I see no reason why the Expos couldn't be competitive when you see teams like the Rays, Royals and Pirates fielding competitive teams. If they're well-managed and can build a farm system anywhere near as good as the old one they once had I'm not worried at all. Revenue in today's MLB is less dependent on gate receipts than it was back in 2004. It's all about broadcast rights and with TSN/RDS on board that won't be a problem. Nature abhors a vaccuum and Bell Media has a lot of hours to fill now that they don't have hockey or the Blue Jays. They would need to insist on national TV and radio exposure of course. The Blue Jays can't just assume that they get to keep their monopoly. The Expos lost theirs when the Jays entered the majors and the same thing will happen to the Jays when the Expos come back.
The biggest obstacle is the stadium. The most ideal location is no longer available. The Peel Basin site is okay but it's not well-served by transit and parking is an open question. I read the E&Y report when it came out and I don't recall much being said about parking. But that's sort of the trade-off you make when you put stadiums downtown as opposed to the suburbs where you can have a big parking lot surrounding the stadium. In any case I'm sure there will be room enough for a couple of multi-storey parkades at or near the bottom of Peel Street. Transit links are not yet determined. It's a hike from the nearest Metro station.
One of the other proposed sites is the former Children's Hospital area which would be right on top of the Atwater Metro station but forget about parking unless you're going to raze a lot of buildings. On the other hand, that end of Ste. Catherine could do with a few wrecking balls between Lambert-Closse and St. Marc.
I have no issue with having a so-called "budget" stadium either. First and foremost, we all know that whatever the projected cost is at the beginning, it will be over-budget because this is Quebec and corruption is still the way things work there. So the last thing you need is to have a stadium that starts out expensive and turns into the Big Owe Version 2.0. Secondly, you simply don't need to go insane with a stadium design. All you need to do is stick to the essentials. You want comfortable seating areas, good sightlines and a sufficient number of restrooms and concession areas. Yes you also want a limited number of club seats, corporate boxes, and the like. But what you do not need are grandiose entrance foyers with chandeliers and waterfalls. You don't need a Hard Rock Cafe in centrefield or a hotel attached to the stadium. You don't need escalators (which, let's face it, would be out of service half the time anyway) and you especially don't need a retractable roof.
Ah yes, the roof.
There's good and bad about putting in a roof but the bad outweighs the good. The E&Y study nailed this one, in my opinion. You look at Minneapolis where the Twins moved into the outdoor Target Field after decades under the dome. The weather in Minny is very similar to that which you see in Montreal which is why they chose it as a comparable. The number of games that have been rained out at Target Field do not support the enormous cost of installing a roof. Sure, it would be convenient in terms of drawing fans from further out of town if they knew for certain that any game to which they bought tickets would be played, rain or shine, but even then the added cost of a roof just ain't worth it. The retractable roof they put on Safeco Field in Seattle added hundreds of millions to the overall cost of the stadium and in all the time it's been in use they've only had to close it for a Mariners game a handful of times.
the new stadium doesn't have to be the 8th wonder of the industrialized world. It just has to be better and cheaper than the Olympic Stadium. How hard could that be?