Toggle sidebar

Nationwide Arena/CBJ Finances Discussion II

RedStorm45 said:
He may not be a hypocrite, but without the Arena deal there's a very real possibility he doesn't get to enjoy the festivities last weekend. I think that was the original point Sanderson was making.
Click to expand...

Yes, that was my point (perhaps I could have stated it better). In any event, I'm not sure what else the Coalition can do as their attempt to get the issue on the ballot was shot down by the Supreme Court (the petition was filed with the wrong city office I believe). I'm sure they'll come up with something as they are all about keeping themselves in the news.
 
Speedy Sanderson said:
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/06/07/cash-poor-arena.html

My takeaway is Nationwide may fall behind the times in terms of the latest updates, new seats in the upper bowl, etc., but the team is in no danger of moving as a result.
Click to expand...
“It’s not like these things wear out,†Matheson said. “They’re just not nice and fancy as you want, and they don’t generate as much revenue
Click to expand...
.â€

So... what's the argument here? NWA is still one of the better facilities in the NHL. Also, if you want casino money, not moving the casino to the ghetto and not building a hotel on site didn't help.
 
There are very few Arenas, if any, that make money. The vast majority are cash cows. But, arenas do much more for a community, then they take away. They provide things that nothing else can provide. If you look at the big picture, they are assets for any major city. Unless of course you build it in the middle of corn fields, not close to anything, like the long gone Richfield coliseum.
 
Dr. Fire said:
There are very few Arenas, if any, that make money. The vast majority are cash cows. But, arenas do much more for a community, then they take away. They provide things that nothing else can provide. If you look at the big picture, they are assets for any major city. Unless of course you build it in the middle of corn fields, not close to anything, like the long gone Richfield coliseum.
Click to expand...

or the Canadian Tire Centre (not) in Ottawa.
 
Dr. Fire said:
There are very few Arenas, if any, that make money. The vast majority are cash cows. But, arenas do much more for a community, then they take away. They provide things that nothing else can provide. If you look at the big picture, they are assets for any major city. Unless of course you build it in the middle of corn fields, not close to anything, like the long gone Richfield coliseum.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree with the first sentence, but you do realize that a "cash cow" is a good thing right? It's a steady stream of income; which is contrary to your first sentence.
 
blahblah said:
I tend to agree with the first sentence, but you do realize that a "cash cow" is a good thing right? It's a steady stream of income; which is contrary to your first sentence.
Click to expand...
Same.

Arenas tend to be cash sinkholes which are owned by the community and offer service. It is rare for them to make money and even rarer for them to be privately owned.
 
blahblah said:
I tend to agree with the first sentence, but you do realize that a "cash cow" is a good thing right? It's a steady stream of income; which is contrary to your first sentence.
Click to expand...

I meant that the arena itself tends to be a revenue minus. But collaterally a revenue plus. My terminology may have been somewhat confused, as I often am. :confused: So money pit would have been better.
 
Crede777 said:
Same.

Arenas tend to be cash sinkholes which are owned by the community and offer service. It is rare for them to make money and even rarer for them to be privately owned.
Click to expand...

The problem comes back to - the taxpayers turned down the arena, so private money put it up, but when it came time for round 2 of financing those guys didn't want anything to do with it - so they got the county/city involved in taking it over.

At some point the politicians need to get 100% behind it and have a compelling story - they've tried at time to talk about the # of jobs created, etc.

End of the day (and I am a capitalist 100%) but Nationwide (specifically NRI) is making a butt-load (that's a technical term lol) of money off from the real estate. They own all the land, they get primo rents from a lot of bars and restaurants and apartments and sell a lot of $350k-1M condos plus have the city in their back packets to get real estate abatements as needed (for condos and jobs created). So at some point they need to step up, as do the citizens of Columbus, but NRI/Nationwide is making a ton of cash off from the real estate in the District and they will need to step up and take the load.
 
JacketsDavid said:
The problem comes back to - the taxpayers turned down the arena, so private money put it up, but when it came time for round 2 of financing those guys didn't want anything to do with it - so they got the county/city involved in taking it over.

At some point the politicians need to get 100% behind it and have a compelling story - they've tried at time to talk about the # of jobs created, etc.

End of the day (and I am a capitalist 100%) but Nationwide (specifically NRI) is making a butt-load (that's a technical term lol) of money off from the real estate. They own all the land, they get primo rents from a lot of bars and restaurants and apartments and sell a lot of $350k-1M condos plus have the city in their back packets to get real estate abatements as needed (for condos and jobs created). So at some point they need to step up, as do the citizens of Columbus, but NRI/Nationwide is making a ton of cash off from the real estate in the District and they will need to step up and take the load.
Click to expand...
They kind of did part of that already by loaning a goodly portion of the money necessary for the public purchase. No payments made on that loan yet, and yet Nationwide doesn't sound like it's going to foreclose anytime soon.
 
Viqsi said:
They kind of did part of that already by loaning a goodly portion of the money necessary for the public purchase. No payments made on that loan yet, and yet Nationwide doesn't sound like it's going to foreclose anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Yea, can't see Nationwide foreclosing on the centerpiece of its very lucrative office/housing/entertainment district. That's what it may all come down to - if, and when, Nationwide will collect on the outstanding debt. At this point the casino money is only covering the maintenance of the arena, and nothing more.
 
Nationwide will never forclose or try to collect. It's my understanding that the loan just rolls to the next month adding to the length of the loan each time a payments missed. Nationwide was never considered with getting money from the sell of the Arena they mostly wanted to get rid of the lease with the Jackets that was going to kill the team while keeping their name on the arena.
 
JacketsDavid said:
The problem comes back to - the taxpayers turned down the arena, so private money put it up, but when it came time for round 2 of financing those guys didn't want anything to do with it - so they got the county/city involved in taking it over.
Click to expand...

Don't forget that Priest and a few select council members tried to push through their CAM group, which would basically take the public money earmarked for the arena and they would be the middle men to distribute it....Basically trying to have their cake (county pays for arena lease) and eat it too (continuing to receive the check and dictate how it's used)
 
Well there's this.......

http://www.dispatch.com/content/sto...rely-in-black-with-tax-bill-debt-looming.html

Nationwide Arena should finish in the black again this year, but disappointing casino-tax receipts that subsidize the publicly owned arena are forcing its operators to dip into a rainy-day fund to pay for capital projects and leaving its debt unpaid.

And its long-term financial picture could get murkier if the state does not restore the arena’s tax abatement that expired this year, potentially adding a $4 million annual tax obligation.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The entire Casino - Arena thing was strictly political BS.
Nationwide was politically against it, because they wouldn't make any money off from it, but they had no problem at all with NRI (Nationwide Realty Investments who built the arena and area) bidding on the Pittsburgh arena which was strategically located next to a casino.

But notice as soon as the casino decided to move out west who swooped in and bought the land - NRI.

I have no doubt if the Casino would have included Nationwide in their deal they would have been all for it, instead they wanted to protect their "family friendly" arena district.
 
JacketsDavid said:
The entire Casino - Arena thing was strictly political BS.
Nationwide was politically against it, because they wouldn't make any money off from it, but they had no problem at all with NRI (Nationwide Realty Investments who built the arena and area) bidding on the Pittsburgh arena which was strategically located next to a casino.

But notice as soon as the casino decided to move out west who swooped in and bought the land - NRI.

I have no doubt if the Casino would have included Nationwide in their deal they would have been all for it, instead they wanted to protect their "family friendly" arena district.
Click to expand...
I rather suspect that a lack of customers there might have some more to do with it being located in a city that routinely voted against any casinos being here for years and years and years, and then had one imposed on it because of votes from out of town.
 
I've heard that some people avoid the Cleveland casino because the minimum bets are too high. Does the Columbus casino have that problem?
 
The table minimums are way too high and they don't have enough staff/demand to open the second area of tables on Friday nights. It's sad really
 
Viqsi said:
I rather suspect that a lack of customers there might have some more to do with it being located in a city that routinely voted against any casinos being here for years and years and years, and then had one imposed on it because of votes from out of town.
Click to expand...

I believe there is truth to this.

But I also think local politicians and business leaders, once the decision was made, could have made a better environment for all stakeholders. They didn't. They set it up to fail all the while pitching it as an economic boon for the West Side when all they were doing was dumping it as far from their toys as they reasonably could.
 
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe said:
I believe there is truth to this.

But I also think local politicians and business leaders, once the decision was made, could have made a better environment for all stakeholders. They didn't. They set it up to fail all the while pitching it as an economic boon for the West Side when all they were doing was dumping it as far from their toys as they reasonably could.
Click to expand...
Quite possibly. And normally that's kind of a petty thing to do, but admittedly if it were me in charge I probably would have done the same. "We never wanted you, so you get exiled to the borderlands."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom