Expos de Montréal

[Exposteve]

We`ve had this debate over and over again in these threads.  Location is a primary driver of business, and if you're attending games with your departure and arrival point both being downtown, I agree a 20 min metro ride is no big deal.  However, if you live in Laval or the south shore or the west island and you work downtown... and you need to go home after the game, that is very inconvenient.  Sure it`s 20 mins from the office, but it's 1h30 home to the West Island on public transit after the game.  I work downtown with many baseball fans (the kind, like me, who are willing to travel to different cities to see live MLB), many of whom were not prepared to go to Olympic Stadium after work and then have to return to the south shore afterwards.  It`s 20 mins back by metro, then transfer to a bus that may be infrequent to get home, etc.  I'm not saying they're right, but that is the feedback I received.  They would be more willing on weekends.

There is nothing appealing about the neighbourhood around Olympic Stadium, and that is not intended as a knock to the residents of the sector because it`s a perfectly nice place to live.  You need restaurants and bars and a 'vibe' surrounding games.  

If you were to survey MLB fans across all baseball cities in North America, the approximate breakdown of die-hard baseball fan to casual fan is about 20% die-hard, 40% casual fan, and the remaining 40% are people who are there for the experience.  The experience of being part of a fun event in a fun location, outside, with friends, etc.  In Montreal at Olympic Stadium, over the long-run you would still draw the 20% die-hards and some of the 40% casual fans when the team is exciting, but you will ALWAYS struggle to attract the other 40%.  Sure you will get them to some games, but certainly not too many.  

Toronto Rogers Centre is not a classic ballpark, and it is definitely among the worst in MLB.  However, #1 it is in the best possible location for that city... 100% in the heart of the GTA where all transit meets.  They have commuter trains heading in almost all directions on a regular basis even at night/weekends.  It's walking distance to the largest business district in the country, it's a few mins walk to the lakeshore, and it has a surrounding population of around 6 million people, many of whom are very wealthy.  The ballpark also has a fully (or nearly fully) retractable roof that, when opened, makes you feel like you are truly outside.  Despite being multi-purpose, it is significantly more fan friendly than Olympic Stadium could ever be as it's smaller in terms of volume, does not have as much of a cavernous feel, was built with baseball very much in mind in terms of seat placement, angles, etc.   While some of these aspects could be improved at Olympic Stadium, it is unreasonable to think it would make a material difference, and you've still done nothing to improve the location issue.  And as a reminder, from 1998-2014 or so, the Jays were at best middle of the pack in terms of attendance despite all of these factors.  Rogers was able to acquire the SkyDome for essentially $1.00 as part of their purchase of the Jays, and that is certainly an incentive to maintain what is a great asset in an incredible location and work with it for as long possible.  Note that the Argonauts were not able to make it work at Rogers Centre much like the Alouettes at Olympic Stadium.

For anyone who has been to ANY existing ballpark in the United States aside from Tropicana Field in St-Pete and the field in Oakland, you usually have a combination of wonderful, family-friendly, fun/attractive/cool vibe design with views from the seats, PLUS convenient location to the vast majority of the people you hope to attract to the games.  This is a BIG industry today that relies heavily on TV audience... and the TV audience event gets impacted by the beauty of the stadiums the games are played in.  Watching a game on TV taking place in San Francisco is a treat because every angle is beautiful and basically an advertisement for the team, the brand, and to buy tickets.  I made a trip with friends to San Francisco specifically to visit the ballpark because it's so beautiful looking.  Same with Pittsburgh and Cleveland among others.  The stadium sells the viewers, definitely.  The price of admission is basically a cover charge for a nice evening or afternoon out with friends, hence the popularity of affordable bleacher seats, the 360 degree layout of all new stadiums, where fans can buy a ticket but wander around and watch from any number of interesting vantage points including patios, family picnic areas, grassy areas, amusement zones, etc all while being able to keep an eye on the game.

If you are thinking of MLB as a business that only caters to die-hard baseball fans, you're expecting to draw only 10,000 people max in (nearly) ANY market in MLB.  You can't always be the best team in MLB, you can't always depend on the bandwagon, you need to be appealing.  You need to be an EASY draw for corporate tickets who will form the majority of a 20,000-base of season tickets (and sure, some of those seats will be empty on April weekdays when the team is not winning), easy for hipsters who want a place to hang out and take Instagram pictures to ADVERTISE YOUR BRAND to their friends, easy for people who are in to visit from out of town (this is bigger in MLB than NHL or NBA because of the 3-game series and uniqueness of each ballpark), and easy for the majority of your population to get to/from... in Montreal that means easy by transit to all the shores as well as east/west of island.  Baseball is the only large sport left where you can still bring in your own food (not beer/bottles but food), can afford to go to a game as a family (or at least a lot more affordable than NHL in Montreal)... where you can enjoy a nice day as a family outside regardless of whether the team is in first place or last place, or whether the game was a no-hitter or a blowout.  

It's competitive out there... and you're selling a lifestyle event as opposed to an intense 2-hour non-stop matchup like NHL/Habs.  Baseball is all about the experience, talking to friends/family, eating a hot dog and sipping a beer... because the game itself is not always very exciting, not unlike golf or many other events. You attract the most people by making it a desirable and fun and affordable experience for MOST people, not just people who are specifically in love with baseball the game.  At Olympic Stadium, even if it's more comfortable with nicer seats, better concessions, better sound system, etc... you're still really only going to attract people who REALLY like baseball, which is not going to be 25,000-30,000 on average, and is likely not to include enough of the business customers and higher-spending clientele that really moves the needle in terms of profitability for this kind of thing. 

 

 

Modifié 27 mars 2018 par Exposteve

[IluvMTL]

I agree. In an ideal world you have a closer to downtown baseball stadium and a winning team. But I'm pretty sure taxpayers here will not be convinced by your arguments. And it's their money the governemnt will be asked to spend. Taxpayers are more savvy and less forgiving than before. The Formula E has burnt them even more. You can sense it. You have to think like them and have more persuasive arguments. But I don't think that it is possible. They'd rather use the money for hospitals or roads. Baseball fans are are a whole other species of course, but they are in the minority don't forget.

That's why I think a more pragmatic approach might have a better chance. At least we've have a team again. The syndicate could pay for the renos and the government for a retractable roof. Food trucks and beer gardens outside could create some atmosphere lacking in the area. We could build from there and eventually build the stadium of our dreams...but the all or nothing approach will lead to failure I'm afraid. If the baseball side won't  compromise it won't happen.

[Exposteve]

I don't disagree and don't expect taxpayers to pay for the bill, or at least not the full bill.  I am a taxpayer myself.  Selfishly as a baseball fan I would be okay with them investing responsibly in the project just like they do in a number of other sectors that don't specifically impact me (that's called living in society!)... but I never suggested that taxpayers should pay the full/majority of any such project.  I know enough about the economics of these stadiums that it's rarely a good deal for the government.  That said, the model being employed by Cadillac Faiview and the Canadiens is a godo example of a trend common in sports these days where stadiums and arenas are used as centrepieces for development clusters, and there may be some value in that for the government.  

Side-note:  Bringing Olympic Stadium up to even just "average" quality would require hundreds of millions of dollars... I mean average 2018 quality.  So while the idea of throwing some money at the Olympic Stadium to host MLB is a nice idea, it's still a few hundred million dollars and you're not going to get the ideal product.  The fact that recent media reports are talking about $1 billion over the next 8 years in upgrades to Olympic Stadium (some of which relates to the tower reno for Desjardins and the Biodome) should be a good indication of just how complex that building is and how far we're starting from.  And you still haven't addressed the fact that sitting in the upper deck at Olympic Stadium for baseball you may as well be in a different time zone.

I like the suggestion of a beer garden/food trucks.  Although that doesn't generate much plus-value for the neighbourhood outside of baseball games and won't increase property values, etc.  Still a good suggestion.

Modifié 27 mars 2018 par Exposteve

[IluvMTL]

Bronfman was interviewed by Patrice Roy at 18h30. A very optkmistic guy. He's thinking it will happen within 5 or 6 years.  He said they are working with this firm regarding stadium scenarios.  https://populous.com

[fmfranck]

Il y a 14 heures, Exposteve a dit :

We`ve had this debate over and over again in these threads.  Location is a primary driver of business, and if you're attending games with your departure and arrival point both being downtown, I agree a 20 min metro ride is no big deal.  However, if you live in Laval or the south shore or the west island and you work downtown... and you need to go home after the game, that is very inconvenient.  Sure it`s 20 mins from the office, but it's 1h30 home to the West Island on public transit after the game.  I work downtown with many baseball fans (the kind, like me, who are willing to travel to different cities to see live MLB), many of whom were not prepared to go to Olympic Stadium after work and then have to return to the south shore afterwards.  It`s 20 mins back by metro, then transfer to a bus that may be infrequent to get home, etc.  I'm not saying they're right, but that is the feedback I received.  They would be more willing on weekends.

There is nothing appealing about the neighbourhood around Olympic Stadium, and that is not intended as a knock to the residents of the sector because it`s a perfectly nice place to live.  You need restaurants and bars and a 'vibe' surrounding games.  

If you were to survey MLB fans across all baseball cities in North America, the approximate breakdown of die-hard baseball fan to casual fan is about 20% die-hard, 40% casual fan, and the remaining 40% are people who are there for the experience.  The experience of being part of a fun event in a fun location, outside, with friends, etc.  In Montreal at Olympic Stadium, over the long-run you would still draw the 20% die-hards and some of the 40% casual fans when the team is exciting, but you will ALWAYS struggle to attract the other 40%.  Sure you will get them to some games, but certainly not too many.  

Toronto Rogers Centre is not a classic ballpark, and it is definitely among the worst in MLB.  However, #1 it is in the best possible location for that city... 100% in the heart of the GTA where all transit meets.  They have commuter trains heading in almost all directions on a regular basis even at night/weekends.  It's walking distance to the largest business district in the country, it's a few mins walk to the lakeshore, and it has a surrounding population of around 6 million people, many of whom are very wealthy.  The ballpark also has a fully (or nearly fully) retractable roof that, when opened, makes you feel like you are truly outside.  Despite being multi-purpose, it is significantly more fan friendly than Olympic Stadium could ever be as it's smaller in terms of volume, does not have as much of a cavernous feel, was built with baseball very much in mind in terms of seat placement, angles, etc.   While some of these aspects could be improved at Olympic Stadium, it is unreasonable to think it would make a material difference, and you've still done nothing to improve the location issue.  And as a reminder, from 1998-2014 or so, the Jays were at best middle of the pack in terms of attendance despite all of these factors.  Rogers was able to acquire the SkyDome for essentially $1.00 as part of their purchase of the Jays, and that is certainly an incentive to maintain what is a great asset in an incredible location and work with it for as long possible.  Note that the Argonauts were not able to make it work at Rogers Centre much like the Alouettes at Olympic Stadium.

For anyone who has been to ANY existing ballpark in the United States aside from Tropicana Field in St-Pete and the field in Oakland, you usually have a combination of wonderful, family-friendly, fun/attractive/cool vibe design with views from the seats, PLUS convenient location to the vast majority of the people you hope to attract to the games.  This is a BIG industry today that relies heavily on TV audience... and the TV audience event gets impacted by the beauty of the stadiums the games are played in.  Watching a game on TV taking place in San Francisco is a treat because every angle is beautiful and basically an advertisement for the team, the brand, and to buy tickets.  I made a trip with friends to San Francisco specifically to visit the ballpark because it's so beautiful looking.  Same with Pittsburgh and Cleveland among others.  The stadium sells the viewers, definitely.  The price of admission is basically a cover charge for a nice evening or afternoon out with friends, hence the popularity of affordable bleacher seats, the 360 degree layout of all new stadiums, where fans can buy a ticket but wander around and watch from any number of interesting vantage points including patios, family picnic areas, grassy areas, amusement zones, etc all while being able to keep an eye on the game.

If you are thinking of MLB as a business that only caters to die-hard baseball fans, you're expecting to draw only 10,000 people max in (nearly) ANY market in MLB.  You can't always be the best team in MLB, you can't always depend on the bandwagon, you need to be appealing.  You need to be an EASY draw for corporate tickets who will form the majority of a 20,000-base of season tickets (and sure, some of those seats will be empty on April weekdays when the team is not winning), easy for hipsters who want a place to hang out and take Instagram pictures to ADVERTISE YOUR BRAND to their friends, easy for people who are in to visit from out of town (this is bigger in MLB than NHL or NBA because of the 3-game series and uniqueness of each ballpark), and easy for the majority of your population to get to/from... in Montreal that means easy by transit to all the shores as well as east/west of island.  Baseball is the only large sport left where you can still bring in your own food (not beer/bottles but food), can afford to go to a game as a family (or at least a lot more affordable than NHL in Montreal)... where you can enjoy a nice day as a family outside regardless of whether the team is in first place or last place, or whether the game was a no-hitter or a blowout.  

It's competitive out there... and you're selling a lifestyle event as opposed to an intense 2-hour non-stop matchup like NHL/Habs.  Baseball is all about the experience, talking to friends/family, eating a hot dog and sipping a beer... because the game itself is not always very exciting, not unlike golf or many other events. You attract the most people by making it a desirable and fun and affordable experience for MOST people, not just people who are specifically in love with baseball the game.  At Olympic Stadium, even if it's more comfortable with nicer seats, better concessions, better sound system, etc... you're still really only going to attract people who REALLY like baseball, which is not going to be 25,000-30,000 on average, and is likely not to include enough of the business customers and higher-spending clientele that really moves the needle in terms of profitability for this kind of thing. 

I think we need to stop analyzing the viability of the Big O as a baseball stadium with the context of the mid 90s. You have to take into account the revitalization of the sector + the developments that will help mobility. 

1 - I dont think it'll take 1:30 mins to get home for West Islanders with the new REM. Its a 15 mins ride to McGill station, and then a 30 mins ride home.  When you look at it, with one transfer or less you'll be able to go to : Pierrefonds, Kirkland, DDO, Pointe Claire, Cartierville, Ville-St-Laurent, Ville Mont-Royal, CDN, NDG, Montréal-West, Lasalle, Lachine, Griffintown, Laval, Vieux-Montréal,  HoMa, Tétreauville, Anjou, Rosemont, Plateau, Outremont, etc. Et la plupart de ses destinations en moins de 45 mins. 

2 - For your point about the breakdown of matchday tickets, I beleive that the 40% of non fans you mentionned that go there to be entertained would be more than interested by the Big O area. The whole area has been revitalized. Especially if you compare it when the Expos started dropping in popularity at the end of the 90s. You have the new Planetarium, the Biodome is getting a makeover, there's the new Impact Stadium, l'Esplanade got a makeover, the olympic sports centre has been renovated, Pierre-de-Coubertin is getting a makeover as well (with plenty of forestation), the Insectarium is getting a makeover, la Tour du stade got its makeover, and the big piece, the Big O itself is also getting a makeover. With a firm commitment of the return of the Expos as well, a totally retractable roof becomes a viable option financially as well. WIth all of this, no way that a Griffintown stadium is more interesting to non fans in my opinion. 

 

[IluvMTL]

http://montrealgazette.com/sports/bronfman-doesnt-want-tax-money-just-citys-help-to-bring-expos-back?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1522237373

Bronfman doesn't want tax money, just city's 'help' to bring Expos back

Bronfman wants to reassure Montrealers that the experience of Quebec City will not be repeated — no stadium construction will begin until a franchise has been confirmed

PRESSE CANADIENNE

Published on: March 28, 2018 | Last Updated: March 28, 2018 7:33 AM EDT

 

SHAREADJUSTCOMMENTPRINT

Stephen Bronfman wants to avoid the Olympic stadium should his group of investors land a major league baseball (MLB) franchise for Montreal.

“It’s always fun to come to the stadium,” he said. “(But) MLB has already told us the Olympic stadium won’t work. I’d really prefer to start off new with a new stadium.”

That statement may seem surprising, given that most observers believe any new team would begin playing at the Olympic stadium while a new venue is being constructed. But Bronfman says the idea doesn’t come from him.

“That’s pretty much the message we’ve been given by (MLB),” he said.

And that message was confirmed in an email from MLB to Presse Canadienne.

“What we’ve always said is that we will not return to Montreal without a firm plan for construction of a new stadium, including its financing,” an MLB spokesperson wrote.

 

However Bronfman wants to reassure Montrealers that the experience of Quebec City will not be repeated — no construction will begin until a franchise has been confirmed.

“We won’t be doing a Kevin Costner: ‘If you build it, they will come,’ ” he said, citing a signature line from “Field of Dreams”. “We won’t be doing that – we don’t have the money to do that. I’ve often said that if baseball 2.0 comes to Montreal it will be well managed, it will be be for a long time.”

While he admits there have been a lot of changes in the situation over the past year, Bronfman maintains his group has done its homework.

“We spent the necessary money to work with American firms, consultants, architects, in order to confirm our plan. We’ve been assured that at our end, (the business plan) is solid, since there are a lot of factors we can’t oversee.”

Bronfman repeated that he has no intention of seeking money from Montreal taxpayers, but added he needs “help” from Mayor Valérie Plante, and will meet with her “in a few weeks.”

“I’m looking forward to meeting her..We all have to be on the same wavelength…This is a sports team. Everyone has to play their role. We don’t need a cent from the city of Montreal, but we need a little help.”

[fmfranck]

That's for the city. I heard this morning on the radio that he would seek help from the provincial/federal however. I have to find a source for that.

[IluvMTL]

What I don't like from Bronfman is the message that since the MLB doesn't want a team to go back to the Big O,  we can't talk about it anymore.

It's as if the syndicate would like this elephant in the room to go away. They find it an annoying factor to say the least (and a counterproductive argument to their plan)...Sorry, but if there are public finds involved, everything is on the table. That being said, he seems confident with their business plan. So I'm anxious to hear their proposal. But until then, the Olympic Stadium (v2) will remain on the table for taxpayers. 

[IluvMTL]

58 minutes ago, fmfranck said:

That's for the city. I heard this morning on the radio that he would seek help from the provincial/federal however. I have to find a source for that.

They might be asking for some long term /low interest loan to cover part of the cost of building a stadium. Assurances that the government gets their investment back in case the team is sold before the loan is paid. 

[MtlMan]

Il va falloir que les obstineux arrêtent de s'entêter : le baseball majeur ne veut pas retourner au Stade olympique. Peu importe tous les arguments cérébraux qu'ils pourront sortir de leur chapeau. Ceux qui donneront l'autorisation d'avoir ou non une équipe n'en veulent pas, alors peu importe ce qu'on dira, si on veut une équipe, il faut un nouveau stade. C'est quoi cet acharnement? Vous êtes en business et vous souhaitez obtenir une franchise populaire mais vous insistez pour vous installer dans une location que le propriétaire de la chaîne déteste? Tsé, la voulez-vous ou pas la franchise?

Je vais au matchs de l'Impact, et je préfère 1000x l'ambiance du Saputo, même avec 40 000 personnes dans le Stade olympique. Vous direz qu'il n'est pas un stade de soccer. Je vous dirai que, justement, il n'est pas un stade de baseball non plus!

Même avec un toit ouvert, l'ambiance est plombée par le béton partout, le gris et l'opacité des structures. C'est bon pour des événements occasionnels nécéssitant de grandes foules, pas pour une équipe qui veut bâtir un fan base et une expérience exceptionnelle répétée.

Même à l'époque des Expos au Stade, la plupart du monde parlait tout le temps du stade Jarry. Bronfman veut un Jarry 2.0. C'est ça qu'il faut.

Il faut vraiment arrêter de faire vivre des fadaises. Please.

PS: je suis contre de l'argent public en cadeau pour un stade, pour ceux qui se demandent. je pourrais défendre une aide indirecte ou un prêt, mais certainement pas du BS comme à Québec. Je me dois d'être cohérent avec ce que j'ai toujours dit à ce sujet.