All else being equal, what does the useful lifespan of the arena have to be to turn this into a break-even proposition? The Saddledome, approaching 35 years old, is considered obsolete because ...
(a) the roof design cannot physically accommodate modern stage shows, and
(b) there isn't enough interior space to provide all the "premium" revenue-generating services that other arenas offer
It's not crumbling down. The central location, near public transit, is perfectly good. The hockey-watching experience is very good. My point is that I don't see why we have this expectation of only a 35-year "useful life" for a new arena. We should expect that the next arena can last for at least 50 years, and plan it with the ability to renovate / adapt.
|