the Washake sponsorship seems to have soured that idea) And it's not any cheaper to see a movie there, and have to subject myself to all that extra advertising. I like the AMC in West Jordan which was my favorite until Regal opened. Every seat is a recliner and has a tray table.

It seems that Megaplex will soon have to invest a considerable amount to upgrade to match what AMC and Regal are offering in the market.

I don’t care for AMC at all. They are by far the most expensive. They Only become competitive if you are willing to adopt their paid membership, witch is a bunch of nonsense. I’m sure they offer nicer theaters in other states but the ones in Utah are not very nice compared to the others.

I do like the Reagle location. They have good concessions and the trays are nice... although I like Cinemarks actually reclining seats better. The nicest reclining seat I’ve ever sat in is actually the ones that megaplex has it gateway. There are only a few of them and they are premium seats... they are actually two way adjustable... and have trays.


As for the other guys comments ( too hard to do multiple quotes on an iPhone )

Courts would not block Cinemark. They have done the same thing in other states, and purchasing megaplex would not in anyway stop regal or AMC from expanding here. Cinemark is very dominant in states like California and Texas, while the others are dominant else where. There was actually a time when AMC dominated Utah. They ended up selling all of their Utah locations except for the Layton Cineplex Odeon, which has since been remodeled.

You are correct about megaplex bringing in a lot more customers. One of the biggest reasons for this is that Cinemark is converting to reclining seats which has drastically reduce their capacity. They are actually innthe prosess of building more theaters because of this. There currently remodeling their Ogden location... I believe the Salt Lake century theaters will be next and the dollar theater in west Valley will be closed.

This isnt going to continue forever though. As I said megaplex is slow to react but they do react. Megaplex will also be converting to reclining seats. They are starting in Utah County... This is going to dramatically alter their capacity.

[Stenar]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Also Cinemark buying Megaplex would probably be blocked by the courts because it would essentially turn the movie theater industry in Utah into a monopoly. Or they could buy some Megaplex locations but have to sell off others. More than likely they would be bought by someone who wants to get a bigger foothold into the market, like AMC or Regal. That's even assuming Megaplex does sell.....which is, again, pure speculation.

Either way, none of this changes my argument for why Brewvies has nothing to worry about, even if other theaters start serving alcohol. The point of Brewvies is not just that they serve alcohol, but that you can get a different experience watching a movie, and that won't go away.

The Justice Department would most likely not block any such purchase. They only block mergers and acquisitions above a certain size. Generally, if an acquisition was going to give a firm a regional or national monopoly, they might intervene.

[PhilipDDG]

"He...hel...hello-o?? 459 Dirella Street?" (Arcane film reference.)

Please don't hurt me. I have an honest question that I truly don't believe is controversial. On previous posts I've read references to the S-line. The general view is that development along that transit route is especially promising and pleasing. For those that feel this way, I'm curious to hear opinions about why that particular corridor seems to be so successful. I drive through SLC on occasion en-route between Santa Rosa and Denver, and I know little about your city in general or the S-line in particular. But the interplay of site and situation, and the historical and sociological factors involved in making one swatch of urban fabric more desirable than another all interest me. I'm wondering about the perceived success of S-line-related development and proposals in relation to these topics. I'd appreciate any thoughts.
Signed: Eunice Burns ("I am not "A" Eunice Burns, I am "THE" Eunice Burns.)

[ajiuO]

Originally Posted by PhilipDDG

"He...hel...hello-o?? 459 Dirella Street?" (Arcane film reference.)

Please don't hurt me. I have an honest question that I truly don't believe is controversial. On previous posts I've read references to the S-line. The general view is that development along that transit route is especially promising and pleasing. For those that feel this way, I'm curious to hear opinions about why that particular corridor seems to be so successful. I drive through SLC on occasion en-route between Santa Rosa and Denver, and I know little about your city in general or the S-line in particular. But the interplay of site and situation, and the historical and sociological factors involved in making one swatch of urban fabric more desirable than another all interest me. I'm wondering about the perceived success of S-line-related development and proposals in relation to these topics. I'd appreciate any thoughts.
Signed: Eunice Burns ("I am not "A" Eunice Burns, I am "THE" Eunice Burns.)

I think sugarhouse has a lot of appeal for various reasons. I have considered relocating there from down town. I like it because it has a nice downtown vibe without some of the pitfalls of Salt Lake. In Salt Lake I’m constantly being approached by panhandlers. It’s gotten to the point where it’s almost a harassing feeling ... I never experienced this in Sugarhouse.

Also sugarhouse has a much nicer variety of amenities which I would take advantage of. They have a huge variety of places to eat, a nice walkable Park, a nice movie theater... downtown Salt Lake doesn’t have any of that. The s-line is Nice development opportunity because it extends the access to sugarhouse and also to other areas.

[asies1981]

Photo update by a new BSL contributor of the 60 missing middle units underway in the Marmalade/West Capitol Hill.

[jubguy3]

Originally Posted by asies1981

Photo update by a new BSL contributor of the 60 missing middle units underway in the Marmalade/West Capitol Hill.

I really love this project. Its good to see units with larger square footage that still conform to urbanist ideals. This is the type of housing I said I wished more Utahns were drawn to in my last post - conforms to the needs of larger families but also doesn't consume significant amounts of land.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

The redevelopment of this area is one of my redevelopment fantasies. I would love to see this whole area overlaid with small blocks and tied into the Glendale, Popular Grove, Fairpark and Rose Park neighborhoods. This could become a really great urban neighborhood and provide a lot of energy to downtown. I have always been surprised that the Gadsby plant stays there despite the emissions it must emit. I know it is a natural gas plant, but I would like to see it closed and Pacific Corp divest this land. I am sure it would fetch a pretty penny.
[IMG][/IMG]

[linguisize]

*Checks forum after a few weeks of giving up*

Originally Posted by ajiuO

First of all Megaplex has 15 locations in the state of Utah. Cinemark has 16 Locations with 2 more on the way, AMC has 3...

Yup.... still fruitless arguments. Maybe I'll try again in a few weeks.

[TonyAnderson]

Originally Posted by Makid

I think a small grocer would do well there. Harmons is bigger and is more of a super market then just a grocer. I think with the apartments going in on the block as well as those across the street, a medium sized grocer would do well. This is before the other recently started or completed projects along 3rd West.

With the Downtown Streetcar planned to go along 2nd South, It could help those that live near the gateway as well unless they get a small to medium grocer there as well.

It's crazy to think downtown has one grocer (Harmons) while Sugarhouse has Smith's, Whole Foods, and Natural Grocer all within about two blocks.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by TonyAnderson

It's crazy to think downtown has one grocer (Harmons) while Sugarhouse has Smith's, Whole Foods, and Natural Grocer all within about two blocks.

SH has way more residents than downtown. One of the most densely populated parts of the city vs one of the least.

[airhero]

It isn't odd for neighborhoods just outside a city's CBD to have a higher density residential population than the CBD itself. DT Salt Lake has the tallest buildings and looks dense, but as in most cities, it's mostly office. If you go a few blocks east to Central City/East Downtown, it as a whole has higher density residential than downtown itself, and probably Sugar House. In the Central City neighborhood, depending on where you live, you have a Smith's, Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Natural Grocers, and Sprouts all within 2 blocks.

[Liberty Wellsian]

Originally Posted by airhero

It isn't odd for neighborhoods just outside a city's CBD to have a higher density residential population than the CBD itself. DT Salt Lake has the tallest buildings and looks dense, but as in most cities, it's mostly office. If you go a few blocks east to Central City/East Downtown, it as a whole has higher density residential than downtown itself, and probably Sugar House. In the Central City neighborhood, depending on where you live, you have a Smith's, Trader Joe's, Whole Foods, Natural Grocers, and Sprouts all within 2 blocks.

It definitely does. IIRC the highest density by Census tract in 2010 was right there. That was before all the new development.

[AllOutOfBubbleGum]

This is just a rumor but something some on here have said would be awesome to see happen.

The person I spoke to has direct access to Peter Metcalf CEO of Black Diamond. But to get to the dirty ... he and a few other outdoor execs are pissed at the outdoor retail show pulling out of Utah so easily, he like the idea of defending public lands but not at the sake of moving the show and using their business status as a political position. He believes their is a middle ground on all things and didn't like the ultimatum the ODR people took. Also said that it was a minority of the ODR participants that got their way not the majority.

He and others have talked about having another show in Utah (possible in the winter) and it be centered around the consumer, maybe calling it Winter Fest.

I know that's been addressed here. So I'm telling you there is a chance.

[Utah_Dave]

Originally Posted by AllOutOfBubbleGum

This is just a rumor but something some on here have said would be awesome to see happen.

The person I spoke to has direct access to Peter Metcalf CEO of Black Diamond. But to get to the dirty ... he and a few other outdoor execs are pissed at the outdoor retail show pulling out of Utah so easily, he like the idea of defending public lands but not at the sake of moving the show and using their business status as a political position. He believes their is a middle ground on all things and didn't like the ultimatum the ODR people took. Also said that it was a minority of the ODR participants that got their way not the majority.

He and others have talked about having another show in Utah (possible in the winter) and it be centered around the consumer, maybe calling it Winter Fest.

I know that's been addressed here. So I'm telling you there is a chance.

I thought Mr Metcalf was one of the leading voices calling for the OR to pull out of Utah?

[airhero]

Originally Posted by AllOutOfBubbleGum

This is just a rumor but something some on here have said would be awesome to see happen.

The person I spoke to has direct access to Peter Metcalf CEO of Black Diamond. But to get to the dirty ... he and a few other outdoor execs are pissed at the outdoor retail show pulling out of Utah so easily, he like the idea of defending public lands but not at the sake of moving the show and using their business status as a political position. He believes their is a middle ground on all things and didn't like the ultimatum the ODR people took. Also said that it was a minority of the ODR participants that got their way not the majority.

He and others have talked about having another show in Utah (possible in the winter) and it be centered around the consumer, maybe calling it Winter Fest.

I know that's been addressed here. So I'm telling you there is a chance.

If this is true, then Peter Metcalf screwed up royally. The convention exodus talk gained steam after he suggested OR move to another state.

"If they don’t want to change their policies, we should respond with our dollars, with our conventioneers, with our money, and take this show to a state that is much more aligned with our values." - Peter Metcalf

That sounds like an ultimatum to me. Now seeing the damage he's created, he wants to change the memory of what happened. But if he can get a good group together and salvage some of the mess that's been created, I think he could redeem himself a little.

To be fair, I think OR would have left regardless. They've been eyeing a bigger, sexier city for a long time. They just needed a reason bigger than the lack of a CCH to divorce themselves from their SL and Utah friends, with whom they had strong ties after two decades of OR shows. And when our state leaders, emboldened by the new administration, started to act ridiculously, they gave OR a bigger reason. In that sense the fight against our state leaders on Bears Ears was little more than political opportunism. I'm not sure the show organizers themselves had a huge desire to leave (tho clearly not against the idea), but the big retailers like REI and Patagonia did, and when they took a stand, suddenly it made more sense to leave.

[Always Sunny in SLC]

Originally Posted by airhero

If this is true, then Peter Metcalf screwed up royally. The convention exodus talk gained steam after he suggested OR move to another state.

"If they don’t want to change their policies, we should respond with our dollars, with our conventioneers, with our money, and take this show to a state that is much more aligned with our values." - Peter Metcalf

That sounds like an ultimatum to me. Now seeing the damage he's created, he wants to change the memory of what happened. But if he can get a good group together and salvage some of the mess that's been created, I think he could redeem himself a little.

To be fair, I think OR would have left regardless. They've been eyeing a bigger, sexier city for a long time. They just needed a reason bigger than the lack of a CCH to divorce themselves from their SL and Utah friends. Then our state leaders, emboldened by the new administration, started to act ridiculously, and OR had a bigger reason. In that sense the fight against our state leaders on Bears Ears was little more than political opportunism. I'm not sure the show organizers themselves had a huge desire to leave (tho clearly not against the idea), but the big retailers like REI and Patagonia did, and when they took a stand, suddenly it made more sense to leave.

I am not real familiar with how the vendors operated day-to-day, but I wonder what they value more a vibrant nightlife/culture or easy/fast access to the mountains and water? The fact that they moved makes me think the former, but time will tell once the show has a few years under their belt. I agree that Bears Ears was not the reason for the departure. If it was I would be upset too that the organization I am apart of made a huge financial decision that was wholly political. My guess, they will be there for many years and overall very happy, but SLC will have a chance to get them back in 10 or 15 years once enough time has passed.

[delts145]

Did I miss something, but has the SLC Thread been demoted? I know one of the moderators finally got around to cleaning the thread up, but did they also demote the thread as a non-sticky?