Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

What's the point of bringing the Calgary arena news up here if there's no willingness to discuss it? An item faces the slightest breeze of questioning and the whole thing collapses like a house of cards. I'll remember to only say nice, positive things in the future and accept any and all recommendations handed down to use by the designers and investors no questions asked.


What about my post was false?


Can you give a source saying that the Saddledome has a higher than usual number of events on a yearly basis? I was under the impression the arena lost out on some events because of its low ceiling.


It's a shame that this can't be discussed in a reasonable manner. I provided my opinion and i'm met with utter disdain.

Straight up, demand in Calgary is there for the new arena to be 19,100. It’s supported by the current demand in a less than mediocre, outdated, worst arena in the league. Demand will, in my opinion, increase from their current numbers for flames regular season games, and, god willing, even more so in playoffs. Not to mention the demand that will exist with acts that had previously skipped Calgary, along with the 10 day “Greatest Outdoor Show On Earth” the Calgary Stampede.

To limit to 18,000 as you propose just means the market is being handcuffed and held hostage. I am personally happy it’ll be 19,100, cause that means I’ll hopefully get to enjoy 1 or 2 games, through my buddies season tix. If the capacity is limited as you suggest, there is a good chance he wouldn’t be able to afford the cheap seat season tix. Remember too, this is a facility built with municipal cash, which should try to be inclusive for the general public in general as well.

To align Calgary to other, very different markets, is not a realistic approach to determine a max capacity. Seattle, is a new unproven market. NY Isles have proven to lack support. Likewise NJ Devils. They’ve struggled for the longest time to have good attendances. The closest to compare to is Edmonton, and they’ve shown success as Coldrsx has alluded to (3-4x more revenue compared to the previous Northlands). Likewise, comparing hockey to basketball is not an accurate argument, in completely different markets and social groups, in my opinion, is a less than stellar way to peg the max capacity for the flames in Calgary. Montreal Cdns has a 21,000 arena, and get ~99% attendance capacity, should they in your opinion, limit themselves to 18,000, for the sake other leagues do and other teams do? I say no, or are they just an exception?

Anyway, we’re debating over 1100 seats...

agree to disagree I suppose

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by JHikka

You're right - it was designed for even higher capacity Raptors games, which further cements my point about how arena capacities have been declining in recent years as designs focus more on lower capacities and higher luxury suite counts.

To be fair, the arena it was replacing had hardly any suites and about 3000 less seats. I'm not sure how big the Leafs planned Union Station arena would have been, but their attempts to get the Raptors to abandon the ACC suggested that they didn't think the ACC was big enough. I think they settled for smaller because that was the option available to them.

[EpicPonyTime]

Isn't the Calgary arena rumoured to feature an inverted bowl design? That would go some ways to justify building an arena with a nominal decrease in seats since your cheap seats would be much closer to the ice.

[Coldrsx]

*'The closest to compare to is Edmonton, and they’ve shown success as Coldrsx has alluded to (3-4x more revenue compared to the previous Northlands).'

The 15,000/seat loge(s) are massively tied to the economy and we will have a lot of empty loge/boxes next year...

The lower bowl and upper will do alright, but the loge are underperforming, as are the theatre boxes at what... 20k a seat or something absurd.

[esquire]

It's hard to gauge demand in the abstract without reference to pricing. Are there 19,000 people a night interested in attending a hockey game in Toronto, Winnipeg, Calgary and Edmonton? Most definitely.

What if the highest 2,500 nosebleed seats were $30 a pop? The answer is still probably yes.

Now jack those same nosebleeds up to $60 a pop. Suddenly you start losing people to TV since the experience of staying at home and watching on TV with an extra hundred bucks or so in your wallet once you factor in parking, drinks, snacks, etc. becomes much more competitive.

Once those nosebleeds go up to $100 or more, I'm guessing the numbers start falling off dramatically except maybe in Toronto where the population is so vast you can probably find enough takers.

So the point is this, you can easily fill 19,000 or 20,000 seats in Edmonton and Calgary as long as the seats are priced attractively enough. I suppose that profits disappear at a certain point once you get high up enough that the marginal costs of more seating exceed the revenue it's going to bring again. That point is normally where the seating capacity gets capped.

Anyway, my take is that with their considerable skin in the game, I'm pretty sure the guys in Calgary did their homework when it came figuring out the optimal seating capacity. Unless someone has done the math to prove it, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.

[Coldrsx]

^What I dislike about the new stadium here and the world of sports for that matter, is that to get into Rogers it is easily $150 for two people just to get in the door. Taking your family of 4 with a few snacks and it is $100/person minimum... and has really pushed a lot of 'the former' fanbase out of the market versus The Coliseum. Thankfully the Oil Kings have a good product and is family orientated in delivery/pricing, but kinda sad that the NHL is now out of reach in many Canadian/US markets for many.

[Franco401]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

^What I dislike about the new stadium here and the world of sports for that matter, is that to get into Rogers it is easily $150 for two people just to get in the door. Taking your family of 4 with a few snacks and it is $100/person minimum... and has really pushed a lot of 'the former' fanbase out of the market versus The Coliseum. Thankfully the Oil Kings have a good product and is family orientated in delivery/pricing, but kinda sad that the NHL is now out of reach in many Canadian/US markets for many.

...and it will be their downfall.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

^What I dislike about the new stadium here and the world of sports for that matter, is that to get into Rogers it is easily $150 for two people just to get in the door. Taking your family of 4 with a few snacks and it is $100/person minimum... and has really pushed a lot of 'the former' fanbase out of the market versus The Coliseum. Thankfully the Oil Kings have a good product and is family orientated in delivery/pricing, but kinda sad that the NHL is now out of reach in many Canadian/US markets for many.

100 years ago the bourgeoisie here would hobnob in smoky wood-panelled rooms at the Manitoba Club or the Carleton Club... now Earls and Jets games have kind of taken on that social role to some extent. I guess that has driven ticket prices to where they are now.

I can see spending hundreds of dollars for some kind of critical matchup or a playoff game, but honestly I wonder what kind of entertainment value you're getting on a $250 ticket to watch a Tuesday night regular season game vs. San Jose.

[Coldrsx]

Right.

They HAVE to get back to the core fan, at least inpart.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by esquire

100 years ago the bourgeoisie here would hobnob in smoky wood-panelled rooms at the Manitoba Club or the Carleton Club... now Earls and Jets games have kind of taken on that social role to some extent. I guess that has driven ticket prices to where they are now.

Up until the 80s/90s you could say that NHL players came from pretty blue collar backgrounds. You could be decently poor growing up but if you were good at hockey you found a way. These days? They're all coming from wealthy families. None of the kids coming into the NHL today are from blue collar backgrounds at all (especially not the ones who are sons of former pros), so there's a disconnect between the older viewerbase who view themselves as blue collar versus the players they're watching.

100 years ago you'd pretty much go and watch someone just like you go and play a sport. That isn't the same any more. For hockey especially there's a social class instrument at work because 1) it's expensive to play hockey anyway and 2) it's even more expensive to play high level hockey as a kid. It filters out poorer players and positions more wealthy players into positions of opportunity.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Up until the 80s/90s you could say that NHL players came from pretty blue collar backgrounds. You could be decently poor growing up but if you were good at hockey you found a way. These days? They're all coming from wealthy families. None of the kids coming into the NHL today are from blue collar backgrounds at all (especially not the ones who are sons of former pros), so there's a disconnect between the older viewerbase who view themselves as blue collar versus the players they're watching.

100 years ago you'd pretty much go and watch someone just like you go and play a sport. That isn't the same any more. For hockey especially there's a social class instrument at work because 1) it's expensive to play hockey anyway and 2) it's even more expensive to play high level hockey as a kid. It filters out poorer players and positions more wealthy players into positions of opportunity.

I and my kids are at an age where many of the best hockey playing boys are headed for the CHL. I know through one degree of separation a couple who have gone to the Q and even one to the O.

And yes, they're all from well-off families for sure.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I and my kids are at an age where many of the best hockey playing boys are headed for the CHL. I know through one degree of separation a couple who have gone to the Q and even one to the O.

And yes, they're all from well-off families for sure.

It is funny that way... hockey is not really an egalitarian sport. It's probably more like polo than soccer or basketball in that regard. Players whose parents have the ability to pay for instruction have a huge leg up. There are a lot of children of professionals and businesspeople among the ranks of top AAA and junior players locally.

Anecdotally, I signed my seven year old up for a couple of training sessions at a facility here in Winnipeg last summer. One of them was a shooting clinic where he had a couple of very qualified instructors including someone who is basically a consensus top 10 pick at this year's NHL draft teaching him. So now he can go top shelf with the flick of a wrist...it impresses the adults down at the outdoor rink. If I just keep ponying up for more and more of these kinds of lessons with elite coaches I can be a CHL dad someday... maybe I need to take out a loan.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by EpicPonyTime

Isn't the Calgary arena rumoured to feature an inverted bowl design? That would go some ways to justify building an arena with a nominal decrease in seats since your cheap seats would be much closer to the ice.

Rossetti's inverted bowl was one of the initial considerations, but CMLC, the City, CSEC, and the Stampede Board eventually decided not to take the risk on an unproven design.

[esquire]

^ Smart choice. Sports fans tend not to be interested in novel seating configurations. Playing it safe makes sense from a business standpoint.

[Chadillaccc]

Yeah exactly, plus the point is to future-proof this thing for the next 30+ years of technological advancement, not to be an experimental half billion dollar project. At $500 million, it's going to be the third most expensive hockey stadium ever built adjusted for inflation - but the highest initial price tag of all - so it better friggin last the test of time

[J.OT13]

Here are some images showing one of the newly open community rinks and progress on the main arena.

The three community rinks will replace some of old Gatineau's legacy arenas.







The source also includes the opening news conference.

https://www.iheartradio.ca/energie/e...eau-1.14517815

[EpicPonyTime]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Rossetti's inverted bowl was one of the initial considerations, but CMLC, the City, CSEC, and the Stampede Board eventually decided not to take the risk on an unproven design.

Makes sense, although it is certainly disappointing to hear. That really does make me question the size of the arena. Unless the Flames have something up their sleeve to make those nosebleed seats more affordable (such as discounted concessions), I can see them struggle to get butts in the seats. Ticket prices are guaranteed to go up across the board once this place opens and Calgary's got a long road to economic recovery.

Could be a really good opportunity for the Stamps/Hitmen/Roughnecks/Cavalry though.

[ZeDgE]

From r/Calgary

Aerial shot of the corral demo.



Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Calgary/com...al_demolition/

[Denscity]

The demo is to make room for the new arena?

[ZeDgE]

Originally Posted by Denscity

The demo is to make room for the new arena?

For the BMO convention centre expansion.

https://www.calgarymlc.ca/bmo-centre-expansion

The new arena location is a block or so away from here.