Expos de Montréal

[peekay]

10 minutes ago, YMQ said:

I'm being serious. I want our lovely mayor to come out in the media and overtly say that this is a project that will benefit tremendous economic opportunity to Montrealers including small business owners (shops/restos etc.). Just say it - can't be that hard

She won't. She doesn't like baseball. Actions speak louder than words. Look at what she did with the public baseball diamonds. And where was she when the Blue Jays came to play last year?

Who talks about social housing when the topic at hand is a baseball stadium? Someone who had zero business acumen that's who. It makes no sense. Focus on building the stadium first. The rest will follow. 

 

1 minute ago, fmfranck said:

You could always tweet her or write her an email.  On the flip side, it is well known that stadium projects positive effects are greatly exaggerated (see video below at 9:22 or, if you dont have time for comedy, skip directly to 10:59).  Even when the Expos were riding high, the surrounding Hochelag area didnt all of a sudden transform into an active and prosperous area because of the added commercial activity from sporting events. Unless you deem that Bar 99 is quite the hot spot. 

 

The Olympic Stadium wasn't built for baseball. The surrounding area was residential and had no life to it. I think the future owners will make it the area into a family friendly, festive place. It is exactly what the focus group wanted. 

[fmfranck]

il y a 6 minutes, peekay a dit :

The Olympic Stadium wasn't built for baseball. The surrounding area was residential and had no life to it. I think the future owners will make it the area into a family friendly, festive place. It is exactly what the focus group wanted. 

1

Who cares, Montréal was way above MLB attendance averages from 1979 to 1984 with close to 30k. And then until 1997, it was averaging around 20k a game. Thats 20 years of "supposed" economic ripple effect. Not much of a ripple, unfortunately...

[peekay]

1 minute ago, fmfranck said:

Who cares, Montréal was way above MLB attendance averages from 1979 to 1984 with close to 30k. And then until 1997, it was averaging around 20k a game. Thats 20 years of "supposed" economic ripple effect. Not much of a ripple, unfortunately...

I've been around stadiums across the East coast. The beauty of entering a stadium built specifically for baseball is quite a lovely experience.  It has so much atmosphere and a true fan would appreciate that. A proper project would also draw non traditional fans just like the Jarry stadium does for tennis. The focus group knows that and so does the future owners. Sadly, our current mayor doesn't but that isn't a pre-requisite.

[nephersir7]

il y a 1 minute, peekay a dit :

Sadly, our current mayor doesn't

Pourquoi as-tu cette impression?

[fmfranck]

il y a 7 minutes, YMQ a dit :

 

Just curious - have you been to area around the Bell Centre, ScotiaBank area in Toronto or the Rogers arena in Vancouver. And have you been to Oracle Park in San Francisco? If you haven't, well I have... and perhaps you should see for yourself how the area around it has come to life. 

Come on. The Bell Centre? 1250 was built before the Bell Centre. Who's to say who really contributed to its resurgence. Not only that, but it took almost THIRTY years for developments to start to appear. Not quite a direct causality, no?

For all of these examples, there are PLENTY of counter-examples. I prefer to base myself on academical studies than to go from anecdotal personal experience. 

=======================================

Bref, tout ce que je dis c'est que Plante a affirmé à maintes reprises maintenant soutenir le projet. Lui demander d'être une cheerleader qui ne va rien demander à des promoteurs d'un méga-projet qui va affecter et définir un quartier limitrophe au Centre-ville, je suis pas sûr que ce soit nécessaire. C'est normal de vouloir bien faire les choses, surtout quand les promoteurs vont aussi en demander à la ville.

[peekay]

3 minutes ago, nephersir7 said:

Pourquoi as-tu cette impression?

Elle ne l'ai jamais montré publiquement avec des gestes concret mais je faisais reference au beauté des autres stades de baseball, un fan le saurait. Un fan saurait aussi que le stade n'est pas une bonne place pour le baseball

 

[ToxiK]

Il y a 3 heures, fmfranck a dit :

Come on. The Bell Centre? 1250 was built before the Bell Centre. Who's to say who really contributed to its resurgence. Not only that, but it took almost THIRTY years for developments to start to appear. Not quite a direct causality, no?

For all of these examples, there are PLENTY of counter-examples. I prefer to base myself on academical studies than to go from anecdotal personal experience. 

You want causality?  What about when the Forum closed in 1996?  That commercial stretch of Ste-Catherine started to really have troubles.  You could blame other factors, you could even blame the referendum that happened just a few month before, but the departure of the forum and the crowds it brought had its effect.

These days, stadiums and arenas are built to have commercial activities around them.  Attendance is a commodity that has value.  If there are stores, bars and restaurants near a stadium you give more things to do to people before and after the game.  Not only you get more revenues from the spectators, you heighten their experience.  They don't have to go to a restaurant if they don't want to, but at least they have a choice.  And with a significant percentage of people staying in the area after a game, it reduce the pressure on transport because less people will need to be on the road or in public transit at once.  The Olympic stadium has no real commercial venues around it for that purpose.  The Ottawa Senators want to more even thought their arena is barely older then the Bell Centre because it is (still today) in the middle of nowhere.  A stadium/arena has a symbiotic with a surrrounding commercial sector (when that commercial sector exist).

Imagin the Bassin Peel with a baseball stadium.  It could have restaurants, bars, stores, food stands, maybe a theater or other venues, not to mention hotels and residential towers, and so on.  After a game, you could not only go there, but you could go to Griffintown, or if you are motivated you could follow Peel to downtown.  Mill street could become a choice access to go to Old Montréal from the stadium.  And if you just want a quiet walk, you could follow the magnificient Lachine Canal nearby.  The potential of that area is huge and baely exploited.

[crosbyshow]

Il y a 4 heures, fmfranck a dit :

Come on. The Bell Centre? 1250 was built before the Bell Centre. Who's to say who really contributed to its resurgence. Not only that, but it took almost THIRTY years for developments to start to appear. Not quite a direct causality, no?

For all of these examples, there are PLENTY of counter-examples. I prefer to base myself on academical studies than to go from anecdotal personal experience. 

=======================================

Bref, tout ce que je dis c'est que Plante a affirmé à maintes reprises maintenant soutenir le projet. Lui demander d'être une cheerleader qui ne va rien demander à des promoteurs d'un méga-projet qui va affecter et définir un quartier limitrophe au Centre-ville, je suis pas sûr que ce soit nécessaire. C'est normal de vouloir bien faire les choses, surtout quand les promoteurs vont aussi en demander à la ville.

Lollll.

 

Quoi. 

 

Peux tu tu me donner un quadrilatère à Montreal avec autant de tours de 40 étages et plus au pieds carré et le Centre Bell a rien à voir la dedans...????  Come on

 

Le fait qu'il s'est rien passé  entre 1996 Et 2010 est que les 3 proprios à qui appartenait l'immense stationnement devant le centre Bell voulait pas vendre.  L'un d'eux un italien vivant en Italie attendait son prix..

 

Le centre Bell est toujours dans le top 5 mondial des salles qui vend Le plus de billets en tout genre et tu penses que sa présence à ancun impact sur la venue de nouvelles tours....je rêve ou Quoi.

 

 

Je suis allé cet été voir les Padres à San Diego et je t'invite à alller voir ce quartier avant et après le stade pour le fun.  On a bien intégré un schéma d'aménagement là bas et c'est extraordinaire!!

 

Bronfman veut faire la même chose ici ( claridge) et je serais pas surpris que Mitch Garber ( c.a du cirque du soleil et investisseur des Expos) veule construire une salle semi permanente ( show 6 mois par Année du cirque) aux abords du stade.

 

 

[fmfranck]

Il y a 1 heure, ToxiK a dit :

You want causality?  What about when the Forum closed in 1996?  That commercial stretch of Ste-Catherine started to really have troubles.  You could blame other factors, you could even blame the referendum that happened just a few month before, but the departure of the forum and the crowds it brought had its effect.

These days, stadiums and arenas are built to have commercial activities around them.  Attendance is a commodity that has value.  If there are stores, bars and restaurants near a stadium you give more things to do to people before and after the game.  Not only you get more revenues from the spectators, you heighten their experience.  They don't have to go to a restaurant if they don't want to, but at least they have a choice.  And with a significant percentage of people staying in the area after a game, it reduce the pressure on transport because less people will need to be on the road or in public transit at once.  The Olympic stadium has no real commercial venues around it for that purpose.  The Ottawa Senators want to more even thought their arena is barely older then the Bell Centre because it is (still today) in the middle of nowhere.  A stadium/arena has a symbiotic with a surrrounding commercial sector (when that commercial sector exist).

 Imagin the Bassin Peel with a baseball stadium.  It could have restaurants, bars, stores, food stands, maybe a theater or other venues, not to mention hotels and residential towers, and so on.  After a game, you could not only go there, but you could go to Griffintown, or if you are motivated you could follow Peel to downtown.  Mill street could become a choice access to go to Old Montréal from the stadium.  And if you just want a quiet walk, you could follow the magnificient Lachine Canal nearby.  The potential of that area is huge and baely exploited.

When did I say that the site had no potential? It started with people saying that Plante was being negative towards the project. To which I said it was hardly the case. Then Mark said that she should not request anything from the promoters as this project was going to have an incredible ripple effect on the economy. To which I pointed to factual information that suggests that the effect on the economy is grossly exaggerated. There are instances when that effect has been stronger in specific contexts. I don't want to extensively evaluate the forum's demise. Funnily enough, it fits pretty well with Montréal's overall slow down (1995-2012). 

I think the development of Pointe-St-Charles is inevitable, whether we build a stadium there or not. I do welcome the Stadium project, but some people do tend to overexaggerate the effects that sports venues have. 

" Economists reach the nearly unanimous conclusion that “tangible” economic benefits generated by professional sports facilities and franchises are very small; clearly far smaller than stadium advocates suggest and smaller than the size of the subsidies. The fact that sports subsidies continue to be granted, despite the overwhelming preponderance of evidence that no tangible economic benefits are generated by these heavily subsidized professional sports facilities, remains a puzzle. "

COATES, DENNIS; HUMPHREYS, BRAD R, "Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Subsidies for Sports Franchises, Stadiums, and Mega-Events?" Econ Journal Watch. Sep2008, Vol. 5 Issue 3, p294-315. 22p.

 

Modifié 17 février 2019 par fmfranck

[fmfranck]

il y a 13 minutes, YMQ a dit :

Honestly don't even bother arguing with this guy. He lives in own little fantasy land of reality.

1

Je cite des articles de revue scientifique, et toi tu te fie sur quoi au juste? La visite de trois ou quatres stades? L'attaque ad hominem; la marque des arguments solides.