New Downtown Calgary Arena

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by patm

lol first off, I was as anti-BS as it got. Check out my earlier posts in this thread.

Apologies, your post sounded a lot like all the BS fanboys who are all convinced the Flames are moving.

Second, sure the IOC would love Calgary to put forth a real bid but from what the exploration committee proposed, Calgary will not be doing that and instead will submit a bargain basement bid that is frankly embarrassing. If the IOC is willing to except such a terrible bid from Calgary, I'm sure other cities in North America will jump on the chance except they won't have to resort to using something so decrepit as the Grandstand as the showpiece for the games. There has already been rumoured interest from Salt Lake City and Denver to bid for 2026 after LA got their double olympics. Both have better facilities than Calgary if the IOC is willing to accept concessions like they would have to in order for Calgary to bid.

CAlgary hasn't decided whether or not to bid, and unless there is some new study you are referring to, your post is entirely speculation. If Calgary bids, we will bid based on the massive study that was already done, there is no political will to spend millions on another study.

Third, I think a sale is far more likely than relocating and keeping the team. They're set to realize massive returns on their initial investment if they can sell the franchise. They will have no risk. They sell the team and they take their money and do what they please with it, in fact, they can probably find a far more profitable investment for that money than the Flames. If they did move the team then they take on all of this risk from moving to a new market. Don't see them doing that when they're in a perfectly good market already. If they were serious about wanting to retain ownership, they would be negotiating in good faith.

C'mon man, if they were interested in purely making money, they would have sold the team the second it was profitable to do so (likely after we made it to round 2 in the playoffs a couple years ago as the team was most valuable and they just got paid for all the extra playoff games), but they didn't. Saying anything beyond that is again, pure speculation.

(Also no one is paying $500 Million for an NHL team. The Seattle group already stated that they won't. People need to get that out of their head. Just cause Vegas caved, doesn't mean other markets will)

The NHL set the expansion fee at $500 million, you don't pay, your team doesn't pay. Once again, you are speculating without anything to support your position while the NHL has clearly set the fee at a certain amount.

[patm]

The link to the report on the city's site is broken but they did have a report on the initial feasibility of a bid. There was a lot discussion about how bargain budget it would be. It was included in the report that spawned this article: https://globalnews.ca/news/3540067/4-6-b...lgary-to-host-2026-winter-olympic-games/

So that wasn't speculation. It was the recommendation made by the committee.

The other two points are speculation because the NHL and the Flames are not a public company, or even a normal for-profit company in that it's a cartel of owners that for the most part don't view their team as important investment. They could decide today that they're over it and try and sell the team. It's a toy to them. The best we can do is speculate based on how each side carries themselves. The Flames have carried themselves in a way that makes me think they have no desire to "meet in the middle" with the city and I fully believe that if they don't get their dream deal, they will sell the team. Luckily for the city's budget, Calgarians gave them a big F-U on that front.

As for the expansion fee, you think the NHL won't negotiate with Seattle on the expansion fee if no one steps up to pay the original fee? Yeah right.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by patm

The link to the report on the city's site is broken but they did have a report on the initial feasibility of a bid. There was a lot discussion about how bargain budget it would be.

It was included in the report that spawned this article: https://globalnews.ca/news/3540067/4-6-b...lgary-to-host-2026-winter-olympic-games/

Yep, saw that report, and the IOC responded to that bid by saying they could work with the city to further reduce costs. They want a bargain Olympics, the fat bloated shows in China and Russia soured a lot of places to the olympics, That's why in the current bid from Innsbruck has been dropped, so currently it's only Calgary and Sion Switzerland bidding, and both are seriously considering dropping out.

So that wasn't speculation. It was the recommendation made by the committee.

Jesus man, read what I'm writing! Calgary offered up a bargain bid that is seen as too expensive, the IOC offered to help lower costs! they aren't going to turn away our big because it's bargain, they will try to make it more bargain to get us to bid. What you are speculating is that they will reject it despite all the evidence to the contrary. THEY WANT A BARGAIN GAMES!!!!

If Seattle doesn't pay the expansion fee they don't get a team, that's 100%. Vegas would obviously sue the NHL if Seattle got a sweetmeat deal and the lawyers for the NHL know that.

[patm]

Yeah and I can't see them going for that bid in that form. I think they're just trying to get the final "Yes" from council so at least one city submits a bid. I guess the speculation on my part is that I think that someone like Denver will step in when they see what Calgary is submitting, which is now rumored to be in the works.

I'm sure there is a clause on how long the NHL has to wait before accepting an expansion fee lower than 500 million. That's how long Seattle or Houston will wait in the unlikely case that the NHL blocks a move.

[Calgarian]

So you admit it's all speculation then.

[patm]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

So you admit it's all speculation then.

I did in the first place.

All you can do is speculate. You don't have a seat at the table.

[Calgarian]

You are speculating based on little information and I'm disagreeing with it based on what we know. Anyway, agree to disagree and lets move on.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Yep, saw that report, and the IOC responded to that bid by saying they could work with the city to further reduce costs. They want a bargain Olympics, the fat bloated shows in China and Russia soured a lot of places to the olympics, That's why in the current bid from Innsbruck has been dropped, so currently it's only Calgary and Sion Switzerland bidding, and both are seriously considering dropping out.

I'd like to see both of them stick it to the Olympics. The IOC can pound sand IMO.

[Rollerstud98]

I'd love to see the Olympics here again. Having attended in 2002 and 2006 it was a great time. Helped that I was going to watch my bro but I was also lucky enough to witness that Australian win short track speed skating gold live. Amazing time.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Rollerstud98

I'd love to see the Olympics here again. Having attended in 2002 and 2006 it was a great time. Helped that I was going to watch my bro but I was also lucky enough to witness that Australian win short track speed skating gold live. Amazing time.

I'd like to see it as long as we aren't out a couple billion dollars. If we fast track some much needed infrastructure, then we can offset a bit of that cost as that money would have been spent eventually. But something like the security bill will just be a straight up loss. I give it a 10% chance we bid personally.

[patm]

Originally Posted by wave46

I'd like to see both of them stick it to the Olympics. The IOC can pound sand IMO.

As a Flames fan, I'm fully on board for a bid. Only way I see us getting a new arena with this ownership and council still involved.

The tax burden being shared by all 3 levels of government and being spent on a civic event that brings recognition, infrastructure and facilities and not on a for profit business that will only make their product more inaccessible is a lot easier for me to swallow. Plus, I'm greedy and want the olympics here when I'm still under 40?

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

I'd like to see it as long as we aren't out a couple billion dollars. If we fast track some much needed infrastructure, then we can offset a bit of that cost as that money would have been spent eventually. But something like the security bill will just be a straight up loss. I give it a 10% chance we bid personally.

Based on what Nenshi said today it sounds like the city will have a serious look at this after the next Winter Olympics and based on what the IOC says then. If we get needed infrastructure out of this then I'm okay with spending the money as long as it's quality infrastructure.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

Based on what Nenshi said today it sounds like the city will have a serious look at this after the next Winter Olympics and based on what the IOC says then. If we get needed infrastructure out of this then I'm okay with spending the money as long as it's quality infrastructure.

As I've shared separately on the construction thread, the massive changes on the books for the BMO centre are all related too. It will create the second largest convention space in Canada, and have an integrated 600 room hotel. So from the city's perspective, Olympics or not, the arena has always been part of something that was way more big picture.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by suburbia

As I've shared separately on the construction thread, the massive changes on the books for the BMO centre are all related too. It will create the second largest convention space in Canada, and have an integrated 600 room hotel. So from the city's perspective, Olympics or not, the arena has always been part of something that was way more big picture.

A new arena has never had anything to do with an Olympic's bid.

[Socguy]

Couple thoughts:

Inverted bowl design looks pretty cool. Might really work well in cramped locations. However, the extreme amount of cantilevering will come at the cost of seating. In a traditional design of stadium seating the circumference continually increases as the height increases. This means that each higher row of seating has room for more seats. With this design you won't gain the square footage as the building rises. I suppose you could counteract this by increasing the height but then your cost shoots up. This idea would seem in line with the trend of shrinking arena seating whist boosting the price of the remaining seats. That being said, this design would lead to a smaller interior area that should lead to cheaper operating costs. At the end of the day, I suspect that this design would be more expensive to construct but cheaper to operate.

As for the flames leaving: highly unlikely. It would take a majority of 29 other owners voting to allow the Flames to move for it to happen. Expansion fee has been set at 500M to be split among the other owners. Relocations fees are much lower. Why would they allow the Flames to move to one of the few possible expansion cities when they would be giving up their share of 500M for a share of say, 200M? Why the Flames when teams like the Coyotes or Florida are losing money hand over fist every year? Furthermore, If the Flames have all this money to relocate, why would they not use it to build themselves a new arena in Calgary...? ...Having said that, even if it was 100% guaranteed that the Flames would move unless the taxpayer gave them everything they are asking for, I would sadly wave goodby.

Finally Nenshi being re-elected is great news for the taxpayer but terrible news for the CSEC. You can tell by the now deleted tweet by their communication director how upset they are. Not only will the Flames have to tuck their tail and return to the table to try to salvage something from the mess they've made, but they will be negotiation with a Mayor who has been empowered by the electorate to drive a hard bargain.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

A new arena has never had anything to do with an Olympic's bid.

Sure it does. The bid exploration committee says a new arena is needed, but otherwise stays out of the details. Can't say I really blame them, but it leaves the impression that they think it'll get built with pixie dust.

Says http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Recreation/Documents/Events/CBEC_Recommendations.pdf:

4. Will there be a new event centre/arena and fieldhouse in Calgary so CBEC’s Master Facilities Plan remains relevant?
A new arena has been identified as a requirement to position Calgary well for a competitive Games bid. A decision over the next few months on both facilities will help focus the MFP for any potential bid.

Says http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Recreation/Do...c%20Bid/ReporttoCommunity-July182017.pdf:

[The $910 million direct Olympic capital costs] does not include the proposed arena or fieldhouse as these are facilities in discussion independent of a prospective Games bid.

On the flip side of the coin, I'm pretty sure I've heard Ken King mention how nice it would be to have a new arena conveniently in time for the Olympics... I'm not going to bother trying find a quote for that now though.

[McMurph]

Where the hell would the Flames go? Aren't they number 11 currently in terms of revenue? If the owners wanted to sell the most profitable place any new group could put a team would be Calgary. There is zero chance that Seattle or Houston would be in the top half of league revenues ever, regardless of local arena deals. Quebec may be some day, but if any team ever moves to Quebec it'll be Carolina or the next failed Southern (and Eastern) US team.

I hope CSEC sells the team because I now hate them. Then I'll be able to cheer for Calgary again.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Sure it does. The bid exploration committee says a new arena is needed, but otherwise stays out of the details. Can't say I really blame them, but it leaves the impression that they think it'll get built with pixie dust.

Yes, a new arena is needed to get the Olympics but the new arena talk has been going since something like 2007 which predates any 2026 Olympic bid talk. Potentially being able to host the Olympics again is just another reason why we need a new arena.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by Socguy

Couple thoughts:

Inverted bowl design looks pretty cool. Might really work well in cramped locations. However, the extreme amount of cantilevering will come at the cost of seating. In a traditional design of stadium seating the circumference continually increases as the height increases. This means that each higher row of seating has room for more seats. With this design you won't gain the square footage as the building rises. I suppose you could counteract this by increasing the height but then your cost shoots up. This idea would seem in line with the trend of shrinking arena seating whist boosting the price of the remaining seats. That being said, this design would lead to a smaller interior area that should lead to cheaper operating costs. At the end of the day, I suspect that this design would be more expensive to construct but cheaper to operate.

As for the flames leaving: highly unlikely. It would take a majority of 29 other owners voting to allow the Flames to move for it to happen. Expansion fee has been set at 500M to be split among the other owners. Relocations fees are much lower. Why would they allow the Flames to move to one of the few possible expansion cities when they would be giving up their share of 500M for a share of say, 200M? Why the Flames when teams like the Coyotes or Florida are losing money hand over fist every year? Furthermore, If the Flames have all this money to relocate, why would they not use it to build themselves a new arena in Calgary...? ...Having said that, even if it was 100% guaranteed that the Flames would move unless the taxpayer gave them everything they are asking for, I would sadly wave goodby.

Finally Nenshi being re-elected is great news for the taxpayer but terrible news for the CSEC. You can tell by the now deleted tweet by their communication director how upset they are. Not only will the Flames have to tuck their tail and return to the table to try to salvage something from the mess they've made, but they will be negotiation with a Mayor who has been empowered by the electorate to drive a hard bargain.

I don't see how the election results have empowered Nenshi at all to drive a hard bargain regarding a new arena. The percentage of the vote he won was down by about 45% from 2013 and he likely would have lost against someone who had indicated what they planned on doing. As for the Flames person who made that tweet, what an idiot. The team screwed up not denouncing that tweet.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

I don't see how the election results have empowered Nenshi at all to drive a hard bargain regarding a new arena. The percentage of the vote he won was down by about 45% from 2013 and he likely would have lost against someone who had indicated what they planned on doing. As for the Flames person who made that tweet, what an idiot. The team screwed up not denouncing that tweet.

I think it sends a pretty clear message that in spite of all the weight CSEC pulled in this election citizens turned out in never before seen numbers to ensure that their puppet didn’t get elected. Their biggest mistake was having that sleazeball Bettman come and lecture us about ousting our non compliant mayor.