Cincinnati’s Heritage Bank Arena: Time for Change or a Financial Gamble?

As Cincinnati’s Heritage Bank Arena nears its 50th birthday, discussions about its future have ignited a spirited debate among city leaders, business owners, and residents. Originally opened in 1975 as Riverfront Coliseum, the arena has been a stalwart for concerts, sporting events, and other entertainment. However, its age and outdated facilities have led to questions about its viability in a competitive regional market, and whether the city is falling behind its peers.

The State of Heritage Bank Arena

While Heritage Bank Arena still hosts over 600,000 visitors annually for events like Cirque du Soleil and Cincinnati Cyclones games, its limitations are increasingly apparent. A 1997 renovation provided some upgrades, but the venue lacks modern amenities that have become standard in new arenas. Seating capacity, premium spaces, and backstage infrastructure all fall short of what major acts and national events demand.

According to a recent feasibility study commissioned by the Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber, the city’s inability to attract top-tier concerts, national sports tournaments, or conventions is tied directly to the inadequacies of the aging facility. Cities like Louisville and Indianapolis, which boast modern venues such as the KFC Yum! Center and Gainbridge Fieldhouse, regularly host events that bypass Cincinnati altogether. “We’re losing out,” one local business leader said. “And it’s not just about entertainment; it’s about staying relevant.”

The Cost and Economic Impact

Replacing the Heritage Bank Arena won’t come cheap. Estimates for a new facility range between $675 million and $800 million. If built, the construction phase alone could generate an economic impact exceeding $1.2 billion, creating over 5,900 jobs and $418 million in wages, according to the chamber’s study.

Once operational, a new arena could host approximately 116 events annually, drawing up to one million visitors each year. This would translate to an annual economic impact of $22.6 million, supporting more than 230 permanent jobs and generating millions in revenue for local businesses. With a major league tenant like an NHL or NBA team, revenues could climb significantly—potentially doubling operating profits from $5-6 million to $40 million annually.

Supporters: A Vision for Growth

Advocates for a new arena argue that it is essential for Cincinnati’s economic future. Business owners at The Banks—the riverfront entertainment district—have been among the most vocal supporters. In an open letter, they emphasized the importance of retaining the arena at its current site, highlighting the synergy between the venue and nearby restaurants, bars, and attractions. “A new, state-of-the-art arena could bring up to one million visitors annually, boosting foot traffic and economic activity across The Banks,” they wrote.

The Cincinnati USA Regional Chamber and Visit Cincy have also championed the project. Jeff Berding, co-CEO of FC Cincinnati, framed the issue as a matter of competitiveness. “A new arena would ensure Cincinnati remains a destination for national events, which benefits the entire region,” he said.

Opposition: Financial and Practical Concerns

Not everyone is convinced. Critics point to the steep price tag and the challenge of securing funding. While supporters envision a mix of public and private investment, many taxpayers are wary of footing the bill. Some skeptics argue the city should prioritize other pressing needs, such as affordable housing or public transportation, over a costly entertainment venue. “The return on investment for arenas is often overstated,” said a local economist. “Without a major league tenant, the financial risks are significant.”

Others question the necessity of replacing the current site. Nederlander Entertainment, which operates Heritage Bank Arena, has pushed back against claims that the location cannot accommodate a new facility. They argue that rebuilding on the same site would be more cost-effective than starting from scratch elsewhere. Additionally, moving the arena away from The Banks could disrupt the area’s thriving ecosystem of businesses and events.

Is Cincinnati Falling Behind?

The broader context is clear: Cincinnati lags behind peer cities when it comes to arena infrastructure. Louisville’s KFC Yum! Center, which opened in 2010, has become a magnet for NCAA tournaments and concerts, while Indianapolis’ Gainbridge Fieldhouse recently underwent a $360 million renovation to remain state-of-the-art. Even smaller markets like Columbus, with Nationwide Arena, offer facilities that far outshine Heritage Bank Arena.

Without a new venue, Cincinnati risks being left out of the regional competition for marquee events. This not only impacts the city’s cultural vibrancy but also its economy, as fewer events mean fewer visitors spending money at local businesses.

The debate over Heritage Bank Arena’s future boils down to one question: Can Cincinnati afford not to build a new arena? The economic projections are enticing, but the financial risks and competing priorities cannot be ignored. A thoughtful approach, one that considers the long-term implications for residents, businesses, and the city’s identity, will be essential.

As Cincinnati grapples with this decision, the stakes are high. A new arena could solidify the city’s place as a regional powerhouse, attracting events and investments that benefit everyone. But without careful planning and clear funding strategies, it could also become a costly misstep. In the words of one city official, “This is about more than just a building; it’s about the future of Cincinnati.”