New Downtown Calgary Arena

[sammyd]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Yeah. It is a really good deal - way better than Seattle’s. Way better than Edmonton’s. Would need to dive into numbers but possibly better than most if not all that have had public participation over the last 30 years.

Why is Seattle’s privately funded arena inferior to this model?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by sammyd

Why is Seattle’s privately funded arena inferior to this model?

I had the same thought when I saw his post. Also, isn't Seattle getting some infrastructure upgrades paid for by the developer?

[DoubleK]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Yeah. It is a really good deal - way better than Seattle’s. Way better than Edmonton’s. Would need to dive into numbers but possibly better than most if not all that have had public participation over the last 30 years.

Were you thinking Detroit vs Seattle? IIRC Seattle is being privately funded.

[YYCguys]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

For those wondering about what's going to happen to the Saddledome, the Calgary Herald article I posted last night has been updated to include some key info on this matter and one other point worth noting.

One key additional cost to the city will be the demolition of the Saddledome: the city will pay $12.4 million, or 90 percent of the total cost.

The deal also includes an option that would allow CSEC to acquire valuable city lands for redevelopment, including lands at the site of the former Enoch Sales house and Victoria Park bus barns along the banks of the Elbow River. The option on Enoch Sales would expire on opening day of the arena. The option on the bus barns would expire after 10 years.

The option for CSEC to acquire and develop lands in the area is something I said all along that they wanted.

Did/does the CSEC have a concept in mind for either of those pieces of land?

[DoubleK]

This is probably the worst take I've seen. How Staples keeps his job is beyond me.

What is the cost sharing on this new deal? The details are murky but it looks like instead of paying 33.3 per cent as they were to do in the 2017 deal, the City of Calgary will now pay 50 per cent. The Flames owners will now pay just 22 per cent and the ticket tax will provide 28 per cent.

By comparison, the 2013 deal for Edmonton’s downtown arena saw the city of Edmonton pay 47 per cent of the $483.5 million project, the team owner Daryl Katz pay 27 per cent and a ticket tax pay 26 per cent.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by sammyd

Why is Seattle’s privately funded arena inferior to this model?

Originally Posted by DoubleK

Were you thinking Detroit vs Seattle? IIRC Seattle is being privately funded.

Originally Posted by Corndogger

I had the same thought when I saw his post. Also, isn't Seattle getting some infrastructure upgrades paid for by the developer?

Seattle’s deal being private is entirely spin. It is complicated and each level of government has an interest in calling it private. What it seems to be is privately financed (no government bonds are being issued directly) but that does not mean it is privately funded (no government funds contributing to paying for the project).

In fact the arena will have state financing (just like Seattle’s nfl and mlb arenas) https://www.king5.com/article/news/l...b-e95a536d6b96

And it will have federal tax preference (privately issued but tax classed as tax exempt municipal bonds).

As for the deal itself.

“The city will pay ArenaCo about $350,000 a year for the first 10 years of the deal to cover the sales tax ArenaCo will pay during construction. The city will also pay ArenaCo any admissions taxes collected on tickets for events at the new arena beyond the amount the city currently collects from admissions taxes on events at KeyArena.”

And more importantly, the third provisions here: https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.soni...0-million-plus

“Base Rent - OVG will pay about $2.8 million in rent to the city annually. That number will be adjusted throughout the term of the lease based on the Consumer Price Index to account for inflation. The rent payment amount was determined by the average of the last four financial years of net revenue earned from KeyArena, the 1st Avenue N parking garage, and Seattle Center campus sponsorships. This is the first in a two-step process to ensure the city doesn’t go backwards from what it currently earns from KeyArena.

Tax Revenues - The city is guaranteed to receive $2.24 million in tax revenues annually from the arena and the 1st Ave N parking garage, the current level of taxes it receives. OVG will reimburse the city for tax revenues that drop below $2.24M in a given year. This is the second in the two-step process.

Upside Tax Revenues - OVG and the city will share any additional tax revenues earned each year above the base $2.24 million, excluding admissions taxes. For the first 10 years of the lease agreement, OVG will get 75% of the upside revenue and the city will get 25%. After that, for the remainder of the lease including the extensions, OVG and the city will split the upside revenue 50-50.

So since the new arena owners want to increase the number of events by a large amount and improve the attendance at events and the ticket price the upside is large. The city has handed its future revenue uplift to the arena corporation. And not just the uplift above but a much broader base much like tax increment financing - on my phone and don’t care to find this again.

That the revenue the arena people will receive from this is opaque does not mean it won’t exist. Over the term Calgary’s deal has a cost to the city of -$48 million. I bet Seattle’s number will be at least double that. The direct tax alone is probably $20 million a year (Seattle seems to have classified all parking profits as a tax).

TLDR: you’ve been taken in on spin on Seattle’s deal.

[jawagord]

Originally Posted by DoubleK

This is probably the worst take I've seen. How Staples keeps his job is beyond me.

He's writing for Edmonton readers, to make them feel better about their prolonged and antagonistic arena debate, ignoring the arena district give aways to Katz. The only thing he has right is how the Flames will finance their part is not stated but then that's the Flames business unless they are getting the money loaned from the City.

Same deal with his "Fire Treliving" article, makes the Oiler fans feel better about paying Lucic's $3 mil bonus before trading him.

For small and medium market cities its unrealistic to expect a sports team to pay 100% for an arena or stadium, I think 50-50 will seem fair to most people and who cares if it could have been 51-49, just hope we are getting a kicking design like the inverted bowl shown in the renders.

[Deepstar]

That's what I'm thinking too. It's not perfect, but as far as cities of 1.5Million people go, it's as good as can be expected, and better than most others.

Compare it to Quebec city who paid half the money for an arena and has junior hockey as the only tenant.

Originally Posted by milomilo

It's a deal where I don't feel like we're getting completely shafted, so it's good enough for me. I'm sure people with more expertise than me will be able to more thoroughly look at the numbers and decide, but to me it seems better than expected. Calgary needs something to get excited about, so by all means let's get on with it.

Originally Posted by DoubleK

So the city coughs up half of the upfront costs, plus all of the infrastructure/utilities, ends up with an arena and some higher revenue in an underdeveloped part of the core.

Seems like a good deal, no?

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

Yeah. It is a really good deal - way better than Seattle’s. Way better than Edmonton’s. Would need to dive into numbers but possibly better than most if not all that have had public participation over the last 30 years.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by YYCguys

Did/does the CSEC have a concept in mind for either of those pieces of land?

I imagine they do but I have no idea if it's been made public. The rendering the City released of the area makes it look they're expecting to see a ton of condo towers.

[SHOFEAR]

Not to be that guy....but assuming your new arena will have a bowl box/seating configuration similar to Rogers you should prepare yourself to be disappointed.

It looks stunning, but the huge cavernous void between the two seating levels as a result of the box and loge levels absolutely kills the energy in the place.

That being said, most weirdo's on here are more concerned with jerking off to pictures shiny new buildings so you probably wont mind.

[Corndogger]

Speaking of Seattle's arena how did this not get major press here? The cost has risen from $600 million to $930 million (real money) and the opening is delayed. That's over a 50% cost overrun and they're nowhere near done. Are we going to find out that CDN$575 million is nowhere near enough to build a state of the art facility? And if we have a 50% cost overrun who's going to pay for it? If they start cutting back other aspects of the overall project then what's the sense of spending the money?

• Video Link

[Suburgatory]

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

Not to be that guy....but assuming your new arena will have a bowl box/seating configuration similar to Rogers you should prepare yourself to be disappointed.

It looks stunning, but the huge cavernous void between the two seating levels as a result of the box and loge levels absolutely kills the energy in the place.

That being said, most weirdo's on here are more concerned with jerking off to pictures shiny new buildings so you probably wont mind.

We're not. We're getting Rossetti's inverted bowl concept.

• Video Link

[craner]

Originally Posted by Deepstar

That's what I'm thinking too. It's not perfect, but as far as cities of 1.5Million people go, it's as good as can be expected, and better than most others.

Compare it to Quebec city who paid half the money for an arena and has junior hockey as the only tenant.

I agree it's a decent deal for Calgary and now I'm excited to see what this new event center is going to look like.
Next up - reno/replacement of McMahon & new fieldhouse.

[jawagord]

Some confidence the process for the arena project will keep it from spiralling out of control like the green line project.

You’ll see plans — more than renderings, actual plans — in the new year,” said Michael Brown, president and CEO of the Calgary Municipal Land Corp.

“Often times people will do the pretty pictures and then have people choose the pretty pictures, but the way we choose to do it as a corporation is the reverse. We establish a budget price and then we design within that budget price.”

The same process was followed during the creation of the $245-million Central Library, he said.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...be-months-away

[Doug]

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

Not to be that guy....but assuming your new arena will have a bowl box/seating configuration similar to Rogers you should prepare yourself to be disappointed.

It looks stunning, but the huge cavernous void between the two seating levels as a result of the box and loge levels absolutely kills the energy in the place.

That being said, most weirdo's on here are more concerned with jerking off to pictures shiny new buildings so you probably wont mind.

I question the assumption that corporate boxes are such a cash cow. Times are changing. Corporate entertainment is in decline for numerous reasons. More and more companies have policies that severely limit their employees from accepting gifts from business partners. Activities need to be seen as inclusive to everyone and sporting events may be viewed as too male. More and more business occurs online.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by Doug

I question the assumption that corporate boxes are such a cash cow. Times are changing. Corporate entertainment is in decline for numerous reasons. More and more companies have policies that severely limit their employees from accepting gifts from business partners. Activities need to be seen as inclusive to everyone and sporting events may be viewed as too male. More and more business occurs online.

How can they not be a cash cow? You're basically renting out a tiny apartment for six figures a year.

Bell MTS Place has the names of every business owning a suite right by the door... when I walk around there, I find it staggering how many businesses there are that I've never heard of. You have the big players like insurance companies, banks, law & accounting firms, etc., but there are all kinds of random other companies too. The suites are clearly still popular (they're sold out as far as I can tell) and the teams rake in the money from them.

[Deepstar]

Originally Posted by craner

I agree it's a decent deal for Calgary and now I'm excited to see what this new event center is going to look like.
Next up - reno/replacement of McMahon & new fieldhouse.

The mood has changed for sure. Some people are still complaining about it, but more people seem on board, and are now looking forward to what it'll bring.

[Deepstar]

Overruns happen, but in the case of Seattle that's an anomaly. It's not often an arena goes over budget that high. $575 Million is plenty enough to build a great arena.

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Speaking of Seattle's arena how did this not get major press here? The cost has risen from $600 million to $930 million (real money) and the opening is delayed. That's over a 50% cost overrun and they're nowhere near done. Are we going to find out that CDN$575 million is nowhere near enough to build a state of the art facility? And if we have a 50% cost overrun who's going to pay for it? If they start cutting back other aspects of the overall project then what's the sense of spending the money?

[Fishthebow]

Originally Posted by Deepstar

The mood has changed for sure. Some people are still complaining about it, but more people seem on board, and are now looking forward to what it'll bring.

Big time change from what things were with the first proposal. Most people just want it done and not to drag it out any more than it already has.

FWIW, it's the same at SRC. The latest poll is heavily in favor of the arena. https://calgary.skyrisecities.com/fo...istrict.29262/ So it's not just the folks on SSP.

[milomilo]

If CSEC representatives had spent the last few months threatening to leave and calling Calgarians stupid if they didn't take a one sided deal like they did last time, my opinion would be different and I'm sure so would many others. Doing it all behind closed doors and coming out with a balanced deal was much more likely to be successful.

I'm glad there is virtually no consultation period either. It's pointless, all that needs to be said has been said and opening up a debate will just lead to needless heat.