[News] "Scotia Place" ground breaking and design release on July 22 1pm MT

[Freeway]

Originally Posted by Muta

Fun fact - there's really three firms that do the largest chunk of arenas, sports stadia and conference facilities across North America - Populous, HOK, and AECOM. Populous was the convention centre designer for the recently-completed BMO Centre (with S2 and Stantec as the local firms), and HOK is doing the Flames arena (with Dialog as the local firm). We have two of the three foremost architectural experts (IMO) in these building typologies helping shape the future of the Rivers District, which is great.

At the BMO Centre opening I had a great long conversation with Populous' prime architect for convention centres. That business is fascinating.

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by Shazam

The teensy sheet of ice is meant for learning.

Good intentions. Stupid waste of space and money in execution.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by SilverKast

We have fire as part of our identity as the Flames, why can't we come up with something exciting along those lines - shouldn't it be easy? Shouldn't there be all sorts of fire themes that would make people think "hell ya!".

I'm tired of arenas named after banks and other financial institutions. And sure I get the reasons why, but Murray has a ton of loot so give us cool stuff.

First Alert Centre

[browna]

Don't look at the reveal from yesterday of some of the tech Steve Ballmer's Intuit Dome built for the Clippers, if you want to be disappointed about the Flames arena before it gets the first shovel in the ground.

Yes private money etc etc.

As well an interesting concept, where one end is only for Clippers supporters (special season ticket holders).

Tickets in that section (51 rows worth) can't be sold on secondary market, no opponent teams gear or cheering for opponents allowed. No idea how that will be enforced but a cool idea in concept, similar to European soccer terraces.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by browna

Don't look at the reveal from yesterday of some of the tech Steve Ballmer's Intuit Dome built for the Clippers, if you want to be disappointed about the Flames arena before it gets the first shovel in the ground.

Yes private money etc etc.

As well an interesting concept, where one end is only for Clippers supporters (special season ticket holders).

Tickets in that section (51 rows worth) can't be sold on secondary market, no opponent teams gear or cheering for opponents allowed. No idea how that will be enforced but a cool idea in concept, similar to European soccer terraces.

If you don’t take it off they kick you out!

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by browna

Don't look at the reveal from yesterday of some of the tech Steve Ballmer's Intuit Dome built for the Clippers, if you want to be disappointed about the Flames arena before it gets the first shovel in the ground.

Yes private money etc etc.

As well an interesting concept, where one end is only for Clippers supporters (special season ticket holders).

Tickets in that section (51 rows worth) can't be sold on secondary market, no opponent teams gear or cheering for opponents allowed. No idea how that will be enforced but a cool idea in concept, similar to European soccer terraces.

I've already resigned myself to the idea that the Flames waited the exact right number of years to build and will save the exact right amount of dollars to get the most bare bones arena at the end of an arena designing era, right before things blow up (already signs they are) into the next wave of state of the art buildings. 100% guarantee that's what happens.

I'd much rather them wait a couple years and see where things go and try to get ahead of everything. We're heading into an exciting time and we're about to get the opposite of exciting after waiting 30+ years.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I've already resigned myself to the idea that the Flames waited the exact right number of years to build and will save the exact right amount of dollars to get the most bare bones arena at the end of an arena designing era, right before things blow up (already signs they are) into the next wave of state of the art buildings.

Look no further than the SAP Center in San Jose (opened in September of 1993) and the Honda Center in Anaheim (opened in June of 1993) to see this phenomenon in action. SAP Centre feels at least a decade older than Honda Center.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I've already resigned myself to the idea that the Flames waited the exact right number of years to build and will save the exact right amount of dollars to get the most bare bones arena at the end of an arena designing era, right before things blow up (already signs they are) into the next wave of state of the art buildings. 100% guarantee that's what happens.

I'd much rather them wait a couple years and see where things go and try to get ahead of everything. We're heading into an exciting time and we're about to get the opposite of exciting after waiting 30+ years.

I’m not sure how big of a leap any innovation in this space really is, outside of something like Sphere (which is a totally different application).

At the end of the day an arena is an arena. I don’t know if you’ve been to some of the newer ones but they’re ultimately the same experience just elevated and I expect that to continue for the foreseeable future.

It’s like getting a new phone. Yeah, every year there’s new features and reasons to upgrade. So, why not just wait in perpetuity? Or take the plunge and look back in 5 years only to realize yours is still pretty much on par.

The Saddledome still holds its own from an experience standpoint. It’s not fancy, but who says it has to be?

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I've already resigned myself to the idea that the Flames waited the exact right number of years to build and will save the exact right amount of dollars to get the most bare bones arena at the end of an arena designing era, right before things blow up (already signs they are) into the next wave of state of the art buildings. 100% guarantee that's what happens.

I'd much rather them wait a couple years and see where things go and try to get ahead of everything. We're heading into an exciting time and we're about to get the opposite of exciting after waiting 30+ years.

[IMG]https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:960/format:webp/1*6jqVG6RvAKA0ebf9zW3JYg.jpeg[/IMG]

[Titan2]

Originally Posted by jayswin

I've already resigned myself to the idea that the Flames waited the exact right number of years to build and will save the exact right amount of dollars to get the most bare bones arena at the end of an arena designing era, right before things blow up (already signs they are) into the next wave of state of the art buildings. 100% guarantee that's what happens.

I'd much rather them wait a couple years and see where things go and try to get ahead of everything. We're heading into an exciting time and we're about to get the opposite of exciting after waiting 30+ years.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Look no further than the SAP Center in San Jose (opened in September of 1993) and the Honda Center in Anaheim (opened in June of 1993) to see this phenomenon in action. SAP Centre feels at least a decade older than Honda Center.

Yeah, the Flames are chasing Little Ceasers Arena in Detroit, which is okay. But the firm weas hired 14 years ago with renderings released a decade ago, and I'm confident we'll get a similar version of that Monday, before we likely see some serious valued engineering.

Get on the next thing. It won't matter though, ownership just needs to slightly impress the public with renderings while not caring at all as they get their much larger revenue streams simply from having a new building.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The Saddledome still holds its own from an experience standpoint.

lol, surely you’re joking or trolling.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Slava

lol, surely you’re joking or trolling.

Sightlines are good, seats are good, food and beer are good, everything else is just extra.

Rogers Place is nice and a cool experience for everything outside of why you’re actually there but if you put it up against the Saddledome you’d be hard pressed to justify the hundreds of millions and increased per ticket cost to anyone.

If the bathrooms and concessions are more than a fraction of a percent of why you’re there then you’re in a tiny minority. I’ve been to more ballparks than hockey arena, some that span 40 years between them, and once you’re watching the game the year of the build makes very little difference.

I’m not 60 so I don’t need to piss 5 times in a game, and I’ve never had trouble getting a beer or… you know… watching the game/concert/whatever. How much did you want to pay for nicer LEDs and a more open concourse? Seems worth it lol.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sightlines are good, seats are good, food and beer are good, everything else is just extra.

Rogers Place is nice and a cool experience for everything outside of why you’re actually there but if you put it up against the Saddledome you’d be hard pressed to justify the hundreds of millions and increased per ticket cost to anyone.

If the bathrooms and concessions are more than a fraction of a percent of why you’re there then you’re in a tiny minority. I’ve been to more ballparks than hockey arena, some that span 40 years between them, and once you’re watching the game the year of the build makes very little difference.

I’m not 60 so I don’t need to piss 5 times in a game, and I’ve never had trouble getting a beer or… you know… watching the game/concert/whatever. How much did you want to pay for nicer LEDs and a more open concourse? Seems worth it lol.

Are there better sightlines in the league then inside of row 10, second bowl?

I

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Major Major

Are there better sightlines in the league then inside of row 10, second bowl?

Nope, and I'm not sure the last time there was an arena that could rival those. I soaked up every second of any chance I got to sit around there, because watching hockey like that just isn't possible anymore.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I’m not sure how big of a leap any innovation in this space really is, outside of something like Sphere (which is a totally different application).

At the end of the day an arena is an arena. I don’t know if you’ve been to some of the newer ones but they’re ultimately the same experience just elevated and I expect that to continue for the foreseeable future.

It’s like getting a new phone. Yeah, every year there’s new features and reasons to upgrade. So, why not just wait in perpetuity? Or take the plunge and look back in 5 years only to realize yours is still pretty much on par.

The Saddledome still holds its own from an experience standpoint. It’s not fancy, but who says it has to be?

Private suites within private suites.

[BigThief]

The Calgary Flames organization; players, owners, executives etc etc need this arena 100% more than the Calgary Flames fans do.

[PuckSlap]

Originally Posted by BigThief

The Calgary Flames organization; players, owners, executives etc etc need this arena 100% more than the Calgary Flames fans do.

80%


Well done is better than well said

- Somebody

[FlamesAreOne]

Likely nothing, but sure would be cool!

https://x.com/SlapshotShibe/status/1815058874287993028

[Slava]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sightlines are good, seats are good, food and beer are good, everything else is just extra.

Rogers Place is nice and a cool experience for everything outside of why you’re actually there but if you put it up against the Saddledome you’d be hard pressed to justify the hundreds of millions and increased per ticket cost to anyone.

If the bathrooms and concessions are more than a fraction of a percent of why you’re there then you’re in a tiny minority. I’ve been to more ballparks than hockey arena, some that span 40 years between them, and once you’re watching the game the year of the build makes very little difference.

I’m not 60 so I don’t need to piss 5 times in a game, and I’ve never had trouble getting a beer or… you know… watching the game/concert/whatever. How much did you want to pay for nicer LEDs and a more open concourse? Seems worth it lol.

Yeah, of course the sightlines are good, but what modern arena or venue are they not good? Maybe in buildings that are just not designed for hockey, but really this is a pretty low bar?

The reality is, the Saddledome for experience is not good for exactly the reasons that you discount. You want a beer during an intermission? The line is likely going to eat up basically the entire break. Sure...you can skip part of the game and grab one, but really that's not great experience. You want to use the washroom during the intermission...good luck. And as far as the age goes, I'd bet that you and I are pretty close in age and I'm not 60. It's not a huge ask as a consumer to be able to use a restroom when you're at a venue for 3/4 hours though?

As far as the concourses and means of entry/egress, it's not a great experience either. You say that you've been to a lot of other stadiums and arenas. Surely you've noticed this difference in those other buildings? I was in the arena in Omaha (for the Ak-Sar-Ben Knights, our old farm affiliate) and it was miles better than the dome in this scenario. I'm not even talking about purely for hockey; you go to any concert or event at the dome and these things are all annoying and impactful on the user/consumer experience.