Reader comments
Does Salt Lake need a convention center hotel?

Spend more | 5:25 a.m. June 11, 2009

That's all Utah needs, more public funding for private businesses in a time of economic disaster that has made the depression of 1930's look like a picnic. Who will be around to use a convention center? Many conventions have already been canceled and with empty centers. To put taxpayers in to more indentured servitude for this farce is ridiculous.

Those saying we need a convention hotel are after the tax payers money and is obviously not the time to be spending on an unknown future. If Las Vegas and California can't fill their convention centers what makes them think conventions will come to Utah? Fraudulent waste of taxes and pipe dreams.

foresight | 8:04 a.m. June 11, 2009

This is exactly what Utah needs.......more business. I hear the person before post that these times make the Great Depression look like a picnic. Sorry, but I haven't heard of stockbrokers jumping to their deaths by the dozens off of buildings. I've yet to stand in a bread or soup line or see my friends or family have to do so. I just don't agree with that assessment. And what shall taxpayers do? How else can we bring in more business to this city? Convention business is good business. We have to get this right.

This is well spent taxpayer money. Period. If a major hotel is built it will bring more conventions and ALL of the hotels and businesses in the area will benefit. Right now there is one major convention in this town twice a year (Outdoor Retailer). That particular show brings over 6 million dollars in tax revenues every time it comes to town. If you look at the gross numbers, that means 100 million dollars is spent over a 10 day period or so. That is huge money being lost for every show of that size we can't accommodate.

@ Spend more | 8:18 a.m. June 11, 2009

"Made the depression of 1930's look like a picnic"? I don't think so.

Comments continue below

Anonymous | 8:30 a.m. June 11, 2009

the convention center is county owned, not a private business. Conventions bring millions of dollars into the state economy, and millions of dollars to the state in taxes. So yes using public money for this investment is good.

Former Holding Minnion | 8:51 a.m. June 11, 2009

Earl Holding's offer comes "too litle, too late". He only makes that offer now in the argument that his two hotels, Little America, and the Grand America Hotel will be left out in the cold. As the second largest land holder in downtown Salt Lake City he could have added or expanded convention space long ago before the Salt Palace Expanded. But he chose to do what he does best, sit on the porperty until the time is right and it suits him to build.

The Grand America Hotel was a promise to the USOC and IOC if they brought the Olympics here he would build them a hotel worthy of their use. After the SL Olympic Scandal they ended up not using the Grand for fear of backlash. So there it sits, mostly at a low occupancy, as a memorial to the greed of Earl Holding.

Salt Lake does need a major convention hotel within a "short" walking distance or adjacent to the Salt Palace. Adding a 1,000 room hotel will only help our ability to host conventions and is a far cry from the overbuilt city of Las Vegas.

Anonymous | 9:02 a.m. June 11, 2009

Who wants to go to SLC?

What are you smoking Spend More | 9:03 a.m. June 11, 2009

It's exactly what Taxpayers need. Dollars from the room tax flow from tourists and attendees into our economy. They eat in our restaurants and their money energizes our economy and businesses.

How short-sighted of you to think that creating a community amenity that enhances the flow of external dollars into our economy is a foolish use of taxpayer dollars.

Adding the hotel only enhances the desirability of our convention center.

Anonymous | 9:39 a.m. June 11, 2009

If the area needs this so badly why isn't anybody from the private sector standing up to construct the building? The county government should stay out of the hospitality industry.

Anonymous | 9:56 a.m. June 11, 2009

as a convention planner myself, I say YES to this proposal. Salt Lake is a very attractive place for conference attendees but they do need a central convention hotel. Conventions bring in big bucks, and even in these hard economic times they are still holding them and people are still attending. SLC is a great bargain for convention planners, easy to fly into, great location, relatively inexpensive prices for hotels, restaurants etc compared to other cities.

to Spend More: people aren't booking conventions in Vegas or CA because it's EXPENSIVE. Plus, many people have the "been there, done that" attitude. Salt Lake is great. We just need more options to attract the larger groups!

Jakeman | 9:56 a.m. June 11, 2009

I don't think we simply need more hotel rooms. When will Salt Lake be an attractive choice because of additional things it can offer convention goers? I wouldn't be surprised if Salt Lake doesn't get repeat business because of it's antiquated views towards nightlife. Establish an entertainment district with restaurants, bars, live music, art events, and have convention goers spend money there and benefit more than a handful of developers

I guess | 10:17 a.m. June 11, 2009

if SLC wants to spend money to build a hotel let them go for it but please do not allow any state tax money go to its construction or maintenance. I am tired of seeing state money used to benefit SLC at the expense of rural Utah.

If you build it | 10:25 a.m. June 11, 2009

... will they REALLY come?

Holding's Grand America was built using the "If-you-build-it-they-will-come" philosophy.

Except - they didn't.

Are we about to make the same mistake - at taxpayers' expense?

The fact is, Las Vegas (SLC's biggest competitor for this kind of business) is struggling to fill their rooms right now. And Las Vegas is typically MUCH more attractive as a meeting destination than SLC. To meeting attendees. (You know... attendees... the people who would be actually coming...)

So we've got the Outdoor Retailers. OK. That's ONE convention. What about the rest of the year? Do we have committments from meeting planners that they WILL hold their annual meetings in SLC? Can we book this thing out 12 months?

And what does building this do to change the perception of SLC as a painfully boring burg? Nada.

And what happens to the other downtown hotels when they don't get even the little meeting business they get now? They get bupkus.

Let's see the feasability studies, the marketing plan, the forward bookings, and the hard numbers BEFORE we throw away a billion or two on a new white elephant.

to Anonymous @ 9:56 | 10:47 a.m. June 11, 2009

People aren't booking in Las Vegas because it's expensive???

Dude... check their current marketing.

They're practically giving the place away. Their prices are easily on a par with SLC right now. The hotels are desperate for business.

And if SLC is such an attractive place for attendees, why is it every time I go to a conference and say I live in SLC, the response is, "Why???"

And the next question is, "Are you Mormon?" (I am not.)

Don't get me wrong: I love living in SLC. I'd almost rather the secret doesn't get out. But if we want to attract meeting business, things need to change. We need a real entertainment district. And liquor laws that don't wiffle on about protecting the eyes of the children from the SIGHT of a bottle of demon alcohol, and impose absurd and expensive restrictions on restauranturs and bar owners.

Reason | 10:53 a.m. June 11, 2009

We subsidize the convention center about $25 million a year - that's one heck of a public jobs program already. One has to wonder why the robust, private and enormous hotel industry would not move in to build if there really is an opportunity to fill the rooms. More likely, the proposed hotel would be unprofitable to build and so it would become another large subsidy from the general public.

Utahn in San Diego | 11:02 a.m. June 11, 2009

This is another common sense proposal for Salt Lake and Utah. I book conventions for our company and as a frequent visitor to SLC, it is my opiniion you are in dire need of a world class hotel close to the Convention Center. Dont listen to the typical naysayers to these projects. A new hotel would benefit Salt Lake's and Utah's economies.

Stenar | 11:21 a.m. June 11, 2009

We definitely need a convention center HQ hotel.

Silly waste of time and money | 11:31 a.m. June 11, 2009

I have been in the financial services industry for over 30+ years in senior management...SLC was NEVER even considered as a conference/convention destination. It wasn't because of meeting space either. There is too much competition with destinations such as San Francisco, L.A., San Diego, Orlando, Miami, Chicago, Dallas, Houston, NYC, Las Vegas, and the list goes on and on and on. Lagoon, Temple Square and the Great Salt Lake just don't make it!

Adam | 11:34 a.m. June 11, 2009

I help run a local convention and I'm all for the new hotel. Right now we have outgrown every hotel in SLC with convention space, except The Grand America because its absurdly overpriced. So we are stuck with what is currently here and out annual 15% attendance growth is going to cause major pains for us over the next few years.
Our convention needs are such that we need a hotel not a convention center.

to Utahan in San Diego | 11:50 a.m. June 11, 2009

I'm seriously no fan of Earl Holding but, we already HAVE a world class hotel close to the Convention Center. The Grand America is a AAA Five Diamond property. It's the choice of lodging for presidents, ambassadors, stars of film, music, and sports, and other assorted bigwigs and muckty-mucks.

You don't get much more world class than that.

So why not book your people into the EXISTING world class hotel? Is it because they're not really willing to pay for "world class"? (BTW: the Grand is cheaper than most 5 Diamonds found anywhere in the country).

And if you're already booking your conventions in Salt Lake City, clearly you've found the lodging you need already here.

If not, how many conventions are you willing to COMMIT to bringing to SLC if this hotel is built? How much GUARANTEED attendee revenue will SLC see from you, personally?

When you can show me facts and guaranteed numbers, I'll be willing to conceed that a new mega-hotel will benefit SLC and Utah's(?) economies. Until then, I remain

Unconvinced.

Smells fishy | 1:34 p.m. June 11, 2009

The only reason for this article seems to be to build public support for using tax-payer money to do this. If it has a good ROI, then I'm sure someone will do it without tax money.

There is a problem, though. The hotels are clustered too many blocks south. And the walk to the convention center, through giant intersections, is not pretty. And the restaurants and bars are spread so thin it is tough for them to know where to go afterwards.

Anonymous | 2:11 p.m. June 11, 2009

I hate Vegas but you can sure beat SLC having a convention there. You have a $2.00 imported beer compared to over $5 in SLC. This is funny. I can get a room cheaper in the Bay Area than in SLC. SLC thinks its a "little bit of Paris." :-)

Once Utah was a great deal. No anymore. You can get more fun for your money in many other cities. SF has the bay, beaches, redwood, many of the world's finest restaurants. SLC has Temple square. :-)

NL | 2:32 p.m. June 11, 2009

I travel to 10 or more conferences a year and most have a hotel very close or part of the convention center. I will book a room which will be close to the convention center or part of. Even though the cost of the room may be a little higher the benefits out weight the cost. I have been doing this for 22 years and have seen the growth of many convention centers. I know for a person traveling a lot this helps to make the travel a little easier. For a person who has medical problems then it is real major benefit. Many people who attend a conference have some type of handicap. Would it help increase revenue for the state I believe it would.

To Silly waste of time and money | 3:31 p.m. June 11, 2009

Just because SLC has not been an option before doesnt mean it could NEVER be. If you think Lagoon, Temple Sqare, and the Great Salt Lake are the only reasons for bringing people to utah, you are very narrowminded. Yes, Utah has a lot to work on as far as nightlife and entertainment, but there are many things here allready that are attractive to a lot of people out of state. How is SLC supposed to compete with all the other destinations you named without growth?

Dave | 7:40 p.m. June 11, 2009

What will it take to stop the trend of public money going to build and/or subsidize PRIVATE profits?

Anonymous | 9:20 p.m. June 11, 2009

If there is a need for another hotel, then some entrepeneurial person or company will see the value in building one on their own.

NO WAY | 11:05 p.m. June 11, 2009

We don't want the government to run a hotel too!!!!! Even Utah is turning into a power happy political state where more government power is running rampant in this country already. If the government builds a hotel there, it will just show that other local governments can build hotels and pave the path for it. What next, government is trying to make communism look good!!!!!!!!!!!!! Republicans and democrats have forgotten what this country was founded on: FREEDOM!!!! = less government regulation and control.

Why | 11:15 p.m. June 11, 2009

Why do we need "night Life" on the world's standards. WE are taught to be in the world, but not of the world.

Why Not | 10:06 a.m. June 12, 2009

Speak for yourself "Why". Not all of "WE" are so insular. It's called "being hospitable". And a good host always thinks about the needs of his guests.

Yours is exactly the kind of attitude that keeps people away from Utah. If we want tourism and meeting business, we become hosts of those we seek to invite here (our guests). As such, we should be generous and considerate of our guests.

The world is full of pretty good people with different views, opinions, and beliefs from yours.
So step outside your self-imposed bubble once in a while, and greet the outside world with an open heart and an open mind. It's not that scary to get another perspective. Really.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.