Regina | New Mosaic Stadium

[wacko]

Originally Posted by Stormer

The Provincial Government can easily afford this. They have no real deficit. The summary number you are quoting is just caused a shortfall in break-even insurance funds (Auto Fund, Crop Insurance and WCB) which go up and down year to year but are self funding over time.

I looked it up, and Finance Minister Ken Krawetz attributes the deficit to the $244 million the province spent to cover flood expenses, as well as instability in financial markets which caused lower returns on investments for the insurance funds you mentioned. I'm not sure we can count on the markets to be more stable in the near term, but if we don't have any natural disasters next year, we could possibly budget some money for a stadium.

I agree that building a stadium on the CPR railyards would not necessarily be the best use of the land. After all, a stadium is essentially just a place for sports teams to play, surrounded by a few acres of parking. Not exactly the pinnacle of economic redevelopment. If we can't collaborate with the U of R, then maybe the stadium would be best located in one of the light industrial areas. If we do partner with the U of R, then I hope we can get the Trans-Canada east bypass done concurrently. It would be great if the bypass could open by the time the stadium is ready, which would alleviate some of the traffic concerns at Vic East/Ring Road.

As for weather: football has largely always been an outdoor sport, which is a sentiment I agree with. If NFL teams can play outdoors in December, then I certainly think us Canadians can handle the occasional inclement weather, given that the CFL finishes its season eight weeks earlier than the NFL does.

[boborider]

My point re: the enclosed roof is not that football needs to be inside BUT whatever is built must be capable of hosting and being user friendly to other activities, irregardless of weather, in order to at least attempt to cover the operating costs. Ten or eleven football games a year is not going to provide enough income to come close to recovering operating and maintenance costs unless the Riders are prepared to forfeit all their profits. I'm not sure how many different ways I can say this but THIS CANNOT BE JUST A FOOTBALL STADIUM. That notion makes no practical, economic sense. Just because hockey can be played outside on natural ice, we don't erect bleachers around Wascana slough and hope it is cold enough to freeze the ice for the Pat's games. This would serve the purpose of providing a venue for hockey but, otherwise, would serve no other useful purpose.

[Dougler306]

Yes an outdoor football stadium would be great. But who wants to pay top dollar tickett prices to freeze your ass off outside, id rather just do that in the stadium we got and pay my tickett price that i have already and an outdoor stadium dosent solve the problem that regina needs a bigger venue then the brandt center to hold indoor events

[osmo]

Originally Posted by boborider

My point re: the enclosed roof is not that football needs to be inside BUT whatever is built must be capable of hosting and being user friendly to other activities, irregardless of weather, in order to at least attempt to cover the operating costs. Ten or eleven football games a year is not going to provide enough income to come close to recovering operating and maintenance costs unless the Riders are prepared to forfeit all their profits. I'm not sure how many different ways I can say this but THIS CANNOT BE JUST A FOOTBALL STADIUM. That notion makes no practical, economic sense. Just because hockey can be played outside on natural ice, we don't erect bleachers around Wascana slough and hope it is cold enough to freeze the ice for the Pat's games. This would serve the purpose of providing a venue for hockey but, otherwise, would serve no other useful purpose.

Large Stadiums seldom make money tho, they really do not operate to make money. They generate profits for the the beneficiaries whom collects profits of its uses.They area means to profit not and end.

Rogers Center does not make any money, neither does B.C. Place. But for the folks whom host events there it does.

The Regina Performing Arts Center does not make any money. But if I rent it out.. host and event and collect tickets, food.. etc. I will make some coin.

The only winners in a Stadium deal would be the Riders. Its just they have no means of eating the losses so they have to dump them onto the general public.

It makes perfect sense to build a new Stadium for Football for the Riders. What else would it be used for? The feasibility study already admitted for the previous proposal that the Riders would dominate 80% of the uses of the facility. 20 days max of use. If the Riders are the main tenants then build them a football stadium capable of hosting Soccer (I do think Canada will host a World Cup in the near future) and Grey Cups.


.....


As for as casting it off to the far flung industrial areas... errrr I myself aren't to keen to that idea. I would rather place in a spot where there would be some hope of generating some type of positive spin off versus a industrial bunker where people drive to and from. Even Evraz Place would be more Ideal to me then the industrial lands.

You would end up with the Situation with Booney Stoney Creek versus Hamilton's orginal lakefront proposal.

We have time to do things right. The Riders should be ashamed for fear mongering us tho about moving. Its like The Yankees or Leafs threatning to move to Oklahoma or something. The most lucrative market in the league and your saying your going to leave? Yea right... I'll show you the door and make you repay out the shares the public bought also (based on current values of the team... adjusted for inflation of course ) The Riders wouldn't do it.. all a bluff.

.....

Originally Posted by Dougler306

Yes an outdoor football stadium would be great. But who wants to pay top dollar tickett prices to freeze your ass off outside, id rather just do that in the stadium we got and pay my tickett price that i have already and an outdoor stadium dosent solve the problem that regina needs a bigger venue then the brandt center to hold indoor events

You could easily build both a new Arena and Outdoor Stadium for the same if not less then a large Domed Stadium. The Arena would get more use simply out of the demand for that type of space versus larger venues.

All of the top grossing sports facilities in North America are typical 25K-32K seat arenas. It does help to have a hockey and basketball team to fill out 80 + days, But you get the idea.

If there was such a demand for larger spaces. BC place and Skydome would be putting up comparable numbers to thier respective arena cousins in the same towns. you can make the argument that for a City like Regina once facility could work, but then from a design stand point Stadium builders shy away from making overly technical seating arrangements as it makes quirky and strange set ups for the main event... Football. Skydome is a mess in Football configuration, since it was built to hot every event under known to man.

[boborider]

I am not saying that this has to be built to host "every event known to man" but that even if it is set up, seating wise, to appropriately host football does not mean it is not amenable to host a number of other activities. Track events come to mind and those do not negatively hamper a football friendly stadium. I say it again - This does not have to be only for football. Your arguement that stadiums don't make money but rather facilitates the hosted activity to make money would support a facility that could host numerous events year round as opposed to being a revenue generator for one activity, in this case the Riders. You seem to contradict your own arguement with that statement.

[Dougler306]

I find this funny, as people are arguing about new stadiums, renovations, downtown etc. This article pops up on the leader post with some intresting news

http://www.leaderpost.com/Evraz+Plac...758/story.html

[osmo]

Originally Posted by boborider

I am not saying that this has to be built to host "every event known to man" but that even if it is set up, seating wise, to appropriately host football does not mean it is not amenable to host a number of other activities. Track events come to mind and those do not negatively hamper a football friendly stadium. I say it again - This does not have to be only for football. Your arguement that stadiums don't make money but rather facilitates the hosted activity to make money would support a facility that could host numerous events year round as opposed to being a revenue generator for one activity, in this case the Riders. You seem to contradict your own arguement with that statement.

Not so, because I am referring specifically to smaller Arenas whom oddly have more flexibility in the uses it can permit.

North American facilities now shy away from installing tracks into football type facilities as Track and Field is not as large as a draw in lets say Europe for example, track specific stadiums work better for that purpose in North America. Most large track meets in the USA are held at smaller college venues such as the one in Sacramento, or the Hayward in Oregon. You push the view of the most proftible grandstand seats farther back then needed, rather then pushing them closer and jacking up the price some more.

Edmonton's infamous corner seats are so far and awkward you hardily ever see them full. The thickest end of the run track pushes these seats back crazy far. I guess the Europeans don't care if the track may hinder the viewing experience for soccer much they must be to drunk at the matches to notice lol.


....

That is a interesting article posted. It would not surprise me if Evraz expand the Arena if the Riders/City take the Outdoor facility route. They seem to have the cash if there sitting on 100+ million to beef up the current setup.

[boborider]

There is an absolutely easy fix to incorporating track events. Installing slding bleachers that can be brought forward for footbal games or other events and retracted for track events. Some things are not rocket science. Many arenas do this to enhance the flexibility of their facility. Money that might be earmarked for expanding the Brandt Centre would be better utilized to build an encloed stadium. It is rare that the Brandt Centre sells out aside from a few concerts which would be much better accommodated in a new multi purpose facility. Recentexample would be the Keith Urban concerts held back to back there. Had an enclosed multi purpose facility been available this concert could have occurred in one evening.

[osmo]

Originally Posted by boborider

There is an absolutely easy fix to incorporating track events. Installing slding bleachers that can be brought forward for footbal games or other events and retracted for track events. Some things are not rocket science. Many arenas do this to enhance the flexibility of their facility. Money that might be earmarked for expanding the Brandt Centre would be better utilized to build an encloed stadium. It is rare that the Brandt Centre sells out aside from a few concerts which would be much better accommodated in a new multi purpose facility. Recentexample would be the Keith Urban concerts held back to back there. Had an enclosed multi purpose facility been available this concert could have occurred in one evening.

I hear you. I was just stating that this has been a abandoned trend among the new football facilities. I can't recall any of the newer NFL facilities being able to convert to Track and Filed configurations. By installing mechanical units to aid in seat configuration you are taking away subspace that can be used to house facilities that thus keep the open parts of the seating concourse open for revenue generating activities.

Even the largest new NFL Stadiums (Cowboys Stadium, UofP, Lucas Oil) don't have any substantial multi-use configurations. The modern NFL Multi-use Stadium is the ability to place a basketball court and add a grandstand in for a Final Four tournament. This isn't them begin shortsighted its simply them being realistic in not trying to hinder the top draw of the facility (football).

Single use isn't a dirty word, especially for Football. The added 5-10 dates of use a year does not justify the extra hundreds of millions in price.

And in regards to space. The lack of space is never a bad thing for profit generating events. For the Keith Urban example I can almost bet they we're able to sell the tickets for tho sold out shows for more than what they could for one show held in a larger venue.

[boborider]

Points taken, however I would only add that these are major market facilities that may not require additional events to keep them afloat. The NFL is a money machine and seem to be able to charge exhorbitant event prices and still sellout. Their capacity is also much larger so generate huge sums per event. Adding events in a smallrer market such as Regina may be the only way to cover costs. It would be interesting to know to what extent the Riders rent and the rent from the handful of other events, cover the operating costs at Mosaic.

[boborider]

Here is a link to story just appearing on the LP website. Read it, but must admit I found it quite confusing re what the f#%# the process is going to be. Anybody shine some light on it?

http://http://www.leaderpost.com/Reg...956/story.html

[HomeInMyShoes]

^I think the translation is: "we're hopeful some private company will foot the bill and build us something, anything, so that the city can run it while the builders make nothing on it."

The translation can be translated as: "this thing is never getting built so let's try something random."

It must be cyncial Friday.

[wacko]

Yeah, I don't get why a private company would do this. Even if they were given operating rights, they could never hope to make back the capital costs of building a stadium. So either this got misreported, or city council is out to lunch.

[Welkin]

"The preferred option would be having a private partner design, build, finance and maintain a new stadium, but not necessarily operate it — one of many detail that would be worked out later in the process if the P3 recommendation is backed by councillors, he said".

Read more: http://www.leaderpost.com/news/Regin...#ixzz1gkcXCsDs

I am a little confused here. Maybe someone out there can explain how this works. What private company designs, builds, FINANCES, and maintains (but not operate) a money-losing football stadium for a football team that they do not own. I don't see the Riders paying tens of millions in rent every year, so again how does a private company make money with this type of operation? I guess if I was a city without the money to build a fancy new stadium, this would be my "preferred option" also. Does anyone have a current example of this type of arrangement?

[sensiblestampsfan]

Only way I could see a private company footing the bill to construct the stadium would be if the City would then give them first option for development of some other property (either current Taylor Field site / rest of 'new' Stadium grounds / subdivision). If they don't get to operate/run the facility, there is no profit to be made other than rent. Maybe parking revenues?

[Treesplease]

"one of many detail that would be worked out later in the process if the P3 recommendation is backed by councillors, he said".

I am confused by this as well - If I was a conucillor, I would want to know details now - such as what are you promising the private firm to get them to be interested in a venture with a huge capital outlay and limited returns. If there really are private firms interested, there is more on the table than has been revealed thus far.


"In addition to absorbing some of the financial risk, some private development firms or construction companies have ongoing experience in designing and building stadiums whereas a city only builds a stadium every 30 or 50 years, he said."
What? is Sjoberg envisioning Pat out with a carpenters pencil and a napkin designing a stadium? Even private companies will hire architects, project managers and construction contractors.

[Bdog]

Originally Posted by Treesplease

"In addition to absorbing some of the financial risk, some private development firms or construction companies have ongoing experience in designing and building stadiums whereas a city only builds a stadium every 30 or 50 years, he said."
What? is Sjoberg envisioning Pat out with a carpenters pencil and a napkin designing a stadium? Even private companies will hire architects, project managers and construction contractors.

Haha, so true. It's clear that council has absolutely no working understanding of P3s (or are intentionally misleading the public to dodge the funding issue). This is essentially a DBFO, without the O - which is the only way a private partner would make ANY profit on this venture. If it's just a Design, Finance, Build, then it makes no sense either - why would the private sector finance this, when governments can borrow at a lower interest rate. Obvously the private sector would still design and build a stadium, but why would they fund it. Can't wait to hear more details about this...

On another note, from clips I've heard, it sounds like Fiacco is slowly trying to ween the public off the idea of a roof. It sounds like retractable roof is completely out of the picture now, and it's looking very likely that it's going to be an open air stadium. Start the petition now to get this project built elsewhere, or it will be regretted for decades...

[Dougler306]

This is just disappointing, all people in regina just want new staidum, why cant we just get this settled on a desgin, funding, etc, this whole mess is just now turning me off a new staidum, might as well just give it up. Also seeing all the hater comments on the LP makes me think do the people in this city really care for the riders and bleed green?? There prob thinkin we dont get no support here for a new staidum, lets go somewhere else where we do

[Stormer]

Anyone who read the 2010 study knows that the stadium will not make enough money on on operating basis to pay any meaningful amount towards capital costs or borrowing costs. The stadium may be able to pay for its own operating costs. Therefore if a private partner finances 50% of the capital cost as suggested, the City and Province will have to guarantee an income stream in the form of rent of other payments. This is just another way of financing and here is nothing wrong with that provided the cost is comparable to the City and Province borrowing the money directly. In a P3, the private partner will bear at least some of the construction cost and design risk and receive a financial return for that.

[osmo]

Originally Posted by sensiblestampsfan

Only way I could see a private company footing the bill to construct the stadium would be if the City would then give them first option for development of some other property (either current Taylor Field site / rest of 'new' Stadium grounds / subdivision). If they don't get to operate/run the facility, there is no profit to be made other than rent. Maybe parking revenues?

Still negligible. The only way it would be viable to the City to basically make that whole parcel of land a "tax free" zone, thus giving the developers free serviced land to construct market condos and offices. This is extremely reckless though because the City ends up forgoing billions of dollars in lost future revenues because it decided to sell its soul for a big mac instead of waiting for the steak.

Of course the private sector would not be stupid to take on any risk on this project either. The City would still have to underwrite the bonds and be liable if it bursts. I can't see the private sector agreeing to the extant of shouldering the debt other wise. They will simply acquire the resources and means to build it and manage it.

These deals end up being worse then the City simply just stomaching the costs on its own.. but it is more politically doable since the ramifications aren't seen till many years down the road. the Ontario Gov't sleaze sale of the ETR highway did not come to blowup until many years after the Harris government was out of the picture, expect similarly with this.