Pacific Colisuem

Discussion in 'Vancouver Ravens Forum' started by wellington_nc, Sep 1, 2009.

  1. wellington_nc

    wellington_nc New Member

    I was recently up in Vancouver. It's one of my favorite cities. Pacific Coliseum has undergone an extensive refurbish for the Winter Olympics. It would potentially make a great venue for a lacrosse team -- likely a lot more affordable than GM Pace. Anybody heard anything about it being a possible locale for a return of the Ravens?
  2. Metalhead

    Metalhead New Member

    I think last year when investors were trying to bring the Ravens back,t he Coliseum is where they were looking.
  3. Haftalax

    Haftalax New Member

    That is one of the venues I saw in the investor packet

    Yep, I think once the Olympics are done, you could see a team brought back to Vancouver possibly as soon as the 2011 season.

    With Portland folding, there is a vacuum for a team even with the Stealth moving to Everitt and people in Vancouver have been working for years to bring a team back there.

    When I was approached last year and looked over the synapsis, it looked very promising and I remember seeing that venue, but didn't look at the specifics. What is capacity and accessibility?

    Knabber da always loved playing the Ravens.
  4. laxjunkie1

    laxjunkie1 New Member

    I heard the story was the GIANTS owner(s) didn't want the ravens using their brand new dressing rooms for the EIGHT!!!! possible homes games!!! Boy those lax running shoes must really rip up the new hallway carpet!!! At the time the ravens could not afford g.m. place (outrageous rent) So the were on the bubble waiting for the o.k. from the pac col main tenants re giants/ who graciously waited till the last second to deny them any chance of finding anywhere else .....I have yet to pay for a giants game..COME BACK U RAVENS!!!!!
  5. mr. wannabe

    mr. wannabe New Member

    also, he's afraid of the "competition" which is pathetic seeing as some of his players grew playing ball. the guy gets all these civic awards for community service but thrives on the monopoly.
    he's a class A douchebag!!
  6. laxhawker

    laxhawker New Member

    The Pacific Colliseum is owned by the PNE and is not the property of Toigo no matter what he thinks. He may have done some lease hold improvements but the PNE still hold the LEASE. They can deside whether or not the Lacrosse club can play there. Last time it was to short notice and the Giants were not willing to adjust their schedule. Now the new group has time to work on their game plan, but we hope they get it up and running 2011 after the world shindig.
  7. laxjunkie1

    laxjunkie1 New Member

    still leaves toigo as a douche!!!lol lol
  8. Dave S-C

    Dave S-C Well-Known Member

    It may be a lease but Toigo probably has a LOT of say and pull since before he came along the Coliseum was doing nothing but gathering dust. The Giants are solely responsible for its revitalisation and the PNE realises that and aren't gonna to anything to hurt their meal ticket relationship with him.

    On the flip side, the PNE is civic owned and I wouldn't be surprised that all the unpaid bills the Ravens generated at GM Place has them feeling more than uncertain about the money-making potentials of lacrosse. They are under no obligation to give anyone a lease.
  9. ND14

    ND14 New Member

    I'm not convinced that GM Place is entirely out of the question. It's more expensive of course, but it has significant advantages in terms of accessibility and aesthetic appeal. Putting a lacrosse team in a premiere venue as opposed to a secondary one says a lot about the aspirations and intentions of both the team and the league, and helps demand that the sport be taken seriously.

    GM Place might have worked last time if the ownership had been stable enough. With the ownership situation as bad as it was last time around, the team would have struggled in the Coliseum as well as GM Place.

    The real key is to get stable ownership that can take a loss for a few seasons before beginning to turn a profit.
  10. Dave S-C

    Dave S-C Well-Known Member

    I also agree that GM Place would work with the right (i.e. stable) ownership.
    Word I heard was the Ravens were dishing out $43,000 to $46,000 per game for rent at GM Place - which accounted for probably half of ticket income (not sure what a normal percentage of ticket price to arena rent would be).

    Two things I think hurt the Ravens which seems to get overlooked was the switch from Saturday afternoon games to Sundays (after the first season) and the closure of the $9 upper bowls seats. The Saturday afternoon games were great cause it allowed the Victoria fans to make the ferry trip back home the same day and not have to fork out $$$ to stay overnight. Also when the game got out at around 5pm, you could then go and do stuff downtown, etc. The $9 seats probably didn't make any money but were good for drawing in the casual or curious fan - who probably would not shell out $20-$30 for a seat to something they never had seen before.

    Granted that the switch was forced on them as the Canucks wanted to cash in on more HNIC broadcasts, but by making it difficult for the Victoria fan base to make it over was the first nail in the coffin.
  11. ND14

    ND14 New Member

    The problem with the $9 seats is that it would reduce the number of people paying for more expensive tickets. Super cheap tickets like that work in a situation like in Colorado, where simply getting people in the door, the owner makes money on parking, concessions, advertising etc. In the Ravens' case, they had to make all of their money on the ticket sales.

    It's too bad the Canucks don't seem to have any interest in it. If they followed the Colorado model (cheap tickets, fill the building on days when it's not being used), they could have a very successful franchise with minimal effort and expenditure.
  12. laxhawker

    laxhawker New Member

    I was told by Dave Evens at the time that if the Ravens opened up the upper bowl it changed the rental agreement. It was told that as soon as ticket were sold for the upper seats then the whole arena had to be staffed and that all ammenities had to be open Ie food and beverage and shops, so if they only sold a couple hundred of thos seats then the cost of the rink as a whole would kill them. Where just selling the lower bowl meant a limited staffing and amenities and a lower rent.
  13. Dave S-C

    Dave S-C Well-Known Member

    That makes sense - but I do also recall at least one game in the first season sitting upstairs and they had nothing open and we had to go downstairs to get food, drinks, etc. I'm pretty sure it was the game against New Jersey.

Share This Page