New Downtown Calgary Arena

[Tropics]

UC-LAW - look at the numbers from nick.flood that I quoted. It showed percentages in 1998 and 2005 for both soccer and baseball, so those numbers answered your question.

They did not answer his question in the slightest.

Just because something is extremely popular in participation does not mean that it will be popular as a spectator sport. I play pool at a competitive level and the same types of studies are often quoted in an attempt to boost the interest of sponsors into the game but it does not work. Alot of people may casually play pool, alot might even partake in league play, but most of the people who "play" pool don't enjoy "watching" it be played, even at a professional level and thus the sport fails to get any viewership and the people who play it professionally make almost no money relative to other sports.

Kids might be playing soccer, some adults might be playing soccer in leagues, but that does not mean that all of those people are automatically going to be interested in going out and "watching" other people play soccer and paying money to do it. It is that interest people have in "watching" a sport where the money comes from and that leads to the ultimate success and failure of a professional sport.

[nick.flood]

delete

[UC-LAW]

Is that a serious question?

no it wasn't. Because soccer isn't; atleast to me anyways.

I love baseball, great sport. so many things that go on that the average person doesn't realize.

Do you know how hard it is to throw a slider?

anyways my posts are not to get into a subjective debate on which sport is "better". so I hope we will not get into that.

Anecdotally though, baseball is a far more popular sport to watch than soccer. i have friends that play both but in terms of watching professional games, the numbers are definately one sided (other than the World Cup which many people watch so as to go and have a few beers)

What happens in 20 years? who knows... but Calgary would more likely get an MLS franchise than an MLB franchise. Do we have anyone here willing to spend 2 billion on a baseball franchise and another 100 million a year on salaries? doubtful

[ZeDgE]

Anecdotally though, baseball is a far more popular sport to watch than soccer. i have friends that play both but in terms of watching professional games, the numbers are definately one sided (other than the World Cup which many people watch so as to go and have a few beers)



Say what? Do you have numbers to back this up? I find this a bit amusing to me honest. Billions watch the world cup, not to mention Champions league, Euro cup etc. Even the leagues in Europe and other parts of the world have huge viewer ship. Stadiums that seat 70k plus full for every game. Its not even a fair comparison. Soccer destroys baseball as far as fans and viewer ship or anything for that matter.. Maybe in your 'baseball bubble' this is true but cmon now. Just wow..

[fusili]

Do you know how hard it is to throw a slider?

Anecdotally though, baseball is a far more popular sport to watch than soccer. i have friends that play both but in terms of watching professional games, the numbers are definately one sided (other than the World Cup which many people watch so as to go and have a few beers)


Throwing a slider is nowhere near as hard as watching a single inning of that recreational activity (I refuse to call it a sport). I don't care how hard it is- that "sport" sucks.

Despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary, soccer is by far much more popular than baseball. The World Cup is the most watched event in the entire world (more than the summer Olympics). Something like 4 billion people watch the final match. My friend lives in Madrid and was there when Spain won last world cup. I believe over a million people were in the street celebrating.

Sorry to break this to you, but three countries in the world watch baseball (USA, Cuba, Japan), while every single country in the entire world enters a team for the world cup (except the Vatican and a few other city states). Even Bhutan and Montserrat enter teams. I mean, they suck really bad, but they do.

Baseball is fine, and you may like it, but saying that somehow this means it is more popular than soccer is lunacy.

[Tropics]

Haha. Yet you claim that Calgary will get a MLB franchise because they will get lots of support from surrounding communites and rural areas where softball is HUGE. :tup:

Baseball way bigger "than" soccer in this country?

Baseball and softball in the rural areas is huge in not only participation but as a spectator sport. Baseball tournaments bring out the whole community for the most part, players and spectators alike.

The draw that baseball can have on this country cannot be denied when looking at the 90's Blue Jays fever that swept across the entire of Canada.

As a "spectator" sport, I think baseball would do ALOT better then soccer in Canada. Your opinion may differ, that is cool, I am OK with that.

[Ayreonaut]

In spending my first two decades in Southern Alberta, I've met two people that watch baseball.
It was one of the first things I noticed when I came to St. John's - kids in my classes actually talking about the MLB. It was a foreign experience for me.

I know a lot of people that watch soccer, though. Mostly international games, Premier League, and Champions League.

[Ayreonaut]

The draw that baseball can have on this country cannot be denied when looking at the 90's Blue Jays fever that swept across the entire of Canada.


So the MLB would do fine as long as the team makes the World Series every year.

[Tropics]

So the MLB would do fine as long as the team makes the World Series every year.

As I said.

Your opinion may differ, that is cool, I am OK with that.

[freeweed]

In spending my first two decades in Southern Alberta, I've met two people that watch baseball.

You've now met 3 (if online forums count). I love minor league baseball, in a decent facility. Foothills is a shithole, otherwise I'd probably have Vipers season tickets. It's relaxing, it's interesting, and anyone who is a statistics nerd should look into Baseball. It's one of if not the most analyzed sport from that perspective.

Baseball to me is a lot like curling. A lot of standing around, punctuated by brief moments of exciting action where millimetres count. Mind you, I also find Football to be somewhat like this. Soccer is plenty of running around with not much going on other than passing, with the occasional bit of excitement interrupting the diving and ref begging.

And all of these sports garner huge spectator audiences in the right places. Although an MLB franchise in Calgary is ... well laughable isn't a strong enough term. Calgary's baseball season is 3 months AT BEST.

[fusili]

Do you know how hard it is to throw a slider?

l

Maybe throwing a slider is hard, but this goal by Roberto Carlos is almost physically impossible.

YouTube Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nHUCyNkezI) (I still can't figure out how to embed in SSP). :shrug:

[ZeDgE]

As a "spectator" sport, I think baseball would do ALOT better then soccer in Canada. Your opinion may differ, that is cool, I am OK with that.

I would like to know what alternate reality you live in?

There is one pro baseball team in this country which can barely muster 25k attendance, and what happened to the other team if its so good? We now have three MLS teams drawing crowds over 50k at some games. Soccer is on the upswing in North America, thats just a fact. World wide its not even open for discussion. Cricket or Rugby are bigger world wide for petes sake. Its fine if you like baseball, but soccer is already surpassing it as a spectator sport in this country, there is alot more desire for it.

[freeweed]

Maybe throwing a slider is hard, but this goal by Roberto Carlos is almost physically impossible.

YouTube Link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nHUCyNkezI) (I still can't figure out how to embed in SSP). :shrug:

[ youtube ] 6nHUCyNkezI [ /youtube ] <-- with no spaces

6nHUCyNkezI

(Just quote my post and compare it to your link and you might have the light bulb go off)

That sort of goal happens in hockey from time to time. Plus, it's easy to curve the ball in soccer (semi-ironically, he's doing something baseball pitchers do all the time). Very, very skilled player - but impossible? Not by a long shot. I can't even imagine how *I* would do it but I can see how someone with tremendous skill does it. The only reason it's so impressive is that scoring in soccer is about as rare as scoring at church.

[fusili]

The only reason it's so impressive is that scoring in soccer is about as rare as scoring at church.

You just won the internets. That made my night.

[Tropics]

I would like to know what alternate reality you live in?

There is one pro baseball team in this country which can barely muster 25k attendance, and what happened to the other team if its so good? We now have three MLS teams drawing crowds over 50k at some games.

It is simply the real reality.

Montreal did draw 58,912+ on March 17, 2012 in their franchise opener, but they also drew 23,120 to their second home game.

Vancouver drew 21,000 fans to the March 10th game, they drew 19,394 fans to their March 24, 2012 game.

Toronto drew 20,070 fans to the March 24, 2012 game, they drew 23,120 fans to the next on April 7 2012.

These are by no means disrespectful numbers, but your claim that we have three Canadian teams pulling in 50k+ fans at some games is BS, we have ONE team that did that ONE time. I don't mind debating this but if you are going to start pulling out numbers to push your arguement how about using real ones?

Of all the cities in Canada where soccer might really work I think it would be Montreal, I would NEVER have bet against them supporting soccer, but that market is nothing like Calgary. Toronto can support almost anyting given their size. Vancouver will have to work hard for their soccer team to not end up like their basketball team that so many people thought the city would support, instead that just ended up being a huge waste of money.

[Ramsayfarian]

I can watch soccer highlights all freakin' day, but watching an entire game is like watching paint dry for me.

[DizzyEdge]

Going to a baseball game is like going to a bbq. You enjoy the sun, drink some beer, eat a hotdog, and maybe watch the kids play croque..er watch the game. It's enjoyable.

[ZeDgE]

It is simply the real reality.

Montreal did draw 58,912+ on March 17, 2012 in their franchise opener, but they also drew 23,120 to their second home game.

Vancouver drew 21,000 fans to the March 10th game, they drew 19,394 fans to their March 24, 2012 game.

Toronto drew 20,070 fans to the March 24, 2012 game, they drew 23,120 fans to the next on April 7 2012.

These are by no means disrespectful numbers, but your claim that we have three Canadian teams pulling in 50k+ fans at some games is BS, we have ONE team that did that ONE time. I don't mind debating this but if you are going to start pulling out numbers to push your arguement how about using real ones?

Of all the cities in Canada where soccer might really work I think it would be Montreal, I would NEVER have bet against them supporting soccer, but that market is nothing like Calgary. Toronto can support almost anyting given their size. Vancouver will have to work hard for their soccer team to not end up like their basketball team that so many people thought the city would support, instead that just ended up being a huge waste of money.

You realize that 21k in Van is pretty much a sell out. Same for Toronto. and Montreal when they move to their permanent home. Also the TFC Galaxy game in Toronto drew 47k at Rogers Centre, so not just one game. Most MLS stadiums are around 20k, Seattle is one exception that draws 35k a game. They have an awesome stadium though. Calgary with a decent stadium could draw 20k for an MLS team if we tried. Better than baseball, how many teams have we had? 3, 4? Who could barely muster a couple thousand, usually hundreds. And they have a proper stadium, unlike the pathetic attempts we have had at soccer in this city, such a bloody waste. And regarding numbers..show me some. Where are all these baseball games happening with 20k or more all over Canada? Looks like one city, one team to me. Rest of the country couldn't care less. Our large immigrant population is surging the popularity of Soccer and its only going to continue to grow in this country.

[Tropics]

You realize that 21k in Van is pretty much a sell out. Same for Toronto. and Montreal when they move to their permanent home.

<snip>

Most MLS stadiums are around 20k

OK, thays great, but don't say this then.

pro baseball team in this country which can barely muster 25k attendance, and what happened to the other team if its so good? We now have three MLS teams drawing crowds over 50k at some games.

You attempted to make out that baseball struggles to barely draw in 25,000 people and that soccer blows that number out of the water, but now you admit that the stadiums that the Canadian MLS teams play out of are not even capable of holding that number of people.

Calgary with a decent stadium could draw 20k for an MLS team if we tried.

I think that would be really hard to do in this city, we are not much of a soccer city compared to any of the other cities that actually have a MLS team and our population compared to those cities is alot lower.

Better than baseball, how many teams have we had? 3, 4? Who could barely muster a couple thousand, usually hundreds.

We have never had a major league team. The Cannon's did ok when they were here when I was young, I went to afew of their games and they sold out back then (25-30 years ago) at times. But minor league second teir sports teams never do all that well as far as fan support goes. People want to watch the top pros, not the second teir for the most part unless they are diehard fans. I would go watch the occasional pro baseball game if we had a major league team, I would not bother going to watch the Vipers.

And they have a proper stadium, unlike the pathetic attempts we have had at soccer in this city, such a bloody waste.

Perhaps a waste of "potential", but if they build a stadium for what, $100,000,000 and the team fails to catch on, if you are wrong, then it is not a waste of potential, it is a waste of that $100,000,000 which we could build 4 more bridges with!

And regarding numbers..show me some. Where are all these baseball games happening with 20k or more all over Canada?

Where the only major league pro team we have is. The only other team we had was in Montreal and that place is a whole other beast that barely supports any of their teams in any sport.

TBH, I think BOTH pro soccer and pro baseball would be a hard sell in this city due to our population and the interest in either sport the average person in this city has. I know alot of people who are diehard fans of soccer and go to the pubs to watch the league play, but I have also been in those pubs and seen how many people cram into the places to watch those games. It is not exactly playoff hockey numbers of people or Grey Cup/Superbowl numbers going to watch pro playoff soccer. Even the number of people who truly watch the World Cup is a drop in the bucket compared to hockey playoffs or a playoff football match.

My comment was that I think Baseball would do better then Soccer at the pro level as far as getting fans into the seats and getting people to watch the games on TV, but I think neither one would do well enough to support a team in this city at this time.

[nick.flood]

delete

[Innersoul1]

Tropics, dude, you are fighting a losing battle here man.

Consistently, baseball has failed in this city. Now, that's not to say that soccer hasn't because it had. But I don't think that baseball has nearly as much of a draw, or potential draw that soccer does.

Let's look at a few factors with regard to the MLS in Canada. Soccer has been successful for decades in the cities of Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. I would suggest that this is based on two factors. Firstly, that they have all previously had soccer franchises that have been well supported for years. The Impact in Montreal, the Lynx in Toronto and the Whitecaps in Vancouver. This has created a generational support of the team along with the fact that they are familiar to all of the cities. Secondly, all three of these cities have large populations of immigrants who often come from soccer mad countries. This leads to a lot of support from that alone. Each of these cities have used the popularity of the support to get fans out for games. I would go so far as to suggest a third factor being that each of the franchises run a development program at the grassroots level as a means of developing soccer and soccer players in their respective cities (The Calgary Storm were quite successful using this model).

All of the three Canadian teams have used the model of building small stadia with the potential of expansion for their success. Albeit, Vancouver had no intentions of being at Swangard long term, they hoped to build an water front stadium that never came to fruition. Now they are VERY comfortable in BC Place where there are able to somewhat create an intimate soccer specific environment. Toronto scored well with BMO Field (built for $72 million) having a capacity of just under 22,000. It's a great stadium but many would suggest that they are close to out growing it. Montreal's Saputo stadium has also served them well and the during the Impact's tenure in the A-League. However, the capacity of 13,000 is too small so a current expansion will take them to a capacity of just over 20,000 by June. Plus, each of the teams have been able to draw large numbers at larger stadia showing that soccer can be HUGE and can be widely supported.

I mention the above because one of the factors that I believe have plagued soccer teams in Calgary has been the lack of a suitable playing venue. As I have said before, Calgarian's are fickle especially when it comes to weather. There is not desire to sit outside in the wind, rain or snow for soccer or even baseball games. I strongly believe that professional soccer could be successful in Calgary if we had a proper stadium that with a proper playing surface . The Storm failed in part because bleachers and port-a-potties don't cut it and the Mustangs failed because Astro turf ruins the game.

I would suggest that soccer as some have suggested above is a lot of running with moments of brilliance. So the experience and atmosphere of being at games is essential. Part of that experience is created by fan clubs or ultras . In Montreal the Ultras, in Toronto the U-Sector and Red Patch Boys and in Vancouver the Southsiders. These groups with their chats, and dances help to build the atmosphere.

Of the Canadian teams Vancouver has the largest development to undertake. The pitch at BC Place has been criticized and they haven't had the consistent numbers that Montreal and Toronto have had. That being said their geographical location in "Cascadia" has created some natural rivalries with Seattle and Portland. That is HUGE.

I honestly, think that at some point we could have an MLS team but first we need to build the game. We can't expect to have a stadium and throw a team in and have success. I really thing that we would have the support in Calgary especially if we got corporate Calgary behind the process.

[Tropics]

Tropics, dude, you are fighting a losing battle here man.

It is not a battle, it is a discussion. I could honestly not care less if they put a MLS team into Calgary or they don't. If people want to risk their money on it go ahead, have at it. I would rather there are no tax dollars spent on it, otherwise go ahead and buy a team, build a stadium, prove me wrong.

The only thing certain is that "talk" is not going to prove anything on either side, only action will.

[UC-LAW]

Say what? Do you have numbers to back this up? I find this a bit amusing to me honest. Billions watch the world cup, not to mention Champions league, Euro cup etc. Even the leagues in Europe and other parts of the world have huge viewer ship. Stadiums that seat 70k plus full for every game. Its not even a fair comparison. Soccer destroys baseball as far as fans and viewer ship or anything for that matter.. Maybe in your 'baseball bubble' this is true but cmon now. Just wow..

ok i will admit that my comment was written wrong. it was meant as an anecdote on the people i know personally.

But you cannot say billions of people watch the sport in the world and then claim it would work in Calgary where it doesnt fall within the bif 4 sports. different countries/cultures watch different sports

I also said i didnt want to have this debate because its useless arguing over what sport is better so i will not comment on it again. Everyone has a personal preference to what sports they enjoy. I love baseball, i have a lot of friends who really enjoy baseball. Me and some friends are planning a trip to the NE US to watch a few ball games in different cities. I've watched soccer live (EP League) and on TV. Watching soccer live is just like baseball, its slow but you go there for the experience of the crowd than the action on the field. Very enjoyable.

Could Calgary support an MLS team? i dont know what salaries and such are but they could
Could Calgary support an MLB team? NO, way too much money for a team we couldnt draw 50,000 fans a game (neither could we for soccer)
Could Calgary support a AA or AAA farm team? Absolutely!

[MalcolmTucker]

AAA ball would be hard here without more western canada teams. Travel costs add up for both sides. Edmonton was the last hold out, but the lack of other Canadian teams made it hard. Are there even any AAA out east anymore?

I would support tax payers supporting soccer or baseball stadia up to a certain price (less than $30 or 50 million?) in exchange for location agreements of 10 years or so.

There is a case to be made for community amentity up to a point.

[UC-LAW]

AAA ball would be hard here without more western canada teams. Travel costs add up for both sides. Edmonton was the last hold out, but the lack of other Canadian teams made it hard. Are there even any AAA out east anymore?

I would support tax payers supporting soccer or baseball stadia up to a certain price (less than $30 or 50 million?) in exchange for location agreements of 10 years or so.

There is a case to be made for community amentity up to a point.

That is definately a problem. there are some in the PCL league that are in Colorado.
In terms of Canadian minor league teams, there are the Vancouver Giants and one out of ottawa area (both low A ball i think)

But yes its been done before in Calgary and Alberta in general. not sure how well it would go (we all know about sports in calgary that arent high level pro teams and/or not hockey) but i know i would be there often! there were probably 2,000 people at Vipers games on a given day and thats without any players who anyone had ever heard of. Im sure with MLB prosepects, you could attract MLB fans

[freeweed]

one of the factors that I believe have plagued soccer teams in Calgary has been the lack of a suitable playing venue. As I have said before, Calgarian's are fickle especially when it comes to weather. There is not desire to sit outside in the wind, rain or snow for soccer or even baseball games. I strongly believe that professional soccer could be successful in Calgary if we had a proper stadium that with a proper playing surface . The Storm failed in part because bleachers and port-a-potties don't cut it and the Mustangs failed because Astro turf ruins the game.

Agreed 100%. It's also why I see baseball never doing well here. Although I don't think it's that Calgarians are fickle - it's that our bloody weather is fickle. The only outdoor sport that remotely works here is Football, and that's because people are used to Football being played in the snow half the time (hyperbole).

When it can snow literally any month of the year, and the evenings go down to the single digits - not many people are gonna sit outside to watch a "summer" sport. Especially when it is 25 when the game starts. We tried baseball for a couple of years here but it got almost impossible to dress for without bringing a freaking suitcase.

Lacrosse is kinda working, because we play in an indoor league. I bet it would also fail if played outdoors during the "summer".

[Innersoul1]

Just thought that I would add this quote from a recent TSN article. It quotes the MLS commish on criteria for expansion.

He identified three key factors that MLS evaluates in potential expansion targets. Among them: an ownership group financially capable of operating the team, a stadium seating between 20,000 and 25,000, and a market that can draw roughly that many fans and generate corporate support.

[Bigtime]

Leaked images of preliminary designs for the new YEG arena. If anything close to this comes to fruition up there I definitely don't want to see some faux-historicist Stampede themed bullshit in our new arena:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmonton/6514179/story.html

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/6515507.bin?size=620x400s

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/6516696.bin?size=620x400s

[Coldrsx]

^:) Bar has been set:)

[Bigtime]

^:) Bar has been set:)

Dare I say "Challenge Accepted" Edmonton?

I'm still scared we'll go historic style... :yuck:

[Coldrsx]

^giddy up.

Yeehaw

[DizzyEdge]

Can't wait for the "chuckwagon dome" down here...

[Calgarian]

Can't wait for the "chuckwagon dome" down here...

lol, or a damn cowboy hat.

[s211]

Dare I say "Challenge Accepted" Edmonton?

I'm still scared we'll go historic style... :yuck:

For everyone's sake, I hope that the urge gets resisted.

From a city that once openly mused about changing casual Fridays to country and western Fridays (wasn't Bronconnier [sic?] around at the time?), hopefully the city is now mature enough get past the urge to historicize.

[Innersoul1]

Oh lord, if that is what Edmonton is playing with I am pretty sure that we are screwed. That building is cutting edge! I looks totally amazing. I wonder if the Flames are ambitious enough to follow suit or if the lack of funding from the city will be the achilles heel of our project.

[polishavenger]

The mothership has landed. Gorgeous, let the cost cutting and neutering of the design begin.

[DizzyEdge]

It kinda looks like a porkchop from TRON

[stampedeyeehaa]

For everyone's sake, I hope that the urge gets resisted.

From a city that once openly mused about changing casual Fridays to country and western Fridays (wasn't Bronconnier [sic?] around at the time?), hopefully the city is now mature enough get past the urge to historicize.

People come expecting a Stampede city with a modern twist. I say go with it.

No way edmonton can build that Arena with the money they are talking about. Worst yet is they now set the bar so even cutting 100M off the budget will be a massive let down.

[fusili]

I know I will raise the ire of many on this discussion- but I don't think a single public dollar should be spent on either the yeg or yyc arenas. Education, health care, police, infrastructure- sure. But entertainment should never receive public funding.

[DizzyEdge]

I know I will raise the ire of many on this discussion- but I don't think a single public dollar should be spent on either the yeg or yyc arenas. Education, health care, police, infrastructure- sure. But entertainment should never receive public funding.

I would make an exception if the arena would be the cornerstone of the revitalization of a blighted area, although even then tax abatement might be better than outright funding.

[Bigtime]

I would make an exception if the arena would be the cornerstone of the revitalization of a blighted area, although even then tax abatement might be better than outright funding.

A good point, but one could argue that in the Calgary case the new arena is most likely going into an area that is already undergoing revitalization (east Beltline and East Village).

Just playing devils advocate.

[DizzyEdge]

A good point, but one could argue that in the Calgary case the new arena is most likely going into an area that is already undergoing revitalization (east Beltline and East Village).

Just playing devils advocate.

I agree, that's why although I don't care that much either way, I would be ok with not funding a new arena.

[fusili]

I would make an exception if the arena would be the cornerstone of the revitalization of a blighted area, although even then tax abatement might be better than outright funding.

A good point, but one could argue that in the Calgary case the new arena is most likely going into an area that is already undergoing revitalization (east Beltline and East Village).

Just playing devils advocate.

Stadiums rarely attract additional development and tax revenue to offset the cost of the stadium itself. Stadium boosters will always say things like "it will bring in additional tax revenue for the city", but usually this is a shell game, as the increased business from the stadium is just due to people shifting money from other things in the city. Not always the case, but I am always wary of people advocating public money for stadiums and other sports facilities (community soccer fields and arenas are a different matter IMO).

[You Need A Thneed]

Stadiums rarely attract additional development and tax revenue to offset the cost of the stadium itself. Stadium boosters will always say things like "it will bring in additional tax revenue for the city", but usually this is a shell game, as the increased business from the stadium is just due to people shifting money from other things in the city. Not always the case, but I am always wary of people advocating public money for stadiums and other sports facilities (community soccer fields and arenas are a different matter IMO).

I think that a city working with the team to build an arena at the best location is something that should be in the city's best interest. Perhaps it takes a little bit of money infusion to help that, but at a certain point, the benefit would be gone. However, I agree with you that cities should not fund sports stadiums for teams in any great amount. Subsidizing billionaires.

I think that the funding scheme proposed up in Edmonton is quite bizarre. So much public money proposed to go into a project that benefits the public almost nothing, and then additional public funding to reduce the billionaire owners portion through a "management fee".

Essentially, the city is building an arena, letting the Oilers Ownership make all the profit on it, and then paying Katz EXTRA to manage the arena for the city. If the Flames were asking for the same model of financing, they'd be laughed out the door.

[Innersoul1]

I know I will raise the ire of many on this discussion- but I don't think a single public dollar should be spent on either the yeg or yyc arenas. Education, health care, police, infrastructure- sure. But entertainment should never receive public funding.

There is a real separation between entertainment and "the arts" why can't we have a facility that can accommoadte both. I have always been an advocate for any arena to have a modern concerts facility that might be used for arts organization (other than the usual mid-sized concerts).

Any thoughts?

[fusili]

There is a real separation between entertainment and "the arts" why can't we have a facility that can accommoadte both. I have always been an advocate for any arena to have a modern concerts facility that might be used for arts organization (other than the usual mid-sized concerts).

Any thoughts?

The small libertarian / Benthamite is coming out in me: I don't think the arts should receive funding either. I am sure people like the opera, symphony, ballet, etc etc, but I don't think government's role is to fund them. Tax breaks, sure, but never, ever direct funding.

[polishavenger]

I know I will raise the ire of many on this discussion- but I don't think a single public dollar should be spent on either the yeg or yyc arenas. Education, health care, police, infrastructure- sure. But entertainment should never receive public funding.

I agree to a point. I only think public money should be spent on stadiums if approved by super majority in a plebiscite as a one time property tax levy. That way the cost is shared progressively and the spending has overwhelming public support.

The stadium should be publicly owned and run at a profit, so no special deals with sporting tenants with sweetheart concession revenues.

[fusili]

I agree to a point. I only think public money should be spent on stadiums if approved by super majority in a plebiscite as a one time property tax levy. That way the cost is shared progressively and the spending has overwhelming public support.

The stadium should be publicly owned and run at a profit, so no special deals with sporting tenants with sweetheart concession revenues.

Would you agree that funding for a MMA arena if it had overwhelming majority support would be acceptable? How about a cat museum composed entirely of photos of cats doing funny things? Or a lawn bowling stadium?

I don't see in any way how entertainment is a public good, and therefore should not receive public support. Popularity does not equal public benefit. It just means popularity. I don't believe it is the government's role to subsidize goods that are a matter of taste. If so, we should be sending subsidy cheques to Activision for making Call of Duty 3. This is a serious argument. If people want a subsidy for watching flames games, I think the same subsidy should be applied to other forms of entertainment, including video games, movies, etc etc.

[jeffwhit]

The small libertarian / Benthamite is coming out in me: I don't think the arts should receive funding either. I am sure people like the opera, symphony, ballet, etc etc, but I don't think government's role is to fund them. Tax breaks, sure, but never, ever direct funding.

Just so you know, there, in all of western civilization, has never been a time when the arts weren't directly funded by some form of government. So, one might wonder what the state of the arts would be without some direct government funding.

In Canada arts organizations can't even offer the tax incentives that their American counterparts enjoy in order to attract donors.

In reality does it matter if the government contribution to the arts come in the form of tax credits or direct funding, especially since the direct funding model almost is always far less of a burden on the government coffers once the accounting is done? I understand, ideologically there is a substantial difference, but when does ideology ever have anything to do with reality?

[fusili]

Just so you know, there, in all of western civilization, has never been a time when the arts weren't directly funded by some form of government. So, one might wonder what the state of the arts would be without some direct government funding.

In Canada arts organizations can't even offer the tax incentives that their American counterparts enjoy in order to attract donors.

In reality does it matter if the government contribution to the arts come in the form of tax credits or direct funding, especially since the direct funding model almost is always far less of a burden on the government coffers once the accounting is done? I understand, ideologically there is a substantial difference, but when does ideology ever have anything to do with reality?

Tax incentives 100%. I am all for that. I have no problem with offering tax breaks for the arts. I am also big on funding music and art programs in school. I am very supportive of reducing regulatory and tax burdens on the arts. But never direct funding.

Here is the difference between tax breaks and direct funding. Direct funding implies a judgement. We will fund the symphony, but not the break dancers performing in the street. Ballet gets funding, but not a graffiti artist. What about video games? Bad Hollywood movies? When we directly fund art, we imply that one is worthy of funding and the other is not. Who is to say that the thousands of people watching monster truck events are any less worthy of subsidy than those attending the opera? Both are watching a performance. Should Rammstein get a subsidy when they go on tour? It is an old aristocratic idea of "high art" and "low art" and I want no part of it.

I might be pulling this out of my ass, but most funding for the arts in previous centuries came from wealthy aristocrats or the church who would pay composers/musicians/etc to do their work (Beethoven for one IIRC). The government didn't pay for it out of tax revenue (some governments did sometimes).

Look, if people think arts are important, they should go pay the proper price to see them.


EDIT- Oh, just one last thing- I am totally in support of public art. The difference is that it is non-exclusionary.

[polishavenger]

Would you agree that funding for a MMA arena if it had overwhelming majority support would be acceptable? How about a cat museum composed entirely of photos of cats doing funny things? Or a lawn bowling stadium?

I don't see in any way how entertainment is a public good, and therefore should not receive public support. Popularity does not equal public benefit. It just means popularity. I don't believe it is the government's role to subsidize goods that are a matter of taste. If so, we should be sending subsidy cheques to Activision for making Call of Duty 3. This is a serious argument. If people want a subsidy for watching flames games, I think the same subsidy should be applied to other forms of entertainment, including video games, movies, etc etc.

The primary difference between a stadium and the examples you chose is the multi use element of a stadium vs the very specific forms you list. A stadium can be seen as a piece of public infrastructure that allows for concerts, trade shows, sporting events, etc. The problem I see comes up when sports teams coerce, or use connections with politicians to subsidize their private gains with public funds.

[polishavenger]

I might be pulling this out of my ass, but most funding for the arts in previous centuries came from wealthy aristocrats or the church who would pay composers/musicians/etc to do their work (Beethoven for one IIRC). The government didn't pay for it out of tax revenue (some governments did sometimes).



Neither here nor there in terms of relevancy, but where do you think the church and aristocrats got their money from?

[fusili]

Neither here nor there in terms of relevancy, but where do you think the church and aristocrats got their money from?

Tithes and land respectively.

[jeffwhit]

Tithes and land respectively.

Just to enlighten you a little:

http://www.madaboutbeethoven.com/pages/people_and_places/people_patrons/people_patrons_main.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart's_employers_and_patrons

Mozart worked directly for the Emperor of Austria for the majority of his adult life.

Also, just so you know, patronage to a composer is one thing, you do you think employed the musicians and crew at the state owned opera houses?

Aristocracy and Church are completely analogous to today's government in terms of relative historical roles.

Also, when the CPO gives free performances to the terminally ill, the poor, tens of thousands of school children, and other people who are unable to pay to see the orchestra play in a traditional setting, that is where the government funding comes in. I think you are probably unaware of how government grant funding works for the arts; there are no cheques just written to most arts organizations that are aren't tied to a long and arduous process of fulfilling a lengthy list of requirements for using the money for example the purposes I listed above.

[fusili]

Just to enlighten you a little:

http://www.madaboutbeethoven.com/pages/people_and_places/people_patrons/people_patrons_main.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wolfgang_Amadeus_Mozart's_employers_and_patrons

Mozart worked directly for the Emperor of Austria for the majority of his adult life.

Also, just so you know, patronage to a composer is one thing, you do you think employed the musicians and crew at the state owned opera houses?

Aristocracy and Church are completely analogous to today's government in terms of relative historical roles.

Also, when the CPO gives free performances to the terminally ill, the poor, tens of thousands of school children, and other people who are unable to pay to see the orchestra play in a traditional setting, that is where the government funding comes in. I think you are probably unaware of how government grant funding works for the arts; there are no cheques just written to most arts organizations that are aren't tied to a long and arduous process of fulfilling a lengthy list of requirements for using the money for example the purposes I listed above.

Sorry, didn't mean to offend. I am all for paying for kids or the poor to go see the CPO. Perhaps I just don't understand the funding system well enough. You may have turned me on funding for things like the CPO. But I stand by no government funding for the Flames or Oilers.

[polishavenger]

Tithes and land respectively.

Taxes by any other name are still taxes.

[polishavenger]

But I stand by no government funding for the Flames or Oilers.

I agree, but that doesnt mean the city cant build a stadium based on a long term lease from a sports team and a solid business case for other uses. The benefit of the city building and the sports team leasing is that the city has deeper pockets with better financing terms, and can focus more on being the landlord and renting the building out while the individual users focus on the strenghts in runnng their respective businesses.

I would like the city to build a stadium in a partnership with retail/office/residential developers. The sale of air rights would offset some of the capital costs of the stadium, and a master planned project can create a critical mass that would make year round, 24/7 use a real possibility. This way a stadium is a money maker, not a subsidy. The stampede grounds make this a real possibility, and to a lesser extent, so would the Mcmahon area.

[MichaelS]

Hasn't the city kind of already done that, by providing a stadium on the stampede grounds already? The saddle dome. Why spend hundreds of millions more so the flames can have more box seats?

[jeffwhit]

Sorry, didn't mean to offend. I am all for paying for kids or the poor to go see the CPO. Perhaps I just don't understand the funding system well enough. You may have turned me on funding for things like the CPO. But I stand by no government funding for the Flames or Oilers.

Not offended at all. Just pointing out that funding for the arts works in a very controlled way, and also, the funding is granted through arms-reach organizations like Calgary Arts Development, and AFA, so there isn't really a value judgement by the governement on what gets funding. I'm positive the AFA and Calgary Arts Development has given grants to the kinds of things you mentioned earlier on this thread. I mean, thing like Chad Vangaalen's first big album received AFA funding, it's right in the liner notes.

As for public money for the Flames and Oilers - I agree, these are private, for profit businesses. However, I think a city owning, or having an ownership stake in a major league arena is a benefit to the city.

[fusili]

Not offended at all. Just pointing out that funding for the arts works in a very controlled way, and also, the funding is granted through arms-reach organizations like Calgary Arts Development, and AFA, so there isn't really a value judgement by the governement on what gets funding. I'm positive the AFA and Calgary Arts Development has given grants to the kinds of things you mentioned earlier on this thread. I mean, thing like Chad Vangaalen's first big album received AFA funding, it's right in the liner notes.

As for public money for the Flames and Oilers - I agree, these are private, for profit businesses. However, I think a city owning, or having an ownership stake in a major league arena is a benefit to the city.

I am all for CADA. One thing I think CADA should have a larger role in is public art. Basically, I don't think the City of Calgary should have any part in developing arts strategies- that should be put in the hands of organizations like CADA.

[jeffwhit]

I am all for CADA. One thing I think CADA should have a larger role in is public art. Basically, I don't think the City of Calgary should have any part in developing arts strategies- that should be put in the hands of organizations like CADA.

It is, the city provides CADA with a portion of it's budget, CADA does the granting. I know the public art initiative is handled by City Hall, but basically, CADA does all the granting of city provided money. And I agree with you completely by the way on this.

[Calgarian]

Video flythrough of the Edmonton Arena. F'n sick!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSP-GcVtLp8&feature=youtube_gdata_player Not sure how to embed this format...

[Bigtime]

BSP-GcVtLp8

[Coldrsx]

Can't wait to see how you guys respond to this.

[eggbert]

O-M-G!!! That's amazing!

Here's some more great photos too:
http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=631867&navid=DL|EDM|home

[Surrealplaces]

Looks great. Maybe Calgary will do what they did last time; wait until Edmonton builds theirs and then do something better ;)

Seriously though, it's a great looking arena, it would hard to build something better. Hopefully Calgary's new arena is at least as nice.

Can't wait to see how you guys respond to this.

[GTING]

Stunning! What a huge boost this will be for the Edmonton downtown. Are they still planning on that standing room viewing area high up at press level? I couldn't really see it in the video.

I can only wish we get something that unique here in Calgary. No stampitecture please!!

[CtrlAltDel]

Can't wait to see how you guys respond to this.

Oh don't you worry about us....according to this previously unreleased conceptual image, our new barn will blow your beautiful, sleek, modern arena out the barn door!

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/719/calgaryarenabarn.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/calgaryarenabarn.jpg/)
(Hastily sketched by me)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Seriously though, way to go Edmonton! Truly magnificent.

[ByeByeBaby]

That's an awesome looking arena! Eggbert's link to the Oilers site has council presentations, which include full floorplans of every level; there's some sort of "sky terrace" there. The parking is only 300 stalls under the arena, but downtown Edmonton is probably able to absorb a lot more at night once the office workers have gone home. Lots of neat details; the Oil Kings' dressing room is larger than the NHL visitor's. And there's 56 square meters devoted to beer.

Calgary will have a hell of a time putting together a nicer facility than this one.

My only question is what the hell is a "winter garden"?

[MichaelS]

Has Edmonton secured all of the funding yet? Last I heard they were still $100 million short.

[Calgarian]

Oh don't you worry about us....according to this previously unreleased conceptual image, our new barn will blow your beautiful, sleek, modern arena out the barn door!


Seriously though, way to go Edmonton! Truly magnificent.

I don't think there are enough horse statues for that to truly be a Calgary project.

[Bigtime]

Oh don't you worry about us....according to this previously unreleased conceptual image, our new barn will blow your beautiful, sleek, modern arena out the barn door!

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/719/calgaryarenabarn.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/calgaryarenabarn.jpg/)
(Hastily sketched by me)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Seriously though, way to go Edmonton! Truly magnificent.

"My god, it's full of horses..."

[s211]

"My god, it's full of horses..."

<heading out to buy Depends, because I just about pissed myself laughing>

[5seconds]

My only question is what the hell is a "winter garden"?

Presumably a Devonian Garden type facility.

Love the arena, but how likely is this to be built? Is this approved and likely to go ahead, or do we have years to see the design be 'economised' and chipped away?

[Innersoul1]

That's beautiful. I like that they have taken any hockey arena that exists and BLOW it out of the water. That Arena includes exactly what I want for the Flames. Sleek, modern, includes a concert venue and an onsite practice/community rink.

My only complaint is the seating bowl in the upper corners. I dont like the giant columns in the corners like the Jobbing.com arena.

Hmm I am really curious what the Flames' vision is. I am willing to bet that it's nothing close to being as cool as this! How different is Calgary's funding structure as compared to Edmonton's?

My question is the same as 5seconds' above.

[Bigtime]

<heading out to buy Depends, because I just about pissed myself laughing>

http://micahmcmillan.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/its-full-of-stars.jpg?w=400&h=267

[Calgarian]

A winter garden is just an indoor garden that has plants in bloom year round. It creates a nice garden space that can be enjoyed in the winter. The lobby of EAP was supposed to have a winter garden before the cost cutting scissors came out.

I imagine this design will be scaled back significantly as what they show will be very difficult and expensive to build. The end project should still be pretty damn nice though, and I imagine it will go a long way towards helping that part of downtown revitalize.

I wonder if Ken King is changing his mind about the brick building he wanted to build here, now that he has seen this.

[Surrealplaces]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Calgary so far is all private money, and Edmonton's a mix of private and public right? I think the 100 million shortfall for Edmonton is the public portion from the city.

That's beautiful. I like that they have taken any hockey arena that exists and BLOW it out of the water. That Arena includes exactly what I want for the Flames. Sleek, modern, includes a concert venue and an onsite practice/community rink.

My only complaint is the seating bowl in the upper corners. I dont like the giant columns in the corners like the Jobbing.com arena.

Hmm I am really curious what the Flames' vision is. I am willing to bet that it's nothing close to being as cool as this! How different is Calgary's funding structure as compared to Edmonton's?

My question is the same as 5seconds' above.

[stampedeyeehaa]

Presumably a Devonian Garden type facility.

Love the arena, but how likely is this to be built? Is this approved and likely to go ahead, or do we have years to see the design be 'economised' and chipped away?

Its msotly tax dollars being spent thout its not really clear how all the funding is working.

What are all those buildings in the picture? Are they built?

[Calgarian]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Calgary so far is all private money, and Edmonton's a mix of private and public right? I think the 100 million shortfall for Edmonton is the public portion from the city.

Has Calgary even announced anything relative to the funding? All I have heard is that they want a new arena (around 18000 seats), they want it downtown close to transit and that they are looking for land.

The City of Edmonton paid a lot of money in this deal, it was the Feds and the province that opted out of the funding.

[Coldrsx]

Presumably a Devonian Garden type facility.

Love the arena, but how likely is this to be built? Is this approved and likely to go ahead, or do we have years to see the design be 'economised' and chipped away?

Negative... more an inside outdoor space for events and stagging/concerts.

[Coldrsx]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Calgary so far is all private money, and Edmonton's a mix of private and public right? I think the 100 million shortfall for Edmonton is the public portion from the city.

Summary of Financial Framework Terms
The Arena Building
The maximum cost of new arena is $450 million and the building will be owned by the City of Edmonton.

The $450 million includes:

Design, construction, soft costs, eligible pre-development expenses
Any oversight expenses
Associated development costs.
350 parking stalls
Site servicing costs
Levies
$450 million is comprised of:

Katz Group $100 million
Facility Improvement Fee $125 million
City of Edmonton
CRL $45 million
Other sources $80 million*
Other Orders of Gov’t $100 million
Maximum Price of Arena $450 million
*includes $25 million from new parking revenue, $35 million redirected from City support for Rexall Place and $20 million from other current arena area related expenditures that will be re-directed.

[stampedeyeehaa]

Summary of Financial Framework Terms
The Arena Building
The maximum cost of new arena is $450 million and the building will be owned by the City of Edmonton.

The $450 million includes:

Design, construction, soft costs, eligible pre-development expenses
Any oversight expenses
Associated development costs.
350 parking stalls
Site servicing costs
Levies
$450 million is comprised of:

Katz Group $100 million
Facility Improvement Fee $125 million
City of Edmonton
CRL $45 million
Other sources $80 million*
Other Orders of Gov’t $100 million
Maximum Price of Arena $450 million
*includes $25 million from new parking revenue, $35 million redirected from City support for Rexall Place and $20 million from other current arena area related expenditures that will be re-directed.

So expecting $270 Million from Edmonton city tax payers and $80 Million from other levels of goverment that will not pay a dime. It appears Edmonton has got a little ahead of itself in the design phase.

This thing sounds like its along way from being complete. Sure glad we don't have owners like Katz in Calgary. Not only is he stealing from the Edmonton but also a good chance the Oilers don't make the playoffs for years to come.

[Coldrsx]

^clap clap clap

[MichaelS]

Summary of Financial Framework Terms
The Arena Building
The maximum cost of new arena is $450 million and the building will be owned by the City of Edmonton.

The $450 million includes:

Design, construction, soft costs, eligible pre-development expenses
Any oversight expenses
Associated development costs.
350 parking stalls
Site servicing costs
Levies
$450 million is comprised of:

Katz Group $100 million
Facility Improvement Fee $125 million
City of Edmonton
CRL $45 million
Other sources $80 million*
Other Orders of Gov’t $100 million
Maximum Price of Arena $450 million
*includes $25 million from new parking revenue, $35 million redirected from City support for Rexall Place and $20 million from other current arena area related expenditures that will be re-directed.

Who is paying the "Facility Improvement Fee"? Is that tacked on to ticket sales?

Has there been any indication of support for the "Other Orders of Gov't" $100 Million?

And the new parking revenue, is that generated out of the 350 parking spots to be constructed? If so, that is about $71,500 per stall. What is the projected time frame for the stalls to generate that much revenue?

Also, who is getting the revenue from concession sales in the new building? The City as the owner, or the Katz Group? Or, a 3rd party operator?

[Calgarian]

Is the city going to use part of the MSI funding from the Province? I read that in the Edmonton Arena thread some time ago.

[Coldrsx]

MSI is definitely in play.

Added to tickets

Hints, but publicly not.

huh?

Katz Group would get the event revenue, but will also be responsible for the operating and capital costs after it is built.

[AB Born]

Is it just me or does that design look to be more than $450 million?

[MalcolmTucker]

Well the winter garden space is in addition to the $450 million me thinks. I would guess the shape will be simplified to keep the cost down, but even a 'basic' design that fulfilled all the requirements for load bearing, parking, practice rick, and club suites/seats would be high in the project envelop too me thinks.

[suburbia]

The only way we're going to get close to that level of funding (or higher) is by finding a way to integrate the convention centre.

[MalcolmTucker]

Sometimes adding things together doesn't make them better or more economical. Often it is the opposite, more expensive and worse.

[MichaelS]

MSI is definitely in play.

Added to tickets

Hints, but publicly not.

huh?

Katz Group would get the event revenue, but will also be responsible for the operating and capital costs after it is built.

You said $25 million was coming from new parking revenue. You also said that part of the $450 million cost was to build 350 parking stalls. I assume these new stalls will provide the new parking revenue, or are there more new stalls benig built? If they are not new stalls, can you call it new parking revenue, or just redirected revenue?

Do they know what the surcharge on each ticket will be for the Facility Improvement Fee?

[suburbia]

Sometimes adding things together doesn't make them better or more economical. Often it is the opposite, more expensive and worse.

Agreed that it is not always the solution.

So when are we realistically going to get an arena like the one Edmonton is proposing in Calgary?

[Steveston]

O-M-G!!! That's amazing!

Here's some more great photos too:
http://oilers.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=631867&navid=DL|EDM|home

Gorgeous arena.

I have to say, however, that spelling mistakes in your presentation to council are absolutely inexcusable.

[eggbert]

Gorgeous arena.

I have to say, however, that spelling mistakes in your presentation to council are absolutely inexcusable.

Not sure what you mean by "your"? I just posted a link to some pictures.

[DizzyEdge]

Oh don't you worry about us....according to this previously unreleased conceptual image, our new barn will blow your beautiful, sleek, modern arena out the barn door!

http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/719/calgaryarenabarn.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/850/calgaryarenabarn.jpg/)
(Hastily sketched by me)
Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

Seriously though, way to go Edmonton! Truly magnificent.

:haha::haha::haha:

Can I tweet that please? :)

[CtrlAltDel]

:haha::haha::haha:

Can I tweet that please? :)

Sure! I already tweeted it, and a bunch of other random silly photoshopped Calgary images, but I don't have many followers, so not many see them anyway.

[Coldrsx]

:haha::haha::haha:

Can I tweet that please? :)

Some of his best work yet.

[Innersoul1]

This Herald gallery has some renderings we haven't seen including the standing room section that was noted on the previous page.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Gallery+downtown+arena+proposed+Edmonton/6643387/story.html

They have done a lot of things right with this arena! the loge corporate seating looks awesome as does the the Stage End club. I think the standing area at press level has falling cup of beer written all over it!

[Innersoul1]

ALBERTA PREMIER STANDS FIRM ON NO FUNDING FOR OILERS' ARENA

EDMONTON -- Alberta Premier Alison Redford has re-stated that the province will not be investing $100 million in the downtown Edmonton arena project.

Redford told reporters Thursday before the annual premier's dinner in Edmonton that her government's perspective has not changed and will not change.


http://tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=396223