POLL: Continue or scrap the Crestwin Bomber stadium project?

I think the idea has merit. And if it were to succeed you'd see a completely different dynamic at Bomber games. Something akin to the Riders and Packers. That would be a blast.

I think that maybe we should get a quote from the Hutterites! if Livio's comparitive price follows than the (.45 cent price compared to the 2.25 wpg price) then the stadium gets built for $52,000,000 and every one is elated!

Triniman wrote:Tuesday, November 09, 2010

Asper's stadium deal--a Mad Hatter's delight. Plus a big bouquet to CTV News

The saga of the new Winnipeg stadium is getting more surreal by the day.
Failed businessman David Asper appeared on CTV television Monday boasting," We are building a football stadium as designed."

Who's 'we', Kemo Sabe?

Asper doesn't have the money to build a doll house.

The University of Manitoba, which is sitting on a bridge-financing loan from the province, can only afford to build three-quarters of the proposed stadium. (70 percent, actually.)

Sam Katz, the re-elected Mayor of the City of Winnipeg, campaigned for two months on a promise to bring the deal back to council if Asper reneged on covering cost overruns. Instead, his first days back at work are spent in backroom meetings to save a deal that hasn't been approved by council.

And unelected Premier Greg Selinger is preparing to spend another minimum of $45 million toward a new stadium without the consent of the Legislature.

Literally the day before Asper announced that the cost of his proposed stadium has ballooned from $115 million to $160 million (and climbing), a contract was signed for piling.


Ahem. Who signed the contract?

The University? Did they know that the cost of the project was now way, way more than the money they have to pay for it?

Creswin? Did Asper commit the province into building his stadium before telling his "partners" what the true cost is shaping up to be? Needless to say, keeping things going benefits Asper since he's making money on the construction end.

Why isn't anyone suspicious about the numbers being tossed around so freely?

Creswin gets an untendered contract, digs a hole, and Presto Chango the cost zooms into the stratosphere. Do you think we could have gotten a more accurate sense of the cost from someone else?

And where do all these numbers come from?

Apparently, from Asper's company.

Do you trust the guy who's going to milk you for millions or do you get a second estimate?

And what's the true cost of a new stadium going to be? The estimated pricetag for a new stadium contemplated for Regina is $430 million. So how is Winnipeg going to build one for less than half?

Or is this all a scam because none of the politicians wants to admit that the true cost is going to be $300 million or $400 million and change---until it's too late.

(We have the answer, of course. Tie the stadium in with the Canadian Museum for Human Rights. While David Asper says construction costs in Winnipeg went up 30 percent in the past year, his sister Gail Asper says construction costs for the museum haven't budged. If they had, then the museum would cost another $30 million or so, on top of the $35-45 million shortfall they're already facing. You don't think she's hiding that fact from us, do you?)

The stadium deal appears to have been deliberately designed to be as confusing as possible.

The official government news release announcing the bridge financing deal doesn't say who is actually receiving the money. So, of course, it was assumed that the loan would go to David Asper. Or to the Winnipeg Blue Bombers who would funnel it to David Asper.

Except that the loan was actually to the University of Manitoba. In order to take ownership of the football club, Asper has to repay $75 million of the loan--- not to the government, and not to the football club, but to the university.

http://blackrod.blogspot.com/2010/11/aspers-stadium-deal-mad-hatters-delight.html

A number of posts in the newspapers have actually asked for a fraud investigation of this matter.

When one steps back and looks at this "project", it is apparent that some sort of mis-representation took place...and it seems that it continues to take place.

I know exactly what has happened. Asper is nuts about The Bombers, and all he wanted is a new stadium to be built,, and he knew that the public wouldn't be interested in paying any money for it, because the public doesn't go to the stupid games. he had to figure out anything that would get it done, and he came up with c**k-a-many plan that was so stupid, that the Provincial government, the federal government and the City, and the Shindleman's all could agree on it.
What he did wrong was low ball the final price, instead of high ball it.
It doesn't matter who or how it gets done. Some people think a 1953 building doesn't work, and especially in such a central location today.
Anywhere there is adequate space is great. The U of M is even greater as the Bisons draw an average of 275 students to watch their games, and are sure to get 27,500 if the seats were more comfortable.
Asper doesn't care if he participates. All he wants is for a new facility to be built.

They hace the financing for everything except the fancy roof, appx. That is why the are building it!
That fancy looking roof does nothing for the seating comfort, nor anything to keep the people dry and warm.
What was the reason to replace a perfectly good 1953 building?
I checked on those quotes for $40 million in repairs, and they are exactly the dame as what my 760 square foot bungalo need.
Such bullcrap on the needed repairs, and that is what is getting this whole situation in trouble!
All Wpg Blue Bombers stadium needs is a roof!

The Bombers need a new Board.

Actually we need a completely new arrangement with the team.

That was well covered in yesterday's Free Press. Gary Lawless addressed the problem with the current model. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/sports/football/bombers/bomber-board-has-stolen-our-team-107429153.html

The days of a closed board handpicking like-minded new members must end.

We should thank the board for the work they've done and for being fine stewards of the football club. Then revamp the entire organizational structure.

Great minds think alike eh?

Stadium Repairs:
1) Veterans Memorial Stadium in Cedar rapids $220,000
2) Stamford Boyle Stadium - 73 year old, $1.45 million
3) Copeland Park $75,000
4) Houston (retractable 99,000 seat cost $354 M in 2002

Why are we accepting a $50 million dollar estimate for repairs, which hasn't shown us the details?
Maybe there is $22 Million dollars for an apartment for Katz, Asper and Shindleman?
There has to be a copy of the "estimate" for our very needed analysis?
$50 million dollars over the next 25 years?

rosencrentz wrote:Stadium Repairs:

Why are we accepting a $50 million dollar estimate for repairs, which hasn't shown us the details?

Probably for the same reason we accepted building a new stadium for $115 million.

Richard Cloutier said (according to his sources) that Asper is out of the stadium project now.
He was also proposing moving it downtown, across from the Convention Center, getting the Chipmans involved and making it a multi use stadium and an addition to the convention center.

so ... we just leave the hole in the ground at the UofM?

Downtown is not a good location for the stadium. Current location is fine or the UofM... but not downtown.

U of M , from an environment perspective, planning, perspective, accessibility perspective, is a bad choice. Is there a foot print downtown that can work ? I would like to see it off Polo Park so the City can realize some monetary benefit. Not sure if the Convention Center area can handle this size of stadium. Alos not sure what the Chipman's bring to the table other than , "we can make this work, now give us the tax dollars to build it and operate it "

I would assume they would fill the hole in. I don't think those two parking lots are big enough across from the CC. They would have to close York or tunnel.
I just think that it would create two long dead blocks there of concrete/ brick or whatever, unless they build some stores into the exterior like MTS did with Moxies.
There was also talk of building a hotel at one end of any proposed stadium. He figured that once a stadium was built then the CC would want to go ahead with their expansion.
It was interesting. I remember Ledohowski had some sort of proposal for taking over the CC and expanding with a Canad Inns attached, not sure if it involved putting a stadium there
I like the U of M site

I think the m Moxies franchise is up for sale

I forgot about Ledo's St. Boniface site.....is that a good location. ???....could be interesting to see how that played out

I would assume that Leo would need just as much taxpayer money as Asper to make it work.
Personally, I don't like the St. B site, but I am much closer to the U of M

"Alos not sure what the Chipman's bring to the table other than , "we can make this work, now give us the tax dollars to build it and operate it ""

They bring to the table

" we are the ones that can choose to allow a dome or not"

Bullshit Dean. The ability to build a roof isn't set in stone considering one is a hockey rink and the other is a football stadium. I'm sure the Chipmans can be made to see things a certain way especially when they come begging for more moeny to expand for the NHL.

Deank wrote:"Alos not sure what the Chipman's bring to the table other than , "we can make this work, now give us the tax dollars to build it and operate it ""

They bring to the table

" we are the ones that can choose to allow a dome or not"

How true!!
Plus they have the expertise with filling their arena, apparently the exhibition hall is doing better than expected with bodies.
They seem to publically anyway be a top notch company

Livio Ciaralli wrote:Bullshit Dean. The ability to build a roof isn't set in stone considering one is a hockey rink and the other is a football stadium. I'm sure the Chipmans can be made to see things a certain way especially when they come begging for more moeny to expand for the NHL.

Actually yes it is set in stone. Directly... No building shall be built using Federal, Provincial or city money that is in direct competition for events with the MTS Centre for 25 years within 50 miles or the MTS Centre. (or was it 150 miles?)

SO build it without Tax money. But contracts can be ... re negotiated after the fact, just make them a deal they can't refuse. Besides events goign to the stadium don't technically compete with the MTS Centre since the MTS centre can't handle more than 18 thousand people per event. There are different ways to skin a cat, just need the right butcher.

Look at it this way Dean, if tax dollars were to be used to circum,vent this idiotic clause, you could do it this way

The government creates a RealEstate investment Program . If a Citizen were to invest in local real estate, the government would refund them the money. If you build a stadium with the Citizens money up front, it would be "private. If the citizen uses the Program , it has no bearing on the involvement of the government, since the Citizen put the money up in the first place.

I'm sure with a little tweaking , the set in stone clause could be circumvented quite easily.

or.. no tweaking... just ensure the current MTS peeps are involved and they would love to welcome the ability to create even more money for themselves.

Heh...I agree. Everything's negotiable...especially in business.

I, myself, like the idea of a downtown stadium tied into a convention facility/hotel/water park arrangement.

Livio Ciaralli wrote:I'm sure the Chipmans can be made to see things a certain way especially when they come begging for more moeny to expand for the NHL.

Source?