Why did Winnipeg build the MTS Centre to only 15,015 seats?

Status
Not open for further replies.

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
Doesn't really matter what any of us think. The guy who has final say thinks it's just fine.

"There's never been any doubt about the passion of the fans, people, in Winnipeg for NHL hockey," said Bettman. "I know there were a lot of people who weren't happy when the Jets left. I wasn't happy when the Jets left. So it's always been a good hockey market. Finally they have an arena that's up to NHL standards."

"You're going to have a very intimate building that can generate substantially, not completely, but substantially all of the revenues that a slightly larger building could generate," said Bettman. "So I don't think people need to get hung up over a thousand seats."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=326714

Relating to the other thread, the one that I created regarding Expansion Fees, would any of you think that the minimal seating capacity might effect how much Expansion Fee would be demanded to put a team in Winnipeg? And if the Expansion Fee isn't that high, could that play a role in whether the League would prefer to put a re-located team in Winnipeg rather than an Expansion team? Assuming that perhaps a greater Expansion Fee could be garnered elsewhere.
 

TRVIPERS

Registered User
Sep 26, 2006
264
0
Home of the Jets
15,000 is probably the sweet spot for an NHL rink in Winnipeg. The truth is that Winnipeg would never be able to sell out an 18,000 seat arena on a consistent basis. I think people forget how horrible Winnipeg Jets attendance was. In their entire NHL history they never once averaged more than 13,500 people per game. (http://www.curtiswalker.com/jets/attendance.aspx).

We should also remember that Maple Leaf Gardens only held around 15,500 and that didn't hurt the Leafs any, did it? MTS Centre is the perfect size for Winnipeg. More NHL arenas should be around 15,000 or 16,000. There's way too much ticket inventory in some cities.

I don't really think that the Jets attendance could be considered horrible when they were averaging 13000 in a league that was averaging around 14500

1989-90 League Average 14,975 Winnipeg Jets 13,106

1990-91 League Average 14,695 Winnipeg Jets 12,931

1991-92 League Average 14,510 Winnipeg Jets 12,931

1992-93 League Average 14,045 Winnipeg Jets 13,550

1993-94 League Average 14,748 Winnipeg Jets 13,297

1994-95 League Average 14797 Winnipeg Jets 13,013

1995-96 League Average 15986 Winnipeg Jets 11,316 (known last season)

http://www.andrewsstarspage.com/ind..._average_attendance_since_1989_90/118-2008-09
 

pucka lucka

Registered User
Apr 7, 2010
5,913
2,581
Ottawa
Relating to the other thread, the one that I created regarding Expansion Fees, would any of you think that the minimal seating capacity might effect how much Expansion Fee would be demanded to put a team in Winnipeg? And if the Expansion Fee isn't that high, could that play a role in whether the League would prefer to put a re-located team in Winnipeg rather than an Expansion team? Assuming that perhaps a greater Expansion Fee could be garnered elsewhere.

An expansion fee would be relative to the value of a team in that market. There are relocation fee's as well, so I don't think it matters either way. I'd be curious what is considered when setting either fee. Obviously the costs of relocation are lower to the purchaser than a new franchise. In the case of TNSE, they obviously have expertise in hockey operations, so getting team up and running from scratch should in theory, be less of a burden than for a green owner.
 

pucka lucka

Registered User
Apr 7, 2010
5,913
2,581
Ottawa
I don't really think that the Jets attendance could be considered horrible when they were averaging 13000 in a league that was averaging around 14500

1989-90 League Average 14,975 Winnipeg Jets 13,106

1990-91 League Average 14,695 Winnipeg Jets 12,931

1991-92 League Average 14,510 Winnipeg Jets 12,931

1992-93 League Average 14,045 Winnipeg Jets 13,550

1993-94 League Average 14,748 Winnipeg Jets 13,297

1994-95 League Average 14797 Winnipeg Jets 13,013

1995-96 League Average 15986 Winnipeg Jets 11,316 (known last season)

http://www.andrewsstarspage.com/ind..._average_attendance_since_1989_90/118-2008-09

Context. If anyone had attended games in that arena they might understand. What a pile of dog crap that place was. Anyone recall the number of obstructed view seats? You couldn't even see the scoreboard from the upper deck. The view from between the blue lines in the upper deck wasn't all that bad though. It was like that old Wayne Gretzky hockey video game.

wayne_gretzky_pc.gif
 

AtomBlaster

Registered User
Mar 3, 2011
71
0
Winnipeg, Mb
Context. If anyone had attended games in that arena they might understand. What a pile of dog crap that place was. Anyone recall the number of obstructed view seats? You couldn't even see the scoreboard from the upper deck. The view from between the blue lines in the upper deck wasn't all that bad though. It was like that old Wayne Gretzky hockey video game.

wayne_gretzky_pc.gif

No the game was better.
 

King Woodballs

Captain Awesome
Sep 25, 2007
39,377
7,401
Your Mind
Context. If anyone had attended games in that arena they might understand. What a pile of dog crap that place was. Anyone recall the number of obstructed view seats? You couldn't even see the scoreboard from the upper deck. The view from between the blue lines in the upper deck wasn't all that bad though. It was like that old Wayne Gretzky hockey video game.

wayne_gretzky_pc.gif

exactly
i went to a kiss concert there and all i saw was half the stage and part of the band
i was upperdeck and in one of the middle sections

that arena was AWFUL
 

Buck Aki Berg

Done with this place
Sep 17, 2008
17,325
8
Ottawa, ON
We should also remember that Maple Leaf Gardens only held around 15,500 and that didn't hurt the Leafs any, did it? MTS Centre is the perfect size for Winnipeg. More NHL arenas should be around 15,000 or 16,000. There's way too much ticket inventory in some cities.

I think that day is coming. With construction costs the way they are, and with political climate leaning against public funds for arenas, you'll see smaller arenas pop up within the next couple of decades once the current arenas start to reach the end of their useful lives, since ~19,000-seat arenas, at the current cost of construction, are too expensive for a lot of private investors.

I can also see the NHL exploring markets where they're the only game in town, and as such, get front-page coverage. Two examples of such markets that I like to point out are Omaha and Madison. While both have a college sports presence that can't be underestimated, both have arenas in the 15,000-seat range, and neither have a professional sports presence. And if the right combination of resources can come together in markets like these (much like they have in Winnipeg), they could be quite lucrative cities to set up shop.
 

jamwires

Registered User
Sep 22, 2008
1,044
0
Winnipeg, MB
There's nothing to discuss here. Building is the right size, Bettman and ownership agree. End conversation.
The atmosphere will be insane.

PS - the old building sucked giant nuts.
 

AllByDesign

Who's this ABD guy??
Mar 17, 2010
2,317
0
Location, Location!
There's nothing to discuss here. Building is the right size, Bettman and ownership agree. End conversation.
The atmosphere will be insane.

PS - the old building sucked giant nuts.

The building is the right size until such a time TNSE states otherwise. Initial projections are often off, just ask the COG how projections work on their parking forecasts. Is the building large enough in the event of an $80 Million dollar salary cap floor?

I'm not arguing that the MTS Centre cannot be profitable in the NHL under today's numbers. How much room is there for cost increases in the current model? How many price bumps can business and the public afford before attending is too expensive? I haven't the time to invest to give an accurate calculation, but my initial thoughts are that there will be a time when costs will be prohibitive.
 

pegcity

Registered User
Feb 9, 2011
1,109
364
Winnipeg
The building is the right size until such a time TNSE states otherwise. Initial projections are often off, just ask the COG how projections work on their parking forecasts. Is the building large enough in the event of an $80 Million dollar salary cap floor?

I'm not arguing that the MTS Centre cannot be profitable in the NHL under today's numbers. How much room is there for cost increases in the current model? How many price bumps can business and the public afford before attending is too expensive? I haven't the time to invest to give an accurate calculation, but my initial thoughts are that there will be a time when costs will be prohibitive.

In 20 years we will be looking at building a new arena (or expanding the current one). The MTSC is the right fit for the city now however, in 2030 it will no longer be adequate.

http://www.winnipeg.ca/cao/pdfs/population_forecast.pdf
 

Puckschmuck*

Guest
In 20 years we will be looking at building a new arena (or expanding the current one). The MTSC is the right fit for the city now however, in 2030 it will no longer be adequate.

http://www.winnipeg.ca/cao/pdfs/population_forecast.pdf

Winnipeg's current growth rate is surpassing what this article had predicted several years ago. It's more than likely we will be at a metro population of about 1 million within 20-30 years, perhaps sooner should population growth rates pick up even more which is very possible. This is something that most people do not take into account when they are quick to write of Winnipeg as economically viable in the NHL. Growing cities and economies will do very well in the short term AND long run, which is why I have all the confidence in the world that will will succeed in the NHL, similar to Calgary, Edmonton and Ottawa.
 

Seanconn*

Guest
15,000 is probably the sweet spot for an NHL rink in Winnipeg. The truth is that Winnipeg would never be able to sell out an 18,000 seat arena on a consistent basis. I think people forget how horrible Winnipeg Jets attendance was. In their entire NHL history they never once averaged more than 13,500 people per game. (http://www.curtiswalker.com/jets/attendance.aspx).

We should also remember that Maple Leaf Gardens only held around 15,500 and that didn't hurt the Leafs any, did it? MTS Centre is the perfect size for Winnipeg. More NHL arenas should be around 15,000 or 16,000. There's way too much ticket inventory in some cities.


EXACTLY, if a 15,700 capacity stadium was adequate for the most valuable team in the NHL in the biggest city in Canada, 15,000 is absolutely perfect for Winnipeg, and increase the likelihood of ever seeing a sellout.

I think the seating capacity is perfect, if you can add 500-1000 extra seats on the cheap do it. but instead of adding more nosebleed seating, add more private boxes instead that will actually generate a tonne of revenue.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
Possibly a stupid question in that there's probably a logical answer that I just don't know, but I've heard that the old Colisée (cap. 15,399) could likely be used in the interim while waiting for a new arena to be built. So what about the Key (cap. 15,177) in Seattle, if ever it were decided to get started on a new arena there? Both of those old arenas have greater seating capacity than the MTS Centre. And then there's also the XL Center in Hartford with a seating capacity of 15,635.

Qwest Center, Omaha, 16,680
BOK Center, Tulsa, 17,096
Toyota Center, Houston, 17,800
Sprint Center, Kansas City, 17,752
 
Last edited:

pegcity

Registered User
Feb 9, 2011
1,109
364
Winnipeg
Possibly a stupid question in that there's probably a logical answer that I just don't know, but I've heard that the old Colisée (cap. 15,399) could likely be used in the interim while waiting for a new arena to be built. So what about the Key (cap. 15,177) in Seattle, if ever it were decided to get started on a new arena there? Both of those old arenas have greater seating capacity than the MTS Centre. And then there's also the XL Center in Hartford with a seating capacity of 15,635.

The seat capacity argument has been talked about on this board and is really a moot point. Owner control of a 'modern' arena is the key.

True North is currently the #1 destination for the NHL due to consistent contact over the last 8 years. They have a very stable ownership group and have an arena that's ready to go. I really think it's pointless to discuss who's #1
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
Possibly a stupid question in that there's probably a logical answer that I just don't know, but I've heard that the old Colisée (cap. 15,399) could likely be used in the interim while waiting for a new arena to be built. So what about the Key (cap. 15,177) in Seattle, if ever it were decided to get started on a new arena there? Both of those old arenas have greater seating capacity than the MTS Centre. And then there's also the XL Center in Hartford with a seating capacity of 15,635.

Those 15K seats would include a significant number of obstructed view seats - ala America West Arena when the 'Yotes played there - only more-so:

keyarena_hockey_copy-2063.gif
 

pegcity

Registered User
Feb 9, 2011
1,109
364
Winnipeg
If I can add to my original post, Mark Chipman knows how to run a successful hockey franchise. He (and True North) isn't some owner who wants to buy a NHL team so the various levels of government can build him a tax payer paid arena.
 

MoreOrr

B4
Jun 20, 2006
24,420
438
Mexico
The seat capacity argument has been talked about on this board and is really a moot point. Owner control of a 'modern' arena is the key.

I wasn't asking about whether it was an issue in Winnipeg, but that if 15,000 is a sufficient capacity then what about the Key in Seattle, the XL Center in Hartford, and the Colisée in Quebec City?
 

BLONG7

Registered User
Oct 30, 2002
35,622
21,963
Nova Scotia
Visit site
If you know one day the NHL might be back why not build an 18,000+ Arena? Sure it'll cost more but in the long term it's worth it.
A 15,000 seat arena will also create some supply vs demand issues, which would be good for sellouts! I do think the NHL will return at some point!

A cap is cost certainty, so an owner could still make money with 15,000 in the seats!
 

Big McLargehuge

Fragile Traveler
May 9, 2002
72,188
7,741
S. Pasadena, CA
Those 15K seats would include a significant number of obstructed view seats - ala America West Arena when the 'Yotes played there - only more-so:

keyarena_hockey_copy-2063.gif

To say nothing about the fact that Seattle lost the Sonics because of how much of a dump that place is, and that is with it being built specifically for basketball and being renovated in the mid-90s. Also it would instantly be the oldest venue in the NHL.


Seattle really screwed the pooch with KeyArena and the Kingdome. The original KeyArena was mediocre to fine for it's time, but the decision to renovate it instead of build a new arena in the mid-90s was the death knell to getting a hockey team in the region and was nothing more than a bandage for the basketball team.

The Kingdome...well, whenever you build an arena that serves its purpose for less than 25 years old you know you built a lemon. I mean, there were issues about its sustainability when it was less than 15 years old. The stadium was demolished more than a decade ago and still isn't paid off.
 
Last edited:

RECCE

The Dog House
Apr 29, 2010
3,203
0
Margaritaville
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=756363
http://www2.hfboards.com/3.7.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=773576
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=818198
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=868372

Because I agree.
MTS Centre has now been open for over a year and has been one the world's busiest venues for 15 straight months. It's location and capacity have been debated endlessly since the groundbreaking in early 2003. Luckily they don't have any bearing on the building's suitablity for the NHL. The questions of size restrictions in the new building need to be put to rest. The myth that arenas need to be 18,000-20,000 seats now-a-days is best proven in a dozen buildings across the league that remain 1/3 empty on most evenings, some even half empty. Not only are these buildings unnecessary but they are also unrealistic to fill on most evenings. For our market, MTSC is ideal. At 15,100 seats, MTSC can sellout consistantly and have a lower operation cost than any building in the NHL. It can also create the all-important supply and demand aspect of marketing. What better mentality than to have it be actually difficult to get a ticket to a Jets game! It is crucial to create that excitement and desire to want to get to the box office early to be part of the noise and intimacy the MTS Centre will provide. Walk-ups just before game time shouldn't exist. In fact, a majority of NHL teams don't need the huge buildings they are in. The NBA creates the need for the size these buildings are. Many American markets have numerous sports that utilize their arena. Winnipeg would have one key sport in MTSC. We would also be able to generate all of the revenue that Winnipeg Enterpises Corp. swallowed up in the past. There will also be new revenue opportunities that didn't exist before as well as revenue from concerts and non-hockey events to off-set any losses that may or may not result in running an NHL team. Owning a team and the building it plays in has many perks.

MTS CentreIt has been documented that owners in the NHL wish they actually had smaller arenas! The NHL has given the thumbs-up to MTSC in all aspects. After all, it is no longer about how many seats you have in your building as much as it is about how much you can get for each seat in it. A ticket will cost more than the Jets of old, but what doesn't cost more today? Fuel is double the price than it was in 1996. So are concerts. So is airfare. And on and on. Also remember that an arena is a glorified hockey rink. You see, an arena doesn’t need a million square feet of office space and room for an amusement park! We are Winnipeggers. We buy hockey free of gimmicks, at full price and we actually attend the game. In short, MTS Centre is just right for Winnipeg and arguably the most ideal size for NHL hockey. Just ask Washington, Buffalo, Florida, Nashville, Carolina, Phoenix, New Jersey, Atlanta and Pittsburgh. Their fans couldn't fill MTSC's lower bowl on some evenings and couldn't fill our entire arena on most nights. And how many of them actually paid for their tickets? On a final note, the cities mentioned above are all, quote "larger markets". Are they?
http://jetsowner.com/3keys.htm
 

roccerfeller

jets bromantic
Sep 27, 2009
7,632
6,246
British Columbia
A lot of you guys talking economics here. Especially the 'limit the supply so you can jack up the price' idea. Have you ever heard of elasticity? Because it may surprise you, but the hockey-going Winnipegger does not have an unlimited supply of money. And when tickets hit Toronto levels, the MTS Centre will be empty.

Even if they charged Toronto prices for the tickets, do you think they'd be making enough money to play to the cap and turn a profit? They'd probably play to the floor, and stock the roster with aging journeymen, inexperienced rookies, and bubble players. Now you're paying some of the highest prices in the league to watch a team that has no chance of making the playoffs. How long do you think that will last before Winnipeggers can't afford it? Old Winnipeg Arena wasn't full most nights, because the Jets were a disgrace for half their time in the league.

We must live in two different Winnipeg's. And you're comparing Winnipeg to Toronto on two different fundamental levels...and connecting them. :amazed: It makes for a convincing argument, but the city is more (much more) diverse than you give it credit.

Cities change over time. Winnipeg was the financial hotspot of western Canada once. It went from that, to being the cheapest city in Canada, economically devastated, and "elderly". And if the current city growth and stabilization, on both the population and economic levels continues, Winnipeg is going through another metamorphosis. The foundations that were set in the 90s and 2000's were imperative to Winnipeg's economic structure, such that even when CanWest went bankrupt and left the tallest office tower in Winnipeg, the city chugged along and will even post further growth this year...something that would not necessarily happen, say in Calgary, if the biggest corporations moved or went bankrupt. There is a whole angle you are not considering, and I think your view is slightly pessimistic and archaic.

"Supply and Demand"

Thats why the arena is 15,015. TNSE did the studies and based on historical demand and the size of the Winnipeg and surrounding market ( the supply ), 15,015 was the best number. But here is the kicker.... the only reason this works is because the owner of the team also owns the building ( I have lost count as to how many times I've explained this to people ).

If the only revenue that a hockey team in Winnipeg had was gate receipts and revenue generated on game nights ( like Edmonton and that's why they need a bigger building ) then there is NO WAY this would fly. But TNSE is interested in how much revenue TNSE as a whole generates, not just a hockey team. Example: in May, Elton John is coming here and playing the MTS Centre. It will be sold out with most of the tickets going for $165. TNSE gets the revenue from that concert, and hence the team also gets that revenue. Its all one pile of money. If the NHL team was to lose a few bucks one season, all the other events more than make up for it.

Back to the building... It is estimated that the extra 3,000 seats to bring it up to 18,000 would have potentially made $4M per season because these extra seats are your cheap seats. TNSE just finished building a multiplex hockey facility for rentals and adult leagues etc. They estimate that facility will make $4M per year. So to TNSE its a wash.


Exactly. Not to mention the numerous side sources of revenue TNSE will have. There is a whole business model and structure in play, that people are not aware of, but will learn of in due time ;)
 
Last edited:

roccerfeller

jets bromantic
Sep 27, 2009
7,632
6,246
British Columbia
In 20 years we will be looking at building a new arena (or expanding the current one). The MTSC is the right fit for the city now however, in 2030 it will no longer be adequate.

http://www.winnipeg.ca/cao/pdfs/population_forecast.pdf

For the record, as of today the CMA population is already around what it was projected to be in 2014 (~760k)

Expect some of the best years for the city population-wise these next 2 decades.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->