Originally Posted by REDREAD
Still, if a lot of the floors are worn out after 11 years, maybe they didn't use the greatest materials to begin with?
I understand, this is a commerical setting, but still.. 81 games/year X 11 years .. that means the floors have about 2.5 years of "real life" on them.
Sure, maybe some parts of the GAB are used on other days, but it seems that they didn't exactly get top of the line stuff.
I'd bet it's all pretty routine maintenance stuff. Value engineering studies are rarely that myopic and usually involve business case planning several years, if not decades out. It would be literally short-sighted to "value engineer" something against a single point in time.
If a cheaper material was used for carpeting, for instance, it was probably determined that the cost to replace it after X number of years was still more affordable than a higher-price material would be over its total life... even if that life was marginally longer than material A. The business case planning that goes into those sorts of studies is extremely rigorous and a lot of those ROI details (down to materials and finishes) would have been taken into consideration well before GABP was signed off on.
I work in retail and environmental design, so this is just my two cents. But the Reds would have been foolish to have invested in premium flooring materials or top of the line finishes in a facility that large, that gets that much traffic. Beyond the functional considerations there, arena-type settings also need to be flexible enough in their trade dress so things don't look dated after ten years. Trends for flooring, wall treatments, lighting design, etc. change drastically from year-to-year.