Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[J.OT13]

Honestly, I don't think Edmonton got such a bad deal. Could have been better, but overall, the City is better for it.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

Also if that investment kept Stantec in town, that alone was worth it as they are a huge employer and were weighing options for a new head quarters and not all of them involved Edmonton from what i understand.

Both of the Stantec options in Edmonton involved a lot of public money. The Galleria (new theatres and such supported by office leases to UAlberta and later AHS (I heard the AHS offer was initially refused by the Galleria proponent)) was going to be a lot of provincial money, and the province refused because adding office space to downtown Edmonton which even a decade ago had a surplus of office space was folly.

The City of Edmonton instead took them up on it. Subsidizing the arena. Leasing an unnecessary addition to office space for City of Edmonton employees. Throw a billion bucks into redevelopment and yeah, you're going to make a place more nice. And yeah, without something, I bet as costs dropped in Calgary both Stantec and Enbridge would have moved to Calgary.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

In all fairness, Taxes from those structures plus the upcoming CWB Tower over 150+ years plus a 5 star hotel, 100's of downtown homes, casino,community rink,The jobs that come with all of those ect. I mean as far as modern arena deals go Edmonton got something out of the deal. Downtown was an empty and lowly part of the city and has been full of life since ice district phase 1. And the efforts to beautify downtown has reflected in that as well, well outside ice district, big example of that is jasper ave. Also if that investment kept Stantec in town, that alone was worth it as they are a huge employer and were weighing options for a new head quarters and not all of them involved Edmonton from what i understand.

Not saying i agree with public funds being poured into arenas especially at a provincial level. But IF it results in what has happened in Edmonton, it at the very least takes the sting away a bit as it was a partnership between the city and darryl katz to make it all happen and i can see the argument for the city to fund a large portion of it as it makes Edmonton a more livable and attractive city, brings Business, Tourism and Events to downtown. In the end it was a win and a slightly less but still substantial win for The oilers and the city.

And Let's not forget, phase 2 and 3 of Ice District is still coming, That's 12 additional towers. 2500 units planned so far

https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/oilers-owner...district-north-of-rogers-place-1.5855030

These districts are what gets sold to the pubic. Let's not fall for the marketing pitch. There is no reason the district couldn't have gone ahead for a much smaller public investment (which I wouldn't support) without burning public dollars to build a stadium. The city renting one of these 3 skyscrapers notwithstanding, nearly every city offers incentives and breaks for commercial development on top of the public investment in this district. The stadium deal ends up a fraction of the public input into this generic entertainment district

There's national developers that would compete with each other to build a similar generic entertainment neighbourhood in Calgary for a quarter of the investment dollars in that deal. I presume the majority of the people that complained about a internationally recognized $25 million pedestrian bridge are more than happy about the stadium deal similar to the defense of the Ice District in Edmonton. These deals make people happy.

Phase 2 and 3 are just plans.

[J.OT13]

So Edmontonians, has the new arena attracted a high number of new events and concerts compared to Northlands?

[EpicPonyTime]

All I see in that photo of Ice District is the displacement of the vulnerable people in the community north of Rogers for fancy condo towers they wouldn't even be allowed into.

Which, I suppose, is a benefit according to some people.

[blueandgoldguy]

Anyone who has looked at annual poll star numbers of the busiest 200 arenas knows that Edmonton has fewer attendees/concerts at the new arena vs. the old one 7 - 10 years ago.

Of course, some factors determining the number of concerts Edmonton attracts per year are out of city's control. I think geographic isolation and the low dollar would be the primary reasons. If a concert tour is traveling through the Northwest (Seattle and Vancouver), it's a 10 - 12 hour drive to Calgary and if their arena is not available or incompatible with the requirements of the stage setup, then you would be looking at a 13 hour drive. Any concert tours coming from the east may have to travel 13 or more hours from Winnipeg (5 hours from Saskatoon but due to the city size they are limited by the number of concerts they may draw). From what I understand, people within the industry are increasingly concerned with the bottom line - does it make sense to incur all the additional travel costs of traveling to a remote location (plus set up costs of the stage) which will cut into the profits of a single concert....or would it make more sense to just add an additional concert to a location that is already scheduled on the tour?

The decline in concerts for Edmonton just goes to show that a new arena won't live up to the promise of providing additional nights of entertainment as intended. Something that I'm sure will be ignored by proponents of a new arena in Saskatoon.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

Anyone who has looked at annual poll star numbers of the busiest 200 arenas knows that Edmonton has fewer attendees/concerts at the new arena vs. the old one 7 - 10 years ago.

Of course, some factors determining the number of concerts Edmonton attracts per year are out of city's control. I think geographic isolation and the low dollar would be the primary reasons. If a concert tour is traveling through the Northwest (Seattle and Vancouver), it's a 10 - 12 hour drive to Calgary and if their arena is not available or incompatible with the requirements of the stage setup, then you would be looking at a 13 hour drive. Any concert tours coming from the east may have to travel 13 or more hours from Winnipeg (5 hours from Saskatoon but due to the city size they are limited by the number of concerts they may draw). From what I understand, people within the industry are increasingly concerned with the bottom line - does it make sense to incur all the additional travel costs of traveling to a remote location (plus set up costs of the stage) which will cut into the profits of a single concert....or would it make more sense to just add an additional concert to a location that is already scheduled on the tour?

The decline in concerts for Edmonton just goes to show that a new arena won't live up to the promise of providing additional nights of entertainment as intended. Something that I'm sure will be ignored by proponents of a new arena in Saskatoon.

So, the new arena has not helped to attract more concerts and events? How do numbers compare to the 40 year old Saddledome?

I wonder about Ottawa as well. Our location between the two largest cities in Canada can be both an advantage and disadvantage. Advantage because our proximity to them makes us an easy and cheap stop for tours, and a good option for residents of those markets if they want to get tickets, but disadvantage because we are competing with them.

The location of the current arena itself is a disadvantage as it's only reasonably accessible by car, but a new downtown arena would change that.

[thurmas]

I think a big reason for less concerts in Canada especially Western Canada was the vaccine mandate. I have seen tons of country acts that used to play Winnipeg like Alan Jackson as an example that now only go up to Fargo or Grand Forks to play. Also in general I see very little to no license plates from north dakota and Minnesota in manitoba compared to pre covid-19 when I always saw tons here.

[Hackslack]

Does the city of Edmonton benefit at all from concession revenue, and/or ticket tax fee? - or whatever it is called for the user to help pay for the new stadium

[Djeffery]

It's almost assured that concerts would increase in Edmonton with a new arena in Calgary. 2 stops in large cities close together makes it worthwhile to go there. I think a new arena in Saskatoon also helps this case.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Hackslack

Does the city of Edmonton benefit at all from concession revenue, and/or ticket tax fee? - or whatever it is called for the user to help pay for the new stadium

The Edmonton arena deal:

Element			Estimated Cost	CRL		Other City Funding	EAC Lease Funding	EAC Cash*	Ticket Surcharge	Other
Rogers Place		$483.5		$145		$81				$112.8			$19.7		$125

Winter Garden		$56.8		$25		 $0.1				$25				$6.7

Pedestrian Corridor	$15			$15

LRT Connection		$7			$7

Community Rink	$24.9		$14		$0.1					$0.3							$10.5

Arena Land		$26.5		$25		$0.5								$1	 	 

Totals			$613.7		$231		$81.7			$137.8			$27.7		$125				$10.5

Effectively the Katz group paid $290.5 million, but a large part of that is structured over time (the lease and ticket surcharge).


(sorry, I thoughts tabs would make this work and was mistaken)

[blueandgoldguy]

This is OT since I'm talking about Buffalo, but I saw some renders of their stadium...and talk about a bland forgettable design, both inside and outside. Apparently $1.5 billion doesn't go as far as it used to.

[jonny24]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

This is OT since I'm talking about Buffalo, but I saw some renders of their stadium...and talk about a bland forgettable design, both inside and outside. Apparently $1.5 billion doesn't go as far as it used to.

Basically, lol. There's not even anything that interesting structurally. At least when I priced NYCFC's Bronx stadium that never materialized it had some cool cable trusses. I've looked at office towers with more complex steel than Bills lol.

[thurmas]

Oakland As have agreed to relocate and build a new 35,000 seat ballpark in Vegas for 1.5 billion USD as reported by sports illustrated last night. I think Jays will be in Rogers centre for a long time based off how expensive stadium are becoming.

[craner]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

What if the NDP promises not to kill the deal? Talking about the arena, so still on topic!

Well, Danielle Smith has made it impossible to vote for her. So I will just sit this Provincial election out (i.e. abstain from voting).

[craner]

Originally Posted by thurmas

Oakland As have agreed to relocate and build a new 35,000 seat ballpark in Vegas for 1.5 billion USD as reported by sports illustrated last night. I think Jays will be in Rogers centre for a long time based off how expensive stadium are becoming.

Curious if the new ball park in LV will be climate controlled ?
Man, Oakland teams are really getting “Raided” by LV.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by craner

Curious if the new ball park in LV will be climate controlled ?

Realistically it would have to be (could you imagine an outdoor afternoon game in the desert heat?!?!), and for $1.5 billion I sure as hell hope that price includes a roof!

[Hawrylyshyn]

Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy

This is OT since I'm talking about Buffalo, but I saw some renders of their stadium...and talk about a bland forgettable design, both inside and outside. Apparently $1.5 billion doesn't go as far as it used to.

Based on the design, it's likely going to have a much better atmosphere and be be more comfortable than Highmark Stadium, and that's what matters at the end of the day

[craner]

Originally Posted by esquire

Realistically it would have to be (could you imagine an outdoor afternoon game in the desert heat?!?!), and for $1.5 billion I sure as hell hope that price includes a roof!

Yes -I just read the SI article and it mentions a retractable roof.

[blueandgoldguy]

I feel bad for the people in Oakland. The owner of the A's has deliberately sabotaged the team over the past few years trading players with any value well before they hit free agency and fielding at team that is not remotely competitive. All while raising ticket prices in a outdated and dilapidated stadium to further alienate the ticket buying public and basically asking for the public to fund the entirety of his proposed stadium. He makes the Coyotes looks like a reasonable functional franchise.

He also collects tens of millions of dollars of revenue sharing while maintaining a team salary of around $40 million or so. Guys like him and the Pirates owner are the true welfare bums of the world.