View Single Post
04-23-2013, 08:15 PM
Checked out
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hiking
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,856
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by 5RingsAndABeer View Post
Think about how many events happen at Rexall. Think about the number of people that go to events at Rexall.

The old Edmonton Art Gallery had attendance of about 20,000 PER YEAR. Rexall gets that in half a week in live attendance and thousands more watch events at Rexall on TV.

Of course, the budget for building a new arena is much greater than the budget for building the new art gallery, but the relative benefit to the Edmonton area is proportionally greater.
Wait, were including watching on TV as a benefit?

I don't know anybody around these parts that doesn't consider it a habituated chore. Cutting the lawn promises to be better entertainment.

But anyway, lets look quickly at some current downtown facilities. Current Art Gallery does over 100k patrons/year (****** I realize) Citadel theatre draws a lot larger numbers with multiple theatres and a good fanbase. Hard to guesstimate annual numbers but they could get 2k in one night in a facility that cost the city very little. Next Winspear which again cost very little with 1800 capacity.
WE could factor in Shaw Conference Center as well and look at annual numbers for that facility which can house as much as 5k for concert setting.

Point is all these downtown facilities combined cost the city far less than the current arena will and with combined patron use that would put them on a similar level to what the new arena would attract. You could get away with saying the new arena would attract twice as many people. But 100X? Forget it.

Last edited by Replacement*: 04-23-2013 at 08:27 PM.
Replacement* is offline