Sign in to follow this  
Whalevolution

As we've been saying there is an investment group

Recommended Posts

"I'm not against renovating the XL Center. I'm against renovating it for the NHL, without a commitment from a team to come here."

 

Even if the alternative is closing it down completely?

 

"And you're right, if it closes, it's their call, not mine. But you'll blame me, right?"

 

No, I'll blame the state government.

 

"Are you saying no more Wolf Pack? Yeah, I can live with that...Besides, there is AHL hockey in Bridgeport if you need your pro hockey fix."

 

Or Springfield, which is much closer for me. But, after watching UConn hockey for 3 years at the XL Center...there is a big difference in the atmosphere and the crowd. Truth is, I prefer college hockey to the AHL at this point.

 

"If you're talking NHL, i haven't heard about any team moving here, have you"

 

What difference does it make? You and others wouldn't believe me if I say yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> "I'm not against renovating the XL Center. I'm against renovating it

> for the NHL, without a commitment from a team to come here."

>

> Even if the alternative is closing it down completely?

 

The politicians are framing it as a false all-or-nothing proposition. It doesn't have to be. Without an NHL team, there is no need for the expansion to 18,000 seats. It's a scare tactic, and as I said before, a more affordable compromise can be found if the politicians want it.

>

> "And you're right, if it closes, it's their call, not mine. But you'll

> blame me, right?"

>

> No, I'll blame the state government.

 

Good.

>

> Or Springfield, which is much closer for me. But, after watching UConn

> hockey for 3 years at the XL Center...there is a big difference in the

> atmosphere and the crowd. Truth is, I prefer college hockey to the AHL at

> this point.

>

I prefer college hockey to the AHL also. But when I mention going to college games, I'm treated here like a criminal apparently because my favorite college team doesn't play at the XL Center. If the XL Center were to close, would you follow UConn hockey on campus?

 

> "If you're talking NHL, i haven't heard about any team moving here,

> have you"

>

> What difference does it make? You and others wouldn't believe me if I say

> yes.

 

You're right about that...rumors on a message board are not enough to say that a team is coming here. How many times have people here, (including you), have said that some team or other is coming to Hartford? I want to see and hear it reported in the media, preferably multiple sources.

 

It's been 20 years and the only real thing I've heard is that the governor sent a letter to the Islanders. Sorry, that's not enough to justify the expense they are talking about IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark is the gift that keeps on giving. He doesn't even now where to argue from now. Last week it was the governor had a team in his back pocket. Now it's renovate the XL so he can go to 10 UCONN games a year or we may as well shut the state down. Good luck figuring out how to be an adult and budget your money when you buy your own house someday Mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: You two and others obviously don't want the XL renovations, and would prefer to see the building close (which is absolutely mind-boggling to me) then spend $250M

I don't support state of Ct spending $250 million in borrowed money on luxury extra like arena renovation when state is in tough economic times that are going to impact priority responsibilities like public education and public infrastructure .

 

MarkH2919 wrote: and again Chad, before you start with the other options (which aren't going to happen)

Because for some reason Malloy and Freimuth won't consider them. Why? According to you because no private entertainment and arena management company would want to pay for reno of Xl center even in exchange for taking ownership of building. If that is true that tells me private experts at entertainment and running arenas think reno of Xl center is bad investment. If private experts at running arenas and entertainment think Xl center can't be saved what makes Ct government officials think they can do job? Ct government officials put Xl center in condition it is now in. Ct government leaders are responsible for putting Xl center in the position it is in. They have already blown it and proved they can't maintain Xl center properly. Now taxpayers are supposed to trust Ct government leaders to run Xl center properly going forward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will, I've always wanted the XL Renovations, since day one. Try to pay attention. As for "being an adult and budgeting money", I do just fine, thank you. Appreciate the concern though. :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I don't support state of Ct spending $250 million in borrowed money on luxury extra like arena renovation when state is in tough economic times that are going to impact priority responsibilities like public education and public infrastructure ."

 

So what makes you think times will magically be better down the road? What if the situation is worse? Then what? Kick the can down the road a few more years? That's the typical response to ANYTHING in this freaking state. It's not just the XL Center. The roads in this state are a nightmare. I-95 between Greenwich and New Haven? Yuck. I-84 between Danbury and Waterbury? Aw**l. The Merritt Parkway pretty much anywhere? Yikes. I-84 between say...Exits 57 and 40? Brutal. But again...if there's no money for the XL Center, there's no money for this either. Once again...you can't have it both ways, as much as you think you may want to...you can't.

 

"Because for some reason Malloy and Freimuth won't consider them. Why"

 

You (and others) don't want $250M spent on a renovation, but you have no problem spending money to replace what's broken and keep the building open and pray that other stuff doesn't break down. What sense does that make? If we spend the $250M now, we'd have what amounts to a brand new facility in a few years (because they'd keep the building open in the winter) and then there wouldn't be this constant concern of stuff breaking down and doors not opening and ice plants not working, etc. The longer we wait, the more expensive the repairs/renovation cost...to the point where, like in New Haven, the only decision that made sense...would be closing it.

 

See, this is what you guys miss...without the renovations, the building eventually closes...maybe in 2 years...maybe in 5...but it will close, because the state won't continue to lose money on the building. What company would?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: it's the state itself, namely the governor and the man that runs the CRDA now that said the building would close if the renovations don't get done

 

Maybe Malloy and Freimuth are being completely honest about that. Maybe they are painting worst picture of what MIGHT happen because they hope if they make it sound like Xl center is absolutely closing down immediately if reno isn't approved that it will force members of general *****embly to support reno plan. Would not be first time politicians exaggerated to scare other politicians and voters into giving them what they want. Also tough to trust Malloy or Freimuth when it comes to anything about Xl. They are politician and political appointee who are both part of state government. It is Ct govt that has been mismanaging Xl center for years. Even more reason for state of Ct to get out of arena business and let private companies do job. Private companies are better at it.

 

MarkH2919: So...you guys are happy with no more pro hockey, regardless of league or level...UConn playing strictly on campus, and probably never moving into a Power Five conference, and for Hartford, our capital city, to be nothing more than a 9-5 city.

 

My family loves pro hockey. But my family doesn't think it is state govt's responsibility to build & maintain arena for private pro ice hockey teams to run their for profit business in. My family loves Uconn sports. A lot of us are Uconn alumni. But we don't think it is state government's biggest priority in education to provide pro level arena for Uconn sports teams to play in or to get Uconn sports teams into Power five conference. We believe State of Ct's priority when it comes to Uconn is to provide students with great education in cl*****room. College sports at Uconn are an extra, not a necessity. My family also wouldn't be bent out of shape if Uconn sports teams played on Uconn campus. And that is even though getting into Hartford is personally more convenient for most of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: It's not just the XL Center. The roads in this state are a nightmare. I-95 between Greenwich and New Haven? Yuck. I-84 between Danbury and Waterbury? Aw**l. The Merritt Parkway pretty much anywhere? Yikes. I-84 between say...Exits 57 and 40? Brutal. But again...if there's no money for the XL Center, there's no money for this either. Once again...you can't have it both ways, as much as you think you may want to...you can't.

 

I just don't believe that building arenas and maintaining arenas is responsibility of government. At most government should partner with private companies on arena projects. I think government could help private companies by helping with infrastructure around arena and selling or leasing land to private arena company at fair price. Maybe giving short term tax breaks to private arena company when arena first opens. But cost of building and maintaining arena is responsibility of private company. Government's responsibility is maintaining public safety and public education and public transportation infrastructure and a justice system and a tax system to pay for these necessities. Maybe also public utilities.

I also know that economy is going to go in cycles with economic times being good sometimes and sometimes bad. Sometimes during tough times it might be necessary for state to borrow money through bonding to pay for necessary government services like public safety or public education or public transportation infrastructure costs. Believe me I am not happy about government borrowing like that, but if it is borrowing to support government necessities then I can deal with it. But that is very different than

borrowing money through bonding for luxury extras like arena construction. One is borrowing to help a government afford providing necessary services. The other is borrowing for a luxury extra.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I just don't believe that building arenas and maintaining arenas is responsibility of government. At most government should partner with private companies on arena projects."

 

But Chad, the XL Center is owned by the state. Before it was owned by the state, it was owned by the city. Hartford is not the only city that has an arena (or a ballpark or a stadium) owned by the city or state. Who owns the Arena at Harbor Yard? The City of Bridgeport. The Dunkin' Donuts Center in Providence is owned by the Rhode Island Convention Center Authority, before that? City of Providence.

 

In Newark, the Prudential Center is owned by the Newark Housing Authority. N*****au Coliseum is owned by N*****au County. PPG Paints Arena in Pittsburgh? Owned by The Sports & Exposition Authority of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County. You get the idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: But Chad, the XL Center is owned by the state. Before it was owned by the state, it was owned by the city.

 

Yes, MarkH2919. And under city of Hartford and state of Ct ownership and city of hartford and state of Ct political leadership Xl center has deteriorated into mess of a facility that Malloy and Freimuth tell us MUST have $250 million in publicly **nded repairs ASAP or else arena will have to be closed and demolished. Sorry but track record of Hartford and CT ownership of Xl center doesn't fill me with confidence that continuing to have state govt continue to own Xl is going to become a good thing. City of Hartford and state of Ct have already blown it when it comes to owning Xl center but Ct taxpayers are now supposed to trust that state govt will do better in **ture. A lot of Ct taxpayers aren't going to buy that.

 

MarkH2919: Hartford is not the only city that has an arena (or a ballpark or a stadium) owned by the city or state.

 

I don't live in any of the places you listed. Part of that is just fact of where I was born and raised. But it is also a matter of my choice. PArt of my choice about where I live as I get older will be about choosing city or a state where govnt **nctions based on things I believe in. I don'rt believe govnt paying to build and own arenas is in best interest of taxpayers. I don't believe it is priority of government. Also I could make just as long a list of places where arenas and stadiums and ballparks were privately built and privately owned and privately maintained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Sorry but track record of Hartford and CT ownership of Xl center doesn't fill me with confidence that continuing to have state govt continue to own Xl is going to become a good thing. City of Hartford and state of Ct have already blown it when it comes to owning Xl center but Ct taxpayers are now supposed to trust that state govt will do better in **ture. A lot of Ct taxpayers aren't going to buy that"

 

It's not up to the taxpayers, it's up to the state lawmakers. It's part of the budget...if the lawmakers p***** the budget without eliminating the money for the XL Center....guess what?

 

"I don't believe govt paying to build and own arenas is in best interest of taxpayers. I don't believe it is priority of government. Also I could make just as long a list of places where arenas and stadiums and ballparks were privately built and privately owned and privately maintained"

 

That's fine, but I would be more than willing to bet there are more arena/stadiums/ballparks owned by cities and towns than are owned privately. I'd even guess the number is like 2 to 1, meaning for every one arena/stadium/ballpark you find that is owned privately...I'll find two that are owned by some form of government (either city, town, county or some specially made "branch" of government)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: It's not up to the taxpayers, it's up to the state lawmakers. It's part of the budget...if the lawmakers p***** the budget without eliminating the money for the XL Center....guess what?

If taxpayers take responsibilities as voters seriously then it is always ultimately up to the taxpayers. Because if voting taxpayers don't like what their elected state lawmakers do in the general *****embly... guess what? The lawmakers run the risk of not being lawmakers anymore.

 

MarkH2919 wrote: That's fine, but I would be more than willing to bet there are more arena/stadiums/ballparks owned by cities and towns than are owned privately. I'd even guess the number is like 2 to 1, meaning for every one arena/stadium/ballpark you find that is owned privately...I'll find two that are owned by some form of government (either city, town, county or some specially made "branch" of government)

 

I would be willing to bet arenas and stadiums and ballparks that are owned by private companies that specialize in building arenas and managing arenas and booking entertainment in arenas are run more efficiently than arenas and ballparks and stadiums owned by city and state governments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Chad, I've gone through MLB and the NFL. And of the 61 stadiums, 16 are owned by the teams. That's 26%. So it's not 2 to 1. It's 3 to 1. 10 in Baseball (BAL, BOS, CHC, LAD, MIL, NYY, SD, SF, STL, TOR) and 6 in football (MIA, NE, NYJ/NYG, WSH, CAR, LA Rams in 2019)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: Well Chad, I've gone through MLB and the NFL. And of the 61 stadiums, 16 are owned by the teams. That's 26%. So it's not 2 to 1. It's 3 to 1. 10 in Baseball (BAL, BOS, CHC, LAD, MIL, NYY, SD, SF, STL, TOR) and 6 in football (MIA, NE, NYJ/NYG, WSH, CAR, LA Rams in 2019)

 

Real question is how much of the revenue generated in stadiums that are owned by cities and states are the cities and states actually getting to keep?

 

According to Forbes 8 of 10 most lucrative sports venues in USA & Canada are privately owned & operated.

#1 Staples Center

#2Air Canada Centre

#3 TD Garden

#4 Madison Square Garden

#5 United Center

#7 Yankee Stadium

#8Wells Fargo Center

#9 Pepsi Center

Only #6 American Airlines Center in dallas and #10 AT&T stadium in Arlington are owned by city they are located in. Private owned and operated Fenway park at #11, just edged out by AT&T stadium.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> Will, I've always wanted the XL Renovations, since day one. Try to pay

> attention. As for "being an adult and budgeting money", I do

> just fine, thank you. Appreciate the concern though. :roll:

 

MarkH2919 is for it.

 

And sorry guys but if you aren't for the transformation of the XL you aren't really looking for Hartford and Cts best interest.

 

Only some here are not for the transformation and waiting on the NHL before renovating isn't going to happen. After 43 years of utter neglect nows the time.

 

Now there's nothing wrong with rooting for the negative but you either want what's best for Hartford or you don't.

 

I'm for the Transformation NHL or not. It's not all UConn in regards to getting renovations. It would allow for the XL to attract a concert that isn't being performed by someone over 50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chad, There are 108 facilities in use by the 4 major pro sports in the US and Canada (MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL). Of the 108, 33 are privately owned, or a little over 30%. The rest are all owned by the city, county, state, or some "branch" of state government.

 

There are cases, such as Wells Fargo Center in Philly, TD Garden in Boston, Barclays Center in Brooklyn, Staples Center in LA, and the coming new NFL stadium in LA, where one team owns the stadium, and the other team(s) is/are a tenant. Those all count as privately owned, of course.

 

The point is...you say that cities and governments should get out of the arena owning business...that's going to be difficult to do. And, let's be honest, if I started going through the minor league stadiums/ballparks/arenas, I'd guess almost all of those are owned by some form of local government, simply because minor league teams don't have the capital to own their own facilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'm for the Transformation NHL or not. It's not all UConn in regards to getting renovations. It would allow for the XL to attract a concert that isn't being performed by someone over 50."

 

Same here. It would also allow for the XL to have a chance to be profitable, even if all we end up with is minor league hockey and UConn.

 

By the way...

 

http://fox61.com/2017/03/21/leaders-make-case-for-xl-center-renovations/

 

"HARTFORD – Leaders of the Capital Region Development Authority came to the Capitol hoping to persuade legislators to **nd an upgrade to the XL Center.

 

Officials said Tuesday the choice is invest in needed renovations to Hartford’s XL Center or $hut it down."

 

I have been getting ripped up one side and down the other by people here...but it sure looks like there's two options and ONLY two options. Putting it off for another 5-10 years is NOT an option, despite what people here might think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the people who don't believe the XL is s h u tt ing down:

A. Don't go there often

B. Haven't seen the infrastructure below the arena

C. They also aren't up to speed and ofcourse aren't listening to us either

 

Let's not forget the XL has had a major issue since post roof collapse.

 

You can't stick 15k people on one concourse a second concourse is needed for the upper bowl. As it is now for decades you have to cut through concession lines to get to the rest room.

 

They're actually is a lack of bathrooms in the building which causes lines where people would rather be buying concessions and or be back in their seats.

 

That's why, AGAIN, NHL or not this needs to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whalevolution wrote:

> And sorry guys but if you aren't for the transformation of the XL you aren't really

> looking for Hartford and Cts best interest.

 

Connecticut's best interest lies in getting it's fiscal house in order, not spending more money that it doesn't have. We need to make the state economically viable for businesses as well as individuals. Beyond trying to stop businesses from leaving, we need to attract new companies here. They bring jobs, tax revenue, demand for real estate, etc. That will take a long time, of course, but if that happens, we will be in a much better condition to get an NHL team. But we are not ready now.

 

> It would allow for the XL to attract a concert that isn't being performed by someone over 50.

 

The concert business is not what it once was, and Connecticut concert goers can get their fill at the Meadows or the casinos.

 

MarkH2919 wrote:

> Same here. It would also allow for the XL to have a chance to be profitable, even

> if all we end up with is minor league hockey and UConn.

 

How would the building make a profit with minor league hockey and UConn? Does your profit forecast include paying off the $250 million, (plus interest), that these renovations cost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whalevolution wrote:

> Remember the people who don't believe the XL is s h u tt ing down:

> A. Don't go there often

 

Yes, a lot of people in the state don't go to the XL Center often, or ever. Yet you would force them to pay for your entertainment, right?

 

> B. Haven't seen the infrastructure below the arena

 

What do you mean by this? Is the foundation of the building not structurally sound? Or are you talking about the electrical system, HVAC, and refrigeration systems being deficient?

 

> C. They also aren't up to speed and ofcourse aren't listening to us either

 

Speaking for myself, I am listening, but I haven't heard anything that makes me believe that an NHL team is coming here, which would be a game changer. What I've heard is people thinking only about one building in one city, without considering the rest of the state, although they demand that the rest of the state pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Yes, a lot of people in the state don't go to the XL Center often, or ever. Yet you would force them to pay for your entertainment, right?"

 

I rarely, if ever travel on 95 between Greenwich and New Haven, but you're forcing me to pay to fix it for other people to use, right?

 

You keep forgetting that for every point like the one made above, there's a counter point that can be made that turns it around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL you force me to pay for QU entertainment, you don't have a problem with that I see. but if you are ok with being hypocritical then that's you.

 

Besides as I have explained adnausuem you will be FORCED to pay to bail out Hartford many times over if the XL fails and goes away. So do you want to be forced to pay 20 bucks once or 20 bucks every year with an increase per loss revenue each year that follows?

 

It's an easy answer for most Ct residents. I'd pay the 20 bucks once and reap the rewards.

 

Yes the structure is fine other than needing a second concourse but everything else is failing and I've seen it with my own eyes twice. Not many people have seen it. Again if this was a redo after 10-15 years you'd have a point but, again, this is a 1960's design with 1970 infrastructure. How long do you want to wait and lose money in the process. Eventually something will have to be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> I rarely, if ever travel on 95 between Greenwich and New Haven, but you're

> forcing me to pay to fix it for other people to use, right?

 

Not a reasonable comparison. A major highway that runs along the entire eastern seaboard is much more of a necessity than a sports arena. Beyond that, I-95 is a federal highway, so federal **nds are available to maintain it. Get $250 million from the federal government for the XL Center if you can.

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