-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
Has anyone seen the renderings for the Arena-Aud renovation?
- Thread starter LawPoke
- Start date
Cowboy Junky
Well-known member
McPeachy said:
Smalltime = increased revenue for scheduling, recruiting, and coaching salary.
Give me the extra million a year to the budget so we can sign a decent home opponent, pay our coaches, and increase our recruiting budget. If it's coming at the expense of 3000 empty seats at 90 percent of our games it seems like a no brainer.
The stadium will probably get louder as you'll move the seating closer to the court.
Besides, renovated buildings make recruits sign letters. It's a fact.
kansasCowboy
Well-known member
Cowboy Junky said:
Here's your rebuttal.
1. New recruits could care less about luxury boxes and club seating. The only people that care about that are the alums and boosters. (Cameron Indoor has none of that, Neither does Allen Fieldhouse) Indiana has done nothing to their arena YEARS and they still bring in quality recruits. Your point number 1= completely negated.
2.Having 3,000 empty seats per game does not lose us any money, But, However, If we lose those 3,000 seats you can kiss all extra ticket sales (for those sellout games) goodbye. At $25.00 a ticket that's 75,000.00 just on ticket sales alone you have lost. Plus revenue you would have made elsewhere on those 3,000 seats.
And I'm not seeing how you are getting this half million saved? You'll have to enlighten us on that.
But, I do agree with you in a few points, we have bigger needs in our athletic dept including coaching salaries, recruiting budgets and even scheduling money. But those 3,000 empty seats are not taking away anything either. In all actuality think of those seats as our bleachers that we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on for our Sellouts in football to be installed and then taken back down. Same concept. Put in the permanent end zone seats which cost a fraction to keep updated, or spend 150,000.00 to build them for one game, and then another 150,000.00 to take them back down. (WOW! Permanent seating: WMS 33,500: Also saves us 300,000.00 a year. And the seats are there when needed. That would mean more revenue. Not unnecessary spending on building up and taking down.)
laxwyo
Well-known member
yeah, i'm sure we'll miss those 3000 tickets sold once every 25 years. instead of the revenue brought in by eliminating those seats and putting in some club seating. i wonder why we put in the Wildcatter's then if we really needed all those empty bleacher seats for 98% of the games.
Cowboy Junky
Well-known member
kansasCowboy said:
I agree with that.
75,000 in ticket sales once every four or five years is not worth sacrificing club seating and luxury boxes that will generate around a million a year to the athletics budget every year.
I'll take the million a year in athletics budget especially when it comes with nicer concourses, a glass entryway, practice facilities, renovated restrooms, structural repairs, a center hung video board, and more high def t.v's.
This move is anything but small time. They're going to renovate a beautiful building that has served us well and create a modern arena that few in our league have.
calpoke25
Well-known member
Cowduck it's tough arguing with the crowd who, as you so eloquently put, views the downsizing of the AA as a reduction in our collective dick sizes, but you are dead on the money with your thoughts.
Again, I agree UW is riddled with small time thinking, but this project isn't an example of that.
Think of the Wildcatter, before it was installed I too felt a little uneasy about reducing capacity, but looking at the War today and you would have to be a fool to think that the War circa 2003>War 2012 because War 2003 "could" hold more people.
Again, I agree UW is riddled with small time thinking, but this project isn't an example of that.
Think of the Wildcatter, before it was installed I too felt a little uneasy about reducing capacity, but looking at the War today and you would have to be a fool to think that the War circa 2003>War 2012 because War 2003 "could" hold more people.
NowherePoke
Well-known member
McPeachy said:
I just don't see how a 12k arena is small time. Has Viejas (12k) hurt SDSU? Far from it.
The War capacity is a little bit more of an issue since 30k is very small by FBS standards.
The main issue is the same in both sports: we can't fill either one consistently.
kansasCowboy
Well-known member
SDSU's arena is an upgrade. If you remember they used to play in an old high school gym that held maybe 3,000 tops. I actually remember watching a couple of those games back in the 90's against Wyo. It was pathetic. So yeah, they get a 9,400 seat add on when they get their new arena. We go have a few bad years and now we need to down size. This reminds me of the pricks that are adamant that building a Dome over WMS will increase attendance. Unnecessary spending. That's all we do, and then we have no money. No money to keep coaches, no money for paying upgrades outright, No money for recruiting.
To me this just seems like another example of rich boosters and alums who can no longer stand enjoying the game with all the other fans and would prefer to have a place of their own to enjoy the game in. Hope you can afford to enjoy it. As for me when that sellout comes I probably won't make it, because you got rid of my seats for clubs and boxes I can't afford and won't pay for to just go to an hour and a half basketball game.
No this is why it all bothers me:
Utah's Stadium was 32,500-Renovated it is now 45,000
UNM's stadium was 30,257- Renovated it is now 38,500
UNLV's stadium was 32,000- Renovated it is now 36,800
CSU's stadium was 30,000- Renovated it is now 35,000 (Plus they are talking of building a new and BIGGER one)
WYO's stadium was 33,500- Renovated it is now 29,086 (But we may make a few more dollars for club seats)
Now, Let's do the same to basketball!
To me this just seems like another example of rich boosters and alums who can no longer stand enjoying the game with all the other fans and would prefer to have a place of their own to enjoy the game in. Hope you can afford to enjoy it. As for me when that sellout comes I probably won't make it, because you got rid of my seats for clubs and boxes I can't afford and won't pay for to just go to an hour and a half basketball game.
No this is why it all bothers me:
Utah's Stadium was 32,500-Renovated it is now 45,000
UNM's stadium was 30,257- Renovated it is now 38,500
UNLV's stadium was 32,000- Renovated it is now 36,800
CSU's stadium was 30,000- Renovated it is now 35,000 (Plus they are talking of building a new and BIGGER one)
WYO's stadium was 33,500- Renovated it is now 29,086 (But we may make a few more dollars for club seats)
Now, Let's do the same to basketball!
NowherePoke
Well-known member
kansasCowboy said:
In regards to SDSU, they did play the majority of their games in Peterson Gym (the one you are referring to), but they actually could have, and did, play some games at the San Diego Sports Arena (14k capacity or so). Their problem was not they didn't have enough interest to use the bigger building. Their problem was not lack of capacity, it was lack of interest and a crappy team.
If you are a season ticket holder, I am reasonably certain there will always be tickets available (can't imagine us selling 10k season tickets, even at the peak of the Bailey era we sold about 5.2k). It's been 10 years since there was an actual chance that someone who wanted to go wouldn't be able to go.
Anyway, all of the examples you state are Football. I agree with you that the capacity of the WAR is a concern as it is very small relative to our peers. The same is just not true of the A-A.
I guess it comes down to this, what is better for UW: The current 15k A-A or a remodeled 12.5k A-A. We will just have to agree to disagree on the answer.
What I do know, and I hope we can agree on, is that the real problem is the fact that there are only 5k in the seats every night. 15k, 12k, doesn't matter if the majority of them are empty. That reflects very poorly on us as a fanbase and makes arguments over arena capacity quite humorous to outsiders I am sure.
Cowboy Junky said:
I still do not like the 12,500 number but, to me, that does not seem like we are throwing in the proverbial towel in the way that cutting down to 10,000 does.
I can agree to disagree about whether it is better reduce the number of people that attend the biggest games in order to build the luxury boxes and to be able to say we come closer to selling out a few other games. If the program is where it should be, we will not be going years between sellouts. I also think that it is more important to increase the average attendance than it is to increase the number of sellouts.
If we were currently using a 7K-9K seat facility that was 30 years old and beginning discussions about building a new facility from scratch, the 12,500 capacity would make more sense to me. However, we are talking downgrading our best-case scenario. I am with everyone who takes the position that we should be figuring out how to sell more tickets rather than retrofitting the facility we have to more closely fit the crowds that we have drawn during the worst stretch we have had since we built the A-A.
At the end of the day, 12K is still a 25% reduction from the best crowd we had which was over 16K. I want the program to grow into the facility we have.
I am also one of those who does suspect that a domed football/track/soccer stadium would be a good thing in the long term.
McPeachy
Well-known member
Cowduck said:
There are a BUNCH of examples in football, and several examples in basketball...our own MWC member SDSU basketball comes to mind with Viejas at like 11K versus what they used to play in (I think a 4K seat community arena).
We can argue this forever...but as far as my research would let me seek out, the University of Wyoming is the only D1 football stadium to INTENTIONALLY decrease it's seating capacity in the last decade. And like I said above...everyone around us is growing. Hell even FCS schools are upgrading and adding more seating.
McPeachy
Well-known member
Cuttslam said:
:thumbdown:
You and I obviously don't have the same peer group / friends / aquaintances...we don't hear the same things, run in the same circles, or are privy to the same information or conversations.
My statement was more an exageration of a point...that the UW athletic administration, (Moon, Barta, Burman) and staffs, have not inspired to be the best / biggest at anything. Example: If it weren't for Joe Glenn...the IPF would have probably never been funded / built when it was.
Why not think big, and get after it? Again, see CSewe on campus stadium example.
TSpoke
Well-known member
In 2010 New Mexico renovated The Pit and went from 18,018 to 17,126.....What small time thinking. And they sell you more than we do.
Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pit_Arena
Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pit_Arena
McPeachy
Well-known member
TSpoke said:
Christ on a Harley, you got me. That 892 decrease in seating at the pit was huge. 17K is a bit different than 12K. Etc. What did NM do to their FB stadium? Soccer? Baseball? Practice facilitie(S)?
And the upgrade was more of a necessity (structurally and to strive to be nationally competitive) than anything. It was either fill it in and build something new, or dump money in it, and get it UP TO CITY CODE (opened in 1966)...while not sacrificing annual walk-up and season ticket sales, yet also increasing actual revenue.
So, NM was innovative. With 60 million invested. We are dumbing down, for how much?
Basically, you know as well as I know, New Mexico takes their hoops serious (men's and women's)...
There's a lot of pre-occupation with size on this topic!
I'm of the "quality beats quantity" mindset, myself. Thing is, since most of the home games have been televised and available locally, that option is going to affect attendance during the winter months that are basketball season. Given the limited size of the Wyoming television market universe, I highly doubt there'd be much enthusiasm on the part of the broadcaster to impose a blackout without being compensated.
Another simple fact- the AA is larger than the majority of college basketball arenas, yet we have the smallest D1 population within a 1 hour drive of the venue. When it was built 25 years ago, televised games were nearly unheard of- if you wanted to see the game, you HAD to go. Now, not the case. Our population demographics have also changed- more people consume alcohol than they did 25 years ago, and for many of them, the choice of sitting comfortably at home or in a local bar and being able to watch the game, eat something besides popcorn, hot dogs, or nachos, and drink good beer or whatever their hearts desire, is affecting their decision to attend.
The AA, when originally built, had seating for 14,400. It is currently the third largest arena in the MWC in, as I said before, THE smallest D1 population footprint in the entire country. As someone with an extensive background on hospitality operations- one of the biggest problem I've often seen is a space that is unrealistic in terms of expected capacity, and suffers from "crowd-lag". Put 100 people in a place that is built for 500, and it feels empty, energy levels run low, and people feel like they're somewhere everyone else doesn't want to be. Drop the capacity to 300 and all of a sudden, it's much easier to generate crowds of 200+ because of the energy level. Same thing with a sports venue like the AA. 7,000 people spread out in a 14,000+ seat arena actually feels less than half-empty. But 7,000 people in an 11,000 seat arena creates energy and is more likely to draw 2,000 more people than that same crowd in the half-empty one.
At the end of the day, it's about the final count at the end of the season. If a half-empty 14K seat arena is going to struggle to put 120K butts in seats over a season, but a 2/3- 3/4 full 11K seat arena is likely to exceed that count, doesn't that make the most sense? It's hard to argue with the numbers.
I'm of the "quality beats quantity" mindset, myself. Thing is, since most of the home games have been televised and available locally, that option is going to affect attendance during the winter months that are basketball season. Given the limited size of the Wyoming television market universe, I highly doubt there'd be much enthusiasm on the part of the broadcaster to impose a blackout without being compensated.
Another simple fact- the AA is larger than the majority of college basketball arenas, yet we have the smallest D1 population within a 1 hour drive of the venue. When it was built 25 years ago, televised games were nearly unheard of- if you wanted to see the game, you HAD to go. Now, not the case. Our population demographics have also changed- more people consume alcohol than they did 25 years ago, and for many of them, the choice of sitting comfortably at home or in a local bar and being able to watch the game, eat something besides popcorn, hot dogs, or nachos, and drink good beer or whatever their hearts desire, is affecting their decision to attend.
The AA, when originally built, had seating for 14,400. It is currently the third largest arena in the MWC in, as I said before, THE smallest D1 population footprint in the entire country. As someone with an extensive background on hospitality operations- one of the biggest problem I've often seen is a space that is unrealistic in terms of expected capacity, and suffers from "crowd-lag". Put 100 people in a place that is built for 500, and it feels empty, energy levels run low, and people feel like they're somewhere everyone else doesn't want to be. Drop the capacity to 300 and all of a sudden, it's much easier to generate crowds of 200+ because of the energy level. Same thing with a sports venue like the AA. 7,000 people spread out in a 14,000+ seat arena actually feels less than half-empty. But 7,000 people in an 11,000 seat arena creates energy and is more likely to draw 2,000 more people than that same crowd in the half-empty one.
At the end of the day, it's about the final count at the end of the season. If a half-empty 14K seat arena is going to struggle to put 120K butts in seats over a season, but a 2/3- 3/4 full 11K seat arena is likely to exceed that count, doesn't that make the most sense? It's hard to argue with the numbers.
Cowduck
Well-known member
McPeachy said:
Auburn's brand new basketball arena is actually smaller than the one it replaced - it seats fewer than 10k.
Viejas is not an arena that supports your argument. It's true that it is considerably bigger than the gym it replaced, but that a) isn't saying much at all since the old one was WCC-sized, and b) it is roughly the same size as a proposed post-renovation AA. Plus it is located in San Diego. Not only does that mean that there is a much larger population base to draw from, it means that it can host A-list concerts and other events regularly. Which it does. How many Lady Gaga or Metallica shows have we hosted at the AA?
And you still don't have an answer for Oregon. They are the vanguard of the modern athletic facilities arms race. You could say a lot of things about that institution but you could never, ever accuse them of "small time thinking" in athletics. That fucking place cost more than twice as much as the arena that Auburn opened at just about exactly the same time. (Incidentally, it is three blocks from the house I lived in my last year there.) They built an arena... roughly the size of a proposed post-renovation AA.
On-campus, college basketball-first arenas built in the last 10 years (not sure if I'm missing any):
University of Miami - 8,000
Pitt - 12,500
Virginia - 14,593 (also regularly hosts A-list concerts and other events)
Mizzou - 15,601
USC - 10,258
South Carolina - 18,000 (also regularly hosts A-list concerts and other events)
Fresno State - 15.500 (also regularly hosts A-list concerts and other events)
Auburn - 9,600
SDSU - 12,414 (also regularly hosts A-list concerts and other events)
Oregon - 12,369
You might think I'm copping out by excluding SDSU, UVA, S. Carolina, and Fresno from the argument to some degree but big time concerts and such are a major revenue stream that those arenas could count on when they were conceived. You can't reasonably compare venues in large metro areas that were constructed with hosting Springsteen concerts and WWE live events in mind in addition to college hoops to the AA. The Stones, Beyonce, Taylor Swift, etc. are not playing Laramie, ever. That leaves Mizzou, who still has the odd big rock show, as the only school you could possibly argue has set the bar higher than where we're going in terms of capacity. Whoopty doo.
It's also worth mentioning that Washington, Cal, and Stanford all extensively renovated their arenas in the late 90s/early 2000s and none of them seat more than a shade over 10,000. Those are all very large Western institutions with solid-to-excellent basketball programs, huge metropolitan areas, and extremely deep pockets. Oregon State just renovated their arena and reduced seating from 10,400 to 9,600.
And you still haven't answered the cold, hard data with respect the AA's own attendance history. 15 sellouts in 30 years?
I won't address the War much because this thread is about basketball and there are much different factors in play with football. But it isn't like we've regularly been selling that place out, and it isn't like we've reduced seating capacity in a way that prevents us from a) generating more revenue overall, or b) substantially expanding it should we ever, you know, justify said expansion by winning and selling it out on days Texas or Nebraska aren't in the house.
TSpoke
Well-known member
Here are some other schools that have had their basketball arenas capacity lowered due to renovations.
Notre Dame 11,418 to 9149
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_P._Joyce_Center
Michigan 13,751 to 12,721
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisler_Arena
Tennesee somewhere around 25,000 to 21,678
http://www.utsports.com/sports/m-baskbl/thompson-boling_arena.html
Butler 11,043 to 10,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkle_Fieldhouse
So obviously we are not the only school that is looking to do this. In fact these schools sell out much more than we do so they would have more to lose by doing this but they still see a benefit of adding club seeting and suites and upgrading the arena. Basketball is different from football and there is nothing wrong with losing some seats if it means a better atmosphere and more revenue coming in.
Now, I have no idea what the renovation plans are for the AA but I would be all for adding club seats and/or suites and more revenue along with a center hung scoreboard and seats closer to the floor at the cost of a couple thousand seats.
Notre Dame 11,418 to 9149
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_P._Joyce_Center
Michigan 13,751 to 12,721
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisler_Arena
Tennesee somewhere around 25,000 to 21,678
http://www.utsports.com/sports/m-baskbl/thompson-boling_arena.html
Butler 11,043 to 10,000
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkle_Fieldhouse
So obviously we are not the only school that is looking to do this. In fact these schools sell out much more than we do so they would have more to lose by doing this but they still see a benefit of adding club seeting and suites and upgrading the arena. Basketball is different from football and there is nothing wrong with losing some seats if it means a better atmosphere and more revenue coming in.
Now, I have no idea what the renovation plans are for the AA but I would be all for adding club seats and/or suites and more revenue along with a center hung scoreboard and seats closer to the floor at the cost of a couple thousand seats.
