KeaneyBlue - The URI Basketball Forum

http://www.providence.edu/finance-busin ... ation.aspx

Someone tell me why a college that has the money to make their hockey rink so nice is basically getting a freebie when it comes to playing basketball at the renovated Dunk? Its not like the state of RI is swimming in money.

I would like to see a study to see what other similar basketball programs are paying in rent and see if the State is getting true market rate, or if PC is getting a special deal due to all their friends in the RI government.

Vanity corner, please.

PC pays around $30K per use, on average about $480,000 per season. What do you think most schools pay for public facility usage?

more importantly; what do the P-Bruins pay? WWE? Ringling Bros.?

Just URI fans piling crap on PC...

Well, the WWE and the Ringling Bros probably pay a higher rate due to volumn of usage.

I would bet the PBruins, being a private, for-profit enterprise, pay a higher rate as well, but that's just a guess.

What do you think UConn pays to use the XL?

EasyEdBrown wrote:Well, the WWE and the Ringling Bros probably pay a higher rate due to volumn of usage.

I would bet the PBruins, being a private, for-profit enterprise, pay a higher rate as well, but that's just a guess.

What do you think UConn pays to use the XL?

It's hard to say, UCONN pays maybe half their home games at XL? So say they pay 40K instead of 30K, they are still only paying about $360K per season. The only way the argument really applies is if UCONN is paying $60K+ per game.

And don't forget, for every PC game at the Dunk, PC is pushing the usage of state parking facilities. That's probably another $300+K per season. Last time I went to the HCC, I believe most lots surrounding the facility were private.

Bill Reynolds in Projo stated that PC pays about $17,000 a game in an article about 4 years ago and I doubt the rent went up. The seats are painted black and their are PC murals all over. It was if PC was given the design they wanted and the state picked up the tab. That is why they built a fancy locker room for PC basketball. Unlike the P-Bruins who did not want the dunk fixed over for fear the rent would go up. I do believe the Dunk gets the concessions.

Even if PC pays $30k a game, which I doubt, it would be are cheaper than spending $100 million building your own building. That would cost about $5 million a year at minimum. By contrast the Ryan Center cost $52 million, $18 M from the state, $15 from private donations, and $21 from a bond being paid by student fees. Just think if the State of RI picked up the whole tab of the Ryan Center, URI could have used the money to create a football stadium, new outdoor track, baseball stands, and maybe new pool complex.

rjsuperfly66 wrote:

EasyEdBrown wrote:Well, the WWE and the Ringling Bros probably pay a higher rate due to volumn of usage.

I would bet the PBruins, being a private, for-profit enterprise, pay a higher rate as well, but that's just a guess.

What do you think UConn pays to use the XL?

It's hard to say, UCONN pays maybe half their home games at XL? So say they pay 40K instead of 30K, they are still only paying about $360K per season. The only way the argument really applies is if UCONN is paying $60K+ per game.

And don't forget, for every PC game at the Dunk, PC is pushing the usage of state parking facilities. That's probably another $300+K per season. Last time I went to the HCC, I believe most lots surrounding the facility were private.

Yeah but for me, per game is more important. If UConn is paying $50k, and PC is paying $17k...that's a pretty stark difference no matter how many games UConn plays at XL.

EasyEdBrown wrote:

rjsuperfly66 wrote:

EasyEdBrown wrote:Well, the WWE and the Ringling Bros probably pay a higher rate due to volumn of usage.

I would bet the PBruins, being a private, for-profit enterprise, pay a higher rate as well, but that's just a guess.

What do you think UConn pays to use the XL?

It's hard to say, UCONN pays maybe half their home games at XL? So say they pay 40K instead of 30K, they are still only paying about $360K per season. The only way the argument really applies is if UCONN is paying $60K+ per game.

And don't forget, for every PC game at the Dunk, PC is pushing the usage of state parking facilities. That's probably another $300+K per season. Last time I went to the HCC, I believe most lots surrounding the facility were private.

Yeah but for me, per game is more important. If UConn is paying $50k, and PC is paying $17k...that's a pretty stark difference no matter how many games UConn plays at XL.

Well I'm pretty confident in saying that PC is paying at at least $30K, those are the numbers that have been quoted to me in the past. UCONN pays $50K per game to play at XL. UCONN's agreement for next season says they will play 9 games there. 50Kx9=$450,000. Providence plays 16 games at home next season. $30Kx16=$480,000.

Until you can come with concrete hard numbers; your argument holds little water other than the usual jealousy and sour grapes.

You'd think such public information regarding a state-owned, taxpayer funded facility would be ... ahem... very public. The taxpayers (the few the proud in RI) should be very concerned over the revenue generation by this very expensive renovation.

ATPTourFan wrote:You'd think such public information regarding a state-owned, taxpayer funded facility would be ... ahem... very public. The taxpayers (the few the proud in RI) should be very concerned over the revenue generation by this very expensive renovation.

They should be, but I assume the way to get around it is that the rental is a contract between a private management company (SMG) and a private university (Providence College).

I'm willing to bet that it would be easier to find out what the RICCA pays SMG to manage the facility than it would be to find out how much Providence College pays to play basketball there.

seanmc94 wrote:Until you can come with concrete hard numbers; your argument holds little water other than the usual jealousy and sour grapes.

Instead of guessing...why don't you do some homework?

seanmc94 wrote:Instead of guessing...why don't you do some homework?

Because personally, I don't think it's a huge conspiracy between the state, Providence College, and the Squimm Group (We Keep You Alive) to cut deals for PC to screw RI taxpayers.

But I did some Google searches and couldn't find anything credible, so I've done all the leg work that I'm willing to do considering I don't care much. I have a family and stuff. I supposed I could file a FOIA request, but it really isn't worth it for me.

Since you seem to be asking though, and I think you're unquoted post above was directed towards me, do you see any criticism of Providence College or the state in my posting? Because what I see is just thinking out loud to the questions others posed.

My daughter, who might be very young but is extremely curious, did ask me why Providence College stood for all the evil in the world and was full of corruption and malice. I told her to do some homework. Kids say the darnedest things.

PC basketball-related revenues give the state more than $800,000K per season between ticket sales and parking rates, fact, not opinion. So your opinion is that it is not sufficient, correct? What would be appropriate to you? 5 million? 10 million?

How about you start your search here ... Figure out what URI was paying per game before they moved to the RC. Was it significantly greater than $30K per game? If it were the same, then your conspiracy about state favoritism is invalid. If URI was paying $60K for their half-season and PC was paying $30K for their full season, then maybe your point is possible.

Are you talking to me here? I made no such argument and very specifically said there was no conspiracy.

I would be interested to see a link to your $800k figure though because that is a higher than expected number.

I'm about 99.9% positive and have heard from very good people in the past that PC pays $30,000 per event. With an average of 16 home games per season, that is $480,000.

PC also arranges deals with season ticket holders to park in the city lots for $10 per game. Last I heard, through this prepaid deal and estimated garage traffic in the area, about 2,000 cars were parking on average per game in state lots. 2,000 cars * 16 home games * $10 to park = $320,000.

$480,000+$320,000=$800,000 on average.

Last year for example, there was 18 games including NIT. $540,000+$360,000 = $900,000.

Not an exact science just numbers that have been given to me in the past. Not going to dive into concessions because I'm sure concessions mostly cover the expense of the building (utilities, etc.) + hourly wages.

RJ, I can see your logic here. Thanks for the breakdown. I would feel better just having an official document to confirm. It seems plausible, for sure.

You want an official document on anything in RI?
Good luck with that

The entire Dunkin Donuts Center purchase and renovation was a sweetheart deal for PC proposed and pushed for by Friar supporters that held key positions. The RI Convnetion Center first propsed buying the venue and renovating it. Its chairman was David Duffy, a prominent PC alumnus that was the business partner of the current PC President. The vice-chairman was Dave Gavitt, former PC basketball coach and Athletic Director. Montalbano, a longtime PC season ticketholder was the Senate President who had the muscle to get it through with no voter approval and little discussion. Additional monies was even later quickly found for significant cost overruns for the renovations at a time when the budget was very tight and services including education were being cut. Contrast that to the Ryan center which was being built during good times with budget surpluses. The height of the Ryan Center was lowered quite a bit to make certain it came in under budget.

PC pays rent and its events add to the tax base of the state. I however contend that the rate they are paying does not cover all the costs of this project. It was already a given that the DDC could not even generate enough revenues on its own with rosy booking projections to meet future bond obligations and would require a state subsidy. God only knows with this bad economy over the last several years and its likely negative effect on arena revenues, what the true expense of the DDC really is. Unlike the Ryan Center which makes up the difference for revenue/expenses from its own sources (such as student fees), the DDC can only seek more money from RI taxpayers.

PC was smart enough to know that arenas rarely ever pay for themselves and can be a drain on operating budgets. They knew that getting the state of RI and its taxpayers to subsidize a facility with them paying nominal rent was a far better prospect than taking it on themselves. That is why they so aggressively promoted the project. They are not concerned with making up any operating losses and paying off a mortgage and instead can put the money directly into their hoops program and be able to pay their coach in excess of 1 million per year. A small school like PC could not have come up with the monies for a facility and still be able to invest in their program. Something would have had to give. Getting a facility on the back of the taxpayers was the best course of action for them and their present and future student base, 90% of which come from out of state and will never pay significant txes to RI to pay for the DDC.

My only question to you is why would PC pay for the upgrades themselves? They aren't the only tenants of the building (P-Bruins, other events), and their only revenue from the Dunk comes from ticket sale profits exceeding the cost of rent. They aren't sole benefactors, and play a measly 16 games per season there. There is no monetary benefit for them to assist in payment for a building they receive zero revenues from, it's not like they are playing bad guy here. Fact is, these upgrades have helped more than you have given credit for. The NCAA Tournament in 2009 brought millions upon millions of dollars to the city and surrounding communities, money that wouldn't have been made with the upgrades. Did PC see any of that money? No, they just got their name on a banner.

I'm sure PC pushed for the project (in terms of the fact the Dunk was a Dump), but in no means are they sole beneficiary from upgrades, and they still pay in their nearly $500K in rent per season anyway. When the upgrades help you, there are no complaints...

Many of the upgrades were specific to PC. Their benefit is not in making money, but in saving money from not having to build their own facility. $500K (if that's the number) is not a net to the dunk, but the gross rent received. If PC had to pay for the management, and maintenance as well, it would be closer to the costs of maintaining your own venue.
You can't white wash this. To their credit they were able to get a sweetheart deal that will continue to cost the taxpayers of RI for years to come. It's all about perception. To the taxpayers of RI, URI gets a negative view, while PC gets a free ride.

What improvements were made just for PC? Video Scoreboard? Helps every event in the venue. More concourse space? Same thing. More concessions? Helps every event. Improved Lighting? Helps Every Event. Luxury Suites? Used every event at the Dunk. Remodeled bathrooms? Same result. The connection to the Convention Center? Don't even know why it was needed but wouldn't say it helps PC.

The only thing you could really argue solely benefitted PC was updated basketball locker rooms, even though every locker room space was improved.

Fact was, many of the improvements PC might have pushed for, these don't just benefit the Friars but every team, concert, or activity that enters the Dunkin Donuts Center.

Forget the improvements. Just look at the big picture with honest eyes, and call me in the morning.

So long as PC is paying a fair market, arms-length rental I see no problem with the Dunk's improvements....it benefits every event in the arena...hockey, concerts, circuses, etc.

I think Brown is the technical host for the NCAA hockey tournaments there....

.....sometimes renting is better than owning for business purposes....there are trade-offs each way,

RAM67 wrote:Forget the improvements. Just look at the big picture with honest eyes, and call me in the morning.

I think you can say the same thing about many schools though. UCONN has pushed for hundreds of millions of dollars of renovations to the XL Center. This summer, they began another $35 million extravaganza to update. Is it slightly different because UCONN is a state school? Sure. But in the end, the school pays zip and they are the ones who keep pushing it. Why? Because they are trying to become players for the AAC Championship. It's more burden on the taxpayers, but helps the Connecticut Whale, UCONN sports, and all other concerts, activities, etc., so does anyone say boo? Of course not.

'Is it slightly different because UCONN is a state school?"
"slightly" is a little understatement.

RAM67 wrote:'Is it slightly different because UCONN is a state school?"
"slightly" is a little understatement.

It's still a situation where a team, whether PC or UCONN, had legitimate concerns of the long-term care of an aging building. Both schools have very small pieces in that stake of the building though, UCONN plays roughly half of their home games there, PC plays all of their home games at the Dunk. At the end of the day, upgrading the facilities goes far beyond PC or UCONN, it goes for the betterment of all events at that arena. You don't think the P-Bruins were equally as excited about the upgrades, seeing as how they play 41 home games per season? Do you think the P-Bruins offered to hand over a dime as well? They play there 41 times and bring in an average attendance not far off from PC, heck one year (maybe 3 years ago) it even beat them over those 41 games.

PC is just a renter, the concerns were still valid though.

rjsuperfly66 wrote:

RAM67 wrote:'Is it slightly different because UCONN is a state school?"
"slightly" is a little understatement.

Do you think the P-Bruins offered to hand over a dime as well? They play there 41 times and bring in an average attendance not far off from PC, heck one year (maybe 3 years ago) it even beat them over those 41 games.

I am sure that the Providence Bruins were thrilled when they were told that the DDC was going to be remodelled at no cost to them and the rent was going to basically stay the same. Improvements are great when there is no cost to the user.

It would be interesting to see how much the rent was raised for entities to use the DDC after all the improvements were made. One would think the venue was more desirable after the remodel making it easier to sell tickets. It should then have been very reasonable to make significant increases in the rent to help pay for the improvements.

The Dunk was a City of Providence owned building. The State of RI would either have to be crazy or partial, to say the least, on having PC have a nice basketball arena. When PC grads run the House Finance Committee I vote for Partial and not crazy. The State should not be in the business of entertainment, and I know what you are going to say, why did the put money into the Ryan Center. The State only came up with 1/3 of the money for the Ryan Center and last I looked ,but it is hard to see, the University is still a State Institution (6% of operating budget if that counts). The City of Prov should have fixed it up not the State, and the Dunk project was never on a bond issue where the voters had a chance to approve. There is so much fuss about Studio 38, but the Dunk will end up costing the State of RI a lot more by far than the Studio 38 deal, and also, all of PC's revenue for basketball is tax free, so you can't call this economic development.

OBRAM wrote:The Dunk was a City of Providence owned building. The State of RI would either have to be crazy or partial, to say the least, on having PC have a nice basketball arena. When PC grads run the House Finance Committee I vote for Partial and not crazy. The State should not be in the business of entertainment, and I know what you are going to say, why did the put money into the Ryan Center. The State only came up with 1/3 of the money for the Ryan Center and last I looked ,but it is hard to see, the University is still a State Institution (6% of operating budget if that counts). The City of Prov should have fixed it up not the State, and the Dunk project was never on a bond issue where the voters had a chance to approve. There is so much fuss about Studio 38, but the Dunk will end up costing the State of RI a lot more by far than the Studio 38 deal, and also, all of PC's revenue for basketball is tax free, so you can't call this economic development.

i didn't realize the only events at the dunk were PC games. the city of providence (and the state) are both jokes financially, but it is really tough to argue that having the dunk in providence isn't valuable to both the city and state. to argue otherwise is foolish.

peeps4life wrote:i didn't realize the only events at the dunk were PC games. the city of providence (and the state) are both jokes financially, but it is really tough to argue that having the dunk in providence isn't valuable to both the city and state. to argue otherwise is foolish.

No one is arguing that there are not some benefits to having a refurbished arena in Providence. The question is whether the cost to purchase and renovate the DDC was worth it. The rosy booking predictions pre-great recession already were projecting that revenues would not be enough to fully pay down the debtload. A state subsidy would be required. God only knows what that siubsidy is now given the RI economy cratered.

While the facility ultimately has many tenants, PC was the tenant making the big push for the state to take over the DDC and renovate it. It used all its connections to get this done and anyone who can't see that is being foolishly blind and ignorant.

Yes, the city should have a good facility like the Dunk. Should the State have come to the rescue, I don't think so, there were other needs far greater, roads, and business climate to reduce taxes. Fixing over the Dunk did not help either.

Wasn't 195 in the beginning stages of renovation at the same time the Dunk was being upgraded? It was also during that time where plans and decisions were made at TF Green for new garages and trains, etc. if memory serves correct. That isn't privatized, is it? I'm really not sure.

You can always argue $$ spent here would better be spent there, but I don't see it as the state ignoring all public infrastructure issues/concerns and putting all of their eggs into the downtown arena. Seems there have been pretty massive undertakings that occured before, during, and after those renovations.

The state does benefit from the improved arena financially, maybe no in terms of taxes, but definitely in terms of increased revenue in the area. NCAA Tournament a few years back was a home run for the state, and that is just one example.

Well, URI wanted a new basketball facility. What did it have to do? URI had to raise most of the money for the Ryan Center, maybe 70%+ when you consider interest expense to build it. PC wanted a fixed over Dunk, make a few phone calls, and get their political influence to get The Dunk fixed over and only pay a token rental fee. If URI had as much political pull, the RI Convention Center could have build the Ryan Center and Hotel on the URI Campus for the many conferences that it host during the year. (Actually a Hotel at URI would be a good idea, try to find a hotel room in South Kingstown in the summer). So, now that you have the Dunk fixed over, PC should be paying their fair share, which should be well over $1 million a year, after all they can pay their coach $1 million a year. Also, PC being in the Big East with new TV contracts, is a for profit entity disguised as non-profit. Since when should the State subsidize for Profit entities with no hope of ever getting tax revenue from it. Tell me who benefits more from a fixed over Dunk than PC. Nobody, the PBruins did not want it. So pay baby, pay! This PC deal is better than want Studio 38 got.

the pbruins "did not want it".... ummmmmmm.

i'm more angry that my state gave more money to curt schilling than to the dunk. we actually get something out of the dunk.

Yes, PBruins did not want a fixed over Dunk if it meant their rent was going to go up. I don't know if the rent did or did not go up after the renovations for PBruins.

The P-Bruins benefit by amount of usage. They play there more than 35 times. They got to host an AHL All-Star game. Attendance has gone up every year. The year before the renovation was complete, attendance was 6,100 (which was down from 6,800 it had 2 years prior and 6,600 the year before). However, the trend has gone:

6,100 (year before finished) - 6,300 - 6,700 - 7,300 - 7,800 - 8,200

So is it just coincidence that in the years following the renovation, attendance has increased by 35% for the PBruins? I believe their average attendance has also beaten PC over the past 3 seasons, and they play more than double the games there and pay less rent to be there.

I'd say the P-Bruins have done alright for themselves.

I'm more excited for the new PC state-of-the-art on-campus practice facility though. That's what the increase in revenue gets you.

I don't think people go to see the PBruins because the Dunk was fixed over, it has to to more with it being the Boston Bruin franchise and the Boston Bruins doing better. My point is the Dunk was fixed over for PC basket ball, not P Bruins, and it it were for the P Bruins the seats would be Gold not Black, like they are in the TDBank Boston Garden.

ob... the pbruins aren't black and gold? the two biggest tenants have black in their colors and the color plays better in the arena.

i can't believe i'm going to ask the question... but you really think that the $90M reno was for none other than PC? no one else benefits? you are pretty much being a clown if you stick to your guns on this one.

Not getting involved in any of this, but I have to ask Peeps...
who is that in your avatar? I can't figure out if it's a male or female going nuts.

it is governor deval patrick's sign language lady from blizzard closings last winter.

Hilarious!

Looks like I was wrong, PBruins aren't Black and Gold, they are Gold and Black.
http://www.providencebruins.com/FrontPage/Index

And yes, I believe that if PC did not play basketball in the Dunk it either would not have been fixed over, or the renovations would have been on the order of $20 million instead of $90 (all borrowed money) million (maybe done by the City) and the State would not have purchased it for $27 million from the City, and the reason is the Chairman of the House Finance Committee on Smith Hill, which controls all the money, was a PC grad and former PC Alumni Association President, Tim Welsh said he would leave as coach if it was not fixed up ( I saw him say that on TV), and not last, Gavitt was the Chairman of the RICC at the time. PC Basketball was the driving force to fix over the Dunk, but the General Assembly could not advertise it like that, so they had to use the argument that the connection to the Convention Center to the Dunk would create synergy that would attract more conventions, which as we know did not happen.

OK, I think the City of Providence should have a nice Center, but if this argument is true then it is true that the State University should not have:
1. An outside Track that is condemned
2. Football facilities that are 40 years old.
3. No stands for the Baseball field
4. Fine Arts building that is a disgrace
5. Pool complex that is 40 years old and never renovated

But if Private money is used at a State University to fix over the baseball field, tennis courts, West Stands at Meade, Student Development Center, Ryan Center (70% Private money), then should a Private College that is using the Dunk not pay their fare share to use a State paid facility especially since they are the main tenant? As it stands PC pays a token rental fee.

OBRAM, I agree with 90% of what you had to say. PC was the primary driving force for the Dunk. They used the mask of "We need a top notch facility and it will benefit the entire state," but of course they were all things that benefitted them. The P-Bruins equally benefit, but could have cared less if the renovation was performed. While I love the Ryan Center, I think it would still benefit URI to use the Dunk as a downtown facility for "bigger" games, especially as the team improves to an NCAA level. There are plenty of teams who venture from their campus venue to a downtown venue for big games, just to attract bigger crowds and get a bigger game feel. If you put 13,000 blue shirts into black seats, it's the same home court advantage, just with double the attendance.

As for the facilities, I agree that they are disgraceful. Having been to many Brown/URI football games, it's painfully terrible to see the state of that football field. The argument around building a newer field can go both ways -- why construct a new field for a failing program or how can you assess the state of the program with terrible facilities? While I agree that public money should be used for some of those buildings, some of them (like football) will be tough to support, not just my opinion, but who would want their $$ going to a football program that they don't necessarily care about and couldn't play their way out of a paper bag? To get stuff done, you have to strike when the iron is hot. Do you think PC would have gotten those big renovation plans if they weren't coming off a season where they at one point were #12 in the country and a #5 seed in the NCAA?

As PC's average attendance improves, I also believe their rent should increase. However, no one has ever proven how "token" the PC rental is. PC pays between $25-30K per use for an entire season. The only comp listed is UCONN paying $50K per use for a half season. However, we would all agree UCONN is not a comparable program. They sell out nearly every game and are a "national" program. If in UCONN's 9 games at XL they drew 50-60% capacity, they would be not be paying such a high figure. The only comparable part to both programs is the fact they both pushed the state for their "downtown" facility to see millions in dollars of renovations.

Does anyone ever believe this? This was from an XL Center article written in June: "The goal of the investment is to increase customer enjoyment, lower operating expenses, and find ways to boost revenue through concessions and advertising, Freimuth said."

I don't think you will see URI playing any home games at the Dunk, especially now with all the PC murals, PC Banners hanging down, and black accents. I do remember a UMass vs URI at the Prov Civic Center in 1993 I believe when Kellogg was a player and we needed the win to go on to the NCAA that year and play Purdue and UNC, it was a rocking crowd.

I don't know what the figure is for PC to play at the Dunk, I have seen Projo write that it was 15,000 a game, and someone told me it was closer to $18,000 a game where the Dunk got the concessions, either way anything short of $600,000 a year is a bargain considering how much it would cost to build your own facility and how much money PC brings in revenue from Big East Contracts, and how financially strapped the State of RI is.

So let's say in a perfect world we both agree that PC should pay more to play at the Dunk since they pushed so hard for the renovations, etc. Where are the comps for what they should pay? The HCC/XL has received hundreds of millions in renovations with UCONN being the primary focus. They pay no assistance towards the building and 450k per season for those 9 games they play there. Throwing out that anything less than 600K is pure speculation and opinion. You have to look at what other programs do and what they pay for the same setup. PC obviously pays less than UCONN but is a lesser program.