I proposed this "solution" in the threads where we were debating the Casino vote last time. I think it has compromise and Toronto thinking written all over it so I think it will pass. Gambling may be bad etc. etc. but basically we already have a casino in Toronto. This location means it can be stuck out in the middle of nowhere, in a place that is already economically depressed and locals actually would look forward to it's construction, where the casino can be a large ugly box that turns it's back to the street, where the city can generate more non-tax revenue, where people can get their gambling fix in a place where some revenue will accrue to the city that has to pay for the services to support gambling problems (now they just have to support the problem gamblers because they can gamble close to Toronto or on their computers at home).

There are basically not enough reasons to oppose the expansion to generate a lot of strong opposition, unlike the previous Casino debate where we were really debating a downtown casino (conveniently forgetting about the fact that there is a place in Toronto where a casino has effectively already existed for years).
 
http://www.cp24.com/news/woodbine-racetrack-operator-developer-propose-new-concert-hall-1.2779908

The operator of Woodbine Racetrack and a property developer have entered into an agreement with an aim to bring a live concert hall to the area.

Woodbine Entertainment Group, who operate the racetrack and another facility in Halton, say they’ve signed a memorandum of understanding with Trinity Development Group to propose to build a 165,000 square foot entertainment complex next to the existing racetrack.

The two groups say the venue would sit on approximately three or four acres and contain seating for as many as 5,000 spectators.

Woodbine Entertainment CEO Jim Lawson says the concert hall is part of their vision that would see “multiple forms of gaming, entertainment and horse racing” in the area.

Lawson says both groups would seek out a third-party to operate the proposed concert venue.

Trinity Development was the company responsible for the Lansdowne Live redevelopment of an ageing outdoor football and soccer stadium and hockey arena in central Ottawa.
Click to expand...

image.jpg
 
That looks like a beautiful structure. I have little faith, unfortunately, that the end result will look anything like that.
 
Why have a roof if it's just gonna have a big hole in the middle that will make everyone wet if it rains?
 
It is great to see this site start to re-develop. Now if only the Finch West LRT could be extended to service it...

Also, here is a night shot of the proposed facility. I think the proposed capacity of 5,000 is good, and represents a niche market - not too big, not too small.
woodbine-view1.jpg.size.xxlarge.letterbox.jpg

The above photo is from a Toronto Star Article.
 
alexanderglista said:
It is great to see this site start to re-develop. Now if only the Finch West LRT could be extended to service it...

Also, here is a night shot of the proposed facility. I think the proposed capacity of 5,000 is good, and represents a niche market - not too big, not too small.
Click to expand...

Is it a profitable niche? Are there lots of acts touring and doing shows looking for that size of venue? I wouldn't have thought so....but perhaps there are. Massey Hall holds, what, 3,200......ampitheatre (without lawns) is about 10k (all numbers approximate).....seems a pretty narrow market if you are going after the acts too big for Massey and not big enough for Ampitheatre (not to mention the plethora of other venues of varying sizes around the area).
 
Rama hosts lots of concerts and their arena is right about 5,000

Fallsview is a lot smaller at 1,500 seats
 
ChesterCopperpot said:
Rama hosts lots of concerts and their arena is right about 5,000

Fallsview is a lot smaller at 1,500 seats
Click to expand...
good point on Rama......I wasn't thinking of casinos (which Woodbine isn't...not quite yet ;) )...as the shows don't need to be profitable in their own right....just bring people willing to lose above their ticket price.....perhaps Woodbine can/will operate within that set of economics too.....we'll see.

EDIT...was just thinking about how "spartan" the Rama venue is....it is essentially a big cavernous warehouse type space with (I think) temporary stands erected inside.......can be used as meeting/"convention" space when no show (again, I think)...but is always indoors. There has to be a difference in capital cost here for what appears to be an outdoor venue of that size.

Ah well, their money...I guess.
 
Last edited:
TOareaFan said:
Is it a profitable niche? Are there lots of acts touring and doing shows looking for that size of venue? I wouldn't have thought so....but perhaps there are. Massey Hall holds, what, 3,200......ampitheatre (without lawns) is about 10k (all numbers approximate).....seems a pretty narrow market if you are going after the acts too big for Massey and not big enough for Ampitheatre (not to mention the plethora of other venues of varying sizes around the area).
Click to expand...

I honestly have no clue, just speculating. I think the profitability of this venue would increase in the context of a larger Woodbine expansion however.
 
Out of any curiousity, does anyone know who owns the vacant lands by Woodbine? My initial guess would be WEG because if the city owned it, it probably would've been sold off for some kind of non-sense massive condo complex long ago.
 
alexanderglista said:
I honestly have no clue, just speculating. I think the profitability of this venue would increase in the context of a larger Woodbine expansion however.
Click to expand...
It does seem like a bit of a backdoor move to a full casino.....we built this entertainment venue...we are losing money on it....we need more things to bring acts/audiences....blackjack anyone? ;)
 
Automation Gallery said:
It sure does, and why not
Click to expand...
nothing in particular...just would prefer that decisions on things like casinos be made on the merit of casinos not on some false bailout of previous economics.....but (from the proponent's point of view) it may not be a bad reversal...the "give us casinos and we will give you stuff you like better" approach did not work so now its "we built the stuff you wanted and have proven it doesn't work without casinos...so can we start ordering the green felt tables"......interesting strategy.
 
It's a nice design, but it seems odd to build something like this in such a wasteland of an area that has very poor transit access.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top