I'm pretty sure the business value of ballparks and sports stadiums having free wifi is that it encourages the promotion of the game experience on social media. Also, there are often social media-centered ad buys throughout the game.
 
Even if a retrofit would cost as much as a new stadium (or more), it might be worth it to keep the location. Having the stadium right downtown is hugely beneficial for the team, nothing in the Portlands will ever be even half as convenient/accessible. Maybe something at the exhibition grounds, but even that is not ideal.

If they can't figure out how to build a new stadium to the south, I'm all for an insanely expensive retrofit if it gives us a drastically different stadium/experience in the current location.
 
EddyMCD said:
Even if a retrofit would cost as much as a new stadium (or more), it might be worth it to keep the location. Having the stadium right downtown is hugely beneficial for the team, nothing in the Portlands will ever be even half as convenient/accessible. Maybe something at the exhibition grounds, but even that is not ideal.

If they can't figure out how to build a new stadium to the south, I'm all for an insanely expensive retrofit if it gives us a drastically different stadium/experience in the current location.
Click to expand...

Building it in the Portlands gives them more breathing room. Where they are now is surrounded by condos unlike when it was built (in 1985 the area was industrial railway lands).

You cannot build a proper stadium in the confines of the area as it is now. Not only will it be a tight squeeze but you would piss alot of people off with the construction.
 
There's a few buildings that are particularly close(81 Navy Wharf, 3 Navy Wharf, 5 Mariner Terrace). The demolition noise will probably be worse than the new construction.

But there has to be some way to make it work because even if they do build in the Portlands, they have to demolish the RC somehow. So I'd rather spend more money now to do it, and retain the location.
 
EddyMCD said:
There's a few buildings that are particularly close(81 Navy Wharf, 3 Navy Wharf, 5 Mariner Terrace). The demolition noise will probably be worse than the new construction.

But there has to be some way to make it work because even if they do build in the Portlands, they have to demolish the RC somehow. So I'd rather spend more money now to do it, and retain the location.
Click to expand...

You really cannot beat the location of SkyDome/RC - there is simply no finer site in the city; any other site and you'd be looking at a relative deficit of regional accessibility (away from the Union Station hub) - pretty much essential for catchment reasons. Not to mention unlike the 80s, there is no cheap land in the city (or even the city region) anymore.

AoD
 
Given how real estate projects are financed and the nature of the eventual proponent(s) involved in any broader redevelopment scheme here, the cost is nearly irrelevant in the question of teardown vs. retrofit.

I would imagine the more salient concern for the baseball team in that respect is the value of time -- after two years of an unprecedented amount of disruption to the players and staff (and the costs associated with playing at both Dunedin and Buffalo), I imagine the retrofit is the preferred option at this point. Shapiro himself has also been pretty clear that the players really disliked being moved around (understandably) and playing in subpar physical environments and that it was an issue they had to discuss with free agent targets.

For a team that has now entered its prime window of competitiveness, and given what the team has recently gone through, I don't imagine relocating is at all desirable to them at this moment.
 
ADRM said:
Given how real estate projects are financed and the nature of the eventual proponent(s) involved in any broader redevelopment scheme here, the cost is nearly irrelevant in the question of teardown vs. retrofit.

I would imagine the more salient concern for the baseball team in that respect is the value of time -- after two years of an unprecedented amount of disruption to the players and staff (and the costs associated with playing at both Dunedin and Buffalo), I imagine the retrofit is the preferred option at this point. Shapiro himself has also been pretty clear that the players really disliked being moved around (understandably) and playing in subpar physical environments and that it was an issue they had to discuss with free agent targets.

For a team that has now entered its prime window of competitiveness, and given what the team has recently gone through, I don't imagine relocating is at all desirable to them at this moment.
Click to expand...

It would likely not be replaced until the end of this competitive cycle anyway (late 2020s). Maybe they could look at temporarily using BMO field after it gets expanded for the world cup in 2026.

Otherwise if you had to work around the existing site without vacating it would take many years, including at least one year playing in a partially complete stadium and probably 2+ years playing without a roof.
 
With the way the batter's box would need to face, we'd have a fairly ugly backdrop in the portlands.

Aerial-view-of-the-Port-Lands-2008-1.jpg
 
Kitsune said:
It's the last active cookie cutter stadium in existence....
Click to expand...
So we have something distinctive, that should be replaced with one that's like all the others?
sixrings said:
From this thread I understand that true baseball fans like going to games for world class city views, to scroll their phones internet for free and to appreciate a good piece of grass.
Click to expand...
At halftime during games at the pre-expansion BMO Field I would often look at the Island Airport, Molson Amphitheatre, and tall buildings in the downtown core.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMO_Field#/media/File:First-goal-at-BMO.jpg
I doubt there is now a large contingent of fans who would otherwise want to attend games but refuse because of the reduced view.
The old north grandstand of CNE/Exhibition Stadium also had a view of the downtown core.
Richard White said:
...What about a glass roof then? It lets in natural light.
Click to expand...
As pointed out earlier in this thread, that might be okay for football/soccer/rugby, but it doesn't seem to work for baseball because fly balls get lost in the glare.
 
Last edited:
SubHuman said:
So we have something distinctive, that should be replaced with one that's like all the others?

At halftime during games at the pre-expansion BMO Field I would often look at the Island Airport, Molson Amphitheatre, and tall buildings in the downtown core.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMO_Field#/media/File:First-goal-at-BMO.jpg
I doubt there is now a large contingent of fans who would otherwise want to attend games but refuse because of the reduced view.
The old north grandstand of CNE/Exhibition Stadium also had a view of the downtown core.
Click to expand...
A view is nice. But Rogers centre is in a perfect location transit wise, pedestrian wise and office building wise. Plus if they can’t fill up the stadium with all those new condominium owners around they park I don’t know how successful they are going to be elsewhere because the new location has a better view and better wifi (which I’m sure could be improved at Rogers) I too remember execution place and ordering pizza pizza.

this thread would implode if Rogers announced the new stadium location is at downs view park.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top