River Market Tower/Place
#21
Posted 05 November 2006 - 03:02 PM
#22
Posted 05 November 2006 - 08:38 PM
#23
Posted 05 November 2006 - 10:35 PM
Architect, on Nov 5 2006, 03:02 PM, said:
I haven't updated anything on that site in a while. I've actually stopped going to that forum b/c if you are not from Atlanta, Charlotte, Nashville or somewhere in Alabama, you really don't get a lot of interest or discussion about your topics. That's why I like posting here because everyone has an interest in what's going on in Little Rock.
Aporkalypse, on Nov 5 2006, 01:06 AM, said:
I thought they were on the same level. No big deal. As I stated earlier, I'm sure that it will be nice.
#24
Posted 06 November 2006 - 08:43 AM
What changes will we see take place downtown because of the increased population. (I'm not even sure how many units are located downtown any more, but I think I remember hearing that MT wanted to build another 700. Could be wrong about that number though)
#25
Posted 29 January 2007 - 02:30 PM
#26
Posted 30 January 2007 - 05:51 PM
skirby, on Jan 29 2007, 02:30 PM, said:
The press release was interesting because no real new details came out.
I wonder if this hotel and the new Wyndham tower, which will start at the same time, will be open by NCAA tourney time in March 2008.
#27
Posted 30 January 2007 - 08:11 PM
#28
Posted 30 January 2007 - 11:17 PM
Aporkalypse, on Jan 30 2007, 05:51 PM, said:
I wonder if this hotel and the new Wyndham tower, which will start at the same time, will be open by NCAA tourney time in March 2008.
Good question. I know that tourism officials hope they are online when March Madness comes around in 2008.
#29
Posted 31 January 2007 - 06:08 PM
theman, on Jan 30 2007, 11:17 PM, said:
Lack of quality hotel rooms is what prevented LR from getting the tourney on previous bids. There's been a lot of progress since then but if we can't meet demand for the tourney we won't get it again. I sure am hoping these rooms will be available, it will really help meet demand.
Of course, the one advantage LR has is so many rooms are downtown and therefore close to the arena. In many cities the arena isn't downtown or their hotels are more scattered.
#30
Posted 01 February 2007 - 12:04 AM
Aporkalypse, on Jan 31 2007, 06:08 PM, said:
Of course, the one advantage LR has is so many rooms are downtown and therefore close to the arena. In many cities the arena isn't downtown or their hotels are more scattered.
You're right in the fact that the lack of quality hotel rooms kept LR from getting the tournament. With the redevelopment of the Peabody, Holiday Inn Presidential and even the Comfort Inn and with the new Courtyard that issue has been resolved. Tourist can take the trolley from most of the hotels downtown to Alltel. Having the Clinton Presidential Center and the River Market helps as well. More hotel rooms will help bring back the NCAA and SEC tournaments the city has landed and to bring in more conventions as well.
#31
Posted 09 March 2007 - 01:46 PM
#32
Posted 09 March 2007 - 01:46 PM
skirby, on Mar 9 2007, 01:46 PM, said:
here is a link to the article:
http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.as...30.62982.109475
#33
Posted 09 March 2007 - 06:23 PM
skirby, on Mar 9 2007, 01:46 PM, said:
#34
Posted 09 March 2007 - 07:40 PM
#35
Posted 10 March 2007 - 07:16 AM
Cru Jones, on Nov 6 2006, 09:43 AM, said:
Cities do not get the opportunity to host NCAA tournaments often. Little Rock/North Little Rock better really get involved and do this thing right, or the NCAAs won't be coming back to the area anytime soon.
#36
Posted 10 March 2007 - 09:48 AM
North Pulaski Player, on Mar 10 2007, 07:16 AM, said:
I agree. We did well with the SEC women's tourney but this is a MUCH bigger deal. I think as a matter of price our city and county governments are going to go way overboard with the whole thing, probably putting way more effort into it than most places do. There's a lot of competition in this region for tournaments sites and LR's a marginal market anyway. If we screw it up it will be our only chance.
#37
Posted 10 March 2007 - 01:27 PM
Aporkalypse, on Mar 10 2007, 09:48 AM, said:
I hope they do put too much into it, I'd love to have it back every so often.
It seems like Boise, Idaho hosts a pod every dang year. If they can, I don't know wy we shouldn't be able to.
#38
Posted 10 March 2007 - 04:07 PM
CentralArkansas, on Mar 10 2007, 01:27 PM, said:
It seems like Boise, Idaho hosts a pod every dang year. If they can, I don't know wy we shouldn't be able to.
#39
Posted 10 March 2007 - 05:40 PM
Architect, on Mar 10 2007, 04:07 PM, said:
1. Lexington's MSA is actually larger, look it up. You guys forgot Greensboro but it's usually counted with Winston-Salem. Still, it's pretty tough to come up with examples analagous to LR. There may be a couple but not many.
2. Boise gets it all the time because in the Western region there are considerably fewer cities with the population to support it, especially if you discount California. In fact, when LR was being passed over because of the lack of hotels they were repeatedly waiving the requirement for Boise for this reason. We are surrounded by larger metros - Memphis, St Louis, KC, Tulsa, OKC, New Orleans, Nashville, DFW, Birmingham, etc, etc. These cities are our competition when we apply for these sites.
#40
Posted 10 March 2007 - 06:12 PM
Aporkalypse, on Mar 10 2007, 05:40 PM, said:
2. Boise gets it all the time because in the Western region there are considerably fewer cities with the population to support it, especially if you discount California. In fact, when LR was being passed over because of the lack of hotels they were repeatedly waiving the requirement for Boise for this reason. We are surrounded by larger metros - Memphis, St Louis, KC, Tulsa, OKC, New Orleans, Nashville, DFW, Birmingham, etc, etc. These cities are our competition when we apply for these sites.
I can find no where that shows Lexington's MSA is larger than Little Rock. In fact it shows LR to be larger by a good amount. In the MSA rankings Little Rock is 80 and Lexington is 110.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users














