New Downtown Calgary Arena

[HomeInMyShoes]

Originally Posted by esquire

That's actually not far off from the funding formula for IGF. As with the Riders, the vast majority of the Bombers share is in the form of a provincial loan that will be repaid by the Bombers.

Personally I'm fine with a loan, so long as it gets repaid.

I'm fine with the loan too, although part of me wonders what those dollars meant to this years hack everything budget with the Saskatchewan Government. $20 million each year over 4 years could have pretty much saved all the library funding and STC for that time period. The 100,000,000 is accruing interest as well and will take (according to the original numbers) 31 years to pay off. Any bets the Riders come looking for funding to do some upgrades within that time frame?

People that look at the Riders strong attendance forget that just ten years ago we were averaging 25,000 a game. What numbers did they use to figure out the loan repayment schedule. 33,000 or 25,000 my rough calculations say that a drop in attendance of that much adds a good decade to the amortization period. So now 40 years. What do the economics of that look like?

Regina is probably two lousy years away from a dip in attendance especially if the economy doesn't rebound. Who pays for box seats when the government is doing so poorly? Hopefully the Riders become competitive again within two years and the economy picks up again and the budgets get better.

[Tarsus]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Heard it from a couple people who have been to most arenas in the country and yes, a few Edmontonians who definitely see it through rose coloured glasses. I won't make a judgement until I visit it, but looks pretty damn nice.

It's nice, no arguments there, just is it any nicer than any of the other new arenas? I'm mainly talking about the the inside, and there's only so much you can do. Those other arenas I mentioned were nicer on the inside IMO.

Also, when saying it's the best in the world, don't compare to other arenas in Canada, as there are only a couple of new ones to compare to, try comparing to other arenas around the world.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Tarsus

I'm baffled by the people of Calgary. Everyone seems okay with the idea of putting money into a stadium that's hardly ever used, but put public money into an arena, and people freak out.

That's easy, pure emotion, not a huge amount of logic. It's a lot easier to freak out about subsidizing millionaire hockey players than freak out subsidizing CFL players, most of whom get an extremely modest sum of money when you consider the risks of the sport and the expected length of their career.

And while I have no idea what Flames tickets costs these days, CFL feels more accessible than NHL (and probably is) for people that don't have a lot of disposable income.

Put it another way: why do the Flames "need" a new arena? So that they can charge higher ticket prices to a larger proportion of customers? Why do the Stamps "need" a new stadium? So that the fans have more comfortable seats and can go to the bathroom and/or buy food without waiting 20 minutes? Which problem/solution sounds better to the public? (I'm being deliberately provocative with this comparison, but there's a kernel of truth there.)

[Habanero]

When was the last time you went to see a good concert at the Dome? nuff said.

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

That's easy, pure emotion, not a huge amount of logic. It's a lot easier to freak out about subsidizing millionaire hockey players than freak out subsidizing CFL players, most of whom get an extremely modest sum of money when you consider the risks of the sport and the expected length of their career.

And while I have no idea what Flames tickets costs these days, CFL feels more accessible than NHL (and probably is) for people that don't have a lot of disposable income.

Put it another way: why do the Flames "need" a new arena? So that they can charge higher ticket prices to a larger proportion of customers? Why do the Stamps "need" a new stadium? So that the fans have more comfortable seats and can go to the bathroom and/or buy food without waiting 20 minutes? Which problem/solution sounds better to the public? (I'm being deliberately provocative with this comparison, but there's a kernel of truth there.)

[Habanero]

Proclaiming an arena as the World's Best, is always going to be a matter of opinion regardless of who visited the arena and liked it or who didn't. It's best to avoid that kind of labelling and stick to known facts, such as 'The world's newest arena', etc... or Canada's newest arena.

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Heard it from a couple people who have been to most arenas in the country and yes, a few Edmontonians who definitely see it through rose coloured glasses. I won't make a judgement until I visit it, but looks pretty damn nice.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Habanero

When was the last time you went to see a good concert at the Dome? nuff said.

Sting & Peter Gabriel last July, if you're looking for an anecdote.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by esquire

I'm not sure how you get a stadium built without some form of public assistance... has there ever been a pro stadium for anything, even minor league baseball, built in this country in modern times without a subsidy?

Maybe not a stadium good enough for a Grey Cup, but I'm sure something good enough for a less demanding event could be built without public financing, particularly if it doesn't have to appeal to the sophisticated cosmopolitan Albertan sensibility.


The 9th NHL team to play in an arena built without public financing starts play next season; maybe we should have a Make It 10 campaign. The Pacific division could be the first one to have 50% of teams in privately financed arenas!

[BlaineN]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Sting & Peter Gabriel last July, if you're looking for an anecdote.

How was Garth Brooks? Oh wait....

[geotag277]

I'd rather the city just buy the flames for the 400 million or so that it's worth and make the decision after that. Rather have a revenue generating asset then play these public financing stadium games every few decades. Even if we build this one, how long until the next protest about "Calgary not having world class facilities and the Flames not being able to perform due to their stadium". Phoenix Coyotes stadium is less than 15 years old and they are already going through this 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

And the whole concert angle is pretty ridiculous. When is the last time you had an acoustically great experience in a stadium? They aren't made for concerts, the sound always 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. If concerts are such a great "public benefit", let the city be the operators of the concert side of things in the new building and reap all the profits of that revenue stream. Don't dangle property tax carrots in front of us, give us the bacon. Especially when asking for hundreds of millions of dollars and who knows how many cost overruns.

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by geotag277

I'd rather the city just buy the flames for the 400 million or so that it's worth and make the decision after that. Rather have a revenue generating asset then play these public financing stadium games every few decades. Even if we build this one, how long until the next protest about "Calgary not having world class facilities and the Flames not being able to perform due to their stadium". Phoenix Coyotes stadium is less than 15 years old and they are already going through this 🞵🞵🞵🞵.

And the whole concert angle is pretty ridiculous. When is the last time you had an acoustically great experience in a stadium? They aren't made for concerts, the sound always 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵. If concerts are such a great "public benefit", let the city be the operators of the concert side of things in the new building and reap all the profits of that revenue stream. Don't dangle property tax carrots in front of us, give us the bacon. Especially when asking for hundreds of millions of dollars and who knows how many cost overruns.

I am sure Calgary Sports Entertainment would love to have the city pay an ongoing contribution to the fixed costs of operating and maintenance in proportion to the number of concert nights expected per year.

In exchange for the city giving a capital grant, we want the city to assume an ongoing obligation? The city got out of of having to contribute to operations and maintenance in the mid-90s. Do we want to go back? Also, if the Flames want to do a mini-reno to enhance something 5 or 10 years in, should the city be forced to contribute since it would gain revenue as well? Do we want a political football over every little contribution? Or just a one and done.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Tarsus

It's nice, no arguments there, just is it any nicer than any of the other new arenas? I'm mainly talking about the the inside, and there's only so much you can do. Those other arenas I mentioned were nicer on the inside IMO.

Also, when saying it's the best in the world, don't compare to other arenas in Canada, as there are only a couple of new ones to compare to, try comparing to other arenas around the world.

Only ones I have for comparison in the Shark Tank in San Jose (love that building!), Rogers Place in Vancouver (found that one to be disappointing)Rexall in Edmonton and the Saddledome. Really want to get to a game or a concert or something up in Edmonton, regardless of being the best or not, that's the bar CSEC should strive for.

[Deepstar]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

Only ones I have for comparison in the Shark Tank in San Jose (love that building!), Rogers Place in Vancouver (found that one to be disappointing)Rexall in Edmonton and the Saddledome. Really want to get to a game or a concert or something up in Edmonton, regardless of being the best or not, that's the bar CSEC should strive for.

CSEC should be striving for something in the likes of Rogers Place, or Staples, etc... any one of the dozen or so new arenas built in NA in the last few years.

[Deepstar]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

I am sure Calgary Sports Entertainment would love to have the city pay an ongoing contribution to the fixed costs of operating and maintenance in proportion to the number of concert nights expected per year.

In exchange for the city giving a capital grant, we want the city to assume an ongoing obligation? The city got out of of having to contribute to operations and maintenance in the mid-90s. Do we want to go back? Also, if the Flames want to do a mini-reno to enhance something 5 or 10 years in, should the city be forced to contribute since it would gain revenue as well? Do we want a political football over every little contribution? Or just a one and done.

One and done IMO. $100M maybe $150M of public money and move on.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Deepstar

CSEC should be striving for something in the likes of Rogers Place, or Staples, etc... any one of the dozen or so new arenas built in NA in the last few years.

Oh I'm sure they will, we just can't let our #1 rival have something nicer!

[tomthumb2]

Originally Posted by speedog

It would appear that they haven't really been at McMahon or been in a variety of it's nooks, crannies and such. The kitchens are pretty much falling apart, the suites - laughable, washrooms - ugh. McMahon has served Calgary well but it is now more of an embarrassment than the Saddledome.

I love the way you think. Craner too. McMahon is a joke and needs to be destroyed. It irritates me when people comment that it has "good bones" (mostly outsiders it seems). It doesn't. Apparently they can't even replace the bench seating with real seats because the rows are too narrow - anyone over 5 feet tall will confirm that. Plus, no mid-level to put in luxury boxes which is where the team can really make some money - like the Riders will be doing. I think we're going to be very disappointed with "Plan B" as far as McMahon is concerned.

[geotag277]

Originally Posted by MalcolmTucker

I am sure Calgary Sports Entertainment would love to have the city pay an ongoing contribution to the fixed costs of operating and maintenance in proportion to the number of concert nights expected per year.

In exchange for the city giving a capital grant, we want the city to assume an ongoing obligation? The city got out of of having to contribute to operations and maintenance in the mid-90s. Do we want to go back? Also, if the Flames want to do a mini-reno to enhance something 5 or 10 years in, should the city be forced to contribute since it would gain revenue as well? Do we want a political football over every little contribution? Or just a one and done.

Don't they already?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/city-agrees-to-cover-saddledome-s-annual-maintenance-costs-1.283621

CSE already strong armed the city to pay maintenance costs. Why would we expect any different now?

So yes, I think it could be a good deal for the city to operate and accept all profits related to concerts, along with the potential marginal maintenance dues that go along with that. You know how I know it would be a good deal? It's not on the table as part of CSE's negotiations.

Too bad that the CSE has to live with it's bad behaviour in the past. You sleep in the bed you make for yourself.

[kev_427]

I was curious to see how an arena and stadium could fit at the stampede site so I dropped an outline of Rogers Place and the new Regina Stadium onto Google Earth. The idea is to build an arena in the lot north of the Saddledome, possibly connected to the 2022 Olympics, then after the Olympics tear down the Saddledome and build a stadium on the site. I think it's a better option financially than the West Village site, and it ties in nicely with the Stampede development plan and the upcoming Victoria Park Master Plan.

[speedog]

Originally Posted by tomthumb2

I love the way you think. Craner too. McMahon is a joke and needs to be destroyed. It irritates me when people comment that it has "good bones" (mostly outsiders it seems). It doesn't. Apparently they can't even replace the bench seating with real seats because the rows are too narrow - anyone over 5 feet tall will confirm that. Plus, no mid-level to put in luxury boxes which is where the team can really make some money - like the Riders will be doing. I think we're going to be very disappointed with "Plan B" as far as McMahon is concerned.

Why does McMahon need to be destroyed? It more than meets the needs of it's owners.

[craner]

^Because of what you noted your post a couple of pages ago:

Originally Posted by speedog

It would appear that they haven't really been at McMahon or been in a variety of it's nooks, crannies and such. The kitchens are pretty much falling apart, the suites - laughable, washrooms - ugh. McMahon has served Calgary well but it is now more of an embarrassment than the Saddledome.

I realize you're probably just playing devil's advocate for the U of C but I think it's pretty obvious who McMahon's main tenant is and just how far at the bottom the facility is among the CFL stadiums.

[upperloge]

Originally Posted by kev_427

I was curious to see how an arena and stadium could fit at the stampede site so I dropped an outline of Rogers Place and the new Regina Stadium onto Google Earth. The idea is to build an arena in the lot north of the Saddledome, possibly connected to the 2022 Olympics, then after the Olympics tear down the Saddledome and build a stadium on the site. I think it's a better option financially than the West Village site, and it ties in nicely with the Stampede development plan and the upcoming Victoria Park Master Plan.

I honestly like the concept of that. I'm still leaning towards the idea of a hockey rink on the grounds, and then rip down the dome AND the grandstand and replace with a stadium that has open endzones that you can run the chuckwagons right through the middle of. I really wish I had some skill with autocad or something to model that up, but an elevated bridge on both sides with video boards and for 2 weeks you roll up the turf and put down dirt to run the rangeland derby and rodeo. Stamps get a bye week and a road game over that window, and hey, the Stampeders play on the Stampede grounds. From what I can tell, a CFL field would more than accommodate the rodeo infield they have there now.

Makes it a multipurpose stadium that's uniquely Calgary, and heck, the Dinos could play there too as their season is nowhere near July.