Phoenix CXII: The Devil is in the Details

[The Feckless Puck]

Most cities are moving away from spending on stadiums. With the rising cost of building and maintaining a stadium, it is no longer a good investment. Teams today expect stadiums to be state of the art with all the amenities which causes operating expenses to go up. I think if cities are going to spend on stadiums, it doesn't have to be so fancy.

That, unfortunately, is a Catch-22. Cities building less-fancy but still useful arenas do so to lower operating and building costs; but in doing so it gives the teams leverage much sooner to complain that their facilities aren't state-of-the-art, and consequently use relocation as a crowbar to get more money for a new building.

The basic conclusion is that municipalities building stadiums for sports teams is simply a bad precedent to set and a terribly poor investment.

 

[Llama19]

Another payment of $38,829.16 was made (posting date 02/11/16) to Beacon Sports, bringing the grand total to $116,365.16.

Source: http://www.glendaleaz.com/FollowYourMoney/Dept.cfm?Type=5&DeptID=221&DivID=11351&Account=518200

Two more fortnights until AEG is voted as the new arena manager...

 

[MNNumbers]

I get what you are saying about the on-paper 50% but the devil really is in the details. It is most common that the teams contribution to constuction cost is little more than revenues from the facility. If the naming rights sell for $100MM and that goes towards the funding, is that really a team contribution? Stuff like that. The other component is the lease that almost universally gives bulk of revenues to the team even though it's marketed as a "public-private partnership"

Interesting viewpoint. I think that the Naming Rights should belong mainly to the team, because without the team, the naming rights are not worth as much. (We will get an example of this if the Coyotes don't play at GRA next year. What will be the renegotiation on that?). Then, with football, there are PSLs. Well, they are usually marketed as a way to pay for the stadium, but the team would charge them anyway. It's a rip-off to get fans to pay for tickets twice. So, yes, that's a team contribution. Etc.

I am with you on the revenues, though. Very true. The teams should not get all the revenues, where they typically do in basketball and hockey arenas. The teams usually get a great deal: You build us a big part of the arena costs. You pay the maintenance costs. We get all the the money.

Yuck.

 

[Fugu]

Interesting viewpoint. I think that the Naming Rights should belong mainly to the team, because without the team, the naming rights are not worth as much. (We will get an example of this if the Coyotes don't play at GRA next year. What will be the renegotiation on that?). Then, with football, there are PSLs. Well, they are usually marketed as a way to pay for the stadium, but the team would charge them anyway. It's a rip-off to get fans to pay for tickets twice. So, yes, that's a team contribution. Etc.

I am with you on the revenues, though. Very true. The teams should not get all the revenues, where they typically do in basketball and hockey arenas. The teams usually get a great deal: You build us a big part of the arena costs. You pay the maintenance costs. We get all the the money.

Yuck.

I'm not sure I agree, MNN. The team (or major league anchor tenant) can enhance the value, but a sponsor is looking for a mention of the name any time someone is buying tickets, looking at entertainment schedules, or attending. It's putting your name on something that a large portion of the local population will know about, and perhaps even attend events hosted at the venue.

 

[Fugu]

That, unfortunately, is a Catch-22. Cities building less-fancy but still useful arenas do so to lower operating and building costs; but in doing so it gives the teams leverage much sooner to complain that their facilities aren't state-of-the-art, and consequently use relocation as a crowbar to get more money for a new building.

The basic conclusion is that municipalities building stadiums for sports teams is simply a bad precedent to set and a terribly poor investment.

That has to be a tactic that's getting old. My preference has always been, "Okay, go ahead. See how much it costs you to move too."

Not only are they running out of cities that will be better, there are the associated costs of just setting up shop in a new market. You figure every major city is booked up, so you're mostly likely going second tier-- unless you have an LA, Houston or Seattle... but these places aren't exactly screaming for teams by opening up the vault.

 

[MNNumbers]

I'm not sure I agree, MNN. The team (or major league anchor tenant) can enhance the value, but a sponsor is looking for a mention of the name any time someone is buying tickets, looking at entertainment schedules, or attending. It's putting your name on something that a large portion of the local population will know about, and perhaps even attend events hosted at the venue.

I won't argue, because I can definitely see your perspective, too. Like I said, the test of this will be when, sometime in the next year or two, the Coyotes are not playing in GRA. Will the tribe want to renegotiate? I am actually looking forward to that.

 

[TheLegend]

San Diego is fighting the good fight against Spanos for what it's worth.

I remember San Diego spent 2-3 years guaranteeing sellouts (lifting local blackouts) by buying up thousands of unsold tickets when the Chargers really sucked. The one benefit was they were distributed to various schools and youth groups so they didn't go unused. But it cost them millions.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

That has to be a tactic that's getting old. My preference has always been, "Okay, go ahead. See how much it costs you to move too."

You'd hope it would get old, but it doesn't. Sports owners know they have excellent hostages in their fanbase to exploit to get what they want.

 

[Killion]

You'd hope it would get old, but it doesn't. Sports owners know they have excellent hostages in their fanbase to exploit to get what they want.

Depends on whether or not they wanna play that card TFP. Norm Green didnt. Barry Shenkarow, Marcel Aubut, ASG, they never slapped it down. Karmano's did in Hartford, then kept moving the goalposts around, appears to be doing the same thing all over again with his irrational expectations. You just dont know whats really going on with these guys. Self interests.... Fact is, by now, if you own the Coyotes 3yrs in, and if Glendale hadnt done what they did.... damn straight your calling on those fans for a minimum of 12,000 ~ 14,000 Seasons Tickets Sold "or else".... Yet, this has never happened. At no time has LeBlanc ever even hinted at dropping that bomb. TV Ratings beyond anemic to boot. And why not? Why hasnt he? Thats troubling to me. Doesnt equate short of = Caretaker, Fake Owners...

Something else is clearly in play.

 

[mesamonster]

Depends on whether or not they wanna play that card TFP. Norm Green didnt. Barry Shenkarow, Marcel Aubut, ASG, they never slapped it down. Karmano's did in Hartford, then kept moving the goalposts around, appears to be doing the same thing all over again with his irrational expectations. You just dont know whats really going on with these guys. Self interests.... Fact is, by now, if you own the Coyotes 3yrs in, and if Glendale hadnt done what they did.... damn straight your calling on those fans for a minimum of 12,000 ~ 14,000 Seasons Tickets Sold "or else".... Yet, this has never happened. At no time has LeBlanc ever even hinted at dropping that bomb. TV Ratings beyond anemic to boot. And why not? Why hasnt he? Thats troubling to me. Doesnt equate short of = Caretaker, Fake Owners...

Something else is clearly in play.

K, the $64,000 dollar question that has been the basis of the threads generated in the last few years is: WHAT IS THAT SOMETHING ELSE?

 

[Dirty Old Man]

Detroit, Milwaukee, Sacramento, St.Louis actually had an offer on the table for the Rams, Surprise redid the Pathers agreement, etc, etc, etc... It's actually easier to list the few outliers where cities didn't provide the majority of the funding.

Took me a minute to realize you probably meant *Sunrise* (a Miami suburb, home to the Florida Panthers), vs. *Surprise* (a Phoenix suburb, home to Spring Training, alongside Glendale, home to Spring Training, including the White Sox, and Dodgers which until recently used to train in Vero Beach, in Florida, along with a bunch of other MLB teams that used to train in Florida, but are as of 2009 training in Arizona, along with the Indians (Goodyear 2009), Royals (Surprise 2003), Reds (Goodyear 2009), Rangers (Surprise 2003)... )

 

[Llama19]

Depends on whether or not they wanna play that card TFP. Norm Green didnt. Barry Shenkarow, Marcel Aubut, ASG, they never slapped it down. Karmano's did in Hartford, then kept moving the goalposts around, appears to be doing the same thing all over again with his irrational expectations. You just dont know whats really going on with these guys. Self interests.... Fact is, by now, if you own the Coyotes 3yrs in, and if Glendale hadnt done what they did.... damn straight your calling on those fans for a minimum of 12,000 ~ 14,000 Seasons Tickets Sold "or else".... Yet, this has never happened. At no time has LeBlanc ever even hinted at dropping that bomb. TV Ratings beyond anemic to boot. And why not? Why hasnt he? Thats troubling to me. Doesnt equate short of = Caretaker, Fake Owners...

Something else is clearly in play.

Yes...'fake' or 'placeholder' owners...

LeBluster(tm) given a 'chance' to make it work but blew it big time...

Only hope is for someone else to pay, and the 'payout' or 'buyout' will soon occur...

 

[cutchemist42]

If that is their main issue (high seating capacity), all they need to do is renovate the ballpark and adjust the seats. Other ballparks have done that without tearing down the whole ballpark. No ballpark should be replaced when it's 18 years old (barring catastrophic flaws, like not built to earthquake standards and they find it's sitting on a fault, etc where it becomes a safety issue). Atlanta's crazy, Arizona need not follow.




That's still a year away. Until then, it's the 5th oldest NL team (which is still nonsense. It would be like a NHL team complaining about their arena only looking at arenas in their conference). He's putting the cart ahead of the horse (I guess that's becoming an Arizona sports tradition thanks to LeBlanc ).

TBF, its a suburb of Atlanta that is doing the new stadium. Atlanta didnt want to budge on a new stadium. I think a college is now going to use it.

 

[0point1]

I'm curious if there has been any noticeable drop off in attendance this winter due to fewer Canadians spending winters down south cause of the loonie.

I've seen a noticeable drop in Canadians this year. It wasn't unheard of before for a game against a Canadian team to have 40% or more of the fans cheering for the Canadian team. Not necessarily more Coyotes fans now mind you, just less Canadian fans.

Anecdotal evidence but I noticed a few neighbors from Canada have sold/have for sale their homes here. This story seems to back that up:

http://ktar.com/story/399891/why-canadians-are-selling-their-phoenix-area-homes/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/snowbirds-loonie-real-estate-1.3425322

Having a currency worth ~35% less take a toll and running off to Arizona is probably one of those luxuries that is first to get cut.

 

[JimAnchower]

TBF, its a suburb of Atlanta that is doing the new stadium. Atlanta didnt want to budge on a new stadium. I think a college is now going to use it.

Atlanta, and the surrounding area, are replacing two stadiums that aren't even 25 years old yet. At least Turner Field will be converted into a football stadium for Georgia State, as you said. One wonders when the Hawks start asking for a new arena.

 

[Llama19]

This poll is not looking good for LeBluster(tm)...

Would you vote for a new downtown Phoenix arena for the Suns and other teams?

43% - No. If the team wants a new arena it should build one itself.
33% - Yes, it's worth it.
24% - What's wrong with renovating the existing arena?

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/...x-arena-for-the-suns-and-other-teams/19185192

 

[Slot]

I've seen a noticeable drop in Canadians this year. It wasn't unheard of before for a game against a Canadian team to have 40% or more of the fans cheering for the Canadian team. Not necessarily more Coyotes fans now mind you, just less Canadian fans.

Anecdotal evidence but I noticed a few neighbors from Canada have sold/have for sale their homes here. This story seems to back that up:

http://ktar.com/story/399891/why-canadians-are-selling-their-phoenix-area-homes/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/snowbirds-loonie-real-estate-1.3425322

Having a currency worth ~35% less take a toll and running off to Arizona is probably one of those luxuries that is first to get cut.

Also selling now nets you a 40% premium when you convert the sale price to Canuck Bucks.

 

[powerstuck]

I won't argue, because I can definitely see your perspective, too. Like I said, the test of this will be when, sometime in the next year or two, the Coyotes are not playing in GRA. Will the tribe want to renegotiate? I am actually looking forward to that.

There is already a recently signed example. Our new arena in Quebec, Quebecor is paying the city $33M for the next 25 years to have the arena named ''Centre Videotron'' but in the contract, it is already established that in an NHL team was to become tennant of the arena, that amount would increase by $30.5M so close to 50% difference.

 

[Llama19]

Also selling now nets you a 40% premium when you convert the sale price to Canuck Bucks.

Or My Canadian Tire ‘Money’...

 

[TheLegend]

This poll is not looking good for LeBluster(tm)...

Would you vote for a new downtown Phoenix arena for the Suns and other teams?

43% - No. If the team wants a new arena it should build one itself.
33% - Yes, it's worth it.
24% - What's wrong with renovating the existing arena?

Source: http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/...x-arena-for-the-suns-and-other-teams/19185192

Been proven over and over that online polls are meaningless.

 

[GuelphStormer]

Been proven over and over that online polls are meaningless.

in this case, sure, but nothing of that sort has ever been proven.

 

[cheswick]

Been proven over and over that online polls are meaningless.

You're confusing unscientific, with meaningless. They have am meaning, they don't have a measurable statistical significance.

 

[Llama19]

in this case, sure, but nothing of that sort has ever been proven.

You're confusing unscientific, with meaningless. They have am meaning, they don't have a measurable statistical significance.

The poll is only as 'meaningful' as the number of respondents in gauging the market...

If it comes to a 'legislative' action, a 'ballot' measure is presented
to 'registered voters' to determine an outcome,
and then that outcome becomes a measurable, statistical reality...

 

[GuelphStormer]

The poll is only as 'meaningful' as the number of respondents in gauging the market...

If it comes to a 'legislative' action, a 'ballot' measure is presented
to 'registered voters' to determine an outcome,
and then that outcome becomes a measurable, statistical reality...

not really, i wont bore you with the details about power calculation and sampling but generally speaking, a poll of 800 to 1200 people is just as accurate as one of 8,000 to 12,000 people.

it's the way those people are selected that makes all the difference. in the case of self-selected readers on newspaper polls, they are generally not all that accurate because of that bias. but in the case of various online polls run by professional pollsters, they are often very very accurate.

things also depend most importantly on what is being asked.

 

[TheLegend]

You're confusing unscientific, with meaningless. They have am meaning, they don't have a measurable statistical significance.

Nope... not confused at all.

The only redeeming value that poll brings to the table is to entertain a specific group.

Which for discussion purposes is meaningless.