Stadiums & Arenas of Canada, Part 3

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by 240glt

I’m guessing that’s referring to lifecycle or capital equipment replacement costs

It’s a bad deal because it gives no incentive to maintain the facility properly with no penalty for running the place into the ground. Edmonton signed a similar deal for the arena up here.

The City of Calgary is responsible for those "uninsured" maintenance costs. So, no, the place won't be run into the ground. Is it a bad deal? Without knowing what's meant by "uninsured maintenance," it could be a horrible deal or nothing to worry about.

[Corndogger]

People keep posting that the Flames are one of the highest revenue teams in the NHL and that they make a ton of money at the Saddledome. That's not the case according to a Forbes article on the new arena.
___________________________

The Flames currently play in the antiquated Scotiabank Saddledome. During the 2017–2018 season, the team posted revenue of $132 million, 20th in the 31-team league. In December, Forbes valued the Flames at $450 million, the 20th-most-valuable team in the NHL.

Arena revenue is crucial in the NHL because it is not shared among the teams, and the league’s shared revenues—notably national television and sponsorship proceeds—are small compared with those of the NFL, the NBA and MLB.

During the 2017–2018 season, the Flames took in about $35 million from premium seating and non-NHL events at their current arena. In contrast, the Edmonton Oilers, who moved into their new arena in 2016, generated some $47 million. The value of the Flames could easily increase by 15% if the new arena is successful in getting sponsors.

Note: All figures are in U.S. dollars.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoza.../#2f0f9951763b

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Corndogger

People keep posting that the Flames are one of the highest revenue teams in the NHL and that they make a ton of money at the Saddledome. That's not the case according to a Forbes article on the new arena.
___________________________
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeoza.../#2f0f9951763b

NHL Team Profitability

Well, the Flames profit $11m USD on revenue of $132m USD (so, about $171m CAD), so that's a rate of return of about 8.3% in 2017.

Edmonton, with its new shiny arena, did about $21m that year.

So, it'll cost the taxpayers somewhere between $100m-150m to improve CESC's profit by $10m yearly.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by wave46

NHL Team Profitability

Well, the Flames profit $11m USD on revenue of $132m USD (so, about $171m CAD), so that's a rate of return of about 8.3% in 2017.

Edmonton, with its new shiny arena, did about $21m that year.

So, it'll cost the taxpayers somewhere between $100m-150m to improve CESC's profit by $10m yearly.

And your point? A near doubling of profit for the team will mean a lot to help them remain competitive. Also, as I've pointed out before, this isn't going to cost taxpayers anything extra. We've already paid for our share. The money for this and a number of other large civic projects has been sitting in slush funds for years. There's ZERO chance that the City will return the money to us. It'll either be spent on this or some project that will result in next to no return for the City. And the money is going to be transferred to cover operating costs or capital projects like roads.

[240glt]

^ I told you. Uninsured maintenance costs are likely another way of saying capital replacement costs. Those costs are never insured.

Think of it this way: if you were responsible for maintenance on a refrigeration unit bit not responsible for it’s replacement would you be signing a quarterly service contract with the units’ manufacturer, perfroming bi-yearly oil and refrigerant lab analysis, Eddy current testing and vibration analysis and doing a 3 year tear down to punch the tubes ? Or would you be more likely to hit the start button and let’er run till it dies, knowing someone else is responsible for replacing the machine. I work in this field and see this stuff all the time.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by 240glt

^ I told you. Uninsured maintenance costs are likely another way of saying capital replacement costs. Those costs are never insured.

Think of it this way: if you were responsible for maintenance on a refrigeration unit bit not responsible for it’s replacement would you be signing a quarterly service contract with the units’ manufacturer, perfroming bi-yearly oil and refrigerant lab analysis, Eddy current testing and vibration analysis and doing a 3 year tear down to punch the tubes ? Or would you be more likely to hit the start button and let’er run till it dies, knowing someone else is responsible for replacing the machine. I work in this field and see this stuff all the time.

As long as the City prepares for such costs things should be fine. With our current council and especially administration disaster is a distinct possibility. Hopefully they'll be long gone by the time the arena is built.

[Calgarian]

IS flooding an insured cost? The Saddledome had millions of dollars in damage in 2013, think they had to rewire most of the lower part of the building.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

IS flooding an insured cost? The Saddledome had millions of dollars in damage in 2013, think they had to rewire most of the lower part of the building.

I'd imagine a significant cost of this new arena will be automated flood protection.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

I'd imagine a significant cost of this new arena will be automated flood protection.

I'm quite sure that they are going to be taking flooding into account in the design, however that would still likely qualify as uninsured maintenance costs in the event they do get flooded.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

I'm quite sure that they are going to be taking flooding into account in the design, however that would still likely qualify as uninsured maintenance costs in the event they do get flooded.

I've never been to Calgary, so I don't know first hand, but what's the terrain like around the arena? It looks to me in pictures like ground level on the north side is higher than the south side, where the floodwaters entered the arena through the service areas. How flooded did that area on the north side where the new arena is planned get? It almost looks to me like that loading dock area on the south side is shaped like a funnel from the river to the arena and directed the floodwater to the arena.

Perhaps the design of the new will place the lower level access away from the river and maybe use landscaping features to provide some further protection should that area flood again like 2013.

[technomad]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

IS flooding an insured cost? The Saddledome had millions of dollars in damage in 2013, think they had to rewire most of the lower part of the building.

this is partly why I think waterpark conversion for Saddledome is the way to go, half the work is already done!

[milomilo]

Since 2007, CMLC has committed approximately $396 million to East Village infrastructure and development programs. This, in turn, has attracted nearly $3 billion of planned development (so far). In turn, residential property assessments in the Rivers District have increased from $328 million to approximately $1.2 billion, while non-residential assessments have gone from $647 million and $1.8 billion.

This too is really just moving money around, so I don't know if whatever tax subsidy the city put in was worth it, but the numbers at least sound better than what we get out of the arena deal.

[Corndogger]

Originally Posted by milomilo

This too is really just moving money around, so I don't know if whatever tax subsidy the city put in was worth it, but the numbers at least sound better than what we get out of the arena deal.

They only sound better because they've had time to attract development. We need to wait and see what happens with this project before declaring it bad. The $396 million (?) figure you quoted sounds way too low. The library alone was close to $300 million.

[milomilo]

It doesn't matter regardless, both are examples of money simply being focused in specific places. It's not extra money for the city.

[milomilo]

They could probably just use the highly advanced technology of building a berm/walls higher than the flood level. It isn't rocket science.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by milomilo

They could probably just use the highly advanced technology of building a berm/walls higher than the flood level. It isn't rocket science.

like i said previously, they are obviously going to take flooding into account in the design. I'm curious if the playing surface will be below grade, or if they will raise it up just to have less risk.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

like i said previously, they are obviously going to take flooding into account in the design. I'm curious if the playing surface will be below grade, or if they will raise it up just to have less risk.

If they're going for an urban scaled arena, the playing surface will most certainly below ground level.

[MonctonRad]

And TD Bank has just bought naming rights to yet another arena.

Harbour Station in Saint John NB will soon be known as TD Bank Centre.

[milomilo]

Funnily enough, I don't actually place any value on how profitable The Flames are.

The Flames are a piddly little minnow compared to Calgary's other big companies, they aren't important to our economy at all and do not warrant subsidy to improve their profits.

[J.OT13]

Progress on Gatineau's new arena.

Originally Posted by Quebeker

Le ''nouveau guertin'' prend forme.


Crédit Photo : PATRICK WOODBURY, LE DROIT



Plus de détails sur le site du journal leDroit : https://www.ledroit.com/actualites/g...Gsvd7VKHISE4bs