New Downtown Calgary Arena

[Calgarian]

Lets see what has the Katz group all excited! c'mon King show us something!

[Coldrsx]

Originally Posted by Stephen Ave

Once Calgary gets a new arena you'll see most of the artists choosing Calgary over Edmonton. In most cases they'll go to both cities, but if choosing only one city, it will mostly be Calgary.

I'm not sure why they're using the Calgary arena as an argument, regardless of what Edmonton does for an new arena it won't change that outcome.

That will be interesting to see... for it is far more about booking agents and promoters than arena.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Sure, as long as you frame every other public expenditure this way. New library? It will delay the LRT. New convention centre? Public art on transportation projects? New drop-in centre? Affordable housing? Yup, they'll all be delaying the LRT, folks!

If anything, the city should be reminding the public that the NHL only uses the Saddledome for ~44 nights a year (the Flames keep missing the playoffs). Our junior kids play a lot of hockey there, we have concerts, the Stampede uses it, and a bunch of other stuff that I'm probably not even aware of.

Alright you got me on that, my concern is the cost of a new arena would be far greater than most other city projects, putting a more significant dent in LRT expansion. Then again that assumes that any LRT expansion would even involve city money vs provincial.

[kw5150]

Agreed. Can we start a savings trust? I dont even go to sport venues, but i realize how many other people enjoy them. Could we not make a 10-15 year plan to get a new stadium / rink?

Originally Posted by artvandelay

Oh didn't see that quote, I should have read it more thoroughly.

Pretty soon Regina and Winnipeg will have brand new top class stadiums; it would be a shame if we here in Canada's wealthiest city could not come up with something at least as nice if not better.

[Deepstar]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Lets see what has the Katz group all excited! c'mon King show us something!

I wonder if there actually is a conceptual design, or is it a case of Laforge simply pointing out that Calgary will be getting a new arena, and whatever the design or size of arena, it will be competing for some events.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Deepstar

I wonder if there actually is a conceptual design, or is it a case of Laforge simply pointing out that Calgary will be getting a new arena, and whatever the design or size of arena, it will be competing for some events.

Most likely the latter. I can't see why the Flames would be sharing details with the Oilers about the new arena, but who knows. Perhaps the NHL is a bit more incestuous than even I give it credit for.

[artvandelay]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Most likely the latter. I can't see why the Flames would be sharing details with the Oilers about the new arena, but who knows. Perhaps the NHL is a bit more incestuous than even I give it credit for.

Incestuous? The Flames and Oilers are each members of a 30 party joint venture, off-ice cooperation is quite obviously in the best interest of all teams, even rivals like Calgary and Edmonton. One would assume that the they would compare notes on new arenas at the very least, they are trying to accomplish the same thing in an almost identical political environment.

[artvandelay]

Anyways, the speculation on CP is that Laforge may have been hinting at the rumoured LA Live style multisport complex. I'm not so sure, but it would be nice.

I also don't understand why many people are so set against public money going towards sporting facilities. If the Flames were raking in massive profits and generating enough cash-flow to finance an arena on their own I might understand, but they are not. The Flames (and Stamps) owners did not invest in a pro sports team make money, they are in it to do something good for the community and hopefully break even. We spend public money on other cultural facilities such as performing halls and galleries without a great deal of controversy, why not arenas and stadiums? The Flames and Stamps not only provide another entertainment option for Calgarians, but they foster civic pride and public participation in athletics. Not to mention that additional concerts and conferences that could be attracted. These are all elements that work towards creating a better and more liveable city.

[SHOFEAR]

[QUOTE=Spring2008;5935563]Oh boy. Wouldn't that be funny if after 6-7 years of delays while constantly hearing the same old story of how desperately Edmonton needs this downtown arena to attract investment into the core etc, and with the arena project in Calgary totally being on the back-burner, that Calgary be the city that actually goes ahead and builds a new one.

[QUOTE]

I think it's safe to say the the Flamers are just waiting for Edmonton and the Oilers to finalize funding. It would be a safe bet to say the the funding model Edmonton uses will be the same as Calgary.

[Policy Wonk]

The only arrangement I would favour would be a sweetheart deal on a wasteland site and I wouldn't include the west village creosote site in that.

But practically speaking I really don't care if the Flames back-up and move to Alabama.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by SHOFEAR

I think it's safe to say the the Flamers are just waiting for Edmonton and the Oilers to finalize funding. It would be a safe bet to say the the funding model Edmonton uses will be the same as Calgary.

The Oilers already have way more money out of the city of Edmonton than the Flames are going to get out of the City of Calgary.

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by artvandelay

Anyways, the speculation on CP is that Laforge may have been hinting at the rumoured LA Live style multisport complex. I'm not so sure, but it would be nice.

I also don't understand why many people are so set against public money going towards sporting facilities. If the Flames were raking in massive profits and generating enough cash-flow to finance an arena on their own I might understand, but they are not. The Flames (and Stamps) owners did not invest in a pro sports team make money, they are in it to do something good for the community and hopefully break even. We spend public money on other cultural facilities such as performing halls and galleries without a great deal of controversy, why not arenas and stadiums? The Flames and Stamps not only provide another entertainment option for Calgarians, but they foster civic pride and public participation in athletics. Not to mention that additional concerts and conferences that could be attracted. These are all elements that work towards creating a better and more liveable city.

The problem is that with an arena, you are putting public money to fund private enterprise. If the city funds some of a new arena, then the city should receive a DIRECT share of the profit from the building.

The problem is that the Saddledome already provides the benefits to the city that a new arena would.

If the business of arena building is so profitable, surely private enterprise can build it on its own.

[93JC]

Originally Posted by artvandelay

I also don't understand why many people are so set against public money going towards sporting facilities. If the Flames were raking in massive profits and generating enough cash-flow to finance an arena on their own I might understand, but they are not. The Flames (and Stamps) owners did not invest in a pro sports team make money, they are in it to do something good for the community and hopefully break even. We spend public money on other cultural facilities such as performing halls and galleries without a great deal of controversy, why not arenas and stadiums? The Flames and Stamps not only provide another entertainment option for Calgarians, but they foster civic pride and public participation in athletics. Not to mention that additional concerts and conferences that could be attracted. These are all elements that work towards creating a better and more liveable city.

People are opposed to spending money on an NHL arena because they don't buy into the rhetoric that a pro sports franchise is a beacon of civic pride and spurs public participation in athletics, nor that the owners are solely in it to "do something for the community" and "hope to break even".

The Calgary Philharmonic is a non-profit organization. They are quite happy to play in the facility they have. The Calgary Flames Hockey Club is a private, for-profit enterprise that makes millions of dollar in profits every season. They are not happy with the facility they play in, even though it's about the same age as the Jack Singer Concert Hall. They want a new arena not because the one they have now, the one we already built for them mind you, is falling apart; they want a new one because they want to make even more money than they do now.


I don't think anyone is really opposed in principle to a new arena. What they are opposed to is the dissonance between who pays for the bulk of construction and maintenance and who gets most of the operating income after it's built. What the Oilers want is for the City of Edmonton to bear the majority of the construction and maintenance costs while they keep almost all of the operating income. The Flames undoubtedly want the same: it would make them the most money. Making the most money possible is good business.

[artvandelay]

Originally Posted by You Need A Thneed

The problem is that with an arena, you are putting public money to fund private enterprise. If the city funds some of a new arena, then the city should receive a DIRECT share of the profit from the building.

The problem is that the Saddledome already provides the benefits to the city that a new arena would.

If the business of arena building is so profitable, surely private enterprise can build it on its own.

The point I was making is that sports ownership should be treated more along the lines of a non-profit than private enterprise. Many people seem to have this erroneous impression that teams are wildly profitable organizations with fat cat ownership. In the case of the Flames, I believe that they do not operate with the goal of profit maximization but aim to provide maximum benefit to the community without losing money.

Who said that arena building is profitable? It's quite obviously not except in rare cases. If arenas could provide a decent rate of return to investors then you would see them popping up across North America. Here in Alberta, none of our existing stadiums or arenas would be here today without public investment.

[MalcolmTucker]

I wonder what the current subsidy works out to for the Saddledome.

[93JC]

Ah yes, the non-profit group that's currently locking out its employees so that it can increase its share of over three billion dollars worth of annual revenue...

[You Need A Thneed]

Originally Posted by artvandelay

The point I was making is that sports ownership should be treated more along the lines of a non-profit than private enterprise. Many people seem to have this erroneous impression that teams are wildly profitable organizations with fat cat ownership. In the case of the Flames, I believe that they do not operate with the goal of profit maximization but aim to provide maximum benefit to the community without losing money.

Who said that arena building is profitable? It's quite obviously not except in rare cases. If arenas could provide a decent rate of return to investors then you would see them popping up across North America. Here in Alberta, none of our existing stadiums or arenas would be here today without public investment.

What benefit is there to the city in a new arena that doesn't already exist with the arena we have? Spending hundreds of millions of dollars to attract 1 or 2 more concerts a year certainly doesn't make sense.

Also, the money fans spend on entertainment stays roughly the same either way. Essentially, the people of the city of Calgary would be paying money to the owners of the Flames, which is a for profit organization.

I could see the argument being more valid if you were talking about building an arena where you didn't already have one, though even then, its more for civic pride than economic reasons. Paying hundreds of millions for civic pride probably isn't a good deal either - the money would go much further being spent on other things that would increase civic pride.

[93JC]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

I wonder what the current subsidy works out to for the Saddledome.

It's complicated, and it's a sweetheart deal. The Saddledome is nominally owned by the City of Calgary. The Calgary Exhibition & Stampede lease the facility from the City for $1/year. They pay no property taxes. The building is 'governed' by the Saddledome Foundation, a non-profit board made of people from the City, Province, Stampede, CODA and Hockey Canada, on behalf of the City.

The Stampede used to operate the facility on behalf of the Saddledome Foundation. They (Stampede) received a portion of the ticket revenue from the Flames and most of the concessions and parking revenue. In 1994 the Flames came to an agreement with the Stampede and the City to "buy out" the Stampede's operating 'contract' for $20 million. A portion of the building's revenue, usually $1-1.5 million per year, is donated back to the Saddledome Foundation to be doled out to amateur sports organizations.

The Flames now shoulder the burden of paying for the upkeep of the building. They pay for maintenance to the building systems (e.g. the ice plant), they pay the power, gas & water bills. (Up to a point, anyway. In the past the agreement was modified such that the first $1.3 million of annual operating costs would be paid for by the City.) They pay to maintain a marketing and ticket office staff to bring in other events to the arena.

While the Flames now have to pay for the ongoing operation of the building they also get ALL of the profits from the facility. Profits from EVERY event in the building goes back to the Flames; not a cent goes to the City nor the Stampede. Hitmen games, Roughnecks games, concerts, trade shows, monster trucks, rodeos: every single ticket, hot dog and heroin beer makes the Flames a profit.

[5seconds]

Wildrose is suggesting a new lottery funding model for new arenas in Calgary and Edmonton:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/albert...enas+Calgary+Edmonton/7771857/story.html

Sounds interesting, though I hope it wouldn't dent existing lottery/charity revenue.

[93JC]

Still corporate welfare. Money goes to the municipal government, who are then supposed to hand it over to the hockey club to build the arena.

The Keno revenue would be generated from sports fans in sports bars and would flow to the municipalities that would own the arenas — not the hockey teams, Smith said.

Ha ha, no. Not gonna happen. The teams want the arenas. They don't just want new buildings, they want new buildings which THEY run and THEY make all the money off of.

If it's such a great idea the Flames and Oilers should just get the appropriate licence and run their own keno and other such games.