Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 40

Thread: Should expanding McCarthy be considered?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17,199

    Default Should expanding McCarthy be considered?

    I know this is the epitome of an off-season topic, but seems harmless.

    I had heard - but am not sure if it is correct, that the Arena was built specifically so that expansion was possible? If that is the case, should it be considered?

    On the yes side, there seems to be lots of people wanting tickets but cannot get past the waiting list - and that is for season tickets, never mind single game tickets.

    The natural expansion would be simply finishing seats all the way up on the ends and fill in a bowl, I doubt that would hurt the "feel" - assuming that is possible.

    Record string of sell-outs, not sure any game hasn't been, probably keep that record anyway. Women's team sells out big games also, which could further justify cost.

    No side - Don't mess with success. Cost. Losing the "feel" of the arena. And obviously, whether it is even logistically possible.

    If it's not even physically possible I will delete the thread with dispatch.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Utsalady Bay
    Posts
    5,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DixieZag View Post
    I know this is the epitome of an off-season topic, but seems harmless.

    I had heard - but am not sure if it is correct, that the Arena was built specifically so that expansion was possible? If that is the case, should it be considered?

    On the yes side, there seems to be lots of people wanting tickets but cannot get past the waiting list - and that is for season tickets, never mind single game tickets.

    The natural expansion would be simply finishing seats all the way up on the ends and fill in a bowl, I doubt that would hurt the "feel" - assuming that is possible.

    Record string of sell-outs, not sure any game hasn't been, probably keep that record anyway. Women's team sells out big games also, which could further justify cost.

    No side - Don't mess with success. Cost. Losing the "feel" of the arena. And obviously, whether it is even logistically possible.

    If it's not even physically possible I will delete the thread with dispatch.
    No to expansion. The revenue generated by new seats would never cover the cost of the expansion. It's much better to have a waiting list than to have empty seats.

    The wish list for the athletic department doesn't include expansion of MAC. The list includes:

    1. Construction of the Golf & Tennis Center (this project is underway; it has been paid for by a very generous donation);
    2. Campaign for endowed scholarships (creation of an endowment large enough to fully self-fund all possible athletic scholarships; a single endowed scholarship is about $1,000,000. There are 155 scholarships to be paid for);
    3. Center for Athletic Achievement (this new building will contain the GU Athletics Hall of Fame; the Student Athlete Academic Support Center; and a 5,000 square foot multi-use event space that will attach to the MAC);
    4. Gonzaga Soccer Complex (construction of grandstands, locker rooms, concessions stand, and installation of stadium lights).
    You have to love the Gonzaga fan. Not satisfied to be affronted merely by common hosings at the hands of ragtag referees, he plows all avenues of discontent. - John Blanchette

    Gonzaga University...Home of the Zags...The Bulldogs. If you pronounce it "Gone Zaw Ga," they'll know you're not from here and they may charge you more for your coffee. - Garrison Keillor

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,950

    Default

    It is always best to have more demand than supply...NO..

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17,199

    Default

    If it would cost more to build than can be made off of extra seats than it totally is a non-starter. I would assume any such consideration would involve a very sophisticated cost-benefit basis.

    Also, I believe we could fill it on season tickets alone, which generally implies donations above ticket cost - might be looked at in the study. If most (by far) of the new seats were season tickets and if any single game wasn't sold out one could always load up a bunch to Fairchild, school districts to raffle . . you get the idea, I think empty seats could be prevented.

    I am not even sure I like the idea - I would lean toward "don't mess with a good thing" but I did want to hear what others thought and largely agree with your points, type of thing people might want to kick around, better than kicking each other around.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Angelo Roncalli View Post
    No to expansion. The revenue generated by new seats would never cover the cost of the expansion. It's much better to have a waiting list than to have empty seats.

    The wish list for the athletic department doesn't include expansion of MAC. The list includes:

    1. Construction of the Golf & Tennis Center (this project is underway; it has been paid for by a very generous donation);
    2. Campaign for endowed scholarships (creation of an endowment large enough to fully self-fund all possible athletic scholarships; a single endowed scholarship is about $1,000,000. There are 155 scholarships to be paid for);
    3. Center for Athletic Achievement (this new building will contain the GU Athletics Hall of Fame; the Student Athlete Academic Support Center; and a 5,000 square foot multi-use event space that will attach to the MAC);
    4. Gonzaga Soccer Complex (construction of grandstands, locker rooms, concessions stand, and installation of stadium lights).
    I wasn't aware of the wish list, I might have wrongly thought that expansion might help pay the wish list. See? I have already learned something, which is good.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Napa, CA
    Posts
    4,277

    Default

    Yeah, the biggest thing with any stadium is that the least expensive ticket/seat is usually the most expensive to build. As such, adding on another 1000 seats would cost well more than the first 1000 cost, and would sell for way less than the first 1000 sell for.
    I will thank God for the day and the moment I have. - Jimmy V

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,490

    Default

    This is at least a once-a-year discussion. Alas, it was not designed for any expansion. With a little more foresight we could have at least had the debate pro vs con. Only option is to tear it all down and start again, which of course will never happen. It is what it is.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roxdoc View Post
    This is at least a once-a-year discussion. Alas, it was not designed for any expansion. With a little more foresight we could have at least had the debate pro vs con. Only option is to tear it all down and start again, which of course will never happen. It is what it is.
    Thanks for answering.

    That is unfortunate, though I am sure there is a reason for it and not oversight. It is unfortunate in that even if one was completely opposed to the idea now, it would always be nice to have that option.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Salt Lake City
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DixieZag View Post

    I had heard - but am not sure if it is correct, that the Arena was built specifically so that expansion was possible? If that is the case, should it be considered?
    The Arena (Spokane Arena) can be expanded and is currently undergoing a modest expansion, replacing existing seats with "space saving" seats. It was designed to be open to future expansion if the metal-clad corners next to the video board were replaced with seats.

    The MAC isn't expandable, and was obviously a short sighted decision.

    I've always thought that we should have big non-conference games in the Spokane Arena. ~3 per year. Good teams (Mich St, Illinois, and even Wake...) have beaten us in the MAC so I don't see what makes the Spokane Arena such a bad idea. Include those games in the season ticket package.
    "After holding open practices during his first three seasons, Romar closed them to reporters last season, citing the "Gonzaga factor." He felt his team was compromised before the 2004-05 game against the Zags, that the opponent awaiting him and beating him 99-87 in Spokane seemed a little too well prepared."

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Napa, CA
    Posts
    4,277

    Default

    Shortsighted? Did you read what Angelo I posted about the cost of expansion? The way building a stadium works is that the seats the furthest away (and thus the least valuable) are the most expensive to build, and the more you get, the more expensive they get, while becoming progressively less valuable. There was a definite reason for choosing to build as they did, the size they did, based on both projected attendance, and on the relationship between revenue gained and cost of build. There were people far smarter in regards to these things than those of us on the board who were involved.
    I will thank God for the day and the moment I have. - Jimmy V

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    13,081

    Default

    I've always thought that we should have big non-conference games in the Spokane Arena. ~3 per year. Good teams (Mich St, Illinois, and even Wake...) have beaten us in the MAC so I don't see what makes the Spokane Arena such a bad idea.
    When GU plays at the Arena, they have to split revenue. At the MAC, they keep it all. Even with 6,000 more people in the stands, GU makes more money by having Michigan State at the MAC than at the Arena. The program needs as many home games at the MAC as possible. The Ronald McDonald Game is enough. I would think that will return this year....they just couldn't fit it in last year due to all of the scheduling contracts they had to finish up. Also, it would be a good idea for the team to experience the Arena at least once since they might play there next March in the NCAA tourney.
    Last edited by CDC84; 06-14-2013 at 08:21 AM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    1,480

    Default

    Both of the threads in the quote below touch on the issue of expansion and have some good information in them.


    Taken from: http://www.guboards.com/showthread.php?t=45206

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    11,839

    Default

    $60 K-$70 K per seat for expansion. Yes the Mac could be expanded but only 800 seats or so....

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    15,739

    Default

    Is the Arena SRO for every Zag game? Thats the best gauge on optimal fan interest and whether a bigger MAC is advisable.

    I agree a waiting list at the MAC is preferable and has more cachet than 100s of empty seats vs the bottom of the WCC and the preseason fillers with a larger facility.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    On an island that is long
    Posts
    12,296

    Default

    I don't think you guys caught exactly what Angelo said there... the costs to have those seats there (not build those seats) on a yearly basis would be a net loss. In other words the seats would be a drain on the AD... in perpetuity.
    "And Morrison? He did what All-Americans do. He shot daggers in the daylight and stole a win." - Steve Kelley (Seattle Times)

    "Gonzaga is a special place, with special people!" - Dan Dickau #21

    Foo me once shame on you, Foo me twice shame on me.

    2012 Foostrodamus - Foothsayer of Death

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    131

    Default

    From the above linked previous threads on the topic... the below is operating on the financials provided by university officials at the time of construction. Specifically, it cost $25,000,000 to build the MAC, and would have cost $37,000,000 to build an 8,000 seat MAC. The $25MM consumed ALL available capital at the time, which means $12,000,000 would have to have been financed.

    Here's some incredibly simplistic math, but it illustrates the point. Assume 2,000 more seats, each selling for $20 for 13 home games and 1,000 more Bulldog Club memberships (1 for every pair of seats) at $200 per year. That generates $720,000 gross revenue a year. Assume you borrow $12,000,000 on a 30 year note at 6%. It will take monthly payments totaling $864,000 a year to pay the mortgage, and that's before you take into account the greater operating costs (heat, lights, staff, etc.) that an 8,000 seat arena would require. That's a revenue shortfall of $150,000 year--without operating costs being figured in. Then there's the matter of what happens if the team becomes a .500 team for a few years and you only sell 6,000 seats a game. You're flipped even worse.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    409

    Default hmmmmm

    AD departments also add facility improvements to help recruiting, perception, etc..... I wonder if the attendance at the soccer field has paid for those improvements---all I'm saying is that there is other value besides what the bean counters can show on paper--having 7,500 vs 6,000 gives the arena more voices and people to impress visitors---also the size (capacity) of the arena you play in is looked at by the media, players, and other fans

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Napa, CA
    Posts
    4,277

    Default

    That'd be true if you were talking about taking perhaps a one-time loss, or at least breaking even. If you're losing 1-2 million per year on that, it'd better be an awful lot of good publicity/goodwill/whatever other intangible you're talking about. The soccer field work will likely be paid for by donations/sponsors, much like the original MAC was.
    I will thank God for the day and the moment I have. - Jimmy V

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    409

    Default moot point anyway

    why was this brought up again?? not going to happen

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    17,199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by realtydog View Post
    why was this brought up again?? not going to happen
    Because I hadn't seen it before and should have done a search but didn't. I didn't realize that it was a moot point, but I definitely believe the people that have put the numbers up and I learned something new about cost per seat basis.

    Could be some discussion about whether more games should be played at the arena but those too seem to lose money for the school.

    If the mods want to take this down, I have no problem with that, I should have done a search but very much appreciate the input of those that know the numbers and priorities.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect.
    Mark Twain.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    15,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DixieZag View Post
    Because I hadn't seen it before and should have done a search but didn't. I didn't realize that it was a moot point, but I definitely believe the people that have put the numbers up and I learned something new about cost per seat basis.

    Could be some discussion about whether more games should be played at the arena but those too seem to lose money for the school.

    If the mods want to take this down, I have no problem with that, I should have done a search but very much appreciate the input of those that know the numbers and priorities.
    bad boy, Dix. i liked hearing all the explanations too. at the end of the day i am thinkng the MAC is optimal and enlarging it is not only $$$ but runs the risk of empty seats for lesser foes. nothing worse than that.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    11,839

    Default

    Dix my cost per seat was NOT for a new Arena. It's for specifically a retrofit....as an FYI. The Sokane Arena in its retrofit is at $80 per/. They have more room that the MAC does. Unions killed em on that. When I've asked the original builders what the cost might be (they do some work for me and are long time friends) the number was quite imprssive to retrofit the MAC.
    If we every get more seats on campus, my guess is that ti'll be in a new arena years in the future.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Oklafriggenhoma
    Posts
    7,042

    Default

    Abe, are you sure Ginge wasn't just running a bootleg on you?
    Birddog

    Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
    Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
    All mimsy were the borogoves,
    And the mome raths outgrabe.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    15,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MDABE80 View Post
    Dix my cost per seat was NOT for a new Arena. It's for specifically a retrofit....as an FYI. The Sokane Arena in its retrofit is at $80 per/. They have more room that the MAC does. Unions killed em on that. When I've asked the original builders what the cost might be (they do some work for me and are long time friends) the number was quite imprssive to retrofit the MAC.
    If we every get more seats on campus, my guess is that ti'll be in a new arena years in the future.
    Doc Abe Trump?

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    11,839

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Birddog View Post
    Abe, are you sure Ginge wasn't just running a bootleg on you?
    Could be Birdmeister. Could be. You know how those Husky QB's are!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •