$100m Aquarium in a Times Square Skyscraper?

Wow, I can't wait to see the aquariums and the pirate exhibit. I like pirate stuff.

Yeah, wow. Didn't see that coming at all. How would this guy make money from investing so much in an aquarium?

@Uraniumfish apparently it will be another 'tourist attraction' in the city which will attract tons of domestic and international tourists who will be happy to pay for yet another New York City experience.

Ah, yes, okay. And he'll charge outrageous entry fees to see a couple of guppies swimming around. And most people will likely be wowed just because it's a few stories up. So now the math geek side of me is wondering how long it woudl take him to recoup that money. Ten years? More?

Hey, can't blame a guy for wanting to make a buck or two. Who doesn't like to see an aquarium? It will help bring in money to a money-strapped city.

Either it will help bring money into Times Square or it will flop miserably. Who knows for sure....

I did a rough calculation for you, Uraniumfish. If he charges $50 entrance fee and has 500 visitors each day, for 350 days out of each year, he brings in 8.75 million. He'll turn a profit in about 12 years.

He'll also have maintenance costs and rent, but he could sell soft drinks and T-Shirts and whatnot to make the extra income that will pay for the upkeep.

Now who's the math geek...

I can't say I'm interested - there are plenty of aquariums in NYC (now, a PIRATE museum?!) It's just that it seems like a bunch of meaningless fluff...just another way to spend lots of money for no reason.

Actually, ajadedidealist, remember that every time someone buys something from his store in the building, if he goes that route, he charges NYC tax. Also, if he charges admission. those tickets may be also accessed a tax. You won't see it because he'll include the tax in the cost of the ticket.

There are many ways he can not only make money for himself, but also help the city economically. He may have to hire people to care for the building and aquarium. I figure the money he could make for the city is a lot.

@DBlack $50 entrance! aI bit steep don't you think?

@ uptowngirl Right, good point. I did figure a high admission price. Since this thing is planned for Times Square, I'm guessing it's aimed right at tourists with money to spend on dumb attractions. Compare admission to the Empire State Building, which can cost you a cool $45 if you take the express pass. Or compare Broadway shows which can cost upwards of $120 for a single ticket. Maybe the real admission price will be less, but I doubt it will be too much less.

@ajadeidealist Right, I agree. This thing is going to be marketed to tourists for sure. No New Yorker would ever go to such a dumb exhibit. Can't you see the corny, cartoon signage and stuffed orcas for sale already?

Ugh - I can't stand touristy things in NY - some of the most beautiful and wonderful attractions of the city (Staten Island Ferry, a walk in Central Park) are free.

Well, ajadedidealist. Remember, NYC is a tourist city. It was built for tourist. And without tourist, this city would have collapsed a long time ago. I hate to see all those people myself, but when I think about it, every dime they spend in stores goes toward the city as revenue, it will help the city get out of its fiscal downfall. At least we hope so.

@hhusted You're right NYC depends a lot on tourist traffic. It seems 45.25 million tourists visited NYC last year making it the top US city in terms of tourist traffic.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-04/nyc-is-top-2009-u-s-tourist-draw-bloomberg-says-update1-.html

@ajadedidealist I'm with you on this one - the whole thing sounds unbearably ridiculous, and a pirate museum is more than out of place in the middle of Times Square; it's absurd.

Never underestimate the spending power of the tacky tourist. And the marketing power of the people who cater to them.

$50 is way too much for an aquarium.... they wouldn't get very much traffic for tickets like that.

@ DBlack Really funny. Though I agree maybe $50 is too steep. They'd have to be able to offer a whole lot of bells and whistles to charge that much admission.

I looked up some aquariums and they seem to range in prices from $2.50 per person admission to $30. I haven't seen one yet that was priced as high as $50.

How much is Madame Tussauds - does anyone know? That's the epitome of tourist trap for me.

@ajadedidealist just looked it up , its $35 but don't most tourists use cards like the NYC Pass(http://www.newyorkpass.com/) which helps you save on entrance fees for each individual attraction?

All right,okay, all right. I see I've been voted down to $35 as an admission fee for our future acquarium. To bring in the same amount of money per day as above, they would have to have 740 visitors each day instead of my 500 guess. That still very very realistic, though.

For the record, Lion King tickets are $68 and South Pacific tickets are $75, and how much more corny can you get? Talk about tourist schlock, right? And how long does the - entertainment - last? Two hours max? Tourists can be fooled into spending their money on the dumbest stuff, is what I'm saying.

I'm sure this aquarium will rent space to vendors - and likely really fancy ones. I imagine an upscale restaurant in an aquarium will bring in some cash. You could chew on some beluga caviar and watch the guppies swim by!

Ugh. This just seems so ridiculous. People are starving and sleeping on subway cars. Bankers can't go on holidays anymore. Donate the friggin money, asshole.....

@Dblack but Lion King and South Pacific are classified 'Broadway' and saying that you went to a Broadway show on your NYC holiday caries much weight in the impress your neighbor/family/friend stakes. I hardly think an aquarium in Times Square will have the same kind of 'Wow' factor.

@DBlack: Usually broadway shows run about 4 hours with a 15 minute intermission. I went to see 42nd St and it ran for 5 hours. The tickets cost me $85 each.

Talking about high prices.

Taking together what BroadwayBK and uptowngirl said: this aquarium could be a new "Wow" factor in the making, couldn't it? As in, "I saw a Broadway show! I sat at the famous Times Square aquarium eating beluga caviar and watching the guppies swim by! Wow!"

This isn't really the right project to build during a recession, is it? Oh, well.

Hey, BroadwayBK, anything that helps to boost the city financially right now is a good thing. We may not think so, but the results is what counts. Hopefully, having the aquarium here will justify the means for it being built.

The thing is that most average spenders are not really putting their money into luxury trips or items at the moment - and what is an aquarium in a Times Square skyscraper but a complete luxury? And who is really going to go to this thing but tourists?

@Uraniumfish Or maybe they could build a new Broadway theater INSIDE the aquarium. Then tourists could watch the latest production of Rent as the guppies swim by.

@BroadwayBK However much I might object to the concept and the aesthetics of this, a big aquarium WILL employ a whole lotta people. Also, in the construction of it, not just in the upkeep. That's the advantage to NY...

@NeverSleeps Brilliant! Why didn't we think of it before!

I am guessing that a $100 m aquarium will actually be really incredible, like no aquarium you've ever seen. Of course I'm no expert, maybe that's the going rate to build an aquarium - but if it's going to be a Times Square institution it'll likely be dazzling. Wonder what skyscraper it's going in? Did they ever fill the space where the Virgin Megastore used to be?

That would be awesome, @neversleeps! An aquarium in a Broadway theatre is pretty much the only way I endorse this. Can you imagine a high soprano belt with a killer whale swimming by?! Friggin awesome!

I think it might be hard to set up a good sound system around all that glass and water, though. The poor guppies will probably be massively confused. So throw in a few more million to make the sound decent and for some killer whale therapy sessions.

Now I'm just thinking this through way too much...

Maybe that's what 2 out of the 100 million is going toward . . . and then the other 98 mill to building it and finding giant predatory animals to put in tiny water cages.

By the options you guys are throwing out there, it seems the guy will need to spend more than what he was thinking. Actually, I don't even know if the plan was even accepted yet. I am sure whatever happens, they guy will build something that will lure people to see it. He's not going to throw a ton of money into something without getting his ROI.

Can you imagine something that will be shown at Times Square that won't attract tourist, and cost money to take part in it. I don't think so. Any time someone creates anything over at Times Square, it will be expensive to participate and will be mainly for tourists.

Times Square is pretty horrendously tourist-flooded, but there are a lot of suits that do business in the area, and some publications are housed in nearby buildings. So there has to be a lot of places that cater to the people who work in the area rather than just the tourists.

You got a point there, BroadwayBK. But, why would suited businessmen be interested in looking at an aquarium. Then again, anything is possible in this city.

...I'm not saying the aquarium would be anything but an attraction for tourists and children.

@BroadwayBK All the suits need is a lunch place that doubles as an after-work happy hour cocktail bar. Maybe two: one with steep prices for the management honchos, and one with more reasonable prices for the peons. Don't need much. And suits don't seem to have high standards for those types of things. Nor do they need any special entertainment. Then they just go home to their families and watch TV.

@DBlack: I get the idea. Give them entertainment as an escape from the pressures and stress of the day. Great idea. That is what you were implying, right?

DBlack is right - all the suits need is a place to have meetings where they can also be served a meal. I have a friend who used to work as a banker in the vicinity and have actually been dragged to just such places.

@hhusted No, that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm responding to BroadwayBK's suggestion that you need businesses to cater to the working stiffs at Times Square, which I don't think is true. The working stiffs just need one or two places to get lunch and they don't have very high standards.

The killer whales will certainly need therapy. Did you hear about the one who killed the trainer?

Oh, DBlack. Thanks for clarifying your point.

@Uraniumfish that was awful wasn't it?

@Uraniumfish That was pretty bad, but in my opinion you'd have to be crazy to get in a tank with a once-wild killer whale.

Hopefully we don't have any incidents like this one in our Times Square attraction: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/25/leak-in-shark-filled-aquarium-in-dubai-mall/

@Neversleeps apparently the whale dragged her by her ponytail!

@uptowngirl I know! And they say - though I suppose no one can really get into the mind of a killer whale - that it may have been just playing? What a horrible way to die.

Although it is extremely sad; I mean, theyre not called killer whales for nothing. They're giant, intelligent, hunters and they're put in this tiny water cages and expected to never act out.

How tragic! And yet - that's what happens when you try to cage animals - they aren't pets, just because they're in captivity, and it's dangerous to treat them as such...

@JenMac so true.. apparently out in the Ocean they travel for miles everyday and in the water park they are expected to live in a tank which can perhaps make them go crazy..the orca that did this -Tilikum apparently has a history of such behavior.

@Ajadedidealist: I agree with you about the whale and how it should have been treated. Any time you cage an animal that was meant to be in wide open water, it will lash out in some way. Whales are meant to be in the wide open seas.

I feel bad for the lady. According to the park, the lady was a professional trainer and never got into the water with the whale. At least this is what they claimed. We all read conflicting reports. No matter how it happened. It is bad situation.

@JenMac That's exactly what I said when I heard the story. And uptowngirl has a good point, too, the thing was probably bored out of its mind with nowhere to go and nothing to do.

@BroadwayBK Except stare at the stupid tourists...

@Uraniumfish: I liked it when you said "stare at the stupid tourists." That made me laugh. Thanks.

Haha, @uraniumfish. Clearly the whales should be paying, and the tourists on display...

@Ajadedidealist: I like your way of thinking. You put a smile on my face. :)

Someone should make a museum where the tourists are the display. I would pay to gawk. Shouldn't be too hard to get them in there, just advertise the place as some sort of overpriced attraction - they will flock.

I'd pay too! Or, a brilliant venture - tourists on one side, NYC natives on the other side - and have both sides pay to look at the other side

@Ajadedidealist and @NeverSleeps: You have me cracking up here. :) You two are funny. I like the idea of putting of the tourist as an attraction. Then we can laugh at them for coming.

I have to admit that tourists sometimes really brighten my day. I just love how happy they seem to be here, and they don't take the city for granted like its inhabitants tend to do. Yes, they can be annoying in packs, but sometimes they are really adorable.

@ajadedidealist Good call! It is somehow less offensive if we are gawking at each other! I wonder why no one has thought of this yet...

@BroadwayBK: I ran into a tourist the other day. There were three of them together. When they spoke, they did so in that cute European accent. When I looked at them, they smiled at me and held up their cameras. One person had a small camcorder. I hope they didn't take a picture of me or video me. I'm not photogenic.

@BroadwayBk they are especially adorable when they come and spend their much needed dollars in the city!

@Uptowngirl: Without the tourist, this city would crumble financially.

I saw a family of tourists today. Mother, bewildered father with a map in his hand, and two teenage kids. The girl had on a Phantom of the Opera T shirt! On second look I noticed she also had a Phantom of the Opera matching rose ring! She wore both with not a single trace of irony! Way to spend your money, tourist family! They were totally adorable....and lost.

@uptowngirl @Uraniumfish Ha!

I have to admit they are not always so adorable. Once I was transferring trains at Canal St and this little old couple - who in no way could have been from New York - were not only taking their sweet time going down the stairs, but they were holding hands so no one could get by them. You could hear the commentary coming all the way down the stairs, but the tourists seemed completely oblivious.

I don't know if I find tourists adorable in any way.... Luckily they don't come out to Park Slope too often.

@BroadwayBK: You said the couple were old. How old? I have seen people, who were like in their '60s, walking down the stairs like they had forever. When I saw such a person, I walked down the stairs and turned to confront the guy and ask why he was walking so slowly. But when I saw his face, I could see he was wrinkled. He smiled despite suffering in pain. Once I saw that smile on his face, I smiled back and kept on going.

@hhusted They were elderly, they had every right to walk slowly down the stairs, they just should have had some consideration for other by not blocking the entire stairway. I wasn't really bothered, personally, but plenty of people behind me didn't hesitate to make their negative feelings known.

@BroadwayBK: Did those people confront the elder couple and yell at them for being slow?

@hhusted They just made snide and/or obnoxious comments, and directed them rather loudly at the poor old couple, as New Yorkers are apt to do.

I went to the San Diego Zoo a few years ago. It's supposed to be the best zoo in the world and I like animals a lot so I went. I will never go back and I will not ever take my children to a zoo. The exhibits really are extremely large compared to what most zoos have; and, they are jungle like in atmosphere instead of cages. But, it is the most awful and depressing thing I've ever seen. The ape exhibit was the worst. They have nearly human eyes and every single one of them, except for the alpha, was sitting against the window with their backs turned. . . as if to say, we are not your spectacle, you a holes. The alpha just stared at everyone and then starting throwing his crap at the window -- which I know happens a lot.
I agree, we should try putting people in a zoo and asking them to start doing tricks and see how long they last without trying to murder someone. . .

A Phantom of the Opera nose ring sounds fantastic, in a strange/eccentric way. Cooler than a T-Shirt, at any rate.

@JenMac: Wow. I am trying to visualize the look of those apes. I can't even imagine what they look like. But if I saw an ape with human eyes, I may just freak out, thinking maybe we are being invaded my aliens from Mars or some place.

That does sound indeed creepy, @Jenmac - I do feel for animals who live in cages - I've never really thought about the ethics of zoos before, but I imagine living in captivity is far inferior to living in the wild. Although I suppose there's a strong case to be made for preserving endangered species...

Yes, ajadedidealist, I do see the merits of protecting certain species. But, it was so incredibly sad, I couldn't take it. There's an abandoned zoo from the 1920's in Griffith Park in Los Angeles. We went to it once just for kicks and it blew our minds. The cages (they were actually cages) were so tiny and there were signs that indicated that things like lions and bears were in them. I guess we've come a long way in the last century, at least.

@ajadediealist I had the same feelings about the Phantom of the Opera ring, though it would probably be one of those things that I'd buy and never actually wear.

@JenMac I've actually been to a chimp farm, which was far more depressing than the zoo you described above. Anyway, long story short, one of the angry chimps had really good aim and, well, got me in the khaki shorts. I was twelve or something, and I don't think I've really been to an actual zoo since.

@Everybody: My favorite zoo is the petting one. I like going in and petting the animals. I like also feeding them. I even taught my girlfriend how to milk a cow. What fun.

neversleeps: Ahahahahahaha! I don't mean to laugh at your pain, but I did laugh out loud when I read your story.

@JenMac My little cousins thought it was pretty hilarious at the time, too. Those are one animal that should be put behind glass, if they've got to be in cages at all.

Hmmmm, I dunno, I kinda feel like maybe bears should be behind glass too . . .they seem awfully dextrous :)

Aren't they usually down in massive pits?

The closest thing I've been to a zoo lately is Busch Gardens in Tampa... I always feel really sorry for the animals that are forced to live in a theme park. I can barely last one day in such a place.

@BroadwayBK: I believe the animals that are in theme parks are under controlled environments. At least that is what I was told by someone who worked at a theme park.

@hhusted - you sound like my boyfriend! We were in the Cotswolds a few months ago and walking through some grass fields. We found a cow - I was afraid it would attack/kick/etc me, and my boyfriend had to convince me that cows were perfectly nice/sweet/safe

@Ajadedidealist: Cows won't hurt you unless they are provoked, then they will throw up their back legs and swish you hard with their tail. I assume neither of you went and touched the cow or even milked it.

Who would just randomly walk up to a cow and milk it?
And what does "controlled environment" mean, exactly?

@JenMac: Oh, I have heard stories of people who did go up and touch a cow that was grazing in a field. They didn't do it again.

As for a controlled environment, this is where there is much security, safety, and control. In other words, the animals are well cared for. Basically, it is an enclosure on a piece of land designed to hold specimens of a listed threatened or protected animal species in a way that will not be harmful to others.

The animals at Busch Gardens, though, are the kind that would really be happier roving around - at least that's what I always think when I look down in those deep pits at the lions and hippos and whatnot. They are massive beasts, and they make the theme park seem really small.

And - whoa! - these conversations take such strange turns sometimes, and suddenly we are chatting about randomly going up to cows and milking them!

Back in Florida, during my formative years, I heard plenty of tell of people tipping over sleeping cows. But not so much randomly milking them.

@Everybody: Just out of curiosity, how many people in this forum know how or have milked a cow?

I guess no one has read this forum topic in a while. Just for anyone's interest, not only have I milked a cow, I taught my girlfriend how to do it.