Sign in to follow this  
Monizzle145

Finally went to the new XL....not really impressed

Recommended Posts

p4277 wrote:"Most private businesses do not get their facilities provided by the taxpayers, nor should they. If this was about a business that makes paperclips, we would expect them to build their own factory, but to attract a sports team, cities and states will spend hundreds of millions of dollars...If having a team in Hartford makes sense from a business perspective, then an owner should have no problem putting up money towards building an arena."

 

On the surface that's true, but it's not realistic. Pro sports is a different kind of business than others. True, a paperclip factory would create some paperclip-construction jobs & bring in some tax revenue; maybe even allow for a few city hot dog venders to make a few more bucks with their trucks.

 

But a brand new arena would transform the area in significant, positive ways that few other businesses ever could even approach. And not all pro-sports cities are created equal. In order to ensure similar non-team relocating security that places like NY & Boston can afford to take for granted, we may have to offer more.

 

You have to spend $ to make $. & the benefits in tax revenue, job creation (both by the team & ancillary to it) the local economy, civic pride & perpetual year-round international recognition would far outweigh the monetary costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chad, Hartford was one of the most beauti**l cities in the country 100 years ago. Mark Twain said so himself. A series of infrastructural mistakes, neglect and the population move to the suburbs did the city in. But now city life is desirable again and you need to make your city a destination. If you continue to let the city slide deeper into the hole it's already in than you'll end up subsidizing more and more. The XL is just a small example but a microcosm of the entire city. How much more money do you want them to throw at the place just to keep it barley **nctional while losing events to competitors throughout the state. In 20 years the money just to keep the place operational will be the same as a new building. Why keep delaying the inevitable?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartfordyouremyhome wrote:

>

> You have to spend $ to make $. & the benefits in tax revenue, job

> creation (both by the team & ancillary to it) the local economy, civic

> pride & perpetual year-round international recognition would far

> outweigh the monetary costs.

 

You've hit on the emotional factor in all of this. We were major-league once and our collective egos took a hit when the Whalers left. As far as tax revenue and job creation goes, a factory or other medium size business would probably employ more people than a hockey team. Other than the relatively small number of players, (who make a lot of money), the jobs created by a new arena tend to be low paying part time jobs.

 

Let's remember the reality of the recognition that we had when the Whalers were here. They were almost always near the bottom of the standings, rarely in the playoffs, and were called the Hartford Failures and the Forever .500's, among other things. We were laughed at for having a team that played in a mall. Does this recognition outweigh the cost of a new state-of-the-art arena and maybe subsidies to a new team?

 

Listen, I'd like to have the NHL back, but not at any cost. If we can get a team back that helps build the arena, and puts a competitive team on the ice, it will be supported. Will that be enough? Maybe, maybe not. I think the NHL's business model needs to be looked at as well. When half the league loses money each year, something's wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am so sick of coming on here daily reading these usual hate**l postings, people bashing the XL/WolfPack Arena, bashing the city of Hartford, bashing the great job that Governor Malloy has done, bashing the idea of a new baseball stadium, bashing Mitch Beck from the Hastings, bashing Petey Hindle from the Hartford Examiner, bashing Joe Zone from WFSB, bashing Sonar, bashing the Rangers, bashing young devoted fans such as Biggie1083 and PackFan5580, bashing the significance of winning a Calder Cup in the year 2000, bashing the AHL, bashing the diversity of the fine citizens of Hartford, bashing the Rock Cats management, bashing the Hartford Courant (the oldest newspaper in the Country), bashing everything about our city.

 

I am PROUD of my city, I am PROUD of my Governor, I am PROUD of the young fanbase such as Biggie1083 and PackFan5580, and I am proud of my Calder Cup Champion Wolfpack.

 

HARTFORD

H

..O

....C

......K

........E

..........Y

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p4277 wrote:"As far as tax revenue and job creation goes, a factory or other medium size business would probably employ more people than a hockey team. Other than the relatively small number of players, (who make a lot of money), the jobs created by a new arena tend to be low paying part time jobs."

 

That's only looking at the small picture. 1st, part-time jobs are better than no-time jobs. But really the much bigger gain is to the city overall. The crowds for 41 NHL home dates plus playoffs, UConn basketball, NCAA hockey & basketball semi-final round tournament games & the added concerts & shows, etc a new arena would bring in would encourage more businesses & establishments around the arena, which would in turn create even more jobs. It'd also draw more conventions to the convention center.

 

p4277 wrote:: "Let's remember the reality of the recognition that we had when the Whalers were here. They were almost always near the bottom of the standings, rarely in the playoffs, and were called the Hartford Failures and the Forever .500's, among other things. We were laughed at for having a team that played in a mall. Does this recognition outweigh the cost of a new state-of-the-art arena and maybe subsidies to a new team?"

 

Yes, I remember. And I couldn't possibly care less what Boston called us. Montreal played in a legendary arena on top of a mall. Who cares? This isn't 1997, it's 2014. It's the time of numerous interactive social media sites, NHL Center Ice, Stubhub, 24-hour sports news coverage, the NHL Network, etc; none of which existed in '97.

 

Do you honestly believe that we should p***** on a potentially huge opportunity for a major renaissance because 20 years ago a couple of untalented sports-writing hacks in Boston called us a few mild names? Really? To me, that'd be absurd.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WolfpackFan1998 wrote:

> I am so sick of coming on here daily reading these usual hate**l postings,

> people bashing the XL/WolfPack Arena, bashing the city of Hartford, bashing

> the great job that Governor Malloy has done, bashing the idea of a new

> baseball stadium, bashing Mitch Beck from the Hastings, bashing Petey

> Hindle from the Hartford Examiner, bashing Joe Zone from WFSB, bashing

> Sonar, bashing the Rangers, bashing young devoted fans such as Biggie1083

> and PackFan5580, bashing the significance of winning a Calder Cup in the

> year 2000, bashing the AHL, bashing the diversity of the fine citizens of

> Hartford, bashing the Rock Cats management, bashing the Hartford Courant

> (the oldest newspaper in the Country), bashing everything about our city.

>

> I am PROUD of my city, I am PROUD of my Governor, I am PROUD of the young

> fanbase such as Biggie1083 and PackFan5580, and I am proud of my Calder Cup

> Champion Wolfpack.

>

> HARTFORD

> H

> ..O

> ....C

> ......K

> ........E

> ..........Y

 

 

 

Also, don't forget, the Calder Cup is coming back to Hartford in 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartfordyouremyhome wrote: You have to spend $ to make $. & the benefits in tax revenue, job creation (both by the team & ancillary to it) the local economy, civic pride & perpetual year-round international recognition would far outweigh the monetary costs.

professor who taught my sports management course says this is not true. he showed us independent studies that proved its not true over and over again. studies payed for by teams that will play in stadiums and arenas and ball parks built by state and city money will twist numbers to claim benefits outweigh costs. studies payed for by states and citys that have already decided to build stadium or arena or ball park for team will twist numbers to claim benefits outweigh costs. studies payed for by groups against public money being spent to build arenas and ball parks and stadiums and arenas for teams will twist numbers to claim benefits dont outweigh costs. but independent studies by leading independent econ experts who dont have any thing to gain but are just studying effect of spending public $$$ to build arenas and ballparks and stadiums have all said in most cases benefits dont outweigh costs. he says best case is benefits and costs balance but most times costs outweigh benefits. cause besides states and citys paying for stadiums and arenas and ballparks they also end up giving teams playing in the arenas all sorts of extra breaks. things like sweet heart leases with cheap rent and tax breaks and lots of concession money and name rights money. they some times let team manage stadium or arena or ballpark and then team takes management fee and big share of money from all other events in building. he did say there are civic pride benefits but that doesnt outweigh money spent.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PlainvilleWhale wrote:

> But now city life is desirable again and you need to make your city a

> destination. If you continue to let the city slide deeper into the hole

> it's already in than you'll end up subsidizing more and more. The XL is

> just a small example but a microcosm of the entire city. How much more

> money do you want them to throw at the place just to keep it barley

> **nctional while losing events to competitors throughout the state. In 20

> years the money just to keep the place operational will be the same as a

> new building. Why keep delaying the inevitable?

i get what you are saying but i think it is sick and sad that so many think a new arena is what is most needed to keep hartford afloat. hartford stayed afloat hundreds of years without arena or Nhl team. i also hate that people think that state of connecticut cant play hardball with Nhl and that we have to cater to potential Nhl owner. its like people are saying that state of connecticut and city of hartford have to roll over and let potential Nhl owner and Nhl stick it to us and let potential Nhl owner and Nhl call the shots about how we rebuild our selves and set up a great **ture for state and city. i keep hearing people out here say that hartford is solution to the problem Nhl is having with its teams in a lot of bad markets. if hartford is solution to Nhl problem then how come we cant leverage being solution to Nhl problem and play hardball with league and tell potential owner that we arent in business of catering on arena deal? i hate that people think we are so low down that we have to kiss a sports leagues ***** to build our selves up again. it makes me real angry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WhalerChad wrote: "professor who taught my sports management course says this is not true. he showed us independent studies that proved its not true over and over again."

 

Almost anyone can show people "studies" that back their opinion. Others will show the opposite. At any rate I disagree. But put that specific point aside for a moment & focus on the other points:

 

Would it create tax revenue? Yes, that's a fact. Would it create jobs? Yes, that's a fact. Would it be a source of much needed civic pride? Yes, that's a fact. Would it allow for perpetual year-round international recognition for Hartford & therefore help tourism? Yes, that's a fact.

 

We're getting a $600 million busway that almost nobody wanted & few will use. That's just one example of hundreds of millions thrown away. A $400 Million arena will do everything stated above & will last for decades.

 

The time to build the arena is now. If not, then in a decade we can just build a tumbleweed museum because we'll have plenty of them around here to display.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Would it create tax revenue? Yes, that's a fact." Would it create enough tax revenue to offset the expense of building a $400 million arena, (plus interest on the bonds?) That's not a fact.

 

"Would it create jobs? Yes, that's a fact." Aside from the construction jobs, which are temporary, and the high paid players, who are very few, (and there's no guarantee they will come even if we build it), what new jobs will be created? Ticket takers, ushers, hot dog vendors, program sellers, etc. are not great jobs. And they already exist at the XL Center, so they will be at a new location, but they are not new jobs.

 

"Would it be a source of much needed civic pride? Yes, that's a fact. Would it allow for perpetual year-round international recognition for Hartford & therefore help tourism? Yes, that's a fact." How is this measured? Can you prove that an arena gives civic pride and recognition? Do you care that Glendale has a state of the art arena? Does it make you want to visit there? And as far as tourism is concerned, be realistic. Hartford is not a tourist destination, A new arena will not change that.

 

"We're getting a $600 million busway that almost nobody wanted & few will use. That's just one example of hundreds of millions thrown away. A $400 Million arena will do everything stated above & will last for decades." I agree about the busway, a shame**l waste of taxpayer money. But a new arena is not the magic cure that you think it is. And lasting for decades? How many decades? The XL Center was only 22 years old when the Whalers demanded a new building. The Hurricane's building is now over 15 years old, will they be demanding a new arena in the next 7 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p4277:"Would it create tax revenue?Yes, a fact.""That's not a fact."

 

Yes it's a fact it'll create tax revenue.How much is debatable.

 

p4277:"Aside from the construction jobs...and the high paid players...what new jobs will be created?Ticket takers,ushers,hot dog vendors,program sellers, etc. are not great jobs.And they already exist at the XL..."

 

I know you know this,so I'm unsure why it must always be repeated.So be it.You're talking about the arena itself,but are leaving out the jobs other businesses/establishments will require due to the influx of people that the arena will bring downtown.Wherever thousands of people regularly congregate,businesses/entrepreneurs will follow.

 

p4277:"Would it be a source of much needed civic pride?Yes,that's a fact.Would it allow for perpetual year-round international recognition for Hartford&therefore help tourism?Yes,that's a fact.""...Can you prove that an arena gives civic pride and recognition?"

 

Yes,I can.It'd increase my civic pride & that of many I know.Have you yourself not stated only an NHL team would be enough to bring you up here?Do you think you're the only one who thinks that way?

 

Recognition:are you saying Hartford would receive no additional recognition from joining the NHL?That being included in every newspaper,sports website&social media outlet in North America would make no difference?That having all its games on Center Ice & national games on NBC would bring 0 additional recognition?If so,we disagree.

 

p4277:"I agree about the busway,a shame**l waste of taxpayer money...And lasting for decades?How many decades?The XL Center was only 22 years old when the Whalers demanded a new building.The Hurricane's building is now over 15 years old,will they be demanding a new arena in the next 7 years?

 

Yes,decades.The XL's lasted 40 years;a new arena would easily last at least as long.If an owner/politician wants to replace it sooner is up to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartfordyouremyhome do you think that a new arena is what is most needed to keep city of hartford afloat? more than any thing else right now? also do you agree with plainvillewhale that state of connecticut and city of hartford have to "cater" to a potential Nhl owner about arena deal? do you agree with plainvillewhale that state of connecticut and city of hartford "cant afford to play hardball" with Nhl about arena? are you okay with state of connecticut and city of hartford catering to potential Nhl owner by charging real cheap rent to use new arena? are you okay with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by letting team owner keep most of concession money from nights of Nhl games? are you okay with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by letting team owner take money from arena name rights deal? are you okay with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by paying Nhl team fee to manage arena? if Nhl team manages arena are you okay with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by letting team keep money from concessions on nights when Uconn or concerts use arena? are you okay with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by giving him tax breaks on money he makes running team in new arena? how far would you be willing to have state and city go catering to potential Nhl owner to make sure Nhl team comes here? i interested in hearing how far you think state and city should go to Nhl team to come to hartford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the tax revenue: If it's not enough extra revenue to cover the cost of the arena, it's a net loss. Not a good thing.

 

On the jobs: If people spend more entertainment dollars in downtown Hartford at events at the arena, they will spend less at movies, bars and restaurants elsewhere. People have only so much entertainment money. What gets spent in one place does not get spent somewhere else. Jobs that get created in Hartford will come at the expense of jobs in other places.

 

Civic pride and recognition: Virtually impossible to quantify. You'd feel better as would some people you know. That's nice. Is it worth $400 million? Sorry, but no, it's not. And yes, I would go to Hartford for NHL games, but that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about a building. And without an NHL team, it would have the same events as the XL does now. As for being on NBC, how often were the Whalers on national TV? About as often as the Hurricanes are now, which is almost never. The national games feature the Rangers, Bruins, Flyers, Red Wings, Blackhawks and rarely anyone else.

 

Decades: The XL as an NHL arena lasted less than 20 years. If the Whalers were still here, it would have been torn down already and the new arena would be getting old by now. The shelf life of sports arenas is getting ridiculously s*h*o*r*t, a result of team owners holding cities hostage.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartfordyouremyhome wrote:

> Yes,decades.The XL's lasted 40 years;a new arena would easily last at least

> as long.If an owner/politician wants to replace it sooner is up to them.

what if Nhl team owner wants arena replaced sooner but wants state or city to pay for replacing it and state and city politicians dont agree that it needs to be replaced? what if Nhl owner says that if state and city wont pay to replace arena sooner he will move team out of hartford? what then? would you want state and city politicians to stick to not paying to replace arena sooner or would you want them to knuckle under and pay to replace arena sooner just to keep Nhl team?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WhalerChad:"Hartfordyouremyhome do you think that a new arena is what is most needed to keep city of hartford afloat? more than any thing else right now?'

 

Yes. And I'll ask you, if not a new arena & all that comes with it, what do you think is most needed to make Hartford viable; to "keep the city of Hartford afloat"?

 

WhalerChad:"also do you agree with plainvillewhale that state of connecticut and city of hartford have to "cater" to a potential Nhl owner about arena deal? do you agree with plainvillewhale that state of connecticut and city of hartford "cant afford to play hardball" with Nhl about arena?...with state of connecticut and city of hartford catering to potential Nhl owner by charging real cheap rent to use new arena?...with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by letting team owner keep most of concession money from nights of Nhl games?...with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by letting team owner take money from arena name rights deal?...with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by paying Nhl team fee to manage arena?...with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by letting team keep money from concessions on nights when Uconn or concerts use arena?...with state and city catering to potential Nhl owner by giving him tax breaks on money he makes running team in new arena? how far would you be willing to have state and city go catering to potential Nhl owner to make sure Nhl team comes here? i interested in hearing how far you think state and city should go to Nhl team to come to hartford."

 

You forgot to ask what if a new NHL owner also demands that his corporation's logo be projected onto the lunar surface nightly with a modified Bat-signal?

 

Tell you what; if an NHL owner asks for everything you've listed above & gets it, I'll post how much of it I think is fair.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems both of your gripes are with pro sports current business model and not about Hartford's need of a new building. The days of owners paying for their own building are over, not when they can find other cities that will fit the bill. But hey we can keep the XL afloat by pouring 35 mill every 5 years while continuing to lose events to cities that invest in their *****ets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I want to hear some ideas for Hartford that haven't been tried already. Something that will change the perception of the city. Something that keeps workers downtown after 5pm and draws suberbanites and families all year round. Go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PlainvilleWhale wrote:

> Also I want to hear some ideas for Hartford that haven't been tried

> already. Something that will change the perception of the city. Something

> that keeps workers downtown after 5pm and draws suberbanites and families

> all year round. Go.

 

How about decent middle cl***** condos or apartments that would attract people to live in the city?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p4277 wrote:"How about decent middle cl***** condos or apartments that would attract people to live in the city?"

 

Out of curiosity, what would be the draw for people to move into expensive city apartments in a city that has few entertainment options & no grocery stores, when they can live in cheaper apartments ten minutes away in suburbs that do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartfordyouremyhome wrote: if not a new arena & all that comes with it, what do you think is most needed to make Hartford viable; to "keep the city of Hartford afloat"?

i dont think a new arena by itself will keep the city of hartford afloat. i dont think a new arena will create enough high pay **ll time jobs in the arena and i dont think a new arena will convince other businesses to create enough high pay **ll time jobs in neighborhood the new arena is in to keep city of hartford afloat. most of jobs both in and around arena that are result of new arena are going to be part time server jobs like ushers and concession workers and waiters and waitresses and bartenders. that is good but that is not going to keep city of hartford afloat. i think new arena can be part of plan to make hartford more livable place. but what is needed to keep city of hartford afloat is **ll time high paying jobs and those are not coming from arena and restaurants. i think state and city would see way bigger number of **ll time high paying jobs by taking all money that would have to be payed to build new arena without help from Nhl owner and put that money into program to lure companies to downtown. take $300 million in seed money and put it in account that generates interest and take money and interest from that account to **nd tax breaks and relocation fees and matching **nds for workspace renovation with companies that agree to move offices and employees to hartford and to hire new employees here. in stead of state and city paying for all construction of new $300 million arena and giving one pro team sweet heart rent deal the state and city could give bits and pieces of matching **nds to lots of different companies who are willing to move to downtown hartford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hartfordyouremyhome wrote: You forgot to ask what if a new NHL owner also demands that his corporation's logo be projected onto the lunar surface with a modified Bat-signal. Tell you what; if an NHL owner asks for everything you've listed above & gets it, I'll post how much of it I think is fair.

i didnt forget to ask. those wouldnt be real demands that potential Nhl owner would make. but all of things i asked you about are the exact sort of things that states and citys end up giving pro sports teams to get them to move to their arenas. so how about you answer the questions i asked and tell which of those sorts of sweet heart deals you would be in favor of state of connecticut and city of hartford giving to owner of a Nhl team playing in a new arena in hartford. what is so hard about posting which of those sorts of demands you think is fair? do you just not want to say that you would be in favor of the state and city giving a Nhl team at a new hartford arena cheap rent AND most of the concession money AND money from arena name rights deal AND paying the team a fee to manage the arena AND letting team keep concession money from Uconn and concert events AND giving owner of the team tax breaks? if you are okay with state and city caving in on every point i asked about and giving Nhl owner every thing he wants just say so. why hide what you believe about corporate give aways to pro sports owner?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Out of curiosity, what would be the draw for people to move into expensive city apartments in a city that has few entertainment options & no grocery stores, when they can live in cheaper apartments ten minutes away in suburbs that do?"

 

Well, that's the problem, isn't it? People don't want to live there because it's expensive and there are no stores or things to do. And no one wants to open a store where there are no people. But when you have a population living there, businesses will come and provide jobs as well as possible entertainment options. It has to start somewhere and this is an option that doesn't require an arena and an NHL team that may never arrive.

 

I guess the question is do you want to try and get people to come from the suburbs for events at an arena or do you want to revitalize the city with people who actually live there? And let's face it people come for the events, not the building. If we had a new state of the art arena and the WolfPack played there, how many games would you go to? Maybe one to see the building, but then you'd watch the NHL on TV at home. The NHL will draw people in 41 nights a year, but it's a long shot that Hartford will get a team again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PlainvilleWhale wrote: The days of owners paying for their own building are over not when they can find other cities that will fit the bill.

most of the time but not always cause there are teams that have paid to build their own buildings. and just cause some other cities are desperate enough to make bad arena deal to get pro sports team to move to them doesnt mean hartford has to. i keep asking and nobody answers question but if hartford is such a great solution to problem Nhl is having in bad hockey markets then how come connecticut and hartford dont have leverage to tell Nhl and potential Nhl owner that we want owner to pay to build arena? if hartford is great solution to Nhl problem then how come state and city have to cater to potential owner and cant afford to play hardball with league about arena? is it cause hartford is not the solution we think or is it cause hartford is only solution if state and city pay whole cost to build arena and then give potential Nhl owner every sweet hear deal he wants on rent and concession money and naming rights money and tax breaks?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this