Lions' contract with BC Place...

[jcalhoun]

Hey all,

The BC Lions pay no rent on the first $9 million of net ticket sales to play at BC Place Stadium, according to their contract with BC Pavilion Corporation that was released under freedom of information on April 21.

The contract was inked in fall 2011, after the stadium reopened from a $514-million renovation that included a new retractable roof. In 2013-2014, the public-owned stadium reported its latest annual loss, $13.3 million.

The public release ends a nearly four-year quest for the document that went through two inquiries with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner. An adjudicator dismissed both PavCo and the Lions' fears of financial harm, should the contract be released, as speculative.

Since 2013, the threshold of $9 million in net ticket sales has been tied to inflation and is the first of a six-step rent calculation for the 10 scheduled Canadian Football League home games. After the rent-free $9 million, the Lions are charged 10 per cent on the next million, 12.5 per cent on the next million, 15 per cent on the next million, 17.5 per cent on the next million and 20 per cent on all amounts over $13 million.

According to figures released separately via FOI, the Lions paid $192,910 rent to host their last home playoff game, the 2012 West Final. Playoff game rental is based on a $50,000 flat fee, plus $25,000 for reaching $750,000 in net ticket sales, an additional $25,000 for reaching $1 million, and 15 per cent on net amounts over $1.5 million.

Lions president Dennis Skulsky declined to give revenue and expense details, but told The Tyee that the club is "in the black" and its payments to PavCo in 2014 for all goods and services totalled just under $700,000. That included rent, food and beverage costs, and the annual fee to use level 3 suites. The contract includes a $200,000 flat fee for suites that the Lions rent or sell to the public, clients and sponsors.

'The Lions' business model got better'

The contract's playoff rent formula is the same as what appears in leaked financial records from 2007, when the Lions paid $147,238 to host the West Final after paying $160,084 rent for the entire schedule of nine regular season games and one preseason game. The Lions reported $7.34 million in net ticket sales when the 2007 rent-free threshold was $6 million and averaged 32,456 attendance for their nine regular season home games. By 2014, the team averaged just over 28,000 at BC Place, which holds 54,500.

Skulsky explained the threshold rose to $9 million in 2011 because "very clearly, the Lions' business model got better."

Under the contract, PavCo retains food and beverage revenue. On game days, the Lions can sell merchandise at their concourse souvenir stands and advertising within the inner bowl. PavCo charges each game-goer a $3 per ticket facility fee, while Ticketmaster levies $6 in fees and service charges per ticket.

"We're not thrilled about that, because that's our customer and they make buying decisions on the total price," Skulsky said.

The Lions' other major source of revenue is a share of the reported $40-million-a-year Bell Media broadcast and internet rights deal with the nine-team league. The club operated under a $5 million salary cap for its 56-player roster last year. The Lions organization hosted the Grey Cup in 2014, which PavCo paid $2.7 million to the CFL for hosting rights. Skulsky said the host committee paid PavCo nearly $400,000 for goods and services, including rent.

Hamilton, Ont. auto parts magnate David Braley bought the Lions in 1997. The Conservative senator from 2010 to 2013 also owns the Toronto Argonauts. Since 2005, Braley has donated $82,750 to the BC Liberals.

FOI copy of the full contract at the link:

http://thetyee.ca/News/2015/04/23/BC-Li ... -Contract/

[B.C.FAN]

LU wrote about the lease last week when the documents were released. As Skulsky said at the time:

“All the teams pretty much pay the same. It’s sometimes how you get to that amount which is different.”

Lions rent of $600,000 similar to other CFL teams

[sj-roc]

So exactly what was the point of this article? Are we supposed to be outraged that a private enterprise, professional sports team is purportedly getting a sweetheart rent deal to play in a public facility?

If that's the case, where are the Whitecaps' numbers?

The Tyee is known for its liberal (small-l) slant; in fact, I knew this was Bob Mackin's writing before I even got past the very first sentence. What with there being no secret over the politics of the Lions' owner not exactly aligning with such, this comes off as an ideologically-based hatchet job.

[jcalhoun]

SJ-Roc --I couldn't agree more. It's the Tyee, so one has to expect an extreme left-wing slant (Look at these fat-cat thousandaire football players, making almost as much as teachers! We should be using that money for community based projects that make a difference, like the anarcho-lesbian theatre collective at the Van East Cultural Centre, ahem...I mean, *The Cultch*).

However, placing the editorial content aside, he does include the rent structure & agreements the Lions work under, along with the complete FOI request from PavCo. We often make suggestions here about what the Lions could/should do, and knowing what the numbers are is helpful.

For example, I've long thought the Lions should bounce the pre-season game around the province: Victoria, Kelowna, Prince George, etc. Throw up temporary stands at some of the smaller, community-sized stadiums, apply for tourism grants (or whatever local/provincial/federal government programs could help). The Lions could negotiate with smaller venues to keep a portion of concessions, would sell a heck of a lot more merchandise, and end up saving on the back end with the BC Place rental. (And how cool would a late June trip to wine country be to catch a football game?)

Anyway,

James

[sj-roc]

SJ-Roc --I couldn't agree more. It's the Tyee, so one has to expect an extreme left-wing slant (Look at these fat-cat thousandaire football players, making almost as much as teachers! We should be using that money for community based projects that make a difference, like the anarcho-lesbian theatre collective at the Van East Cultural Centre, ahem...I mean, *The Cultch*).

However, placing the editorial content aside, he does include the rent structure & agreements the Lions work under, along with the complete FOI request from PavCo. We often make suggestions here about what the Lions could/should do, and knowing what the numbers are is helpful.

For example, I've long thought the Lions should bounce the pre-season game around the province: Victoria, Kelowna, Prince George, etc. Throw up temporary stands at some of the smaller, community-sized stadiums, apply for tourism grants (or whatever local/provincial/federal government programs could help). The Lions could negotiate with smaller venues to keep a portion of concessions, would sell a heck of a lot more merchandise, and end up saving on the back end with the BC Place rental. (And how cool would a late June trip to wine country be to catch a football game?)

Anyway,

James

Some good points, James. But what rubbed me the wrong way about that article was how it completely looked the other way on the Whitecaps. Are their numbers already out there? I don't know, so my question to BM would be either why didn't he bother to look into them with similar FOI requests, or why is there no comparison to such numbers if they are already released.

Don't get me wrong, if the Lions were paying little to no rent @BCP, there'd be room to have a discussion on such a state of affairs. But this doesn't appear to be the case. One wonders if Skulsky ever wishes it was tied to attendance, so he could keep jacking up ticket prices to shrink the crowd and save on rent while maintaining revenues from the die-est of the diehards.

[DanoT]

SJ-Roc --I couldn't agree more. It's the Tyee, so one has to expect an extreme left-wing slant (Look at these fat-cat thousandaire football players, making almost as much as teachers! We should be using that money for community based projects that make a difference, like the anarcho-lesbian theatre collective at the Van East Cultural Centre, ahem...I mean, *The Cultch*).

However, placing the editorial content aside, he does include the rent structure & agreements the Lions work under, along with the complete FOI request from PavCo. We often make suggestions here about what the Lions could/should do, and knowing what the numbers are is helpful.

For example, I've long thought the Lions should bounce the pre-season game around the province: Victoria, Kelowna, Prince George, etc. Throw up temporary stands at some of the smaller, community-sized stadiums, apply for tourism grants (or whatever local/provincial/federal government programs could help). The Lions could negotiate with smaller venues to keep a portion of concessions, would sell a heck of a lot more merchandise, and end up saving on the back end with the BC Place rental. (And how cool would a late June trip to wine country be to catch a football game?)

Anyway,

James

Some good points, James. But what rubbed me the wrong way about that article was how it completely looked the other way on the Whitecaps. Are their numbers already out there? I don't know, so my question to BM would be either why didn't he bother to look into them with similar FOI requests, or why is there no comparison to such numbers if they are already released.

Don't get me wrong, if the Lions were paying little to no rent @BCP, there'd be room to have a discussion on such a state of affairs. But this doesn't appear to be the case. One wonders if Skulsky ever wishes it was tied to attendance, so he could keep jacking up ticket prices to shrink the crowd and save on rent while maintaining revenues from the die-est of the diehards.

The only way PavCo would tie the rent to attendance would be as a % of the gate not a head tax.

[sj-roc]

I just posted in the marketing thread a video of Tom Mayenknecht from May 2010 touting the then-fresh hiring of Dennis Skulsky as Lions President & CEO as a coup.

Here are two more old TM videos from the same youtube channel where he discusses the economics of the BC Place renovations.

This one, "BC Place stadium renovation will be judged by the strength of its bells and whistles", is from Oct 2010, when the BCP renos were still ongoing while the Lions played at Empire Field.

[video][/video]

This other one, "BC Place Stadium economics", is from Sep 30, 2011 — the same day BCP re-opened.

[video][/video]

He was bullish overall on the renovations and their spinoff economic benefits although he points out that other stadiums, including some in the NFL, have been built at lower overall cost. I find his comparison somewhat flawed as BCP has given many more years of service than the other stadiums have yet provided — and it's not clear they will match BCP given the limited lifespan of venues like the Kingdome and greater appetite in the US for publicly funded pro sports venues — so the costing on an annual basis would be more favourable. His assumption that Lions attendance would improve with the new roof has been proven false, although in fairness he certainly wasn't the only one who felt that way, and there have been several other factors depressing the gate in the last several seasons, for not just the Lions but for the league as a whole.

It might also be worth mentioning that Bob ("The Hammer") Mackin — whose writing on the Lions' rental contract is referenced in the OP of this thread — is an occasional guest of TM's Sat morning Sport Market radio show.

[Toppy Vann]

I get it that those to the right don't like The Tyee but to slam the article as a hatchet job is unfair.

This gem was in the LAST paragraph and the story didn't say he got a sweetheart deal. Both need each other. Without the Lions - yikes - what does BC Place do to fill those dates.

Hamilton, Ont. auto parts magnate David Braley bought the Lions in 1997. The Conservative senator from 2010 to 2013 also owns the Toronto Argonauts. Since 2005, Braley has donated $82,750 to the BC Liberals.

The only complaint was it took 4 years to get it under FOI laws. This is very, very long and as it's a commercial party (BC Lions) they do have the extra right as a private business to withhold its refusal. If anything the story could have ripped the Lions and Pavco for stalling as it's a contract and as someone who headed FOI and and other statutory functions for a crown corp, 4 years is rubbish to come to terms with it's release.

If anything the story leaves the reader to make sense of the deal.

There was a fear on some fans that I agreed with when Gordon Campbell was in office and that he'd dump BC Place as fans criticized and build condos and businesses on that site and improve his gov't coffers. Campbell is a bit of a sports fan or was in the past.

No one has done any media analysis as to whether this is a good or bad deal and no one has compared the Lions contract to the private owned Canucks and how they own their own building.

If there was any slant in the article I didn't get it. He just puts it out there with the details.

[DanoT]

IMO Pavco overspent on the renovations. Why replace the original seats in the end zones and upper deck when they should have had the roomier seats as a perk for season ticket holders only, in other words just new seating for the lower deck between the 20 yard lines.

Was there actually any improvement in the washrooms? There sure were big half time lineups with the near sell out at the Grey Cup.

[sj-roc]

I get it that those to the right don't like The Tyee but to slam the article as a hatchet job is unfair.

The only complaint was it took 4 years to get it under FOI laws. This is very, very long and as it's a commercial party (BC Lions) they do have the extra right as a private business to withhold its refusal. If anything the story could have ripped the Lions and Pavco for stalling as it's a contract and as someone who headed FOI and and other statutory functions for a crown corp, 4 years is rubbish to come to terms with it's release.

If anything the story leaves the reader to make sense of the deal.

There was a fear on some fans that I agreed with when Gordon Campbell was in office and that he'd dump BC Place as fans criticized and build condos and businesses on that site and improve his gov't coffers. Campbell is a bit of a sports fan or was in the past.

No one has done any media analysis as to whether this is a good or bad deal and no one has compared the Lions contract to the private owned Canucks and how they own their own building.

If there was any slant in the article I didn't get it. He just puts it out there with the details.

By the way, PAVCO need the Lions to give them dates with folks in seats and buying hotdogs.

What I don't get is, if it wasn't a hatchet job, why didn't he try to find the Whitecaps numbers? They're a pro team renting the same public facility, too. Why does he only care about the team owned by a guy who's very visible in his lack of political alignment to The Tyee? It comes off as disingenuous to go through all this FOI rigamarole to get only the Lions numbers and cloak it as being out of concern for the taxpayer. As I already said, there's room for a political discussion on this if teams are getting cheap, sweetheart rent @BCP but his methods don't strike me as unbiased. It's as if the Whitecaps don't even exist in BM's world, whereas TM, on whose radio show BM has appeared several times, would have you believe they're a bigger deal than the Lions.

[sj-roc]

IMO Pavco overspent on the renovations. Why replace the original seats in the end zones and upper deck when they should have had the roomier seats as a perk for season ticket holders only, in other words just new seating for the lower deck between the 20 yard lines.

Was there actually any improvement in the washrooms? There sure were big half time lineups with the near sell out at the Grey Cup.

As I recall, the washrooms were upgraded in time for the 2009 season before the building closed for roof renovations. I don't know how much they changed things overall (there might have been invisible plumbing upgrades), but the only visible change I noticed was these large "sink islands" in the centre of all the men's rooms, at least the ones I've been in. Not sure what, if anything, they ever did with the women's rooms.

As for the seats it seems they were going for an overall colour scheme with red with varying shades of brown scattered throughout, which would have been compromised with the retention of any of the old blue ones. IIRC, the seats in the 300 level club section are even roomier again and also padded, so there's your seating perk — reserved for the highest price point.

[Hambone]

Re: the seats

BC Place is not a CFL only facility. Thus when it came to seat size in the reno thay had to consider all events the facility is intended to attract. Lions, CFL, concerts etc. Can't sit there and decide to go cheap on the end seats because it may help one tenant make their other seating options more attractive.

[DanoT]

Re: the seats

BC Place is not a CFL only facility. Thus when it came to seat size in the reno thay had to consider all events the facility is intended to attract. Lions, CFL, concerts etc. Can't sit there and decide to go cheap on the end seats because it may help one tenant make their other seating options more attractive.

I can't think of any events that utilize the end zone seats in any significant way. AFAIK most other non spectator sporting events such as RV or Home or Sportsman shows utilize the floor and concourse.

It just occurred to me that maybe soccer fans like the end zone seats as it is not likely that they are going to miss out on getting a good view of all the scoring (lack of scoring) at the other end of the field.

[sj-roc]

Re: the seats

BC Place is not a CFL only facility. Thus when it came to seat size in the reno thay had to consider all events the facility is intended to attract. Lions, CFL, concerts etc. Can't sit there and decide to go cheap on the end seats because it may help one tenant make their other seating options more attractive.

I can't think of any events that utilize the end zone seats in any significant way. AFAIK most other non spectator sporting events such as RV or Home or Sportsman shows utilize the floor and concourse.

It just occurred to me that maybe soccer fans like the end zone seats as it is not likely that they are going to miss out on getting a good view of all the scoring (lack of scoring) at the other end of the field.

That's where the Southsiders supporters group sit (above the dressing rooms). I've seen pictures of them amongst a sea of banners so big (we're talking bigger than tablecloths) that surely some of the fans in that area can't even see the field at all. The Ticketmaster seat map even warns that the view in that area may be obstructed.

[B.C.FAN]

IMO Pavco overspent on the renovations. Why replace the original seats in the end zones and upper deck when they should have had the roomier seats as a perk for season ticket holders only, in other words just new seating for the lower deck between the 20 yard lines.

Season ticket holders sit in all sections, not just between the 20s. In my area, the lower rows of Section 253 and 254 in the middle of the end zone, most seats have been held by the same season ticket holders for 15 years or more. And we needed the new wider plastic seats to accommodate our own (human) seats that have gotten wider over the years.