I like the hotel idea. Some of you may recall, there was a hotel nearby---at 21 st & Euclid----which became Viking Hall---it was the Holiday Inn-Downtown (with Holiday Inn-Lakeside being at 12th & Lakeside).

 

 

Kent State University just built a hotel-conference center in between downtown Kent and the campus -- a location to serve the community's goal of unifying their downtown and the campus. Whatever is done with the Wolstein Center, I hope it is done to serve a community goal, such as energizing linkages between downtown and the Campus District. A redeveloped Wolstein Center and a renovated juvenile detention facility, combined with a cap over I-90, could do wonders for that long-underperforming edge of downtown.

 

 

How often do the Lake Erie Monsters fill The Q?  The Wolstein Center might be a better fit for the team.  Besides- CSU has plenty left to tear down along Euclid!  Bwahahahaha....

 

Wolstein doesn't have ice making capabilities.  So huge expense to facilitate that move.

 

Agree with your other points however.

 

And more importantly, I think Gilbert owns part of the Monsters

I don't have any direct knowledge to support the following comments, this is just my gut opinion.

 

I doubt any large facility, similar to the Wolstein Center, at any college or university ever actually makes money.  I'm referring to specifically the arena portion of the building.  It's a big space with big maintenance costs.  Just like the convention center, the actual profit centers will be the support services and ancillary revenue generators.  The building itself will almost always be in the red.  While I understand the members of the Board of Trustees openly commenting on possible outcomes because of the continued costs of the building, I can't see the University destroying an asset that they currently exercise complete control over. 

 

Without the Wolstein Center, CSU doesn't host the debate between Obama and Clinton.  It doesn't sell over 8000 tickets for a basketball game with Butler.  It has to hold commencement split over 5 locations and it doesn't even get to be in the discussion when arena sized events look at Cleveland. 

 

Tearing it down not only eliminates the costs, it removes the asset and the opportunities that the asset can bring to CSU.  I believe the building will continue to stand for some time.

 

I agree, many division I universities' athletic programs run at a loss.  Boosters keep sports afloat, almost everywhere.

Beyond ridiculous remark, but not surprising considering the source.

 

Jeremy--really, man? You probably think the disneyification of Times Square is a good thing, too. On not wanting a megachurch downtown (or anywhere in the city), I did not mean to offend you if I did....  Cleveland must be forward-thinking and progressive. A megachurch is neither of those.

 

Right' date=' or a hotel geared towards students and parents--but could also be used for business groups needing the conference center as a part of their group trip.[/quote']

 

I like the hotel idea. Some of you may recall, there was a hotel nearby---at 21 st & Euclid----which became Viking Hall---it was the Holiday Inn-Downtown (with Holiday Inn-Lakeside being at 12th & Lakeside).

 

 

I lived in NYC for four years. Times Square is not a place that people who actually live there go, so I don't care what happens to it. There are other places in NY that I care about. I'm not offended because I don't care about mega churches. What I thought was ridiculous was the hyperbole of preferring strip clubs, massage parlors and x rated theaters. You say Cleveland needs to be progressive, however those venues hardly contribute to a better quality of life. If you are going to make an either/or comparison, make it something realistic.  I would prefer the Wolstein was torn down and something better built, but until then I have no problem with CSU renting to whomever can pay the rent. Whether I agree with their religious beliefs is irrelevant.

It's all about the management. I saw NIN there this weekend.

(from a friend)

I stopped waiting in line for beverages after 30 minutes - understaffed.

Bathrooms were nothing short of disgusting. And this was in the beginning of the night when there wasn't a line to get in.

 

Plus I saw poor crowd control, fights, several pedestrian/automobile mishaps waiting to happen... not to mention the reminder of how horrible Wolstein's sound quality is for this type of event.

 

I have been to too many arena shows in many cities to count, and I can say with complete confidence this was the single most poorly run event I have ever been to. It is almost like the management was trying hard to make it a poor experience... sorta like they have given up

 

Does anyone recall why SMG (likely taking over management of the convention center) stopped managing Wolstein about 3 years ago?

^Good question. I'm totally confused now about all the management decisions in recent years and how long the place has been a financial drain.  Here's some coverage back from 2009 when CSU was deciding whether to renew SMG: http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20090723/FREE/907239966#

Does anyone recall why SMG (likely taking over management of the convention center) stopped managing Wolstein about 3 years ago?

 

The contract was up and Global Spectrum took over after submitting a bid.

 

 

It's all about the management. I saw NIN there this weekend.

(from a friend)

I stopped waiting in line for beverages after 30 minutes - understaffed.

Bathrooms were nothing short of disgusting. And this was in the beginning of the night when there wasn't a line to get in.

 

Plus I saw poor crowd control, fights, several pedestrian/automobile mishaps waiting to happen... not to mention the reminder of how horrible Wolstein's sound quality is for this type of event.

 

I have been to too many arena shows in many cities to count, and I can say with complete confidence this was the single most poorly run event I have ever been to. It is almost like the management was trying hard to make it a poor experience... sorta like they have given up

 

 

Food & Beverage:  Signs of an underutilized venue.  See management below.

 

Bathrooms:  Same.  Are you male or female?  I bet the Wolstein has a 50/50 distribution of restrooms--something many arenas address by converting depending on the shows.  I'm guessing Nine Inch Nails was a sausage...I mean heavily-male dominated crowd.

 

Crowd Control:  Same security company that does other events in Cleveland.  Unfair to blame the Wolstein here.

 

Sound:  Too many variables to blame the venue.  I've seen shows there that sound great.  It's an arena with concrete walls, seats, and a roof.  They're all the same to varying degrees.

 

Management:  I highly doubt your assertion.  Probably just lack of experience in the venue between management and staff.  If they did 50 concerts a year, they would improve their scores.

I would not have posted these comments if this was my first show, or my tenth. I'm not that ignorant. I have been in this industry far too long (both as a spectator and worker) to know the difference - including here at the Wolstein/Convocation Center. I have also been on this forum far too long to just spout anecdotal musings.

 

This is speculation, but it appears they are running it into the ground on purpose. Or, as is what seems to be the popular thing to do when a entity doesn't like their property anymore but neither has the means or desire to do anything about it, the university is doing their own version of "demolition by neglect."

 

 

 

I would not have posted these comments if this was my first show, or my tenth. I'm not that ignorant. I have been in this industry far too long (both as a spectator and worker) to know the difference - including here at the Wolstein/Convocation Center. I have also been on this forum far too long to just spout anecdotal musings.

 

This is speculation, but it appears they are running it into the ground on purpose. Or, as is what seems to be the popular thing to do when a entity doesn't like their property anymore but neither has the means or desire to do anything about it, the university is doing their own version of "demolition by neglect."

 

 

 

 

Ok well go on then to back up your speculation, using the examples you provided.  What purpose would Global Spectrum see in running the facility into the ground and losing their contract?  By slowing the restroom lines?    Not sure I'm understanding you.

 

 

Sorry for not being clear. I didn't mean to imply it was GS. I am just wondering if the Board is behind it. Stranger things have happened.

^It's not the Board.  I'm not sure what you saw or experienced, but I do know that a lot of effort has been going into that building to maintain and enhance it within the budget available.

Sorry for not being clear. I didn't mean to imply it was GS. I am just wondering if the Board is behind it. Stranger things have happened.

 

Still not connecting the dots from your examples above to the CSU board deliberately trying to shut the venue down, but ok if you feel that way. 

 

I still feel compelled to say it was a huge show in a venue that doesn't do many these days due to the restraint placed on it by the board in negotiating rent deals. Not unusual in state or city run facilities.

I lived in NYC for four years. Times Square is not a place that people who actually live there go' date=' so I don't care what happens to it..[/quote']

 

You're stating the obvious regarding people who live in NY and Times Square. Regarding Times Sq's sterilization program, it is very disconcerting to many people, but some---like the megachurch crowd--love it.

 

What I thought was ridiculous was the hyperbole of preferring strip clubs' date=' massage parlors and x rated theaters. You say Cleveland needs to be progressive, however those venues hardly contribute to a better quality of life. If you are going to make an either/or comparison, make it something realistic. [/quote']

 

I didn't pick those venues out of thin air--I was simply responding to an earlier posting that presented those options as the other extreme of a megachurch--and I stated I'd prefer that to the church. From a theoretical perspective, it is realistic. Of course I'd prefer a row of restaurants and retail beneath a bunch of apartments over the strip clubs, but that's not what was being compared.

 

Regarding SMG and their taking over the CC, I wonder if there would be some new synergy if they re-won the Wolstein Center---as they could offer potential clients not only a choice of venues in CLE, but the ability to book very large events across venues in the city.

 

 

Regarding SMG and their taking over the CC, I wonder if there would be some new synergy if they re-won the Wolstein Center---as they could offer potential clients not only a choice of venues in CLE, but the ability to book very large events across venues in the city.

 

 

Could be a possibility, but CSU would have to give them room to negotiate on rent.

 

Slightly off topic, I wonder if SMG taking the Convention Center includes Public/Music Hall?

I lived in NYC for four years. Times Square is not a place that people who actually live there go' date=' so I don't care what happens to it..[/quote']

 

You're stating the obvious regarding people who live in NY and Times Square. Regarding Times Sq's sterilization program, it is very disconcerting to many people, but some---like the megachurch crowd--love it.

 

 

I wasn't going to say anything because I didn't want to derail the thread, but this comment is pretty typical of people who never saw Times Square before it changed. Times square, in the 80's, was a pretty sh!tty area. If you liked peep shows, hookers and drug dealers, then I guess it was your scene. I know a lot of people on here like to romanticize 'grit', but the reality is, the only people who liked Times square 'before' (notwithstanding, the masturbaters, crack heads, and working ladies) were tourists who ran through for a couple seconds so they could tell their friends about how they went to Times Square, and how bad it was

 

So in a sense, it's always been a tourist trap area. Now it just caters to a different kind of tourist.

I lived in NYC for four years. Times Square is not a place that people who actually live there go' date=' so I don't care what happens to it..[/quote']

 

You're stating the obvious regarding people who live in NY and Times Square. Regarding Times Sq's sterilization program, it is very disconcerting to many people, but some---like the megachurch crowd--love it.

 

 

I wasn't going to say anything because I didn't want to derail the thread, but this comment is pretty typical of people who never saw Times Square before it changed. Times square, in the 80's, was a pretty sh!tty area. If you liked peep shows, hookers and drug dealers, then I guess it was your scene. I know a lot of people on here like to romanticize 'grit', but the reality is, the only people who liked Times square 'before' (notwithstanding, the masturbaters, crack heads, and working ladies) were tourists who ran through for a couple seconds so they could tell their friends about how they went to Times Square, and how bad it was

 

So in a sense, it's always been a tourist trap area. Now it just caters to a different kind of tourist.

 

Agreed AJ93. It was nothing particularly interesting then, nor is it now. I find the romanticizing of the pre "Disneyfication" to  be quite silly. 

I wasn't going to say anything because I didn't want to derail the thread' date=' but this comment is pretty typical of people who never saw Times Square before it changed. [/quote']

 

Agreed AJ93. It was nothing particularly interesting then' date=' nor is it now. I find the romanticizing of the pre "Disneyfication" to  be quite silly. [/quote']

 

Just clicked back here, only to find you guys still on this.  AJ--don't be so presumptuous about where people have been in their lives and what they know; Jeremey--I was never 'romanticizing' pre-Disney Times Sq, only juxtaposing to it to megachurchland. If you prefer megachurchland to grit, that's your prerogative. I know lots of people hate Times Square as it is now (females included), then again, I don't anyone who is a megachurch supporter, either.

Still on this? We responded on the same day you did. Your comparisons are apples and oranges and don't make much sense.  Just because one doesn't mind a mega church at an otherwise underutilized Wolstein center has nothing to do with one's opinion of Times Square, Disneyfied or not.

The topic is CSU Wolstein center, not Times Square, please.

^Agreed!

 

Venues are critical to have. Thus,  I think efforts should be spent on how to make it viable--rather than what else should be done with the land. Even if it's not viable, it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist. Does CSU's Tennis stadium make money? probably not---but no reason to get rid of it....

^But the tennis stadium probably doesn't suck away seven figures from CSU's general budget either. The discussion was prompted by the net financial burden Wolstein places on CSU, not the possibility of better uses for the land. In any case, it didn't sound as though demolition was a serious proposal, just one of several theoretical options.

The topic is CSU Wolstein center, not Times Square, please.

 

I didn't bring Times Square into the discussion, I was merely pointing out that the comparison is ridiculous.  Pugu mentioned that, of course, if I'm not against a mega church, I must be for the Disneyfication of everything.  Now he says we should look at how best to make  the venue viable which is exactly what the proponents of a mega church were doing in the first place.  It's funny how short some people's memories are.

Jeremy---you're still on about this? And, to boot, you've missed the point:  We should find a way to make Wolstein viable---or not viable and just accept that it should be subsidized by the university like the tennis stadium is. But if the route taken is one to make it as viable as possible, then that should be done as long as it those methods do not include using it as a megachurch. I thought the discussion was pretty clear.

 

To not further derail this thread further, if you'd like to discuss this more, please PM me.

Where is the tennis stadium?

 

^on Chester & 21st---called the Malaga Tennis Center.

 

"The six courts at the Malaga Tennis Center are arranged in two rows of three, allowing spectators the ability to watch several matches at once. Also included in the facility is a storage shed, allowing the Viking teams to store equipment between practices and matches."

 

http://www.csuvikings.com/information/Facilities/index

 

Theres a photo of it as well on that link.

 

^ I wouldn't call that a "Tennis Stadium" as it is just a few tennis courts. The same can be found in countless neighborhood parks through the city. The Wolstein Center is a whole different beast.

Jeremy---you're still on about this? And, to boot, you've missed the point:  We should find a way to make Wolstein viable---or not viable and just accept that it should be subsidized by the university like the tennis stadium is. But if the route taken is one to make it as viable as possible, then that should be done as long as it those methods do not include using it as a megachurch. I thought the discussion was pretty clear.

 

To not further derail this thread further, if you'd like to discuss this more, please PM me.

 

Still on about this? I'm just responding to your comments from earlier so spare me the condescension.  And in what way is the discussion clear? You think because you hate mega churches that it's not a viable use of space. Others obviously disagree and have no problem with that use as long as it brings in revenue and until something better can be done with the property (hopefully knocked down and the land redeveloped). I don't care if it's a church or a synagogue or a Hindu temple or a puppet theater, as long as it gets used. The discussion is not clear.  It's a matter of opinion,which is the point,  and you fail to grasp that.  As I said earlier, short memories on some people.  This is very much on topic.

^It's something that should be taken to PM as was suggested earlier.