2 minutes ago, taestell said:

Also, to back up what Jake is saying:

 

How the Music Industry Uses a Pervasive Secret Weapon to Keep Bands From Freely Touring

 

A radius clause is a common component of the contracts artists sign when they agree to play a show, especially a major music festival. These clauses create restrictions on how long that artist must wait before and after that show to play in the same market, and how many miles outside of that market they must go to play another show within that time frame.

 

For example, a band may sign an L.A. festival set contract stipulating that they are not allowed to play within 150 miles of Los Angeles for two months before or after the event, which would prevent them from playing for four months in L.A., Palm Springs, San Diego and any other venue inside this geographic net. Mileage and time vary between promoters, with some particularly severe clauses extending hundreds of miles and a few covering entire regions of the United States. One L.A.-based festival stipulates that an artist is not even allowed to announce any other shows until the festival has sold out.

 

I'm not denying that these exist, but artists plan their tours to come back and hit cities. They'll play Louisville, Columbus, Detroit and then go to a different region and come back and hit Indianapolis and Cleveland.

4 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

But my point is that the theory seems to affect Cincinnati much more than other cities. Why was Cincinnati the only local city left of the Sheeren tour? Why was it the case with Taylor Swift as well? Jay-Z and Beyonce? Sure, sometimes other cities in the area get left off. But it is much more prevalent with Cincinnati. 

 

If Cincinnati gets skipped more often than other cities, I would say it has much more to do with the companies doing the booking than the condition of the venues. For example PromoWest Productions in Columbus is a powerhouse when it comes to booking bands in certain genres. If that artist signs the PromoWest contract first, they aren't playing Cincinnati on that tour because we're within 150 miles. That's why it would've been awesome to have a PromoWest venue in Cincinnati, as artists could've played a show at Express Live in Columbus and then come down and played the Banks music venue the following night. But instead the Banks venue will be run by MEMI so PromoWest isn't going to let that happen.

I went down the list of the top grossing arena tours of 2018. I excluded The Eagles because I couldn't find a full list of dates for them.

Louisville is the perfect example of "if you build it, they will come."  That city should never get any tours over Cincy based off the size of the markets and yet they routinely do because they have a world class arena while ours is a dump.  

About 12 years ago I had this kind of discussion with someone in the industry and they said it was mainly the amount of ClearChannel (now I Heart Radio) stations in Cincinnati that kept many touring bands out of Cincinnati. At the time Columbus had CD101 which drew a lot of alternative and indie acts there. I think what happened is that this helped draw young people to Columbus and helped keep them there. Despite having a good indie music scene at the time (R.I.P. MPMF) and WNKU, Cincinnati on paper was not attractive to concert organizers. 

 

I would argue we have a better change now thanks to Bunburry and some other festivals but the damage was done. Cincinnati continues to struggle against stronger markets like Indy and Columbus because they got their first. 

 

So to echo others, it has nothing to do with the venues when it comes to music acts.

26 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

Louisville is the perfect example of "if you build it, they will come."  That city should never get any tours over Cincy based off the size of the markets and yet they routinely do because they have a world class arena while ours is a dump.  

 

At what cost for Louisville? That Yum center has been in controversy since it opened much like PBS here. The building was in massive debt in 2017 and had to completely restructure to avoid default and the Louisville/Jefferson Co Metro Gov't is currently paying $10.8 Million annually for it. 

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/louisville/news/2017/12/07/yum-center-completes-restructure-of-hundreds-of.html 

Edited February 26, 20196 yr by cincydave8

15 minutes ago, JYP said:

About 12 years ago I had this kind of discussion with someone in the industry and they said it was mainly the amount of ClearChannel (now I Heart Radio) stations in Cincinnati that kept many touring bands out of Cincinnati. At the time Columbus had CD101 which drew a lot of alternative and indie acts there. I think what happened is that this helped draw young people to Columbus and helped keep them there. Despite having a good indie music scene at the time (R.I.P. MPMF) and WNKU, Cincinnati on paper was not attractive to concert organizers. 

 

I would argue we have a better change now thanks to Bunburry and some other festivals but the damage was done. Cincinnati continues to struggle against stronger markets like Indy and Columbus because they got their first. 

 

So to echo others, it has nothing to do with the venues when it comes to music acts.

We are talking about the biggest touring acts, not small indy or alternative bands.  Those bands don't play at Nationwide in Columbus, they play at small venues like the ones PromoWest owns.  But PromoWest doesn't book acts at Nationwide so they and any indy/alternative band aren't relevant when it comes to discussions about US Bank arena.  

 

Large arenas are generally operated either by a large national corporation (AEG operates the arenas in Cincy, Louisville and Pittsburgh as well as tons of other arenas worldwide),  they're managed by a creation of the local city/county (Indy, Columbus, Nashville and Detroit are setup this way) or they just do their own booking (Cleveland).  

 

So I don't buy the argument of it has more to do with the companies doing the booking.  AEG wants to make as much money as possible so they would want every tour to go to all of their arenas.  I actually think AEG does a good job with US Bank for how shitty an arena it is.  I also think they would definitely get more acts like the ones above who skip us if they were booking for a nicer arena.  The individually owned arenas in Indy, Columbus, Nashville and Detroit don't have any power to mandate bands not play anywhere else close by.  AEG could do something like like because they own so many arenas but in that case it would actually benefit us.  Those cities/counties who own and operate their own one arena don't have any negotiation power to ask for something like that.  

1 hour ago, taestell said:

Also, to back up what Jake is saying:

 

How the Music Industry Uses a Pervasive Secret Weapon to Keep Bands From Freely Touring

 

A radius clause is a common component of the contracts artists sign when they agree to play a show, especially a major music festival. These clauses create restrictions on how long that artist must wait before and after that show to play in the same market, and how many miles outside of that market they must go to play another show within that time frame.

 

For example, a band may sign an L.A. festival set contract stipulating that they are not allowed to play within 150 miles of Los Angeles for two months before or after the event, which would prevent them from playing for four months in L.A., Palm Springs, San Diego and any other venue inside this geographic net. Mileage and time vary between promoters, with some particularly severe clauses extending hundreds of miles and a few covering entire regions of the United States. One L.A.-based festival stipulates that an artist is not even allowed to announce any other shows until the festival has sold out.

 

Festivals do have radius clauses because they tend to pay more for talent and depend on a regional draw.  

 

There are not typically radius clauses between a band playing Indy vs Cincinnati vs Louisville vs Columbus.    In this day and age of national and international promoters, they are looking at things like market history and time since the last play, but ultimately it comes down to availability.  

 

4 minutes ago, cincydave8 said:

 

At what cost for Louisville? That Yum center has been in controversy since it opened much like PBS here. The building was in massive debt in 2017 and had to completely restructure to avoid default and the Louisville/Jefferson Co Metro Gov't is currently paying $10.8 Million annually for it. 

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/louisville/news/2017/12/07/yum-center-completes-restructure-of-hundreds-of.html 

That's the city/counties fault for negotiating a terrible deal.  The people who live in Louisville love the Yum Center because they get all kinds of concerts and acts that previously skipped over their city.  The hotels in the city I'm sure love it because their tourism has increased with people coming to town to go to shows.  The University of Louisville definitely loves the arena because the city/county gave them a Bengals esque sweetheart deal.  The school gets first dibs on scheduling, gets to keep basically all their revenue from it's games and it even got money from other events at the arena for some reason.  

 

That is why I and many others have proposed for years for Cincy/Hamilton county to go in with AEG on a renovated US Bank.  The costs and revenues should be shared proportionally.  There's a world of difference between that and a Bengals/Yum Center type of deal where the government takes on all the expenses but gets little of the revenues.  

46 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

That's the city/counties fault for negotiating a terrible deal.  The people who live in Louisville love the Yum Center because they get all kinds of concerts and acts that previously skipped over their city.  The hotels in the city I'm sure love it because their tourism has increased with people coming to town to go to shows.  The University of Louisville definitely loves the arena because the city/county gave them a Bengals esque sweetheart deal.  The school gets first dibs on scheduling, gets to keep basically all their revenue from it's games and it even got money from other events at the arena for some reason.  

 

That is why I and many others have proposed for years for Cincy/Hamilton county to go in with AEG on a renovated US Bank.  The costs and revenues should be shared proportionally.  There's a world of difference between that and a Bengals/Yum Center type of deal where the government takes on all the expenses but gets little of the revenues.  

 

Honestly, if Jefferson County Metro Govt is only paying $10.8 mil per year for the YUM center I would venture to guess that the return on investment is enormously positive. I'm sure that it generates more than that annually in taxes when you factor in amusement tax, hotel tax, and sales tax.

If Louisville is investing $10.8 million per year in the arena, they need to generate an additional $10.8 million in tax revenue as a result of events at the arena to break even. Louisville/Jefferson County does not have a county sales tax, so they do not directly benefit from additional spending at restaurants or shops, but there is a hotel tax that would see a revenue increase from more events. But the vast majority of the city's revenue comes from income tax and property tax. So the arena would need to be responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars worth of additional hotel spending and new employee salaries in order to generate that $10 million worth of tax revenue.

3 minutes ago, taestell said:

If Louisville is investing $10.8 million per year in the arena, they need to generate an additional $10.8 million in tax revenue as a result of events at the arena to break even. Louisville/Jefferson County does not have a county sales tax, so they do not directly benefit from additional spending at restaurants or shops. The vast majority of the city's revenue comes from income tax and property tax. So the arena would need to be responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars worth of additional hotel spending and new employee salaries in order to generate that $10 million worth of tax revenue.

 

I didn't know they don't have a sales tax. Still, the actual calculation is enormously complex so it is hard to say if it is worth it. They certainly collect more property tax dollars in the area around the arena because it exists, but what percentage can be attributed to it? What are the cost to provide public services in the area vs. what the cost would be without the arena? What is the arena worth as a marketing tool for the city? Lots more to it than simple sales/amusement/hotel tax calculation. 

Fyi 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/deadspin.com/louisvilles-arena-deal-is-a-complete-disaster-1797126730/amp

 

The important thing is to also look at what money they would have brought in if the arena had not been built. You can't just look at the revenue brought in from all events, you have to look at the additional revenue brought in vs. what would be expected from a smaller, more run down arena. The Louisville Men's Basketball Team would still be drawing lots of people to Louisville whether they had the new arena or not. You need to look at the revenue above baseline.

18 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

The important thing is to also look at what money they would have brought in if the arena had not been built. You can't just look at the revenue brought in from all events, you have to look at the additional revenue brought in vs. what would be expected from a smaller, more run down arena. The Louisville Men's Basketball Team would still be drawing lots of people to Louisville whether they had the new arena or not. You need to look at the revenue above baseline.

 

Right, and ultimately I don't think the city should give any free money for an arena. An investment would be a different story. A share of the profits up to a certain percentage above what funds are provided seems like something I'd be willing to support. 

Louisville basketball played at Freedom Hall for like 50 years.  That is a Cow Palace-era state fairground type place.  It would be like if Cincinnati never built the Coliseum and was still slumming with The Gardens. 

 

Obviously there is a difference between the Cow Palace and what the The Warriors are throwing up right now in Mission Bay.  Louisville never had a modern arena like Riverfront Coliseum.   Imagine if Cincinnati only had the Gardens and never had the Coliseum, Shoemaker, or Cintas. 

 

 

 

 

I don't mean to be picked apart here, I accept that you guys are even acknowledging my argument, but someone mentioned NHL and NBA opportunities for US Bank. Especially for Gordon who analyzed the crap out of my argument, I don't think there is any kind of irony there when you have some of the same issues Cleveland does. When I say Seattle doesn't have an arena for it yet, I mean there really isn't. There's work being done in an arena to make an ice surface, so in essence they're making an arena happen. And when I say they want it, its because they want it. They themselves have an expansive hockey history and a sound basis to have the team re-franchised. Some history for you, the Seattle Metropolitans were the first American NHL team to win the original Stanley Cup in 1917 before the New York Rangers. Don't forget you even had a major league caliber team that just missed the WHA-NHL merger in 1979, who actually had a home at US Bank that unfortunately just got lost in the sauce as they say. The Cincinnati Stingers. I mention the Cleveland Barons because we were left in a similar situation. Only played for a couple years professionally, have relatively similar records, but still have a substantial history in hockey. The fact that you have grown such a large basis MLS is astonishing. When I say make your market, I mean exactly that, because you've done it before. Seattle is doing so as we speak with the NHL. You guys could easily be a sport central city. The NHL would be more than willing to expand or move teams, I say so because this is the most wildcard the league has been in just about 20 years when the Jackets and the Thrashers were granted an expansion in '97 & '00. There was talk of making the Monsters an NHL expansion when they won the Calder cup in '16. There's always talk, but there's also opportunities that people aren't watching out for. Cleveland and Cincinnati have one hell of a sports rivalry, but what about Columbus? Show them who's boss Cincy.

14 hours ago, tastybunns said:

I don't mean to be picked apart here, I accept that you guys are even acknowledging my argument, but someone mentioned NHL and NBA opportunities for US Bank. Especially for Gordon who analyzed the crap out of my argument, I don't think there is any kind of irony there when you have some of the same issues Cleveland does. 

 

Just to clarify–I wasn't trying to be rude, rather, it was just easier to respond to multiple points by breaking up the text and referencing things directly. In terms of your more recent post, you state that "there really isn't," an arena in Seattle. There is, though. Key Arena can accommodate a rink, has historically, and will again. The Seattle NHL franchise was contingent on that arena receiving funds for renovation, it's getting them and the entire arena (except for the historic roof) will be gutted and renovated. So, yes, Seattle has and will have an arena that's up to snuff for the modern NHL. I'm aware of Seattle's deep hockey roots, but in terms of "they want it," well... yeah. Hockey has long been popular there, but they also have the proven attendance and rich investors to make it happen. Seattle has long been an expansion candidate/hopeful. Cincinnati has not and will not (even if we had a new arena). 

 

In terms of "making the market," that's the point I'm trying to make. Cincinnati has forced itself into those conversations before, most recently with soccer. This market, though, has expressed little to no interest in terms of pro hockey and pro basketball. There are three D1 college programs already vying for corporate support and hockey has always been received as lukewarm at best. The city's best shot at landing the NHL (after the Stingers left town) was when the original Cyclones were very popular in the early 90s. At the time, the NHL played a series of test games and Cincinnati was under consideration. Lack of a newer arena, the downturn of minor league hockey support, and the ambition of the Blue Jackets put that to rest. 

 

The Barons existed at a similar time to the Stingers, but were NHL from the start (and originated in California). Their demise wasn't at all similar, though. Lack of fan and corporate support combined with NHL/ownership financial issues saw that club merged with the Minnesota (now Dallas) Stars. Even with a renovated and newer arena in Cleveland, an NHL team is still unlikely to exist there with Columbus down the road. 

Same for Cincinnati. We could build the nicest, newest, best facility – the NHL isn't going to give us a team unless the Blue Jackets move or fold. The NHL (and by extension MLB, NBA) has much more financial power and different standards/requirements compared to MLS. Soccer is a whole different animal. We can exist with Columbus in that league, probably not going to happen in the others. Same with the NBA–Indy and Cleveland are too close. Even if we "made our market" and stated our case with huge financial and fan support, there are other cities the NBA has already expressed interest in (spoiler alert: they're all bigger in population and television size). 

All of it's moot anyways....neither the NBA or NHL would ever consider US Bank Arena at this point in time. See Philly's Spectrum and Long Island's Nassau Coliseum as examples. 

And just to reiterate, I love this topic and these kinds of discussions on UO. Not trying to pick on you or your posts, but you offer the opportunity for conversation and I appreciate that. 

@edale - thanks for making that spreadsheet. Contrary to where I originally stood, I think there's maybe a case to be made that the arena could be missing some acts. Still, I'd like to know... why. If it is the arena, then the arena operators should be sharing specifics (especially if they're asking for public dollars). Who have we lost out on, why, and how would a renovation help that, etc. I think they've failed miserably in making their case every time (the place also doesn't do itself any favors when you visit). 

Edited February 28, 20196 yr by Gordon Bombay

FC Cincinnati started with a big fan base because of how big youth soccer is here. Growing up, it didn’t seem like there was a critical mass of blue collar kids that played hockey as there would be in cities further north like Boston or Detroit. Competitive bowling seemed like a bigger deal than hockey on the west side 

7 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

FC Cincinnati started with a big fan base because of how big youth soccer is here. Growing up, it didn’t seem like there was a critical mass of blue collar kids that played hockey as there would be in cities further north like Boston or Detroit. Competitive bowling seemed like a bigger deal than hockey on the west side 

 

There were only two practice rinks in the whole city, Northland and the other one up in the Sharonville area.  At some point the Gardens Annex (which still had exhibits when I was a kid) got a rink, but that has been torn down.  The one kid I knew who played hockey had to get up at 4am. 

 

Anyone else here remember events in the Music Hall attic? I remember my mom dragging me to one when I was a kid that was some sort of Christmas craft show.  I spent the whole time looking up at the way the roof was built. 

 

1 hour ago, Gordon Bombay said:

@edale - thanks for making that spreadsheet. Contrary to where I originally stood, I think there's maybe a case to be made that the arena could be missing some acts. Still, I'd like to know... why. If it is the arena, then the arena operators should be sharing specifics (especially if they're asking for public dollars). Who have we lost out on, why, and how would a renovation help that, etc. I think they've failed miserably in making their case every time (the place also doesn't do itself any favors when you visit). 

 

I was the one who made the spreadsheet ?

4 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

I was the one who made the spreadsheet ?

 

Whoops! Thanks, @DEPACincy for making the spreadsheet and thanks @edale for making some good points!

1 hour ago, Gordon Bombay said:

 

 - thanks for making that spreadsheet. Contrary to where I originally stood, I think there's maybe a case to be made that the arena could be missing some acts. Still, I'd like to know... why. If it is the arena, then the arena operators should be sharing specifics (especially if they're asking for public dollars). Who have we lost out on, why, and how would a renovation help that, etc. I think they've failed miserably in making their case every time (the place also doesn't do itself any favors when you visit). 

 

The arena owners have only asked for money one time and I agree they did a terrible job of selling why they should get public input.  All they did was put out some fancy new arena renderings and expected to get handouts.  I honestly think they're perfectly fine with keeping the area as is because they're making money.  At some point though the arena will get to a point where they get skipped by too many acts and they'll start to lose money.  Who knows when that will be though.  Could be 5, 10 15 or 20+ years.  I would prefer we not wait for that to inevitably happen and get in front of it sooner then later.  Maybe in 5 years when the FCC stadium has been around this will get revisited.  Until then we'll continue to get some good acts while the arena continues to deteriorate.  

^ Totally agree @Cincy513. 

Also, related: I was shooting some photographs of the arena recently and also came across a great podcast episode that discussed Cincinnati's previous flirtation with the NHL ala The Cincinnati Stingers. I posted it all here: http://bit.ly/2tJa2uK

 

The link has some great quotes from former WHA President Howard Baldwin such as:

"Cincinnati had great ownership and wanted to get in the NHL, but the NHL didn’t want them."

 

and there's some photos of the arena that I made too:

 

 

22 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

.  I would prefer we not wait for that to inevitably happen and get in front of it sooner then later.  Maybe in 5 years when the FCC stadium has been around this will get revisited.  Until then we'll continue to get some good acts while the arena continues to deteriorate.  

 

 

Yeah the power kept cutting out on Elton John last night.  The roof was leaking and the toilets were overflowing. 

12 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

 

Yeah the power kept cutting out on Elton John last night.  The roof was leaking and the toilets were overflowing. 

 

Im confused, did the city not ever discuss anything about equipping the new FC Stadium with the capabilities to handle large concert acts? Maybe even making it indoors? Seems like an obvious proposal considering it's not like Cincinnati is getting a new arena anytime soon. 

8 minutes ago, Lucas_uLsac said:

 

Im confused, did the city not ever discuss anything about equipping the new FC Stadium with the capabilities to handle large concert acts? Maybe even making it indoors? Seems like an obvious proposal considering it's not like Cincinnati is getting a new arena anytime soon. 

Soccer stadiums don't have roofs and adding one would have dramatically increased the price.  If the city would have thrown in a bunch more money maybe they would have considered it but I doubt it.  The team wanted to build a soccer specific stadium which don't have roofs.  They can host concerts at the new stadium but they would obviously be outside.  

An indoor stadium is way too expensive. Like multiple times more expensive than an outdoor stadium. Also, players hate playing on turf. They want real grass.

 

They are going to do the occasional concert, but it won't be programmed multiple times a week or anything near it. Think a concert every quarter or something.

28 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

 

Yeah the power kept cutting out on Elton John last night.  The roof was leaking and the toilets were overflowing. 

?‍♂️ that's so terrible.  I honestly don't know how US Bank gets some of the acts they get with how bad the arena is.  

@jmecklenborgwas being sarcastic about the concert last night. Everything went flawlessly. I went down and got  some of the last seats at the box office for $50. My wife and I were seated off to the side of the stage, even slightly behind it, but could see Elton the whole time and they had even put up a seperate screen facing this section that was showing what the main screens were showing. Not bad at all for the price. 

 

As far as the arena itself goes, it seemed like the arena concourses were a little narrow which caused a minor congestion issue when a concession stand was across the way from a merch booth. Also, I don’t think there’s any drinking fountains. All in all I’d say Cincinnati’s arena situation is analogous to having an older car that is paid off but still runs. Yes, there’s a lot of things that would be better with a newer model, but has it reached a threshold where it’s worth adding a car payment to the monthly budget? 

Edited February 28, 20196 yr by thebillshark

1 hour ago, ryanlammi said:

They are going to do the occasional concert, but it won't be programmed multiple times a week or anything near it. Think a concert every quarter or something.

 

So if the FCC stadium, a new state-of-the-art facility, attracts a few major concerts per year; and US Bank Arena continues to draw roughly the same number of concerts that it does now; doesn't that solve the problem of Cincinnati being "passed over" by concert promoters?

42 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

So if the FCC stadium, a new state-of-the-art facility, attracts a few major concerts per year; and US Bank Arena continues to draw roughly the same number of concerts that it does now; doesn't that solve the problem of Cincinnati being "passed over" by concert promoters?

 

I would say the FCC stadium would attract different shows than what is passing over US Bank Arena, but I don't know for sure. They likely won't have the same rigging capabilities as an indoor arena has. So their stage setup might not be conducive to a show in an outdoor stadium when the rest of their shows are in an arena. Some acts can adapt to different setups (think Red Rocks, etc), but others are very specific and require an arena (think highly choreographed shows).

 

I think about Mapfre Stadium in Columbus. They have a permanent stage built into the arena, and they don't host many events. Mostly just Rock on the Range, which is an annual music festival in the stadium that's tailor made for the stadium.

41 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

So if the FCC stadium, a new state-of-the-art facility, attracts a few major concerts per year; and US Bank Arena continues to draw roughly the same number of concerts that it does now; doesn't that solve the problem of Cincinnati being "passed over" by concert promoters?

 

I don't think a new arena and a soccer stadium are attracting the same acts. The soccer stadium is more likely to compete with Great American than the arena. Acts like Zac Brown Band might see it as an option. Last year they played Cincinnati and their show is too big for an arena the size of US Bank so they played in front of a half empty GABP. The soccer stadium would've been a more appropriately sized venue. 

2 hours ago, Lucas_uLsac said:

 

Im confused, did the city not ever discuss anything about equipping the new FC Stadium with the capabilities to handle large concert acts? Maybe even making it indoors? Seems like an obvious proposal considering it's not like Cincinnati is getting a new arena anytime soon. 

 

 

There are literally dozens of similar potential concert venues within a 100-mile radius of Cincinnati.  Does anyone really think that there is some class of performer who has been waiting around for this stadium to appear?

 

It doesn't matter how big a place is, there are still only a few hundred premium seats close to the stage.  It doesn't matter if a place seats 5,000 people or 50,000 -- there is still just one front row. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

It would be interesting to truly see the numbers on how the arena could support itself on a bunch of touring concerts, occasional convention, college tourney event, and some minor league sporting events.

 

What type of tier 1 revenue dates (professional sports, top tier concert, NCAA tourney, convention) needs to be there and how many such events need to happen a year to make it profitable.

What type of tier 2 events (WNBA, minor league sports, arena football) would be required and how many such events.

What type of tier 3 events (HS tournaments, graduations, etc) would be required and how many dates.

 

How many dates a year and events a year would be required to make a newer arena sustainable? I imagine sometimes days in use is not the same as # of events but I could be wrong. Point being, we may not be able to build a YUM Center or Nationwide without a pro team as the primary tenant, but we can do something better than US Bank that current and some expanded events can help sustain and make profitable.  Why not aim for that at the minimum. We need to figure out what the revenues can support and do that level of arena.

 

9 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

 

There are literally dozens of similar potential concert venues within a 100-mile radius of Cincinnati.  Does anyone really think that there is some class of performer who has been waiting around for this stadium to appear?

 

It doesn't matter how big a place is, there are still only a few hundred premium seats close to the stage.  It doesn't matter if a place seats 5,000 people or 50,000 -- there is still just one front row. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps, but I think the underlying tone here is that there is a desire for a higher class stadium--of which U.S. Bank is not and FC's stadium could have been. 

The soccer team has gotten tons of free press from its invented stadium drama.  It's under construction, but we still haven't seen a rendering of what is actually being built.   What are they hiding from us?  How terribly boring the thing is going to be.  It's going to be a new Riverfront Coliseum. 

9 hours ago, Lucas_uLsac said:

 

Perhaps, but I think the underlying tone here is that there is a desire for a higher class stadium--of which U.S. Bank is not and FC's stadium could have been. 

 Yes, but there is not the political will for the next YUM Center but we could justify something else financially that can pay for itself that would be much better than US Bank. Let's figure it out.

 

Personally, I think we need to do something as part of a convention center expansion or at the casino. THe Casino would be a great location because they could help underwrite the costs, the location would have good highway access and plenty of parking nearby.

41 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

 Yes, but there is not the political will for the next YUM Center but we could justify something else financially that can pay for itself that would be much better than US Bank. Let's figure it out.

 

Personally, I think we need to do something as part of a convention center expansion or at the casino. THe Casino would be a great location because they could help underwrite the costs, the location would have good highway access and plenty of parking nearby.

 

The convention game is a difficult game as well. Cities nearby such as Columbus, Indianapolis, Nashville (4hrs away) and Chicago have a lock on larger conventions already. And places like Cleveland have done well at gunning for the mid-tier conventions, which is where Cincinnati might be able to compete. I'm not nocking the convention idea, because Cincinnati desperately needs a better convention center. But it comes with risks in an already crowded and competitive region, and Cincinnati might struggle to recoup the expenses it takes to have the convention center that events have come to expect. That being said, I think the casino area would be a great site for a convention center, especially because you could attach it to the casino and allow that to be an additional asset. Another ideal location (though it might not be popular) is the soon to be vacant IRS property in Covington. That's the massive swath of land that a world class convention center requires and doesn't just become available in a dense urban area every day. Cincinnati has the cultural appeal that nearby Indianapolis and Columbus just don't have, and could provide a leg up. 

 

Outside of Chicago, Cincy can easily compete against Columbus, Indy or Nashville. Indy has an advantage because of the dome stadium, but Columbus could not offer anything that Cincy could not with a similarly sized convention center. I don't buy that argument.

 

I do agree that the casino site is the most ideal site for the arena, mainly because it can host more events like boxing and concerts in connection with the casino and have better promotion and saturation there.

3 minutes ago, Lucas_uLsac said:

 

The convention game is a difficult game as well. Cities nearby such as Columbus, Indianapolis, Nashville (4hrs away) and Chicago have a lock on larger conventions already. And places like Cleveland have done well at gunning for the mid-tier conventions, which is where Cincinnati might be able to compete. I'm not nocking the convention idea, because Cincinnati desperately needs a better convention center. But it comes with risks in an already crowded and competitive region, and Cincinnati might struggle to recoup the expenses it takes to have the convention center that events have come to expect. That being said, I think the casino area would be a great site for a convention center, especially because you could attach it to the casino and allow that to be an additional asset. Another ideal location (though it might not be popular) is the soon to be vacant IRS property in Covington. That's the massive swath of land that a world class convention center requires and doesn't just become available in a dense urban area every day. Cincinnati has the cultural appeal that nearby Indianapolis and Columbus just don't have, and could provide a leg up. 

 

 

Agree- Cincinnati needs to work with Covington & NKY in the convention game now that the opportunity of the IRS site  has presented itself. Let Covington convention center expand and build the state of the art facility. Work together and coordinate on bookings on both sides of the river. 

 

(An aside- It was not a “mistake” on Cincinnati’s part that the airport is located in NKY. What is a mistake is relying on the Brent Spence Bridge as the sole means of accessing it. Need to add new bridge + transit options)

There is zero chance Cincy gives up on their convention center and lets NKY take all that business.  

3 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

There is zero chance Cincy gives up on their convention center and lets NKY take all that business.  

 

The Cincinnati hotels would be empty if the main convention center was right across the bridge? I’m skeptical... 

Edited March 1, 20196 yr by thebillshark

Wherever it is, the arena is important to future convention business no matter what part of downtown it is located, so we need to figure a way to build something that will help supplement that business.

6 minutes ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Outside of Chicago, Cincy can easily compete against Columbus, Indy or Nashville. Indy has an advantage because of the dome stadium, but Columbus could not offer anything that Cincy could not with a similarly sized convention center. I don't buy that argument.

 

I do agree that the casino site is the most ideal site for the arena, mainly because it can host more events like boxing and concerts in connection with the casino and have better promotion and saturation there.

 

The massive financial undertaking it requires to have a world class convention space should not be underestimated. It's a huge investment and commitment. And cities and conventions establish friendship and partnerships, which means the chances of poaching an event from a nearby city is unlikely. The Arnold currently going on in Columbus is almost ingrained in the city's dialect. The BOA and DCI events in Indy will likely never leave. It's going to be hard to compete with cities that already have inroads and established footholds in the convention realm. If Cincinnati is going to pursue these conventions in these cities, it has to be prepared for the fact that it may not be as successful as it would like. But I do think Cincinnati has elements of uniqueness that stand it apart from Indy or Columbus, which may lend to attracting certain conventions. 

 

41 minutes ago, thebillshark said:

(An aside- It was not a “mistake” on Cincinnati’s part that the airport is located in NKY. What is a mistake is relying on the Brent Spence Bridge as the sole means of accessing it. Need to add new bridge + transit options)

 

 Agreed. Cincinnati already has to overcome the division of our metro into 3 states, we shouldn't fight amongst ourselves in our own metro. Cincinnati is stronger when NKY is strong and they work together. The airport proves that. 

 

1 hour ago, Brutus_buckeye said:

Outside of Chicago, Cincy can easily compete against Columbus, Indy or Nashville. Indy has an advantage because of the dome stadium, but Columbus could not offer anything that Cincy could not with a similarly sized convention center. I don't buy that argument.

 

I do agree that the casino site is the most ideal site for the arena, mainly because it can host more events like boxing and concerts in connection with the casino and have better promotion and saturation there.

 

I don't necessarily agree with this.

The two closest, Columbus and Indy have been stepping up their convention offerings for quite some time now and it's an astronomically expensive market to break into from my understanding, and that's not even considering the relationship piece of the puzzle.  

 

What is interesting about convention centers is that perspective shows don't necessarily prioritize total available space, but heavily focus on continuous space and hotel rooms. I think Cincinnati's struggle would be with continuous space. While Cincinnati has culture and a dense built environment great for traditional tourism, convention tourism is a wildly different beast and this would be a hinderance when trying to compete with INDY, CBUS, CHI, Nashville, or Louisville. Cincinnati would either have to build up to gain floor space (which isn't how convention centers work) or relocate leaving behind it's hotels. Most importantly though, in recent years convention centers have leveraged the arena component that Cincinnati just can't do. Yes, UsBank arena exists but when looking at it against NWA, Lucas Oil, YUM, and Bridgestone, Cincinnati is going to fall to the bottom of the list. 

 

At this point, without a new arena and convention center, Cincinnati's best bet of getting into the game is to renovate and compete in the mid-size realm of conventions with Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and KC. Unless Cincinnati agrees to hand over the reigns to Kentucky, or commits close to $1 Billion for a new convention center (Nashville Music City Center was $630 MIllion) and a new arena (YUM Center was $230 Million) I just don't believe CIncinnati has the ability to compete anywhere near the level of it's peers. 

 

Edited March 1, 20196 yr by DevolsDance

The continuous space is what I always mention to people during these kinds of conversations. The Columbus center has 3X of that as compared to Cincinnati's. You can subdivide space all you want, but getting a big room is the real challenge. With the current location in Cincy it's difficult to expand in that manner.

Cincinnati's Convention Center has wanted to expand for the past decade or more, but they've been waiting on the new Brent Spence Bridge to be built, which will free up an entire block of land directly west of the current facility and allow them to expand across Central Avenue. In my fantasy world they would build a totally new convention center on the west side of Central Avenue, extending over top of the new I-75/71 spaghetti junction, and demolish the existing facility, allowing those two downtown blocks to be redeveloped.

1 hour ago, thebillshark said:

 

The Cincinnati hotels would be empty if the main convention center was right across the bridge? I’m skeptical... 

 

I haven't been to a convention of any sort as an adult, other than the Detroit Auto Show.  I  have worked at a lot of events at the Cincinnati and NKY convention centers, though.  People stay at Kentucky and suburban Ohio hotels all of the time for events at the Duke Energy Center.  That's who fills up the parking garage -- people driving to the building from hotels that are outside of walking distance. 

 

The NKY convention center has the huge Kenton County garage directly across the street, so it probably won't need more parking when and if they expand. 

 

Also, the IRS site is poised to become a convention center expansion and...AN ARENA.  So the stage is set for Cincinnat's next development battle royale. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, taestell said:

Cincinnati's Convention Center has wanted to expand for the past decade or more, but they've been waiting on the new Brent Spence Bridge to be built, which will free up an entire block of land directly west of the current facility and allow them to expand across Central Avenue. In my fantasy world they would build a totally new convention center on the west side of Central Avenue, extending over top of the new I-75/71 spaghetti junction, and demolish the existing facility, allowing those two downtown blocks to be redeveloped.

 

Yeah the current convention center creates a dead zone.  The façade along the north side is depressing, as are its parking garages.