Sign in to follow this  
WhalerChad

Islanders looking at new arena next to Belmont Park

Recommended Posts

 

You're talking about expanding the seating capacity...is that your biggest issue here??? So you don't care if the building gets done, as long as the seating capacity doesn't increase??? You keep changing your mind, so it's pretty hard to keep up.

 

It's not just the chillers. The AC breaks down in summer. The heating goes in winter. The big overhead doors down in the bowels of the facility don't work the way they're supposed to. And on, and on, and on. Again, this has been explained to you over and over again...and you either re**se to pay attention to it, or you're too dumb to understand it. Knowing your track record, I'm going with the latter. And I'm not talking to anyone else in terms of the "idiots and morons" stuff, just you. And from where I sit, it's totally appropriate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thin skinned liar. Anyone who calls you out is an idiot / moron. But that's fine with me as it reflects that you have problems. Can't wait for your trip to Burlington to watch uconn uvm. Make sure you bring a puck so you can try to shove into my mouth. Talk is talk. Come on up and walk the walk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

MarkH2919 wrote:

> You're talking about expanding the seating capacity...is that your biggest

> issue here???

>

> It's not just the chillers. The AC breaks down in summer. The heating

> goes in winter. The big overhead doors down in the bowels of the facility

> don't work the way they're supposed to.

 

The refrigeration system, HVAC, loading dock doors, etc... are things that should be part of ongoing maintenance. Apparently that has not been a priority for the XL Center, and now it has gotten to a point where it's a crisis.

 

That's a different situation from adding a second concourse, upper deck seats, and new luxury suites. These things are not necessary for continued operation of the building. The only reason for increasing capacity to 18,000 is for the NHL. UConn and the Wolfpack don't need it. I'd like to see a breakout of costs for renovating the necessities without the added seating. Adding that second level sounds very expensive to me, and if there is no team coming, why bother? If a team comes calling later, we can do it then.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"Thin skinned liar. Anyone who calls you out is an idiot / moron"

 

No. Anyone that has to have the point explained time after time after time after time is an idiot/moron. You fit that role perfectly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"The refrigeration system, HVAC, loading dock doors, etc... are things that should be part of ongoing maintenance. Apparently that has not been a priority for the XL Center, and now it has gotten to a point where it's a crisis."

 

Yes. And, to be fair, these are issues that should have been fixed years ago, but the state of Connecticut, as they always do, puts doing things like this off until it's much more expensive to fix later on. This state never acts proactively when it comes to...well...anything. Just think,20 years ago, there could have been a new building for the NHL/UConn, and it would have cost roughly half what renovating the existing building is going to cost today.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

MarkH2919 wrote:

> Just think,20 years ago, there could have been a new building for the NHL/UConn, and it

> would have cost roughly half what renovating the existing building is going

> to cost today.

 

True, but the prevailing theory today is that these buildings have a use**l life of 20 - 25 years. So we would have paid for a new building 20 years ago and would now be looking at replacing it at today's prices anyway. I don't agree with this, but that's reality in today's world. Some times teams demand new arenas even earlier, like in Arizona.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"True, but the prevailing theory today is that these buildings have a use**l life of 20 - 25 years. So we would have paid for a new building 20 years ago and would now be looking at replacing it at today's prices anyway. I don't agree with this, but that's reality in today's world. Some times teams demand new arenas even earlier, like in Arizona"

 

I think it depends on the market. In Detroit, for example, Joe Louis Arena is 38 years old. The new Garden in Boston opened in 1995, and you don't hear a peep about a new building. Same in Philly...same in Montreal...same in Toronto...I can go on.

 

Now, Arizona...well...as you are very well aware, that's a different situation entirely. That market has pretty much failed from day one, and it's finally taken the NHL 20 years to figure it out.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

MarkH2919 wrote:

> Uh...renovations is a bit different than new building.

 

Really? We're being told that the XL renovations would be like a new building. MSG's renovation was a major project that resulted in a virtually new building, and it cost as much if not more.

 

Looking back at relocations that have happened, many if not most were because the team wanted a new venue. In the NHL that includes Winnipeg, Quebec, NYI, Minnesota, and of course Hartford. And now there are other teams pressing for new arenas or major rebuilds, will they move also? These include Arizona, Ottawa, NYI, and Calgary. Notice that Carolina and Florida are not on that list, despite everyone saying that they are going to move soon.

 

There needs to be some pushback from cities and states regarding the constant quest for new buildings. Arizona will decide soon whether to build another arena for the Coyotes, and it's not looking good. Seattle has resisted the urge to build an arena for the NHL, and seems willing to wait for an NBA team before putting shovels in the ground.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

MarkH2919 wrote:

> Uh...renovations is a bit different than new building.

Uh...after $70 million the building is going to have all the bells and whistles current buildings do. **n fact the Banknorth Garden renovations are being done with private money, not taxpayer dollars.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This was your quote, p4277...

 

"True, but the prevailing theory today is that these buildings have a use**l life of 20 - 25 years. So we would have paid for a new building 20 years ago and would now be looking at replacing it at today's prices anyway"

 

Upgrades/improvements/renovations are done to buildings, yes. And Boston fits into that category. They aren't pining for a new building...neither are the other cities I mentioned, all with arenas in that 20-25 year (or so) age group. There is a big difference between pining for a new building...and renovating what you have. Also, who paid for the renovations in Boston? Private **nding...probably the Bruins and Celtics. But again...they're not asking for new. They're asking for improved, and they're not even asking per se, they're doing it themselves.

 

The XL needs a complete overhaul if it's going to compete with major league facilities. A lot of it is behind the scenes stuff, but a lot if it is also the moving of the club seating, adding seats where they can, and adding other revenue streams so that if/when the NHL comes calling, they can be financially stable.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote: Also, who paid for the

> renovations in Boston? Private **nding...probably the Bruins and Celtics.

> But again...they're not asking for new. They're asking for improved, and

> they're not even asking per se, they're doing it themselves.

 

The Bruins paid for and own TD Garden. The Celtics are tenants there. Ideally, all these arenas should be paid for by the teams that play there. But these days, that is the exception, not the rule. That's not what's going on here. It's bad enough when a city or state is pressured to build or rebuild a facility for a team, but it's beyond stupid to do it when there is no major tenant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And again, the alternative to rebuilding this facility....is to close it. If it's stupid for the city and/or state to pay to rebuild for a team that may or may not come, then you must feel it's just as stupid to keep the building open at all. As you said, it wouldn't matter to you either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> And again, the alternative to rebuilding this facility....is to close it.

> If it's stupid for the city and/or state to pay to rebuild for a team that

> may or may not come, then you must feel it's just as stupid to keep the

> building open at all. As you said, it wouldn't matter to you either way.

 

As I've said earlier, if no team is coming here, they should renovate the mechanics of the building, (refrigeration, HVAC, big doors, etc.), which should have been part of regular maintenance all along. They should not spend money on a second concourse and expansion to 18,000 seats, which are not needed for anything other than the NHL.

 

And you are right, it wouldn't matter to me either way, other than the use of public money for what would be a college/minor league arena.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:> And again, the alternative to rebuilding this facility....is to close it.

That is ONE alternative. That is EXTREME alternative.

Another alternative is tate of Ct could spend $$$ on upgrading systems p4277 talks about (refrigeration, HVAC, big doors, etc), but not spend $$$ on adding 2nd concourse and adding seats up to 18,000 capacity. That price tag would come in under $250 million & would get Hartford improved arena for NCAA basketball and hockey, minor league sports (AHL or ECHL, NBA D-League, MISL, arena football), concerts and maybe NBA & NHL exhibition games. In other words state of Ct could buy what state of Ct can afford right now.

If supposed investment group is willing to make up difference in cost and pay for 2nd concourse and adding seats and any other bells & whistles that they think they need to make Xl center a building that will support Nhl, then let them do it. Let them be real PARTNER with state of Ct on getting Xl center Nhl ready.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WhalerChad wrote:

> MarkH2919 wrote:> And again, the alternative to rebuilding this facility....is to

> close it.

> That is ONE alternative. That is EXTREME alternative.

> Another alternative is tate of Ct could spend $$$ on upgrading systems p4277 talks

> about (refrigeration, HVAC, big doors, etc), but not spend $$$ on adding 2nd

> concourse and adding seats up to 18,000 capacity. That price tag would come in under

> $250 million & would get Hartford improved arena for NCAA basketball and hockey,

> minor league sports (AHL or ECHL, NBA D-League, MISL, arena football), concerts and

> maybe NBA & NHL exhibition games. In other words state of Ct could buy what state

> of Ct can afford right now.

> If supposed investment group is willing to make up difference in cost and pay for 2nd

> concourse and adding seats and any other bells & whistles that they think they

> need to make Xl center a building that will support Nhl, then let them do it. Let

> them be real PARTNER with state of Ct on getting Xl center Nhl ready.

 

So, instead of spending the money to **lly renovate the building with the goal of at worst making the building profitable and at best bringing back the NHL, your proposal is fixing what's broken, nothing else, and watch the building continue to lose money every year?

 

I'm sure the state is all too eager to sign up for this... :roll:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:> So, instead of spending the money to **lly renovate the building with the goal of at

> worst making the building profitable and at best bringing back the NHL, your proposal

> is fixing what's broken, nothing else, and watch the building continue to lose money

> every year?

>

> I'm sure the state is all too eager to sign up for this... :roll:

You know what, MarkH2919? There is something you don't seem to understand and that is that states should live in their financial means just like people have to live in their financial means. You're always talking about how Xl center got into shape its in because state of Ct "kept kicking the can down the road" when it came to making repairs to the building. Well guess what? State of Ct spending $250 million in bonded public money to make Nhl caliber renovations to Xl Center when there is no guarantee Nhl is coming back to Hartford is case of state "kicking the can down the road" in terms of debt. Using bonded public $$$ is like using a credit card. Just like credit card debt has to be paid off debt on bonds has to be paid off. Racking up debt on state of Ct's "credit card" isn't very smart when it looks like state of Ct budget is calling for cutting into **nds for social services and school programs and road improvements. It isn't smart when Ct is asking cities and towns to pick up bigger chunk of education pension $$$.

In perfect world it would be great to have 18,000 seat Xl center with 2 concourses and all the fancy bells and whistles and luxury items a Nhl team owner would want in the building. But in a perfect world governor Malloy and CRDA director Freimuth would have the balls to tell supposed Nhl investor who is supposedly interested in moving a team here that he has to pay at least half the $250 million tab for the Xl center renovation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MarkH2919 wrote:

> So, instead of spending the money to **lly renovate the building with the goal of at

> worst making the building profitable and at best bringing back the NHL, your proposal

> is fixing what's broken, nothing else, and watch the building continue to lose money

> every year?

>

> I'm sure the state is all too eager to sign up for this... :roll:

 

And in your world, the only option is to spend money we don't have, on a building we don't need, for a team that doesn't exist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me try to make this argument with mark simply put. If this was your $ which you do NOT have "GAMBLE IT on a chance that a NHL team will return? OR here's the alternate: Demand solid evidence that there is a group , which must be named And they submit a contract safeguarding this big investment of borrowed $. One *****urance is for them to put up a sizable amount of $ which is not re**ndable if they bail. The details are for their lawyers and the state with their lawyers to work out. The two so called big time supporters are not putting up their $ nor should they. These so called investers have to be named at some time before any $ is procured from the public and a signed contract/ agreement with their money on the table. If your dream which will not happen goes through without these contigents it is larceny against the citizens of CONNECTICUT! Now go play in your sand castles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of You guys are **nny.

 

Demand the group come forward? :lol:

 

Why? You don't even know the reason they haven't come forward. You can doubt a group exists, go ahead but what politician sends any major league tenant a letter without anything to back it up. Proof of a group is enough right there.

 

I see a lot of posts seemingly blaming Mark for the group not coming forward. Like it's MarkH2919 call??! Pretty **nny, Mark you better tell those billionaires to step out of the shadows. Just kidding

 

I bet a million bucks if the investor did come forward some of you would then switch to attacking that group. Maybe that's even why they are holding their cards close to their chest. Whatever the reason, doesn't matter because the XL renovations absolutley do not depend on the NHL. If the NHL doesn't show up guess what you still have an archaic underachieving 43 year old arena that's been horribly neglected.

 

Renovations go through most likely NHL or not. If a team commits expect those odds to rise considerably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

p4277 wrote:

> MarkH2919 wrote:

> > So, instead of spending the money to **lly renovate the building with the goal

> of at

> > worst making the building profitable and at best bringing back the NHL, your

> proposal

> > is fixing what's broken, nothing else, and watch the building continue to lose

> money

> > every year?

> >

> > I'm sure the state is all too eager to sign up for this... :roll:

>

> And in your world, the only option is to spend money we don't have, on a building we

> don't need, for a team that doesn't exist?

 

"On a building we don't need"

 

Wow, it's like this is your first post ever. I don't understand how you can look at the same info we all are and still think 2+2=5.

 

Here's a reality check we can live without Quinnipiac hardly anyone would notice but Greater Hartford probably can't survive without UConn and the XL. Making them quite Vital

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whalevolution wrote: You can doubt a group exists, go ahead but what politician sends any major league tenant a letter without anything to back it up.

The kind of politician that wants to find out if Nhl team might be interested in moving to a city in his state. Or kind of politician who wants to get other politicians and voters in his state to support renovations to arena in his state during tough financial times for his state, so he sends letter to Nhl team hoping letter will convince other politicians and voters that some kind of team move is right around corner even if it isn't. The kind of politician who thinks that if he can just get arena in his state renovated then Nhl team could be convinced to move to his state, but he needs to get arena renovated first.

 

Whalevolution wrote: Proof of a group is enough right there.

What is your definition of "proof". How does govern Malloy and mayor Bronin sending a letter to NY Islanders "prove" ownership group is "right there" ready to move to Hartford? All that sending letter proves is that Malloy and Bronin would like Nhl team to move to Hartford. Sending letter doesn't prove that Islanders owners have any actual interest or intention in moving to Hartford. Sending letter to Islanders doesn't prove that any other investor groups other than Islanders are interested. We only have Malloy's word for that and even he said that 2nd group he claims is interested is interested "should they be success**l in acquiring" a team. Should they be success**l means 2nd group doesn't even own Nhl team yet. They may never own Nhl team. Even if Islanders were to say they were really interested they could just be using Xl center as bargaining chip to get new arena built in Belmont or to get sweet heart deal at renovated N*****au coliseum.

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