HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3181  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 6:26 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,270
Obviously there's a limit, but a little bit extra wouldn't affect it too much. I'm not saying Hamilton should have built a 60,000 seat stadium, but a 30,000 seat stadium wouldn't have been too far out considering they averaged 26,000 last year. Same for Regina, if they consistenly sell more than 33,000 seats a game, I see no reason for them not to go to 40,000.

To counter your Leafs argument, I doubt it feels good to fans in Toronto that it's near impossible to be able to go and see a game. Especially since the CFL doesn't have the unconditional support that the NHL does, making it accessible would be a big help.
__________________
Build transit and stuff around it.
     
     
  #3182  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 6:47 PM
Nathan's Avatar
Nathan Nathan is offline
Hmm....
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Regina
Posts: 3,505
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
Obviously there's a limit, but a little bit extra wouldn't affect it too much. I'm not saying Hamilton should have built a 60,000 seat stadium, but a 30,000 seat stadium wouldn't have been too far out considering they averaged 26,000 last year. Same for Regina, if they consistenly sell more than 33,000 seats a game, I see no reason for them not to go to 40,000.

To counter your Leafs argument, I doubt it feels good to fans in Toronto that it's near impossible to be able to go and see a game. Especially since the CFL doesn't have the unconditional support that the NHL does, making it accessible would be a big help.
I think the problem with limiting ticket availablity for the CFL too much, is that it is widely regarded as a very accessible league for the common person. Restricting the ticket supply too much goes against that and at some point does more to push people away than make people more interested.
     
     
  #3183  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 6:49 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
Obviously there's a limit, but a little bit extra wouldn't affect it too much. I'm not saying Hamilton should have built a 60,000 seat stadium, but a 30,000 seat stadium wouldn't have been too far out considering they averaged 26,000 last year. Same for Regina, if they consistenly sell more than 33,000 seats a game, I see no reason for them not to go to 40,000.
I agree with you that Hamilton's stadium is underbuilt. They have generally averaged more than 22,000 fans for the better part of the last decade, so to me the seating capacity of Tim Horton's Field is well under what it could be. I think 26,000 would have been better (basically filling in one endzone)... 30,000 may have been a bit much but certainly realistic.

Ottawa's stadium size of 24,000 is also on the smaller side of what's acceptable, but in fairness with the CFL's spotty track record in that city I think they're prudent to go with a lower number of seats. That said, 26,000 would have been reasonable considering the Rough Riders and Renegades still drew well even when those franchises were in a state of free fall.

For Regina, 33,000 is a pretty good number. I sure wouldn't go much higher than that...maybe 36,000 maximum. Remember, Regina is a small city by pro sports standards and you don't want to face scads of empty seats if the team hits hard times.

On the whole though, I think the sizes you propose are realistic. I'm just saying that the days of the huge new 55,000 seaters for CFL teams are pretty well gone, much as MLB teams no longer build 55,000 seat monsters anymore. Smaller and more intimate are the keywords now.

Quote:
To counter your Leafs argument, I doubt it feels good to fans in Toronto that it's near impossible to be able to go and see a game. Especially since the CFL doesn't have the unconditional support that the NHL does, making it accessible would be a big help.
It may not feel good for fans, but it sure feels good for MLSE's shareholders. Toronto is practically a perfect pro sports supply and demand storm... a small number of tickets for a huge, fairly wealthy market means that the club will play to capacity crowds for many years, and the fact that there are many well-heeled people in line means that the ticket prices can get jacked up year after year. Whenever an individual ticketholder gets priced out of the market, there's a 100% chance that a corporate client will step up to take those seats. The Leafs couldn't ask for more.

For proof of how good the Leafs have it, check this out:

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/v2/ext/2011-2012LeafsPricingMapPrices.pdf

It's a Leafs seating map with prices for the 2011-12 season. The cheapest nosebleed that year was $55. Lower bowl seats started at $165 and went up to $450. I'm sure those numbers must be at least 5% to 10% higher by now. You need some real scarcity to get away with prices like that.
     
     
  #3184  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 6:56 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,270
I agree with you 100% that 55,000 seat stadiums will not be seen again for a very long tie, and shouldn't be. I look at it the way Nathan put it-the CFL is seen as an accessible league. If you make it artificially inaccessible-as in lowering supply below demand as opposed to having demand exceed supply-then people will be turned off.

Yeah, MLSE definitely has a good thing going. I was looking at it more from a citizen's point of view.
__________________
Build transit and stuff around it.
     
     
  #3185  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 7:23 PM
Jay in Cowtown's Avatar
Jay in Cowtown Jay in Cowtown is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cochrane, Alberta
Posts: 1,906
Quote:
Originally Posted by GlassCity View Post
I agree with you 100% that 55,000 seat stadiums will not be seen again for a very long tie, and shouldn't be. I look at it the way Nathan put it-the CFL is seen as an accessible league. If you make it artificially inaccessible-as in lowering supply below demand as opposed to having demand exceed supply-then people will be turned off.
Speaking of accessible... isn't every game blackout free now, or is that just the HD feeds?
     
     
  #3186  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 7:37 PM
GlassCity's Avatar
GlassCity GlassCity is offline
Rational urbanist
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 5,270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay in Cowtown View Post
Speaking of accessible... isn't every game blackout free now, or is that just the HD feeds?
HD is blackout free. I don't know about other teams, but the Lions blacked out 5 SD games this year.
__________________
Build transit and stuff around it.
     
     
  #3187  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 7:57 PM
SHOFEAR's Avatar
SHOFEAR SHOFEAR is offline
DRINK
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: City Of Champions
Posts: 8,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
The CFL stadiums that were built in the 1970s and 80s (Commonwealth, BC Place, Olympic Stadium, Skydome and before that the massively expanded Exhibition Stadium) were arguably overbuilt to the point that it virtually eliminated ticket scarcity. There is something to be said for having demand exceed the available supply, because it really raises the perceived value of the tickets. Look at the Leafs for the clearest example: no matter how terrible of a team they have, no one would dream of giving up their season tickets because once you lose them, you'll never get another shot. Contrast that with the list of stadiums I just mentioned... they generally go years and years between sellout crowds for football. People know tickets are always going to be available.

I agree with your general sentiment that there is something to be said for being in a big, sold-out stadium with a large crowd. I have been to several Grey Cups with > 60,000 fans in the stands (along with a few regular season games in Edmonton that have either sold out or come close), and the experience is awesome. But having all of those seats to sell in the regular season can hurt the teams more than they help.
Commonwealths reduced capacity should help. This team was averaging close to 40 for most of the 2000's....

That being said, commonwealths size has provided a location for some awesome events in the past. No other stadium in Canada can provide a back drop for events like these. As an Eskimo fan and a fan of large events, i'll accept the good with the bad. For the 70,000 lucky enough to go to AC/DC a few years ago during a massive july thunder and rainstorm....it was something legendary....something that all you your goofy roofed stadiums will never get to experience.



source http://www.flickr.com/photos/eprivass/


source
http://synergy-emusic.com/petergabrielpix/pglive/pglivepix.htm


source http://midotradingco.com/?products=tracks
__________________
Lana. Lana. Lana? LANA! Danger Zone
     
     
  #3188  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 10:26 PM
blueandgoldguy blueandgoldguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,853
A couple things...

Regina's new stadium will be fine at 33,000. As far as accessibility, it's not an issue of lack of seats, but the total number of seats available at a reasonable price. The Rider organization needs to be careful here. Corner endzone seats and endzone seats need to be affordably priced so families, teens and students and lower income earners can afford tickets. They need to cater to the next generation of fans.

Rider sellouts are a recent phenomenon going back 6 years. 33,000 for the stadium should be fine for the forseeable future and if they are selling out every game for several seasons guess what? They can use the areas where the temporary seats would be set up to construct permanent seats. Problem solved.

Seating capacity of 24,000 in Hamilton (I think that includes stading room in the endzone plaza) should be fine. Hamilton averaged more than that recently but that included plenty of freebees. Looking at Hamilton's history through the eighties and nineties the attendance has been consistently under 20,000 per season and that's with several Grey Cup appearances and two wins! The only concern I have is will Bob Young have a few thousand seats available at a reasonable price (less than $30 per game) to snag lower income earners and next generation of fans.

Ottawa has a bit of a spotty attendance record, yes, but in actuality, they had better attendance than Hamilton over the past 30 years, despite putting up with crappier ownership (the Gliebermans twice!) and a team that failed to win a Grey Cup and did not have a winning season in their last 20 years! I think Ottawa would be better off building a slightly bigger stadium than 24,000 - probably 26,000 - 27,000 - so hopefully there is room for a small expansion in the future should the team sellout on a consistent basis.
     
     
  #3189  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2013, 11:40 PM
Welkin Welkin is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Isn't that what I just said?
I am sorry, I must not have paid any attention to what you said. My fault.
     
     
  #3190  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 4:17 AM
rrskylar's Avatar
rrskylar rrskylar is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: WINNIPEG
Posts: 7,641
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
A couple things...

Regina's new stadium will be fine at 33,000. As far as accessibility, it's not an issue of lack of seats, but the total number of seats available at a reasonable price. The Rider organization needs to be careful here. Corner endzone seats and endzone seats need to be affordably priced so families, teens and students and lower income earners can afford tickets. They need to cater to the next generation of fans.

Rider sellouts are a recent phenomenon going back 6 years. 33,000 for the stadium should be fine for the forseeable future and if they are selling out every game for several seasons guess what? They can use the areas where the temporary seats would be set up to construct permanent seats. Problem solved.

Seating capacity of 24,000 in Hamilton (I think that includes stading room in the endzone plaza) should be fine. Hamilton averaged more than that recently but that included plenty of freebees. Looking at Hamilton's history through the eighties and nineties the attendance has been consistently under 20,000 per season and that's with several Grey Cup appearances and two wins! The only concern I have is will Bob Young have a few thousand seats available at a reasonable price (less than $30 per game) to snag lower income earners and next generation of fans.

Ottawa has a bit of a spotty attendance record, yes, but in actuality, they had better attendance than Hamilton over the past 30 years, despite putting up with crappier ownership (the Gliebermans twice!) and a team that failed to win a Grey Cup and did not have a winning season in their last 20 years! I think Ottawa would be better off building a slightly bigger stadium than 24,000 - probably 26,000 - 27,000 - so hopefully there is room for a small expansion in the future should the team sellout on a consistent basis.
So a 10K stadium would work fine for the Argo's in Toronto and the Al's could reduce their stadium back to 22K thats about all they can get anyway!
     
     
  #3191  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 4:46 AM
isaidso isaidso is offline
North of Gilead
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North of Gilead
Posts: 11,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by Welkin View Post
I am sorry, I must not have paid any attention to what you said. My fault.
No worries.
__________________
ELBOWS UP CANADA, ELBOWS UP UKRAINE, ELBOWS UP GREENLAND
CANADA, EUROPE, NZ, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, MEXICO STRONG

US REPUBLICANS/MAGA/ICE NOT WELCOME HERE, STAY OUT
     
     
  #3192  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 5:15 AM
isaidso isaidso is offline
North of Gilead
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: North of Gilead
Posts: 11,065
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
Rider sellouts are a recent phenomenon going back 6 years. 33,000 for the stadium should be fine for the forseeable future and if they are selling out every game for several seasons guess what? They can use the areas where the temporary seats would be set up to construct permanent seats. Problem solved.
Except at the expanded capacity, none of those seats are between the goal lines.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
I think Ottawa would be better off building a slightly bigger stadium than 24,000 - probably 26,000 - 27,000 - so hopefully there is room for a small expansion in the future should the team sellout on a consistent basis.
I was looking at the aerial views of the site and it might be doable. 10-15 years down the road, one might be able to demolish the old north stands, move it further back then build a mirror of the south stands in its place. I believe this would actually reduce capacity to about 20,000? Does someone know what the capacity is of the new south stands. I know it's smaller than the old north stands, but couldn't find the information.

To raise capacity one could then build a sunken bowl of 10,000 between the 2 identical stands. Ottawa could end up with a good looking symmetrical design of 30,000+ as long as they don't build right up to the north stands in the future.
__________________
ELBOWS UP CANADA, ELBOWS UP UKRAINE, ELBOWS UP GREENLAND
CANADA, EUROPE, NZ, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, MEXICO STRONG

US REPUBLICANS/MAGA/ICE NOT WELCOME HERE, STAY OUT
     
     
  #3193  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 8:13 AM
ScreamingViking's Avatar
ScreamingViking ScreamingViking is offline
Ham-burgher
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 7,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire View Post
I agree with you that Hamilton's stadium is underbuilt. They have generally averaged more than 22,000 fans for the better part of the last decade, so to me the seating capacity of Tim Horton's Field is well under what it could be. I think 26,000 would have been better (basically filling in one endzone)... 30,000 may have been a bit much but certainly realistic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
Seating capacity of 24,000 in Hamilton (I think that includes stading room in the endzone plaza) should be fine. Hamilton averaged more than that recently but that included plenty of freebees. Looking at Hamilton's history through the eighties and nineties the attendance has been consistently under 20,000 per season and that's with several Grey Cup appearances and two wins! The only concern I have is will Bob Young have a few thousand seats available at a reasonable price (less than $30 per game) to snag lower income earners and next generation of fans.
There were plenty of free tickets being distributed over Young's tenure as owner. Last season they said they were cutting back on that, but to what extent they actually did I don't know.

I think it's possible we'll see some changes at Tim Hortons Field in the coming years. I can't find any links to it, but I vaguely recall hearing Young mention investing in the stadium once the team is profitable (though given the cynicism about the team regarding the stadium issue, and its lack of investment to date, I doubt many people believe he would)

What that would mean is a good question. A massive and expensive expansion is unlikely. Maybe more bells and whistles, but maybe endzone seating if demand warrants (and it would probably be temporary at first, as a trial).

I think they would first want to secure maximum revenue from what is now being built, however. The private boxes and new lounges will help. The endzone patios are a wildcard - they could either be a hit, or they could end up being a waste... I have an open mind but it's something new for Ti-Cat fans.

Whatever they do, preserving room to expand as much as possible for Grey Cups will remain a priority, because those represent a huge pot of money.
     
     
  #3194  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 1:09 PM
FrankieFlowerpot's Avatar
FrankieFlowerpot FrankieFlowerpot is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
I was looking at the aerial views of the site and it might be doable. 10-15 years down the road, one might be able to demolish the old north stands, move it further back then build a mirror of the south stands in its place. I believe this would actually reduce capacity to about 20,000? Does someone know what the capacity is of the new south stands. I know it's smaller than the old north stands, but couldn't find the information.
There's the slight problem of a 10,000 seat hockey arena underneath the north stands

     
     
  #3195  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 1:21 PM
eemy's Avatar
eemy eemy is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot View Post
There's the slight problem of a 10,000 seat hockey arena underneath the north stands
Build a new one at Bayview!
     
     
  #3196  
Old Posted Aug 28, 2013, 3:25 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot View Post
There's the slight problem of a 10,000 seat hockey arena underneath the north stands
Beat me to it And as it is being renovated as we speak, it's unlikely to be gone in 10-15 years.


Last edited by elly63; Aug 28, 2013 at 3:47 PM.
     
     
  #3197  
Old Posted Aug 30, 2013, 4:58 AM
blueandgoldguy blueandgoldguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Except at the expanded capacity, none of those seats are between the goal lines.
More than 80% of the seats will be between the goal lines. I don't think it's a big concern to have a few thousand extra seats in the endzone that families and lower income earners can afford.

That's probably not something the Rider organization will be concerned with anyways..at least until there are several seasons of sellouts and near sellouts. And I'm sure those seats between the goal lines will be very expensive! Some season ticketholders will be in for a bit of a shock. Those 60 and 70 dollars seats will probably be $80-$90 per game based on buying a season ticket and more than that if bought on an individual basis.
     
     
  #3198  
Old Posted Aug 30, 2013, 8:59 PM
Coldrsx's Avatar
Coldrsx Coldrsx is offline
Community Guy
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 69,060
One of the last hurdles for the downtown Edmonton arena

Sept 16th public hearing







www.edmonton.ca
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish

Wake me up when I can see skyscrapers
     
     
  #3199  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2013, 8:31 PM
elly63 elly63 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,783
Lessons for Hamilton from Winnipeg’s new stadium
Drew Edwards thespec.com Aug 30, 2013

WINNIPEG - The most impressive element of the new Investors Group Field in Winnipeg is unquestionably the massive roof, its two sections of ornately-designed, curved steel covering almost eight acres and stretching almost 200 feet over the seats below. It's swooping profile is the iconic image used in much of the branding.

But the roof also added approximately $35 million to the cost and was the central factor in a year-long delay in opening the facility.

The new Hamilton stadium, due to open in time for the 2014 CFL season next July, will have no such roof, one of several important differences between Tim Hortons Field and the Investors Group version in Winnipeg.

One is cost. Tim Hortons Field has a budget of $148 million, while IGF was budgeted at $200 million before the delay and additional, costs which are expected to push the final tally closer to a quarter of a billion dollars. Money in Winnipeg is undeniably tight: for example, the press box is still unfinished — it's currently situated outdoors — and will have to be enclosed before the Bombers can hold a Grey Cup.

In addition to the roof, the Winnipeg stadium also has close to 10,000 more seats than the 22,500 planned in Hamilton. That may sound like a good thing, but where those seats are located is key: while the Hamilton design emphasizes seating between the 20-yard lines, IGF has extensive end zone seating. The Bombers have yet to sell out a game this season — their winless home record likely isn't helping — but the vast majority of the empty seats have been located in the end zone, where visibility for CFL games is poorest.

One of the design features of the new Hamilton facility that has received the most attention is social areas located behind each zone, places where fans are expected to congregate and watch the game in an atmosphere that's been likened to a sports bar. Winnipeg has those areas as well — they were packed Aug. 24 against Ticats — but they are much further from the field, sitting behind row upon row of end zone seats.

There's also a major difference on how high end ticket buyers will experience the game. The club seats in Winnipeg — known as the Pinnacle Club — feature both a seating area and a communal gathering spot where fans can eat and socialize. But those two areas are separated by a concourse: there's no way to see the action unless seated. In Hamilton, that gathering spot has been designed to allow for a view of the field of play.

One of the possible explanations for the construction delay and some of the oversights in the Winnipeg facility is the relative inexperience in both the architect and the builder in constructing sports facilities. Both firms were required to be Manitoba-based by the terms set by the provincial government, the primary financial backer (more on that in a minute.)

The Hamilton stadium, meanwhile, is being built by an international consortium that includes by Cannon Design, which was involved in the B.C. Place renovation, the Richmond Olympic Oval and the new Landsdowne Park in Ottawa. The builder is Bouygues Construction, a huge multinational based in France. It has built everything from bridges to soccer stadiums, to the containment shelter for the nuclear reactors in Chernobyl.

The Ticats have also spent the better part of two years touring stadiums across North America in attempt to gather the best fan experiences and incorporate them into Tim Hortons Field. They've also hired a number of consultants to advise them, including Jim Cima, who has been heavily involved in the construction of pro stadiums and arenas in Philadelphia, New Jersey and Minnesota among several others.

There are also significant differences in how the stadiums will be financed. Investors Group Field was built with the help of a $22.5-million provincial grant, a $7.5-million city grant and what amount to $170 in provincial loans. The Bombers plan to use revenue from the football team to repay $95 million of that money, while property taxes from new developments at the former Canad Inns Stadium site are expected cover the balance.

That means the Bombers must prioritize their finances to pay for their new building on an ongoing basis, and hope that the developments at Canad Inns produce as expected (it's a series of big box stores.) Because the Bombers are community-owned with no deep-pocketed owner behind them, the responsibility will fall to the taxpayers should the team fail to meet their commitments.

In Hamilton, the financing is more clear. It is budgeted at $145.7 million with the city is contributing $54.3 million, the province $22.3 million and federal government paying the remaining $69.1 million.

The Ticats have committed to pay the city $1.2 million per year for 20 years in exchange for use of the stadium, including $450,000 in rent and $750,000 per season in exchange for naming rights as part of a memorandum of understanding signed in February 2011. A final agreement is still being worked on.

Last weekend, while the Ticats were busy beating the Bombers on the field, representatives from the football team and the city of Hamilton were touring the Winnipeg stadium and talking to their counterparts about the challenges they had encountered. Winnipeg has a magnificent new facility — with a spectacular roof — but Hamilton may still end up with something both more economically and more sporting for fans.
     
     
  #3200  
Old Posted Sep 2, 2013, 9:16 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 37,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by elly63 View Post
The Bombers have yet to sell out a game this season — their winless home record likely isn't helping — but the vast majority of the empty seats have been located in the end zone, where visibility for CFL games is poorest.
The home opener sold out and this Sunday's game vs. Saskatchewan is already sold out.

This article makes it sound like the stadium's design is the reason people are staying away... that couldn't be any further from the truth and is really just some wishful Hamilton thinking. In reality, the team's 1-8 record is the reason there haven't been more sellouts. If the Bombers were even a .500 team, most, if not all the games would have been sold out.
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Closed Thread

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.