KCRag Forum

KC wrote:Kemper has outlived it's usefullness in most people's opinion. I'm not sure if Kemper has cost us concerts or not, I don't set them up.

A new arena located around 13th & Grand would also greatly help the convention business in KC.

13th and Grand is not the correct location. If an arena is to be built it should be connected to the Convention Center. That way it would compliment it and the Convention Center could provide additional dates for the arena. Such as convention general session meetings, exhibit space for shows and conventions, etc.

exactly what it will be used for. Most cities don't have the arena attached to the convention center but it being walkable (under 3 blocks) will give us that added functionality. There really isn't a closer place to put it. That way you bookend the new KC Live! development with the convention center/PAC on one end and the arena on the other....

St. Louis has its Convention Center and its dome connected and they compliment themselves quite well. KC would have the same with the arena and convention center, if an arena is built.

agreed. They will have the same even if they aren't directly next to each other.

at least you are agreeing that it needs to be DOWNTOWN! Connected, or walkable pretty much the same thing. I'm sure there would be some kind of walkway/tunnel.

We do not need an arena connected to the convention center. It cuts down on street animation and pedestrians walking around downtown. The whole point of KC Live! is that it will be a retailtainment district connecting the convention center/municipal to a new arena. The idea is to get people out in the city--not trapped in a controlled, insular environment. Leave the skywalks and "all-in-one" stuff for Olathe and OP.

I think that walkways would be helpful in providing protection from the winter weather. The arena in MN is connected to their entertainment distcritct and it provides easy access. Granted we have a much milder winter here. And it would cut down on some street life.

Every inch of Minneapolis/StP is connected with tunnels and skyways...it is cold as a mutha there.

We just don't need our convention center and arena area designed like Crown Center. CC is cool, but not conductive for purposes of spreading people and development.

I agree. I just wish we were talking about this because it was actually happening. I will take ANY ARENA DOWNTOWN, connected or not. I should be done right though.

Well, at least the arena debate is actually picking up some press due to the Big XII tournamet debacle. It seemed the issue was completely dead until it started picking up steam with tournament.

Here is Posnanski's lengthy diatribe on the arena situation in KC...
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 181440.htm

I agree trailer, I just hope Barnes and maybe block have something up their sleeves and are just waiting for the right time.

Why does Posnanski have to slam the Downtown baseball stadium though? Why does everybody have to pick a project and then put down all the others? Can anybody in this town see the BIG picture?

KK: We need a baseball stadium not an arts center

We need an arena not a stupid stadium, we need schools not better transit, we need a stadium not a stupid arena (I have said this a couple of time but come to my sences), we need to fix the curbs not expand Bartle etc.

This town is wearing me out.

AMEN! Posnanski. Except I think that a downtown baseball stadium is also key. Which brings up an interesting debate that I would like to see opinions on:

Which would be better for Downtown, or which would you like to see happen first, an arena or baseball stadium?

It would seam that there are 2 takes on this question. Those who want a stadium because we have a team for it and do not want to build an area without a team. And those who want to build an arena because we have a baseball stadium.

We ABSOLUTLY NEED AN ARENA, and a baseball stadium would be AMAZING if it was downtown. I say that if we are going to put any money into the K then we should just build a new stadium. But if I had to prioratize the 2 projects I would take an arena over a stadium.

GRID wrote:I agree trailer, I just hope Barnes and maybe block have something up their sleeves and are just waiting for the right time.

You bring up an interesting point about Block. I know that when Louisville was planning an arena so they could get NBA, the naming rights issues were a huge part of the financing for locally based Tricon (KFC).

It was said that Block already has reservations on this right for the arena next to KC Live!. I would not be surprised if Block actually plays a fairly large role, that is if any roles are actually being played (kind of hard to tell at times).

Kropf...there was a lengthy thread on what downtown needs most. The downtown stadium walloped the arena and other options 2 to 1.
http://www.kcskyscrapers.com/kcforum/vi ... php?t=2093

The fact that Block already has naming rights can only be a good thing, and I think that it does imply that they are playing their role. God Bless H&R Block.

Let's see if they can once again amaze us and come out with a plan for the arena.

Just think about what the arena does for Block...

It drops hundreds of thousands of visitors and residents at the doorstep of their glimmering new world headquarters. Everytime the arena hosts a Big XII, a major concert, or event thousands and thousands of people travel and come away with an impression of H&R Block. It is like a form of marketing their company by attaching their corporate HQ and name to a new arena that will bring in hundreds of thousands and visitors from the region and the entire nation.

I think an arena is imperative.....Just let me know what I need to do, if there is any little thing, in order to get it done..

Watching the Tourney in Dallas =

trailerkid wrote:Just think about what the arena does for Block...

It drops hundreds of thousands of visitors and residents at the doorstep of their glimmering new world headquarters. Everytime the arena hosts a Big XII, a major concert, or event thousands and thousands of people travel and come away with an impression of H&R Block. It is like a form of marketing their company by attaching their corporate HQ and name to a new arena that will bring in hundreds of thousands and visitors from the region and the entire nation.

I don't know much about H&R Block's corporate culture, but I've got to wonder if the company can make a business case for buying the arena's naming rights. After all, what does Block gain? It's already a household name, unlike Raymond James or Edward Jones, and its brand is pretty much synonymous with its field, unlike, say, United or SBC, which also are major brands but don't dominate their industries' mindshares. How much would naming rights cost? And could that money be spent more effectively on other marketing channels? I'm not a marketing expert, but just a few things to consider.

I respectfully disagree with you. H&R Block is a household name, but attaching it to a prominent arena only extends the recognition to more and more people. Block is "your father's company" and the new HQ with the new arena give Block a more contemporary edge and hipness(for a tax company) for new generations to see. Attaching their name to new projects and new visions ensures their name to remain a household name.

Odd discussion.

I just don't see the connection. What does a hip cachet have to do with building or maintaining a brand in the financial services sector?