ShareThis Page
Unload the convention center |

Unload the convention center

| Thursday, June 30, 2005 12:00 a.m

The new David L. Lawrence Convention Center would make a wonderful stand-alone casino.

If we sold the building to Harrah’s or one of the other casino companies, we could:

  • Recapture the $400 million cost.
  • Put the building on the tax rolls.
  • Bring a business to town.
  • Eliminate a big dollar drain on the public.

Forbes magazine recently reported that city after city is being taken in by the convention center fallacy. In the past four years, the amount of exhibit space has grown by over 20 million square feet while attendance has remained the same. The article points out that these centers really are financial quagmires. They do not bring business to town. The country is awash in centers, and convention bureaus have to give incentives to compete.

Week after week, the Pittsburgh convention center sits empty with the lights on and utilities running. Recently, it was reported that it is out of money again ( “Banking on slots revenue, SEA needs a hand,” June 18 and

You know how bad this city is struggling, cutting back everywhere. Our police cars are old. Our garbage trucks are worn out. We can’t open pools.

Selling the convention center would be a big step in Pittsburgh’s future.

Ronald Yingling
Mt. Washington

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.