Vancouver Expansion Thread - News, articles, discussion

Discussion in 'Vancouver Whitecaps' started by canuckred, Apr 24, 2008.

  1. canuckred

    canuckred Member

    Dec 15, 2007
    There have been quite a few storys out about the new Vancouver Waterfront stadium in the past few days. There didn't seem like an good place to put them so I created this thread.

    http://www.whitecapsfc.com/archive/feature04230801.aspx
     
  2. roger_cliveston

    roger_cliveston New Member

    Apr 17, 2008
    Canada
    The sad part is Vancouver will be waiting for quite some time for MLS to arrive. Montreal will be the second Canadian team....Caps?
     
  3. canuckred

    canuckred Member

    Dec 15, 2007
    http://www.whitecapsfc.com/archive/feature04240802.aspx
     
  4. ken0sha

    ken0sha Member

    AS Roma and Whitecaps FC
    United States
    Dec 29, 2006
    Somewhere between Madison and Vancouver
    Club:
    Vancouver Whitecaps
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Perhaps Greg Kerfoot is making a mistake by trying to do this without taxpayer dollars.

    Philadelphia, Toronto, Salt Lake City, and Montreal all have stadiums built, planned or under construction with government subsidy. What's in it for the politician if he/she can't get the photo op cutting a ribbon or have something to champion publicly and tell you how they are spending our $$$ efficiently on big buildings that get used 30 times per year and make money for people who tend to have high net worths?

    Sarcasm intended here.

    God forbid a philanthropist like Greg Kerfoot helps transform a under utilized area of town with a stadium.
     
  5. canuckred

    canuckred Member

    Dec 15, 2007
    Thing seem to be rolling on the stadium front a bit... (finally)

    http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/sports/story.html?id=a9aa6813-3501-4ef6-836f-538660f12198
     
  6. canuckred

    canuckred Member

    Dec 15, 2007
    http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/...78cc78-2d8e-48df-93e3-1a3946518800&k=4133&p=2
     
  7. ken0sha

    ken0sha Member

    AS Roma and Whitecaps FC
    United States
    Dec 29, 2006
    Somewhere between Madison and Vancouver
    Club:
    Vancouver Whitecaps
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
  8. Johnnie Monster

    Jul 9, 2005
    Richmond, BC
    Several news outlets here are reporting that the provincial government will announce major renovation plans for BC Place stadium tomorrow, including a retractable roof which will be finished by 2011.

    The Vancouver Whitecaps are apparently participating in the government's press conference, fuelling recent speculation that the Caps are moving from Swangard to BC Place.

    The question now is whether Caps intend to settle at BC Place permanently, or if it will just be a temporary home until their own SSS land issues can be resolved.

    There have been some very recent indications in the past week from the political backrooms that if the Caps can't come to an agreement with the Port Authority for the proposed waterfront stadium site(s), the city will make land available to the Caps near Main & Terminal (which is a short distance from the downtown core and our other sports centres, BC Place and GM Place).

    At any rate, it makes no financial sense at all for the Caps to move from Swangard to BC Place unless they've been promised MLS. This is a 60,000 seat venue, after all. Rent there does not come cheap.

    Rivals Seattle and Toronto are in already, and Montreal also seems likely....

    Could Garber be on the next plane to the west coast?
     
  9. tab5g

    tab5g Member+

    May 17, 2002
    http://web.mlsnet.com/news/mls_news.jsp?ymd=20080516&content_id=158409&vkey=pr_mls&fext=.jsp

    -------------
    05/16/2008 01:05AM
    Commissioner's Vancouver statement
    Garber comments on stadium renovation announcement
    Major League Soccer Communications


    Following today's announcement in Vancouver that BC Place will undergo renovations, Major League Soccer Commissioner Don Garber issued the following statement:

    "We believe Vancouver is a potential market for a future Major League Soccer expansion team. There is no doubt the market for professional soccer exists in Vancouver, as we saw last November when nearly 50,000 fans attended the exhibition match between the Los Angeles Galaxy and the Whitecaps.

    "We understand the newly renovated BC Place Stadium will be a world-class facility. We look forward to learning more about the proposed renovations so that we may determine whether BC Place can serve as an interim venue for an MLS team pending the construction of a soccer-specific stadium.

    "MLS will have 16 teams by 2010 with the addition of Seattle next year and Philadelphia the following season. We are currently in discussions with potential expansion team owners and local governments in many markets across North America regarding the 17th and 18th teams.

    We look forward to continuing our discussions with the Whitecaps regarding the opportunity to award a Major League Soccer expansion team to Vancouver in the future."
    ---------------------------
     
  10. GOALSeattle

    GOALSeattle Member

    Oct 13, 2007
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    There you have it:
    http://www.whitecapsfc.com/archive/feature05160801.aspx

    VANCOUVER, BC - Vancouver Whitecaps FC announced today their intention to pursue a lease agreement in a renovated BC Place Stadium, which is scheduled to open in early 2011. The move would afford the Whitecaps the opportunity to continue to host major soccer matches and also enter the race for one of the last Major League Soccer (MLS) franchises, whilst continuing to pursue the construction of the proposed soccer-specific Whitecaps Waterfront Stadium on downtown Vancouver’s central waterfront and rail lands.

    The Whitecaps have been pursuing plans to build a 15,000 - 20,000-seat waterfront stadium in downtown Vancouver since 2003. In December 2007, the club released a four-year strategic plan, Vision 2011, which identified several opportunities contingent upon the completion of the proposed stadium, or the availability of another suitable facility.

    “The decision to pursue a lease in a refurbished BC Place is a necessary adjustment to course,” said Whitecaps president Bob Lenarduzzi. “It is a result of the long negotiation and approval timeline for our proposed waterfront stadium, combined with the shortening window of opportunity to secure an MLS expansion franchise.”
     
  11. Sport Billy

    Sport Billy Moderator
    Staff Member

    May 25, 2006
    In the big picture, I don't think it means much.

    I would still think it keeps them behind St. Louis and Montreal and slightly behind or even with NY2.

    I guess it's better than nothing for Vancouver fans.

    On a side note, MLS never learns, you cannot award teams on the PROMISE of a SSS.

    I think there's room for Vancouver, but I see them being team 19-22. Preferably with a SSS and not a temporary venue. Though it is nicer than most temporary venues.
     
  12. GOALSeattle

    GOALSeattle Member

    Oct 13, 2007
    Seattle
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States


    Both the league and the Whitecaps are positioning themselves to be Toronto FC's Canadian 'counterbalance' out west, and Kerfoot has far more money than anyone involved with St. Louis.
     
  13. SounderMan

    SounderMan Member

    Nov 8, 2006
    Lacey WA
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Oh the howling out of St. Louis if this happens before Cooper gets his shit together. BC place is another stadium option that could handle crowds bigger than the 20,000 that most teams are setting their sights on. Let's see........ Billions of dollars, large renovated stadium, West Coast Canadian location, built in rivalry with Seattle and San Jose that dates back to 1974...... hmm.
     
  14. studzup

    studzup New Member

    Nov 11, 2007
    Winthrop;Kinsale,IRE
    And when you think about it, what has St. Louis ever done for American soccer?

    Oh, that's right. This is no longer about American soccer.

    Sorry.

    My bad.
     
  15. hipityhop

    hipityhop Member

    New Mexico United
    United States
    Jan 10, 1999
    Mission TX
    Club:
    SønderjyskE
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    St Louis can be there, if they get a stadium and deep pockets for the owner. Otherwise, St Louis can shut up, if Montreal, Vancouver and Portland step up first with the stadiums and the cash.... MLS would be foolish not to take them.

    Forget that notion of a second NYC team for at least 10 years..... that's pie in the sky with no owners or stadium possible...
     
  16. NF-FC

    NF-FC Member

    Nov 28, 2006
    Niagara Falls
    Club:
    --other--
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    realistically, anyone who actually believes that the league will be capped at 18 teams is insane. Right now we have big contenders in Montreal, Vancouver, St.Louis, New York City, Portland, and Miami. We're not talking about Rochester or San antonio anymore. Garber will not turn away all of these Big time cities, he's just playing them off each other to get a bigger expansion fee. I'm not saying get them all in now, but steady expansion into these markets is a must.
     
  17. bright

    bright Member

    Dec 28, 2000
    Central District
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Except Portland is a lot like Rochester. They play in a baseball stadium, and the Timbers only really came into existence to sweeten the deal with the city for the Beavers to get renovations in 2001 to PGE Park, said baseball stadium. Also, ownership is saddled with the baseball team due to the deal with the city for those very renovations. And now the ownership is asking the city for additional money for relatively inexpensive renovations (relative to what most MLS owners are able to afford on their own). While the Timbers have a fan group that is good at promoting itself, the team doesn't enjoy the same level of attendance that Rochester did in the days when people were calling for them to go up. And the organization as a whole is cash-poor. They traditionally have one of the cheapest payrolls in the USL. If St. Louis, a true soccer city, can't get into MLS with a stadium deal already approved by a local community, how can Portland get in? They still have a lot of work to do to be considered even ahead of Rochester, who actually has a stadium and now an owner with some cash. The Rhinos are even able to afford to field a women's team. And I don't think Rochester is really viable for MLS relative to the other candidates out there. Just trying to point out that right now Portland is in the same boat, or even worse.

    - Paul
     
  18. the shelts

    the shelts Member+

    Jun 30, 2005
    Providence RI
    Club:
    Nottingham Forest FC
    Take this for what it is worth............I am simply an anonymous poster on big soccer but

    I know for a fact. A FACT. That Vancouver was told last June that if they got a stadium ( a real stadium ) then they are in MLS if they want to join. After that Garber flew out for a visit with his wife and two others from MLS.

    Don Garber, the billionaire, Lenarduzzi and a number of others (wives, some politician, flunkies, friends etc) all had dinner at the Earls on Robson St in Vancouver. It was or about August 12, 2007. Garber flew in, met some locals, did a tour, went to a couple of meetings in the Pan Pacific and told them that all Vancouver needed was 2 things.

    1/ check to cover expansion fees
    2/ stadium not named Swangard

    There was a representative from Sportsnet Pacific and BCTV who both agreed that tv rights were a lock. You will notice that some bigger announcements about the residency program and the PDL happened around this time.

    I also know that Seattle and Portland were mentioned in the meeting. Originally the idea that all 3 hit the league together was something that would be a "good to have" but was unworkable.
     
  19. PopsKrock

    PopsKrock New Member

    Jul 18, 2007
    Belleville
    Club:
    AC St. Louis
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    MLS said almost the same thing to St. Louis the day of the stadium vote. So...
     
  20. SounderMan

    SounderMan Member

    Nov 8, 2006
    Lacey WA
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The Difference................ Kerfoot's cash situation and BC Place is already built.
     
  21. Baracuda

    Baracuda Member

    Feb 17, 2002
    Portland Oregon
    Club:
    Portland Timbers
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Rochester is waaay off the MLS expansion radar these days :rolleyes: No comparison to Portland's situation at all.

    I also wonder why Paulsen doesn't just pay for everything himself, His partner/dad are really rich. Makes me wonder how involved his dad is in the bid for MLS.

    Paulsen is going to give details of his plans next month. We'll see....

    Now for something Vancouver related :D I wonder if Portland and Vancouver are going to be pitted against each other for an expansion team, or if they are both in when they get their ducks in a row?

    Peace

    P.S. The lady Pilots would kick the Rochester lady's ass! :cool:
     
  22. bright

    bright Member

    Dec 28, 2000
    Central District
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think Portland was for a short while a serious option for MLS, although even then I think they were just on the list to really stir the competition. Now with the maneuvering in Vancouver, I think Portland is looking less feasible relative to the other options out there. That doesn't mean Portland wont be feasible as team #21 or #23, if the league decides to expand that far. But even Merritt Paulsen is on record as saying there is a very finite window of opportunity, because as the expansion fee goes up he won't want to pay for it any longer. That means that the ownership group in Portland cannot depend on Merritt Paulsen (or his dad) exclusively. Someone else will have to step in to help. The only thing, imho, that Portland has going for it right now is the Timbers Army fan group, and as has been pointed out by the TA people who understand, that doesn't amount to much in terms of MLS expansion. What matters is money. Both the ability to make money, and the capital to invest. What will attract investors to Portland over cities like Atlanta (who has already gotten sniffs from the Falcons), New York City (sniffed by the Mets), Miami (where the city is pushing for a soccer stadium before any owners have even stepped up), or St. Louis (that already has a stadium deal approved by a local community)? Will the ROI really be worth it compared to other cities? Also, with Seattle and potentially Vancouver both in the league already, the advertising potential of Portland drops significantly. Portland and Seattle are not in the exact same market, but Seattle is much larger and can account for most of the regional market in terms of advertising. Vancouver takes care of the Canadian segment. Don Garber is on record as saying that in the past the league would go where they had to, now they can go where they want to. I think Miami, Atlanta, New York, and St. Louis are cities where they want to be. Portland would be nice, but not necessary at this point. Somehow, the Portland ownership and the city of Portland will have to do something about that. Not much the fans can do about it.

    Agreed! :)

    - Paul
     
  23. Adair

    Adair New Member

    May 11, 2008
    Vancouver and Portland are both in the same position right now. Both have interim solutions that likely would be ok with MLS - the Caps at BC Stadium and the Timbers sharing PGE park with the Beavers. Both have ownership groups with money that want to own an MLS club. Neither has a long term solution solidified and both potential ownership groups are going to have to negotiate their respective cities' political processes to get new stadiums built, something that ain't easy in this part of the world. I can't imagine MLS awarding a club to either city until the long term solution is in place. I also think both cities will be great MLS markets.

    Bright, whose animosity towards Portland is evident throughout BS, is way off the mark on his analysis, by the way. Pauslon has access to money and his dad will be looking for a new gig come November. The money can be raised. I also disagree about the advertising potential. Portland and Seattle are different media markets. Somehow the Blazers and Sonics managed to attract enough advertising over the years. If anything the addition of Northwest rivals will help to attract regional sponsors.

    Lastly, I can only speak about myself but I am a fan of the Timbers. I will be regardless of whether they are in USL or MLS. I support my local club. I also realize that the crowds will be larger and the level of play higher with an MLS club. I am all for that. But I won't abandon my club if they remain in USL. Fans in Vancouver won't either. They have been very, very loyal over the years. They are deserving of being in MLS. I just hope that they are in an MLS that includes all three teams from the Pacific Northwest. This region is large enough and passionate enough about soccer to support all three teams.
     
  24. bright

    bright Member

    Dec 28, 2000
    Central District
    Club:
    Seattle Sounders
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I have animosity toward certain individuals within the TA, animosity that they have generated themselves over the course of the last few seasons. I have no animosity toward Portland or the Timbers. I've said numerous times before that I would personally like to see Portland in MLS.

    Sorry, Adair, the happenings in Vancouver are a big hit for Portland. Portland and Vancouver are not in the same boat at all. And if Paulson has the money, he isn't willing to spend it. He said so himself; as the expansion fee goes up, he is less interested. Finite window of opportunity.

    The other expansion candidates in play are much stronger than Portland right now. If you want to change that reality, you have to face it first. Well, actually, the ownership has to face it, as this is out of the fans' hands. Looking at things through "rose-colored" glasses isn't going to change anything.

    All you can do is keep on keepin' on building your fan group. Even if Portland doesn't get MLS, at least you will have that.

    Additionally, while it would be nice to have all three cities represented in MLS, MLS does not NEED Portland. However, they do need a team in NYC proper, and they need at least one team in the Southeast. St. Louis just needs a little more juice to their ownership and they are in, as they already have the stadium situation tied up. Then there is Montreal and Vancouver. That's at least 5 cities in front of Portland. 16 + 5 = 21. So Portland might be viable for teams #21 or #23, as I previously said. At that point, they will be competing with a second southeast city, Las Vegas, and probably other larger media markets such as Minneapolis/St. Paul and Detroit. How does Portland stack up to these markets? Just because of the fan group, which like I said still does not match the attendance Rochester was pulling when people were calling for them to move up? What will attract additional investors to Portland's ownership group that these other markets won't also provide? The PNW will become somewhat saturated with the addition of Vancouver. These other regions are not saturated, and they have larger media markets than Portland. Portland needs more juice in the ownership group, and they need a workable stadium situation which PGE Park currently is not. It is nice to talk about possibilities -- renovations, building a new baseball stadium for the Beavers -- but your owner won't pay for that. Portland has to cough up around $100 million. Will they? Miami will. Vancouver will cough up $200 million.

    - Paul
     

Share This Page