Bon Secours Wellness Arena

[distortedlogic]

The success of the Bi-Lo Center comes down to marketing. The facility is nice, it has 16,000 seats, and it's in a good city. There is honestly no excuse to say, "Oh well, we are between Charlotte and Atlanta and they are going to get the bigger acts before we are." We can't sell acts on Greenville alone, but Greenville itself does not hinder an artist from performing at the Bi-Lo Center. Do we know who is in charge of marketing and recruiting performers? It would be interesting to know their philosophy, what they have to offer a performer in comparison to other arenas, etc.

Very well said Greenville! We do have that "halfway between Atl/Clt" mentality sometimes, and we need to stop acting like we are second (or third) fiddle. People like Greenville for what it is, and sometimes because it is not one of the other two. When it opened it certainly did not worry about losing big names, and there is no real reason why it can't continue to get them. I know competition is real, but there are also more big names than there used to be too. Just like with the growwl or the pinnacle or camperdown; Marketing, Marketing, Marketing!

[krazeeboi]

Great point. I sometimes cringe when I hear the "halfway between Charlotte and Atlanta" description because it downplays what Greenville itself has going on. Furthermore, any company with ties to both Atlanta and Charlotte probably would locate to either one of those cities instead of Greenville anyway, so the description means more to those who live in Greenville as far as big(ger) city options go.

[GvilleSC]

I like the fact that the Bilo Center will hold the Upper State basketball championships. It makes sense and should bring some good revenue with it... Greenville schools would most likely produce the largest fan attendance and they have a good chance at being there (considering the number of high schools in comparison with other counties.

Edited August 2, 2006 by GvilleSC

[whitehourseview]

I like the fact that the Bilo Center will hold the Upper State basketball championships. It makes sense and should bring some good revenue with it... Greenville schools would most likely produce the largest fan attendance and they have a good chance at being there (considering the number of high schools in comparison with other counties.

Indeed, I've wondered before why there were not more high school games in the BLC. Should be a great event.

[adrockc2]

Arena football could return to Greenville

[RestedTraveler]

Wow! That's promising news as well! I know the AIFL is looking to expand to 6 more markets, so they seem to be the reasonable choice, IMHO. The WIFL is a brand new (re-born) league, so they're more iffy.

[whitehourseview]

After doing a little web seraching on both leagues, neither of which I've heard of before tonight, I'd say they would be the equivalent of an independent league minor baseball team, a step below the AF2 Rhinos that existed at the BLC previously. Neither league has a connection to the big Arena League, nor even a player development contract.

An arena team would be great in the BLC, but due diligence needs to be very carefully done. A league expanding from 6 to 16 with two more for 2007 like the AIFL smells like too rapid growth to me. I hope the powers that be dot their i's and cross their t's. Another failed minor leagues team at the BLC would be on the harmful side.

[RestedTraveler]

After doing a little web seraching on both leagues, neither of which I've heard of before tonight...

I'd say you have a very short memory then...

[krazeeboi]

Wow, the AIFL has a team in Florence, the Phantoms. So I guess Florence and Charleston are the only cities in the state with indoor football teams.

[Greenville]

The list of cities where the AIFL has teams is impressive (Richmond, Raleigh, etc.) until you get to Florence.

[RestedTraveler]

There seems to have been a recent migration of teams from the WIFL to the AIFL and vice versa. The old Greenville Riverhawks (never played the first game at home) has even switched leagues again.

[krazeeboi]

The list of cities where the AIFL has teams is impressive (Richmond, Raleigh, etc.) until you get to Florence.

LOL. I was surprised to see that Tallahassee has a team as well.

[distortedlogic]

So are we voting for the AIFL? Any ideas for names?

[krazeeboi]

I say this time, stay away from the automotive nicknames.

[carolinadude9409]

...and I say we have too many football teams, as it is. The last thing we need is more football. The only good thing is that it would be in the spring instead of fall. Bring back the Grrrowl.

[RestedTraveler]

...and I say we have too many football teams, as it is. The last thing we need is more football. The only good thing is that it would be in the spring instead of fall. Bring back the Grrrowl.

I agree, but if we can get an arena football team and another hockey team in there, that'd be great for the community and the Bi-Lo Center. I'd have to lean with the AIFL over the WIFL, in my own opinion. Neither seem very stable though.

[carolinadude9409]

I agree, but if we can get an arena football team and another hockey team in there, that'd be great for the community and the Bi-Lo Center. I'd have to lean with the AIFL over the WIFL, in my own opinion. Neither seem very stable though.

I'm not sure why I didn't think about having both sports there seeing how they play different times of the year. I must be tired or something this morning. The problem with the GAD is that they put too much of a burden on the sports teams that play at the Bi-Lo Center to pay off the arena and not enough on tax payers. Basically, the GAD was biting off more than they could chew. They were taking I think like 75% of all the money the Grrrowl made and used it to pay off the arena and that's one of the main reasons the team failed along with lack of attendance due to high ticket prices.

[Chickenwing]

I'm not sure why I didn't think about having both sports there seeing how they play different times of the year. I must be tired or something this morning. The problem with the GAD is that they put too much of a burden on the sports teams that play at the Bi-Lo Center to pay off the arena and not enough on tax payers. Basically, the GAD was biting off more than they could chew. They were taking I think like 75% of all the money the Grrrowl made and used it to pay off the arena and that's one of the main reasons the team failed along with lack of attendance due to high ticket prices.

Maybe I am misunderstanding this posting, but it sounds like you think that the taxpayers should bear a larger portion of the cost. Why? Why shouldn't the arena be able to economically support itself? If it cannot, then how does that make good business sense?

If it cannot support itself, then that is why many taxpayers did not want it in the beginning, because they would be stuck subsidizing the bill for something they do not use.

[carolinadude9409]

Maybe I am misunderstanding this posting, but it sounds like you think that the taxpayers should bear a larger portion of the cost. Why? Why shouldn't the arena be able to economically support itself? If it cannot, then how does that make good business sense?

If it cannot support itself, then that is why many taxpayers did not want it in the beginning, because they would be stuck subsidizing the bill for something they do not use.

That's unfortunately what I am saying. They put too much burden on the teams that came to the Bi-Lo Center and made them pay more money to the GAD then they actually had. Basically, they bite off more than they could chew. That's part of the reason all of these teams have all failed along with lack of attendance due to high ticket prices. I hate to say it, but if they want another team there to survive for at least a decade, their going to have to make tax payers give more money to pay off the Bi-Lo Center and less on the teams. Currently, the arena is in debt and doesn't have enough events to economically support itself. If a sports team comes back to the arena, it will most likely only survive 3-4 years with the current situation the arena is in unless attendance is really good.

Edited August 31, 2006 by carolinadude9409

[whitehourseview]

That's unfortunately what I am saying. They put too much burden on the teams that came to the Bi-Lo Center and made them pay more money to the GAD then they actually had. Basically, they bite off more than they could chew. That's part of the reason all of these teams have all failed along with lack of attendance due to high ticket prices. I hate to say it, but if they want another team there to survive for at least a decade, their going to have to make tax payers give more money to pay off the Bi-Lo Center and less on the teams. Currently, the arena is in debt and doesn't have enough events to economically support itself. If a sports team comes back to the arena, it will most likely only survive 3-4 years with the current situation the arena is in unless attendance is really good.

Taxpayer support of professional sports, whether at the major league or minor league level is a really poor investment of a community's resources.

Post WWII, into the 80's, virtually all arenas, etc. were funded exclusively by local municipalities, which is why so many cities ended up with the monstrosities of cookie cutter stadiums to save costs.

Lots of arenas and stadiums in the past 15 years or so are going to the model of either public/private investment (like the Bi-Lo Center), or entirely privately funded like West End Field or Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte or Turner Field in Atlanta.

The BLC has a very unusual financial situation, let's just leave it at that for the moment. But for a long term franchise to succed in Greenville, it has to be financially capable of doing that on its own. It happens all the time, and it will probably be a few years before hockey comes back to Greenville, but it can very easily happen here with the right leadership. Subsidising entertainment would not only be poor for the taxpayer, but a poor decision for whatever team exists as well, long term.

Edited August 31, 2006 by whitehourseview

[Greenville]

You will be hard-pressed to find many citizens willing to pay more taxes to support the Bi-Lo Center, and rightfully so. It has been a public-private venture from the start, and I am okay with that. But for most people to support increased public funds, the Bi-Lo Center is going to have to show a willingness to add more to the entertainment scene. A few big concerts a year and Southern gospel concerts are not enough. Adding a low-quality minor league sport or two isn't going to change many people's minds.

Chickenwing, I agree with everything you said. The Bi-Lo Center's job is to make it happen. Taxpayers have done their part, and the arena must bring in acts and sports franchises that are worthy of that investment. If they do, then they will have no problem selling tickets and being profitable.

[Chickenwing]

That's unfortunately what I am saying. They put too much burden on the teams that came to the Bi-Lo Center and made them pay more money to the GAD then they actually had. Basically, they bite off more than they could chew. That's part of the reason all of these teams have all failed along with lack of attendance due to high ticket prices. I hate to say it, but if they want another team there to survive for at least a decade, their going to have to make tax payers give more money to pay off the Bi-Lo Center and less on the teams. Currently, the arena is in debt and doesn't have enough events to economically support itself. If a sports team comes back to the arena, it will most likely only survive 3-4 years with the current situation the arena is in unless attendance is really good.

The truly bad thing about this model is that at no point do the taxpayers get any real dollars return on their investment. If, and that is a big if, it were to turn around by taxpayers subsidizing the whole thing, then who is paid the profits? That's right, the teams, who have little invested. I cannot see how this is a win for the taxpayers, most of whom will NEVER go to anything at the Bi-Lo center.

Personally, I say say let the arena default on the debt, and let the bond holders have it. Then we will see if it can be ressurected through private investment. (Please note that I am not sure that a default could happen without some sort of taxpayer liability though, not knowing exactly how the Center is financed. This is basically just conjecture on my part.)

There is a reason that even NFL, NBA, MLB teams, for the most part, do not build their own venues. It doesn't make financial sense for them to invest when they can hold up a city for the tab.

Edited August 31, 2006 by Chickenwing

[krazeeboi]

Lots of arenas and stadiums in the past 15 years or so are going to the model of either public/private investment (like the Bi-Lo Center), or entirely privately funded like West End Field or Bank of America Stadium in Charlotte or Turner Field in Atlanta.

I guess arenas owned by colleges/universities but have sold naming rights to a private company qualifies as a public/private venture?

[whitehourseview]

I guess arenas owned by colleges/universities but have sold naming rights to a private company qualifies as a public/private venture?

Moreso than municipal funded arenas, especially since college arenas are often funded more by boosters/alumni directly and less so by bonds instead of tax increases like sales taxes.

UNC's Smith Center didn't have state funding for example. Clemson's Littlejohn was built in the late 60's through bonds (it's actually owned by the state gov, not Clemson), but its recent renovation was partially funded by booster donations. USC's Colonial Center's finances had to have been a pain to put together, since the city of Columbia was involved. And of course, private schools like Furman fund their own arenas, or rent space from a local coliseum, like Wake Forest does.

[krazeeboi]

Cool. I just thought that was a category that needed to be mentioned, since those types of arenas don't have to worry about a "home team," so to speak.