Will the Canucks ever leave 800 Griffiths Way?

[Nick Lang]

Rogera Arena is 30 years old this year, which is fairly old for an arena (Wells-Fargo Arena is a year younger and is already being scheduled for demolition).

Made me think, seeing as they are renovating Rogers with new seats, and it's obviously a primo location do you think that they will play in Rogers for as long as they exist? Will the Canucks ever get a new arena built from scratch or just keep renovating/gutting Rogers?

Well apparently there is no land available anywhere in Vancouver. They can't even build a practice facility let alone a new stadium lol.

 

[rypper]

Staples center or crypto whatever is a dump too. Unless they've upgraded recently, when I went there a few years ago it had narrow empty concourses with blank walls.

The Honda center was much nicer and is s fairly old building as well.

 

[StreetHawk]

it's hard to find a worse building than rogers honestly

the saddledome is definitely worse but the replacement is already under construction. canadian tire centre is nicer AND is scheduled to be replaced in about five years. anaheim and san jose play in buildings about as old as rogers but both are much nicer. the newer generation of buildings like the ones in vegas, seattle and detroit absolutely blow away rogers

the only ones really close to rogers are scotiabank and the bell centre altho i haven't been to tampa, columbus, buffalo, pittsburgh or winnipeg so maybe those buildings are bad too

everything in context. rogers arena is narrow to fit into the viaducts. Age wise, it's plus/minus 3 years of arenas in portland, LA, toronto, ottawa, buffalo, boston, philly, stl, etc that opened in the 90's.
rogers simply lacks thw sqyare footage.

 

[HairyKneel]

Giggle Mountain or Colony Farm has a shit ton of property to build a new stadium.

 

[geebster]

If you thought the 1994 or 2011 riots were bad just imagine what'd happen if the arena was in Surrey. Now THAT would make international news and probably need a commission.

 

[arttk]

Staples center or crypto whatever is a dump too. Unless they've upgraded recently, when I went there a few years ago it had narrow empty concourses with blank walls.

The Honda center was much nicer and is s fairly old building as well.

You should google the crypto arena upgrades, they make bank from the high end. Look at Roger’s and how there is 1 level of suites between the upper and lower bowl, crypto has like 3 levels of that. They also have like a crazy expensive VIP experience.

 

[StreetHawk]

Oldest to newest NHL arenas: Madison Square Garden to UBS

From Madison Square Garden to UBS Arena, here is every active NHL arena in the league, from oldest to newest.

www.espn.com

Here is the list of oldest to newest arenas.

Rangers - they upgraded MSG several years ago.
Flames - new one on the way
Mammoth - Delta is getting a major renovation

Then you get to Ana and SJ whose arenas opened in 1993. 18 arenas opened in the 90's. 5 opened in the 200X (Jets arena opened well before they got their team back in 2011). 4 opened in the 201X. 2 opened in the 202X (Seattle virtually down to the studs).

Just a matter of whether teams/city have kept their arenas up. The 90's ones, Boston, STL, Phi all put in 9 figure renovations.

 

[VanJack]

I thought the Aquilini's recently pumped lot of money into Rogers Arena.....revised seating, a new scoreboard, concessions, etc. Is the rink still considered a 'dump'?

Edmonton and Calgary have brand new palatial rinks--but with serious price-tags, and the City and Provincial Governments pumped in a ton of taxpayers' money into both of them.. I just can't see that happening in Vancouver. So if the Canuck owners want to build a new rink, they'll have to go it alone.

Just for comparisons sake, the Flames new building called 'Scotia Place' is part of a $1.33 billion development. The rink alone is more than $800 million. And I imagine the land costs in Calgary are far lower than Vancouver.

About the only way another NHL rink might make any sense, would be if the Aquilini's could tear down Rogers Arena and re-develop the site. But upon reflection, even that wouldn't likely cover a fraction of the cost of a new building.

So it's hard to see a new NHL rink on the horizon in Vancouver for a long time.

 

[StreetHawk]

I thought the Aquilini's recently pumped lot of money into Rogers Arena.....revised seating, a new scoreboard, concessions, etc. Is the rink still considered a 'dump'?

Edmonton and Calgary have brand new palatial rinks--but with serious price-tags, and the City and Provincial Governments pumped in a ton of taxpayers' money into both of them.. I just can't see that happening in Vancouver. So if the Canuck owners want to build a new rink, they'll have to go it alone.

Just for comparisons sake, the Flames new building called 'Scotia Place' is part of a $1.33 billion development. The rink alone is more than $800 million. And I imagine the land costs in Calgary are far lower than Vancouver.

About the only way another NHL rink might make any sense, would be if the Aquilini's could tear down Rogers Arena and re-develop the site. But upon reflection, even that wouldn't likely cover a fraction of the cost of a new building.

So it's hard to see a new NHL rink on the horizon in Vancouver for a long time.

In terms of the condition of the arena, certain aspects of it have been renovated over the years. Probably just depends on which aspects you focus on or compare them to against other arenas that you have been at recently. Against the 17 other 90's arenas, plus 5 others from the 200X's, probably comparable. Against the ones build in the last 10-12 years, probably shows its age in comparison.

If you look at the list from ESPN that I posted, there's 17 other NHL arenas besides the Canucks ones that were built in the 90's. I know Philly's, despite 9 figures of renovations is going to build a new one. Again, that's more because the NBA team is owned separately than the NHL team. From what I could find online, they were at one time owned by the Flyers as well. With the Sixers looking to build a new one and have a stake in the arena, Flyers are now planning on building a new one with them. So, seems like a lot of wasted millions renovating their arena if this was going to be the end result.

Only the Sens are looking to move as for them, it's a location issue more than an arena condition issue. Washington did look at going to another site, but they've since reversed course on that.

Again, the only reason the Canucks arena has an issue is the small footprint. Seats and boxes are fine, it's the other non viewing parts of the arena which really through more renovations, can't be made better with the limited square footage. At least not up to the levels of the current arenas. The concourse is just going to be very tight unless they can secure the land that the viaducts sit on and expand the concourse. But, even if they did, is that enough room? Or do the Canucks simply need more space?

But, what other areas are there? The old Edgewater casino? The waterfront location that Kerfoot wanted the Whitecaps stadium? False creek?

 

[Peen]

it's hard to find a worse building than rogers honestly

the saddledome is definitely worse but the replacement is already under construction. canadian tire centre is nicer AND is scheduled to be replaced in about five years. anaheim and san jose play in buildings about as old as rogers but both are much nicer. the newer generation of buildings like the ones in vegas, seattle and detroit absolutely blow away rogers

the only ones really close to rogers are scotiabank and the bell centre altho i haven't been to tampa, columbus, buffalo, pittsburgh or winnipeg so maybe those buildings are bad too

The saddledome also has better sightlines and is like awful but at least has somewhat of a cool old barn factor even if it's run down as shit.

 

[StreetHawk]

The saddledome also has better sightlines and is like awful but at least has somewhat of a cool old barn factor even if it's run down as shit.

Once you get past the Rangers who did do an extensive renovation at like $500 million or something, it goes to Utah who instead of building a new one are going to totally renovate it (not as massive a Seattle to go down to the studs, but are going to have to retrofit structure), you do end up with the likes of Ana/SJ/STL/Chi as the 4 90's arenas that are 1-2 years older than Van's (tied with Ott/Mon/Bos).

Blues did 9 figure renovation. Chicago is actually building up the area around the arena, so will upgrade it as well. SJ opted to remain there vs join the Warriors, so their lease was up and they renewed (getting renovations). Ana, same thing. Though someone said, their concourse is narrow too. See if they have the option to build out or not. Also getting renovations too.

Barring a location issue, size issue, or accommodating another team, I think most arenas are going to be renovated vs get a brand new one built. Starting to see that wave of arenas built in the 90's hit the 30 year mark now.

 

[VanJack]

I suppose the day Gary Bettman or his replacement as NHL Commish steps up and proclaims that NHL hockey in Vancouver is facing an uncertain future without a new rink--then the clock will start ticking.

That's basically what happened in Calgary...... and the City Government and Province basically folded like a cheap camp stool. They committed hundreds of millions in taxpayer money, and it seems nobody is really complaining.

But of course Bettman wouldn't have stepped into the breach unless ownership in Calgary had not sanctioned it in the first place. So really the campaign was designed from the beginning to pressure governments.

It's hard to see a similar campaign working in Vancouver. I just can't see the City or the Province willing commit that kind of money to help out the Aquilini's. But inevitably something has to happen with the rink.

And people getting all bent out of shape about the absence of a 'practice facility' should be more worried about the future of the franchise.

 

[Jyrki]

I suppose the day Gary Bettman or his replacement as NHL Commish steps up and proclaims that NHL hockey in Vancouver is facing an uncertain future without a new rink--then the clock will start ticking.

That's basically what happened in Calgary...... and the City Government and Province basically folded like a cheap camp stool. They committed hundreds of millions in taxpayer money, and it seems nobody is really complaining.

But of course Bettman wouldn't have stepped into the breach unless ownership in Calgary had not sanctioned it in the first place. So really the campaign was designed from the beginning to pressure governments.

It's hard to see a similar campaign working in Vancouver. I just can't see the City or the Province willing commit that kind of money to help out the Aquilini's. But inevitably something has to happen with the rink.

And people getting all bent out of shape about the absence of a 'practice facility' should be more worried about the future of the franchise.

I don't think there's any risk of the franchise getting a relocation unless the CoV was secretly plotting to replace city council with clones of Jean Swanson.

Worst comes to worst, land can be made available for development of a new arena, like consolidating industrial lots around Main St. or maybe going south next to the River District. Even in a poor economic environment, developable land would be valuable thanks to zoning restrictions and pulling that lever would be more than enough to make a new arena viable.

I'm sure some suburban city councils would also be eager to move heaven and earth to entice a relocation if the CoV really was a lost cause.

 

[F A N]

It's been many years since I lived in the Lower Mainland

I live in Richmond

I was going to say "isn't Richmond considered part of the Lower Mainland?" and then I realized that the one who is 21 had moved away.

 

[VanJack]

Well, if the Calgary Herald is to be believed, the cost breakdown on their new rink is as follows: The Flames ownership is in for $356 million; the City of Calgary is in for $537 million; and the Alberta government is in for another $330 million.

The chances of any municipality in Metro Vancouver, or even the City of Vancouver, bankrolling a deal like that for the Canucks--are somewhere being slim and none. I think oppressed taxpayers in the region would man the barricades in protest.

And the chances of the Aquilini's 'going it alone' and coughing up over a billion or a new rink--also in the realm of sheer fantasy.

So I guess the only option is to keep pumping money into Rogers Arena until basically the 'cows come home'.....and I don't mean like 'Cowtown'.

 

[Breakers]

I thought the Aquilini's recently pumped lot of money into Rogers Arena.....revised seating, a new scoreboard, concessions, etc. Is the rink still considered a 'dump'?

Edmonton and Calgary have brand new palatial rinks--but with serious price-tags, and the City and Provincial Governments pumped in a ton of taxpayers' money into both of them.. I just can't see that happening in Vancouver. So if the Canuck owners want to build a new rink, they'll have to go it alone.

Just for comparisons sake, the Flames new building called 'Scotia Place' is part of a $1.33 billion development. The rink alone is more than $800 million. And I imagine the land costs in Calgary are far lower than Vancouver.

About the only way another NHL rink might make any sense, would be if the Aquilini's could tear down Rogers Arena and re-develop the site. But upon reflection, even that wouldn't likely cover a fraction of the cost of a new building.

So it's hard to see a new NHL rink on the horizon in Vancouver for a long time.

They are pumping money into the arena
but the current construction is focused around the VIP lounge and seating section which is a yearly membership, and private elevator, so the patrons dont have to mingle with the "commoners"

Sop the row behind the vip section will be removed and there will be some sort of barrier or glass, and apparently the section should have a private section.
The money from these seats is gonna be pure real estate developers as it is a yearly fee, on top of the regular fee.

 

[StreetHawk]

They are pumping money into the arena
but the current construction is focused around the VIP lounge and seating section which is a yearly membership, and private elevator, so the patrons dont have to mingle with the "commoners"

Sop the row behind the vip section will be removed and there will be some sort of barrier or glass, and apparently the section should have a private section.
The money from these seats is gonna be pure real estate developers as it is a yearly fee, on top of the regular fee.
View attachment 1045175

Focusing on the high spenders for events does seem like the way arenas/stadiums are going. That's why LV Raiders stadium is like bottom 3 for capacity, but like #1 in revenue generation despite being the latest one to open. But, that's the LV market. It's a destination, which works great for the NFL model of Sunday afternoon game at 1-1:25 local kickoff. If you live on the west coast to mid west, you can fly in on a Friday night and get home close to midnight on Sunday to watch them play.

Rogers Arena future, really comes down to square footage and whether the arena gets the greenlight to expand out once the viaducts are down and whether that would truly be enough space for their future needs.

Don't expect arenas or stadiums to get larger capacities moving forward. Van won't ever surpass United/Bell Center for capacity. Going to remain in the 18K range, even dropping from 18.5K down closer to 18K.