BCEC expansion | Seaport

bobthebuilder said:
So if they went through with the expansion, it would have essentially been spending at least $1B to potentially make ~$.5B over the course of a deacade. By that logic it wouldn't break even till almost 2040. Am I missing something here?
Click to expand...

As far as I understand, these were always long-term bonds. One issues a 30 year bond with the idea that it will be paid off over 30 years, not 10.
 
JeffDowntown said:
I am actually surprised they have this level of pre-booking for the expansion given the severe pain and disruption to relocate a booking. (Pre-booking is common/required, but not on an unfinished (even unstarted) facility).
Click to expand...

Bingo. Everyone here was screaming about how there was no demand for bigger conventions and how it would be a waste. The BCEC had 18 mega-conventions pre-freaking-signed.

But once again, Boston: Think Average, remains our slogan.
 
datadyne007 said:
Bingo. Everyone here was screaming about how there was no demand for bigger conventions and how it would be a waste. The BCEC had 18 mega-conventions pre-freaking-signed.

But once again, Boston: Think Average, remains our slogan.
Click to expand...

If there is demand in the market place let the private sector figure it out not the taxpayer.

If there is money to be made then let a private developer clear the path with his own money from investors.
 
Aren't there much better things the city could do with a billion dollars?
 
Why on Earth convention centers and large hotels must operate independent of the free market system has never been explained to me.
 
curcuas said:
Why on Earth convention centers and large hotels must operate independent of the free market system has never been explained to me.
Click to expand...

It's a legitimate question, but big convention centers are public expenditures, like it or not. They're like airports and transit systems. If you don't want one, that's fine, but it costs your economy, and it hits your bottom line (since the BCEC has made a profit to date).

If Charlie Baker said "we'll have an MBTA only if a business decides it can make a profit on it," or "we'll have an international airport only if it turns a profit," would that benefit the city or the state?
 
I don't see an argument that a Convention Center is a public good the way a transit system or airport is.
 
Equilibria said:
It's a legitimate question, but big convention centers are public expenditures, like it or not. They're like airports and transit systems. If you don't want one, that's fine, but it costs your economy, and it hits your bottom line (since the BCEC has made a profit to date).

If Charlie Baker said "we'll have an MBTA only if a business decides it can make a profit on it," or "we'll have an international airport only if it turns a profit," would that benefit the city or the state?
Click to expand...

I think what Charlie Baker is saying is: if we're going to suck a billion dollars out of the tourist business (hotels & rental cars) and invest it in something that makes the city a better place to visit, is the BCEC the place with the highest payback? That's the business question.

There's no reason ('cept a political/opaque/rushed law) that says the BCEC is the right answer. Plenty of other things (expanded HSR station, N-S Rail Link, Seaport mobility) might attract more hotels to the Seaport and encourage visits, AND have a payback that enriches us locals (not just convention-goers)
 
curcuas said:
I don't see an argument that a Convention Center is a public good the way a transit system or airport is.
Click to expand...

Convention centers are catalysts for the service and hospitality industries, they do have a positive impact on a city's economy and it's completely within the bounds of a city government to try and spur these developments for those benefits. Whether or not they're the right or most effective form of gov't stimulus is another question.

There's an important question to ask about these centers: "what do you do when the next large city over builds one twice as big?" Boston has some advantages (Logan's proximity to the city and to Europe - BCEC/Hynes see more Int'l conventions than anywhere else in the country except for DC - almost entirely because of the proximity to the dense European circuit), but CC's are subject to some cutthroat competition so I think yours is a good question to ask, particularly if we're predicting out 30 years from now.
 
CantabAmager said:
CC's are subject to some cutthroat competition so I think yours is a good question to ask, particularly if we're predicting out 30 years from now.
Click to expand...
+1. The BCEC is bait that we dangle in front of a fickle, mobile (and I'd argue, dying) industry. If they don't bite, we're stuck with a can of worms.

Seaport transportation is something you'd want to be stuck with--a permanent investment acting as a permanent catalyst (useful for as long as cities have people for any reason) and bait that we ourselves (as local residents, commuters, etc) can enjoy far more often than we do the BCEC.

And the hoteliers would also get a better payback for themselves (instead of it going to those that get sweet deals from the BCEC to build adjacent) if Seaport improvements meant you could easily get from the Back Bay to the BCEC.
 
Last edited:
curcuas said:
I don't see an argument that a Convention Center is a public good the way a transit system or airport is.
Click to expand...

Not a public good? What would we do without the boat show?
 
Why does it cost a billion dollars to expand a convention center?
 
BussesAin'tTrains said:
Why does it cost a billion dollars to expand a convention center?
Click to expand...

Convention Centers are specially designed not to have pillars in the exhibition rooms. This costs a fortune to construct, AFAIK. We're talking rooms the size of football fields with the roof (and upper floors) held up only by the outer walls.

This all begs the question of how on Earth is a larger convention center worth the value of the land it consumes, when recent property deals nearby show that it's quite the hot commodity.
 
Quote:
With expansion shelved, convention business at risk
Governor Baker’s decision removes all hope of the convention center expansion being done by mid-2019, as projected.

By Jon Chesto GLOBE STAFF MAY 14, 2015

The Institute of Food Technologists was the first to go: The trade group dropped plans to bring its massive convention and its 20,000-plus attendees to Boston in 2019 almost immediately after Governor Charlie Baker halted the Boston Convention & Exhibition Center expansion.

It might not be the last. Baker’s decision to shelve $1 billion in bonds for the expansion endangers another 17 big events with contracts to come here over a decade, the Massachusetts Convention Center Authority says, as well as at least 23 more events that were under consideration. Some of the groups have already started looking elsewhere.

The 18 events booked for the expansion, the agency says, were projected to deliver $33 million in taxes and an economic impact of nearly $500 million. But each contract has a clause that allows the group to walk away if the convention center project or an affiliated hotel across the street won’t be done in time, according to the agency.

...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/business/...?event=event25
Click to expand...

datadyne007 said:
COLD HARD F'ING PROOF that this decision to cancel the BCEC expansion is restricting Boston's economy:



So much for being a "business guy" huh, Charlie?
Click to expand...

Not really... youre just jumping to the conclusion that the BCEC person who released that info wants you to. Yes - they booked events assuming that they were going to have a bigger convention center. Well, what if there was never a planned expansion? Think the BCEC would just be sitting there empty? No, it would have still booked up plenty of events that would have been smaller. Less dollars per contract? Yeah, likely. How much, though? What's the real loss here? Boston is a hot city, it's popular... there's 18 events worth 33 million in taxes, so what's your typical 18 events worth now? That's the more important question.

Take the two different figures, extrapolate them to a year's worth of contracts, and then take the difference and divide by a billion PLUS extra expenses for the larger footprint and youve got tax dollars generated per dollar spent on the expansion. A much more important question.
 
Last edited:
Would this expansion even have put the BCEC in the top 10 in this country for space?
 
mass88 said:
Would this expansion even have put the BCEC in the top 10 in this country for space?
Click to expand...

Wiki has some discrepancies from article to article...

There is a size chart at the bottom of this article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_convention_centers_in_the_United_States

This lists the exhibition space as 516,000 sq ft (47,900 m2) & the total SF of the BCEC as 976,000 sq ft (90,700 m2) and is not cited.

--

This is the article for the BCEC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Convention_and_Exhibition_Center

This lists the exhibition space as 500,000 sq ft (46,000 m2) & the total SF as 2,100,000 sq ft (200,000 m2)* and is not cited. It also alleges that the BCEC is the "largest in the northeast" and is cited to the MCCA website.

* Note: This 2.1 mil figure was recently added on March 13, 2015.
--
Most news articles say the expansion will "double" the BCEC's size, as does the MCCA.

The expansion plans as explained by the MCCA are:
MCCA said:
Expansion plans would double the size of the current facility adding:
335,000 square feet of exhibit space (new total of 850,000 square feet)
100,000 square feet of meeting space (new total of 260,000 square feet in 121 meeting rooms)
Additional column-free ballroom of 75,000 square feet (existing ballroom of 40,000 square feet)
A second headquarters hotel with a minimum of 1,200-1,500 rooms, as well as approximately 100,000 square feet of meeting/function space (two hotels totalling 510 rooms are currently under construction)

See more at: http://signatureboston.com/bcec/bcec-expansion-plans.aspx#sthash.IpFDhSZF.dpuf
Click to expand...

I'd say it would put us close to or somewhere in the Top 10 for both exhibit area and gross floor area if the Wiki list is somewhat accurate. Certainly a leader in the Northeast for sure.
 
Last edited:
Now they can consider utilizing the space for the Olympic Stadium which would have a much bigger economic impact.
 
I'm just not all that enthralled with the idea of that massive building getting even bigger.... Another variable to consider in the math equation is what is a rough projection of the likelihood of other cities building equivalent-sized convention centers? And even if the math supports the project, it's not like we are some struggling ghost town with empty hotels. Seriosuly, we don't even need this. Could be a benefit for some, but it's a huge piece of land... It should be considered very, very seriously.

Moreover, giving money to a hotel company is a real joke... Even with the expansion, the private market ought to pay for hotels since this thing ostensibly is going to support more commerce.
 
I'd have to say that the big money shows involve tech, bio, and medical such and such. Those want to be near hubs of those industries. There are few if any other localities that can boast such a presence in all of those. Plus the other traveling shows.

To say we don't need it, is fair. But, it is in fact a huge draa, and puts thousands of outside persons in our city, buying our goods and services. Few things can produce so many new individuals all year round. Once, the seaport has more capacity (rooms and storefronts) to support those influx, there will be a similar influx of outside money into the area.

The large parcel behind the BCEC was always to be exhibition space, and as it stands has very few other viable options. The area needs the hotel space, so that's a given regardless of an expansion. The problem I might have would be the subsidies in one of the hottest markets around. If hotels are so needed (and all reliable accounts and records say they are) they shouldn't need subsidies to be built. Get and operator and build.

The BCEC has done some pretty good business since opening, and that is with the size restrictions keeping the true big money making shows out. Not the nickel and dime, price gouging Vegas conventions either. The ones that pay to be in the right place. The lesser shows still come, but don't get the prime times, and can run concurrently with smaller shows.

It's a huge white whale in the area, but it serves a real purpose and isn't going anywhere, so why not make the most of it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top