Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[osmo]

SkyDome is useless as you don't get the land with it, all it the place is is a "single use" hunk of concrete that will sink in value like any other structure.

[O-tacular]

Things have gone silent on the arena front in Calgary since the Election. I wonder what the Flames are thinking now that their corporate shill lost against Nenshi.

[The Fisher Account]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Things have gone silent on the arena front in Calgary since the Election. I wonder what the Flames are thinking now that their corporate shill lost against Nenshi.

Flames are biting their tongues until a decision on an Olympic bid comes to fruition.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by The Fisher Account

Flames are biting their tongues until a decision on an Olympic bid comes to fruition.

In other words nothing's happening for the foreseeable future.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ For comparison sake, MTS Centre was built that year to house a AHL team for $133.5 million. This was a then 15 year old stadium several times the size, with two teams as tenants. $25 million was still a crazy price for Skydome even at the time.

I was referring to naming rights.

You have to consider it was a 15 year old stadium that was showing it's age. That's why it was sold and why Rogers was the only one that would buy it. The value of the stadium was worth less than the cost of repairs, replacements and, upgrades; something a brand new arena shouldn't have to worry about for some time.

That's why it's funny when people bring up the new Rogers Arena being turned over to the city after 30 years as a selling point.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ What boggles the mind is that Rogers bought Skydome for $25 million in 2004.

Contrast with Scotiabank buying naming rights to the ACC for, what, $40 million a year?

I find it astounding that no one bid up the price of the Skydome when it was on the market. It went practically for salvage value.

Yep, that number still stuns me - and Canuck bucks too!

If nothing else, it reflects the state of baseball in Canada at that time:
*Professional (affiliated) baseball teams were fleeing the country for greener pastures south of the border.
*The Expos were nearing the end of their slow, agonising, decade-long death.
*The Blue Jays were drawing flies at the Dome (1.9m [2004]; 1.8m [2003]; 1.6m [2002]).
*They were going through an identity crisis - black uniforms, 'The Jays' etc.
*The Yanks and Red Sox were dominating the AL East leaving no room for hope.

It was a period when fans had zero expectation of success and I suppose that's reflected in the value of the team and the Dome.

[Oilkountry]

To add to that I'm sure the city was operating the building at a loss so cost savings there as well. Maybe that's the recipe for success to places like Olympic stadium and Skydome? privatize the ownership or at least the lease. Have an aggressive company breath some life and ambition into the place. Say even a $0 lease wit the expectation that the building is operated and maintained by said Company and find a legacy clause that benefits the tax payers (revenue share, ticket surcharge ect). For the right company a place like the BIG O is a cash cow with a favorable lease or low cost of ownership.

[WhipperSnapper]

Cash cows. Right. Totally explains the Oilers and now the Flames seeking deals to minimize their risk.

[Oilkountry]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Cash cows. Right. Totally explains the Oilers and now the Flames seeking deals to minimize their risk.

I think you're confusing "minimizing risk" with "Minimizing financial obligations" both in terms of construction and maintenance. This has less to do with viability and more to do with keeping those wallets thick. Do you think the Oilers wouldn't be making money if they had to maintain Rogers place? Why do it when the tax payers can take care of it?

If a promotional Company had a chance to run Northlands coliseum right now at a $0 lease and keep %99 of the profits with no Restrictions from the Katz group you don't think someone would step up?

I think Olympic Stadium has equal potential profitability as Skydome (jays removed) with the right ownership

[User Name]

Originally Posted by esquire

^ Looks good. With the big single bowl, all the glass, the boxes on the one side and the red/black/grey colour scheme, the interior reminds me a bit of the Ottawa Civic Centre

The words "looks good" and "reminds me of the Ottawa Civic Centre" do NOT belong in the same sentence

[esquire]

I had a feeling my comment might inspire a response!

[Migs]

Excellent drone video of new Mosaic Stadium.

http://javapost.ca/news/java-post-ae...an-roughriders

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Oilkountry

I think you're confusing "minimizing risk" with "Minimizing financial obligations" both in terms of construction and maintenance. This has less to do with viability and more to do with keeping those wallets thick. Do you think the Oilers wouldn't be making money if they had to maintain Rogers place? Why do it when the tax payers can take care of it?

If a promotional Company had a chance to run Northlands coliseum right now at a $0 lease and keep %99 of the profits with no Restrictions from the Katz group you don't think someone would step up?

I think Olympic Stadium has equal potential profitability as Skydome (jays removed) with the right ownership

Minimal risk and minimal financial obligation are the same thing. Viability and keeping the wallets thick are the same thing too. These facilities make little profit in the best of times. It's the number one reason they have no property value and why the facility owners do everything in their power to monopolize markets. No, I don't see why a promotional company wouldn't try to make a go of a free venue however, it's not a realistic situation at all. Direct competition for Rogers Place?
What's the point of even suggesting it?

The last thing a developer is going to do is share the wealth of a lucrative stadium with the government. The Flames would be reacting quite differently if they could raise the funds through any number of private investment opportunities. There's literally billions being funneled every year into development of real estate properties. The cost of an arena is a drop in a bucket.

[elly63]

Is this it, finally?

Quebec OKs new roof for Big O
Olympic stadium's roof will be soft top and removable for open-air activities
CBC News Nov 09, 2017

The Quebec government has given the go-ahead to replace the dilapidated roof of Montreal's Olympic Stadium, Radio-Canada has learned.

The provincial cabinet approved a new roof, which is expected to cost up to $250 million, at its Oct. 25 meeting.

The new roof will be a soft one and removable for open-air activities.

"We can't use it if we don't repair the roof. That is unavoidable," said Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard. "For us, abandoning it is out of the question."

"It is out of the question for us to leave the stadium adrift or to let it crumble away over time."

The Big O's roof has been plagued with problems ever since it was constructed for the 1976 Olympic Games. It has been deteriorating at a rapid rate over the past decade.

Radio-Canada has found that in the last year, the roof tore 677 times, compared to the previous year when it ripped 496 times.

In the last 10 years, 7,453 tears have had to be repaired.

The Couillard government believes that a stadium with a new roof will attract more activities and will justify the cost, according to Radio-Canada.

The government has been waiting for the end of the municipal elections to make a public announcement.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by elly63

The Couillard government believes that a stadium with a new roof will attract more activities and will justify the cost, according to Radio-Canada.

I would love to see their figures and timelines for ROI on $250M.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by JHikka

I would love to see their figures and timelines for ROI on $250M.

Its got to be better than the tear it down and either (a) an open area or (b) build another one options.

Not much better, mind you, but there's no really good options when it comes to that particular white elephant.

[Dr Awesomesauce]

The psychology of previous investment.

Demolition, I know, would be complicated, expensive and wasteful. But, man, there comes a point...

And we can pretty much guarantee this renovation will NOT come in under budget. And public money too...

[Dalreg]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

The psychology of previous investment.

Demolition, I know, would be complicated, expensive and wasteful. But, man, there comes a point...

And we can pretty much guarantee this renovation will NOT come in under budget. And public money too...

I'll go on record.

$785 million when all is said and done.

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by Migs

Excellent drone video of new Mosaic Stadium.

http://javapost.ca/news/java-post-ae...an-roughriders

I really like the stadium. But man that seat section design placement is just strange.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Dr Awesomesauce

The psychology of previous investment.

Demolition, I know, would be complicated, expensive and wasteful. But, man, there comes a point...

And we can pretty much guarantee this renovation will NOT come in under budget. And public money too...

It's nuts. The place is a giant money pit but sentimentality and a general obliviousness to the sunk cost fallacy is going to result in yet another billion dollars poured down the drain.

Yes it will cost a fortune to demolish, but at least then there is some finality to it. Change up the roof and we know with a reasonable degree of certainty that there will be yet another nine figure fix required a decade down the road. How do we know? Because that has been the pattern nonstop since the 1970s.

If there was at least a tenant in there maybe it would make sense on some level, but spending hundreds of millions on an outdated empty stadium to preserve the memory of the Olympics is bonkers.