T.O. Sun article. Please add a comment to it

Its time for city council to have a re-vote before the Mayor totally blows this deal for everyone involved.
Mayor Fred reminds me of the guy who wants to buy a new sports car when in fact he has a family of 4 to look after.
If someone would have suggested city council would be the stumbling block with this stadium deal a yr. ago I would have thought they were crazy.

If the mayor is up for re-election in October then this issue should become the priority. If enough voters make their feelings known most politicans will cater to them.

By then it will be too late. Fans may have to get involved in an organized way. like now…

I love this post slodrive2 because that is exactly the kind of image upgrade Hamilton requires. However image is hear say as much as it is visual perception. And my ears keep hearing "we are broke" These costs are the tax payers burden and can not be placed on Bob Youngs shoulders, either we are prepared to pay the ENTIRE bill to improve our image or we listen to the thoughts and idea's of others that have apparently done quite well in business.

I d fully support the City and Harbour Front if the bill was being paid by the 3 levels of government and the TiCats were being invited in as a tenant that was given the opportunity to be profitable.

I do not understand how Fred can see this any other way. Bob Young and his sponsors are not responible for Hamiltons problems and therefore in this case should not have to pay.

The City of Hamilton is the wellfare case this time looking for handouts from Bob Young.

Based on any of the polls I've seen (from this site and the Spec) I'd have a hard time thinking that there is any call for a change. Even the Spec poll about whether the site should be re-evaluate only garnered about a 50/50 split -- unless it changed dramatically from the last time I saw it.

I'm just not sure the average citizen isn't behind the mayor on this one. That's why I'm hoping a compelling case can be made by Bob and the team to either convince council that this isn't going to work, or, ensure that revenue streams are built in that will ensure the team's success at the west harbour site.

I sure hope this whole mediation process is public.

Yes, that's a very good point, justafan. A very good point.
To me, even though I'm much in favour of a downtown/harbour stadium, if the stadium that can be afforded (based on private investment) cannot meet or exceed CFL standards, then it's defintely a non-starter.

That's where my viewpoint wavers between support for the city and support for Bob's case. I do just find it hard to believe that a site within a chip shot of a city-centre and within view of the waterfront wouldn't be in commercial demand. To me, that's where I see a shortfall in effort. I think that sales effort has to be a joint venture of the city braintrust and the Ticats.

I'm beginning to wonder if the question isn't so much can the city of Hamilton afford the Pan-Am Stadium (and Velodrome) but rather, equal to this question, can the city of Hamilton afford the Hamilton TigerCats unless they are a total philanthropic venture of some crazy person? :?

Well, I think outside of a handful, the ability to make money in pro sports isn't easy. Generally, I think it's a hobby purchase for someone who's already made their cash. Look at the NHL. The Canadian teams and a handful of American teams make money. The other half are on the dole.

The CFL is constantly going to fly a bit closer to the pavement because the markets are smaller. But, if the costs are managed, and the cities understand that having a team is a public investment that has intangible payoffs, then it will be a success. In many ways, the CFL may have a better model than even the NHL. It just has to be managed, marketed and nurtured with a lot of care.

Problem with the numbers, even a joint venture between the city and Ticats would cost each ticket holder an additional 28.00 per seat per game based on 25000 average to create a break even point if no other public money is to be invested.

We know that wont fly and still doenst justify an investment of 50 million by Bob Young, as well as the report mentioning a venue tax per ticket that goes to the City to recoup some costs I dont see how there will be room to pass on the teams additional costs as well.

So the difference between the two sides right now dollar wise by ticket value is better then 28.00 extra per seat to break even if there are indeed 25000 available seats. Thats how far the two side are apart at this moment.

OUCH !!! and Good luck.

About 15 minutes ago one of the broadcast journalists on Y108, didn't catch his name, said he thinks naming rights for any CFL stadium isn't significant and used a figure off the top of his head that the most of any CFL stadium was $300,000 (not sure if that's per year or one time). Basically he was getting at he thinks Bob Young is blowing smoke on this one.

Hamilton has a long tradition of being unfriendly to business and if this attitude chases the TiCats out of town the voters will be responsible. I doubt that responsibility will be widely accepted however. It's more likely finger pointing and self-entitlement will be the prevailing sentiment.

Yup, the tone of voice and attitude I got from this guy on Y108 is Bob Young should be lucky he's owning the TigerCats and the city is doing him a favour by "allowing" him to be the owner here and playing in "their" stadium even though they expect Bob and partners to immediately come up with the $50 mill or so as as a sign we are all good buds. Honestly, I felt like puking listening to this dude.

He is probably thinking of Mosiac stadium which is 3.75 mill over 10 years ($375,000/year)

Keep in mind that is kind if a partial naming rights as it is officially "Mosiac Stadium at Taylor Field". The full on stadium name would get more I would think.

How about this for outside the box thinking? Cleveland gets companies to sponsor their gates instead:

CLEVELAND KEEPS NAMING RIGHTS, BUT SELLS ENTRIES TO SPONSORS
July 1, 1999
Copyright 1999 MediaVentures

The Cleveland Browns have opted not to sell naming rights to their stadium when it opens this fall, but they have not forsaken sponsorship money entirely and have sold rights to the venue's four entrances. The name of the stadium will remain Cleveland Browns Stadium.

Prices paid for the sponsorships were not disclosed, but National City Corp., Steris Corp., CoreComm Inc. and the Cleveland Clinic Foundation have purchased the rights to have their names emblazoned above each of the four main gates and on signage inside the stadium. Each of the sponsors will also participate in stadium operations. Steris manufactures hand sanitizing equipment and will have its products in stadium restrooms; National City will provide banking services; CoreComm will provide telecommunication services and Cleveland Clinic will be the medical provider.

While the program created by the Browns is unique, the idea of selling entryways to sports venues was first used at the Air Canada Centre which opened this year. Companies were given the chance to sponsor entrances to the building and a budget in which to work. If they decided to go over the budget, the company was responsible for the overage. While prices weren't disclosed, the minimum investment was CAN$500,000.

That is true based on the model in Regina with Taylor Field.

But thats Regina population less then 2 hundred thousand, Bob's talking more passer byers then that every 6 hours or so.

Interesting scups with the naming rights for the gates/entrances.

Yes just, the number of vehicles on the QEW or 403 would be much more than in Regina I'm sure.

Well over 200,000 trips per day (on the QEW alone)...........that's easily 500,000 sets of eyeballs per day (assuming there is an average of 2-3 people per vehicle)

Imagine, such visual combined with the TV telecasts. The sky may be the limit here.

Simple really to me, if the naming rights have more value then so will the team as location and image are everything in business.

True. I'd just love to know the difference. That's what's been missing in the arguments.

If the Harbour is where we end up (and we probably will ) then one way to get even a bit more out of naming rights is to get the video board from IWS and stick it up down by the QEW advertising upcoming events at 'whatever stadium'.

Someone should clue him in that the 5 mill figure/estimate for naming rights was Deloittes not Bob Youngs. :slight_smile: