You knew it was coming. An “unsigned” editorial in the newspaper on the Tsongas [Arena] issue that defies all logic where the writer tries to point out what they think are outrages, but are really actually the opposite. Every day is Opposite Day at the Sun! Fitting that today is April first! How is it we are so blessed with such intelligence and prowess at our local paper? (Yes, Virginia, that is sarcasm.)
God, where to start…why not at the beginning?
Who would refer to the Paul E. Tsongas Arena as “P.E.T.A.”? No one we know, and certainly not any Lowellian born on either side of the Merrimack River.
But that’s what you get when you pay an out-of-state firm $25,000, plus expenses, to do an operations audit hoping the company will come up with something — anything — that is different from what is already known or could have been done with city staff.
OK, so several whiffs and misses here. First, an out of state firm is exactly what one wants for an evaluation such as this, someone who doesn’t have any biases or preconceived notions. Second, there’s a bidding process for such things, or did the Sun think that this company got this job out of the blue? Thirdly, raise your hand if you think that had the city not done this study, they’d be lambasted for not doing their due diligence working on this problem? And if they’d used a local company and still got a result the Sun didn’t like, that they wouldn’t be going to town about this being all about cronyism?
The idiotic snarky commentary on PETA aside (how childish was that?), what this editorial tells me is that I actually really am for this report, not against it. Yay, an independent outside company was brought in. Just what the doctor ordered.
Lastly, “what is already known” - well, if it was so already known, why the fracking hell hasn’t the Arena commission done anything about it? Hmm?
“‘P.E.T.A.’ is mentioned more than 250 times in the 52-page report. It made us cringe.” Haha. Most. Ironic. Line. Ever!!
Now the “unknown” editorial writer, let’s call him or her “Dampanini” for now, then goes on about some specifics in the report like s/he knows what s/he’s talking about. Fun times!
That said, PA Sports’ audit confirms the obvious: In an ideal world of what ifs, where the city gains more revenue from renegotiated rental contracts, concessions and advertising deals, and more concerts — and if the current economic situation doesn’t worsen — the Tsongas Arena “could realize a significant increase in revenue on an annual basis.”
What PA Sports doesn’t say — and here’s the crux of the matter — is there are no guarantees the Tsongas Arena can turn a profit, even with more revenues.
The best-case scenario from the audit’s rosy recommendations is that the arena can generate an extra $900,000 a year against its present annual deficit of $1.3 million. That still leaves an unpalatable $400,000 annual debt to taxpayers.
Again, where to start…ok, we all know there’s a downturn, Dampanini. That’s stating the obvious. Of course, we all also know it can’t last forever, but Dampanini doesn’t mention that obvious bit.
And s/he’s lambasting the report for not saying that there’s no guarantee? Um, again, stating the obvious. If you’re not an oblivious editorial writer, that is. That is all s/he can come up with? Really?
S/he also doesn’t mention that the city currently subsidizes several other public venues such as the Memorial Auditorium (at about that same level if projections in the report were to be correct) and of course, doesn’t mention the purpose of such public venues, which is to generate economic activity and therefore, revenues, from other sources. Like, oh, say, more commercial property taxes from businesses moving in. But like I said, this anonymous writer “Dampanini” likes to state the obvious and leave off any real analysis that might actually mean something.
The arena has lost more than $10 million over the past decade. It has achieved a profit just once in its 13-year history, and that was for less than $70,000.
Oh, so it is possible for the Arena to turn a profit, and it has actually done so. Doesn’t this sort of kill his/her whole “but you’ll never close the deficit” argument? Sigh.
Today, musical acts prefer larger capacity venues to smaller ones, which puts the 5,600-seat Tsongas Arena at a decided disadvantage. The competition is stiff: Boston’s TD BankNorth Garden, Boston University’s Agganis Arena, Worcester’s DCU Center, and Manchester’s Verizon Center.
Plus, with two home hockey teams, the Lowell Devils and UMass Lowell River Hawks, gobbling up a block of key winter dates, the arena’s ability to schedule extra events is made difficult.
First sane logical thing he or she has said. Yes, there’s competition. But, I also think, great opportunity, given that Lowell can offer (especially with some smart planning and development in the immediate vicinity of the Arena) things some of those other venues cannot - like Boston, which is very expensive, or Manchester, which is in freaking New Hampshire (with apologies to my native lands…). Lowell, on the other hand, is situated between great public transit to the Hub of the Universe, without Hub prices, and has a nice burgeoning downtown which is soon to see major expansion. I think we have some things going for us.
And how quickly we forget about the stupid, retrograde contract that the Sun advocated for on the Devils contract, which amounted to little more than economic blackmail. You know, we’re going to get out from under that contract soon. That frees up the city to actually do something to fix that problem that the paper’s lead editor’s BFF Cox stuck us with before he resigned in disgrace.
Taxpayers would be better served if the facility were transferred to UMass Lowell, which would be allowed to expand its campus, improve its academic-athletic posture, and has the ability to fund arena upgrades. It’s a win-win for the city and university.
And the paper’s editor’s BFF Meehan, for god knows what reason we all can discern.
The Paul E. Tsongas Arena has a better chance of succeeding under UMass Lowell’s control than as the city’s P.E.T.A. project.
A statement which can only be pulled out of someone’s ass, since no one can really say this with any more certainty than we can know about the future of the Tsongas if it stays in city hands.
But pulling facts out of asses is something this paper’s leadership is quite fond of doing.
I do think that with proper planning, revitalization, and management we can do really cool things with the Tsongas. It is certainly the case that we cannot stand still on it, because our rivals in other cities such as Manchester have and will not. But no one who is for this “deal” (capitulation) has actually shown us they have any sort of workable plan whatsoever.
