That would be interesting, and definitely could happen down the road. I'd really like to see the Cox torn down once the new conv. center is built and the street grid restored above the underground parking garage i.e. Broadway extending from Sheridan to Reno and California rebuilt from E.K. Gaylord to Robinson. Then infill that area with mixed-use development creating the flagship TOD in the heart of downtown (assuming Santa Fe is the central hub for commuter rail and LRT).


Interesting re: restoring the street grid, but I'd like to see the new arena take up the entire block very similar to how the Verizon Center in DC does, with street level retail/dining that creates pedestrian traffic/activity even on non-event nights.

What COULD be done rather than completely destroy cox, is demolish the exhibition spaces surrounding the arena and replace it with mixed-use structures.

However that leaves us with having to find a new location for the Ford's eventual replacement. Just a thought. I prefer a new arena ala Verizon Center. When I was in DC for the first time, I didn't even notice it was there.

I would encourage all to read the Brookings study on cities mistakenly investing in convention centers. Blair Humphreys links to this study on his imagiNATIVEamerica.com. (You can find the report at Space Available: The Realities of Convention Centers as Economic Development Strategy - Brookings Institution (http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2005/01cities_sanders.aspx)) Here is part of a comment I made on Blair's site, and will repeat here because I believe it to be relevant to this thread:

The primary question is whether the National Convention Business is even a business OKC wants to be in. This question is so basic and fundamental that we run the risk of ignoring it in our haste to focus on future MAPS spending. The Brookings report highlighted is incredibly insightful and, from a business perspective, outlines the National Convention Business as:

- Having significant overcapacity of supply

- Having significantly decreasing demand

- Requiring huge fixed costs to enter

- Generating ongoing operating losses for almost all participants

Question: What business person would want to enter a market with these characteristics?

I’m concerned that people are starting to equate being a Big League City with making the traditional Big League Mistakes. As the Brookings Report points out, these mistakes have been made consistently by our counterpart cities. Rather than imitating these actions, let’s try to learn from them.

I would encourage all to read the Brookings study on cities mistakenly investing in convention centers. Blair Humphreys links to this study on his imagiNATIVEamerica.com. (You can find the report at Space Available: The Realities of Convention Centers as Economic Development Strategy - Brookings Institution (http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2005/01cities_sanders.aspx)) Here is part of a comment I made on Blair's site, and will repeat here because I believe it to be relevant to this thread:

The primary question is whether the National Convention Business is even a business OKC wants to be in. This question is so basic and fundamental that we run the risk of ignoring it in our haste to focus on future MAPS spending. The Brookings report highlighted is incredibly insightful and, from a business perspective, outlines the National Convention Business as:

- Having significant overcapacity of supply

- Having significantly decreasing demand

- Requiring huge fixed costs to enter

- Generating ongoing operating losses for almost all participants

Question: What business person would want to enter a market with these characteristics?

I’m concerned that people are starting to equate being a Big League City with making the traditional Big League Mistakes. As the Brookings Report points out, these mistakes have been made consistently by our counterpart cities. Rather than imitating these actions, let’s try to learn from them.

There are some big flaws with this study. The biggest being the data used for the study is about 10 years old now. The data used was taken during the last recession and after Sept. 11. I don't think data from any industry during that time period gives you a good snapshot of the industry as a whole.

There are some big flaws with this study. The biggest being the data used for the study is about 10 years old now. The data used was taken during the last recession and after Sept. 11. I don't think data from any industry during that time period gives you a good snapshot of the industry as a whole.

This is from the Brookings website:

"The overall convention marketplace is declining in a manner that suggests that a recovery or turnaround is unlikely to yield much increased business for any given community, contrary to repeated industry projections. Moreover this decline began prior to the disruptions of 9-11 and is exacerbated by advances in communications technology. Currently, overall attendance at the 200 largest tradeshow events languishes at 1993 levels."


I am not saying you are wrong, but Brookings does account for your viewpoint and provide a solid rebuttal. Have you found more current data that shows a different trend?

I am really quite interested in finding facts to base an opinion on - either for or against. If you know where I can find some more reliable information, please let me know. Thus far no one has been able to provide any evidence as to why it is a good idea to build a convention center instead of investing in quality of life components like transportation, public space, etc.

There are some big flaws with this study. The biggest being the data used for the study is about 10 years old now. The data used was taken during the last recession and after Sept. 11. I don't think data from any industry during that time period gives you a good snapshot of the industry as a whole.

Oh, and the data is only 5 years old - not 10. The most current data available today would be for 2008. This report uses data up to 2003 and information from reports used in 2004.

I tend to believe trade shows are in decline, and that we could be leading edge if we developed spaces around the contemporary ways of doing industry meetings. There is more business "power dating" types of events now and I think OKC could take a lead in providing leading edge conventioning. It would require less space but more communications equipment. There would be auditoriums and many small meeting spaces.

Any proof to back up your claim?

This is from the Brookings website:

"The overall convention marketplace is declining in a manner that suggests that a recovery or turnaround is unlikely to yield much increased business for any given community, contrary to repeated industry projections. Moreover this decline began prior to the disruptions of 9-11 and is exacerbated by advances in communications technology. Currently, overall attendance at the 200 largest tradeshow events languishes at 1993 levels."


I am not saying you are wrong, but Brookings does account for your viewpoint and provide a solid rebuttal. Have you found more current data that shows a different trend?

I am really quite interested in finding facts to base an opinion on - either for or against. If you know where I can find some more reliable information, please let me know. Thus far no one has been able to provide any evidence as to why it is a good idea to build a convention center instead of investing in quality of life components like transportation, public space, etc.

Try searching for IAEM's Brookings' report rebutal. It gives some good counterpoints to the study. It's been awhile so I can't find an active link to the full report but I know its has to be out there somewhere.

OSUFan, thanks for suggesting where to look. Here are a couple of critical responses to the Brookings study.

Center for Exhibition Industry Research
White Paper: "Space Available…The Rest of the Story"
www.conventionindustry.org/resources/CEIR_Brookings_Response.pdf

"Is the Sky Falling on the Convention Center Industry? A Critical Review of the Brookings Institution Research Brief on Convention Centers as Economic Development Strategy" by Thomas Hazinski and Hans Detlefsen of HVS Convention, Sports, & Entertainment Facilities Consulting (http://www.civicdesigncenter.org/PDFs/Hazinskiarticle.pdf)

In addition, here is a page with some helpful links organized by the City of Nashville as a basis for discussion regarding the planning of its convention center: Urban Design / Policy Briefs (http://www.civicdesigncenter.org/convention_center.html)

I would welcome a fact-based discussion on this very important topic...

Well right now, we can't deny that conventions are on the downslide. There was even a nice little report this morning on NPR regarding Miami's convention business. Because of the economy and everyone trimming budgets, companies aren't spending the money to attend the events, so many of them are cancelling. Those that are being put on are being downsized, they are forcing discounts from hoteliers and shorter lengths of the conventions (ie fewer days for the show).

It's much like a car dealership right now. How much can you cut just to get the thing sold before you quit making enough off of the thing to survive? Convention business is on a downward trend, HOWEVER....I don't think anyone in OKC can really honeslty believe that the Cox Center is adequate for even our current needs. We are currently limited in space and can't even be considered for a great many shows because our exhibition space is so small. There are countless tradeshows and convention groups that travel the country and make stops in smaller towns (like Baton Rouge) simply because they have a larger exhibition space. Even a town like Shreveport has stolen some of our convention business because their facility is so much nicer (and easier to get to). It's smaller, but it's a nice place...not downtown so there isn't traffic, it's right off the highway, etc.

So while I do agree that the overall trend in the convention industry is on the downslide, I don't feel that it means we should stop our improvement push. Do we need some massive D.C. sized center, No. But what we do need is a facility that accurately reflects what we SHOULD have.