HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Projects & Construction Updates


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4041  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 9:57 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
This will get done and likely in the form the city wants. Apparently the sticking point is if the city recovers their investment or not. The word is that the cost will be $550 million split evenly 3 ways between CSEC, The City and a ticket tax, the city just wants some sort of return on their investment and CSEC wants all the revenue which would prevent that. This is totally just a tactic by CSEC (despite their assuraces today that it isn't) to influence the election to try and get people emotional about this and to elect a city council that will be more favourable to CSEC's terms.
The Flames have said all along they want all of the revenue from the arena. Would the city not recoup their share from investments made by others to build up the adjacent area?

Of course the Flames are turning this into an election issue but so is Nenshi. I'd say Nenshi started it by unveiling his cultural district vision. One day he says a new arena is a vital component and the next that it's not absolutely necessary.

This is the first time I've seen a dollar figure for the project. Does $550 million include land costs or is it just the cost of the building itself?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4042  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 9:58 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
I absolutely do.
Being a Nenshi insider you probably do have inside knowledge.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4043  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 10:37 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
Being a Nenshi insider you probably do have inside knowledge.
I have connections everywhere corndogger.

But it isn't just me with networking webs. Lot more going on right now than meets the eye.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4044  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 10:54 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
I have connections everywhere corndogger.

But it isn't just me with networking webs. Lot more going on right now than meets the eye.
I'm sure there is. Why was Bettman in town yesterday? Did the Flames ask to fly up or was he already here on other business? Even though I think Bettman has been great for the league it's a mistake for the Flames to use him to get a new arena.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4045  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 10:55 PM
Airboy Airboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Edmonton/St Albert
Posts: 9,815
__________________
Why complain about the weather? Its always going to be here. You on the other hand will not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4046  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:00 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 25,152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
The Flames have said all along they want all of the revenue from the arena. Would the city not recoup their share from investments made by others to build up the adjacent area?
No idea, I haven't seen any of the studies. The question I would ask would be, is the city having to sink much money into that part of Victoria Park in order to facilitate the redevelopment? They sunk a bunch into the East Village and I believe there is a CRL in place to recover some of those costs, can something similar work in Vic Park?

Quote:
Of course the Flames are turning this into an election issue but so is Nenshi. I'd say Nenshi started it by unveiling his cultural district vision.
Agreed. He shouldn't be surprised that it came back at him. I still support Nenshi, but things like this are making me take a more serious look at some of his rivals.

Quote:
This is the first time I've seen a dollar figure for the project. Does $550 million include land costs or is it just the cost of the building itself?
The numbers I have seen come from the Herald, they mention nothing about land acquisition.
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4047  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:10 PM
Socguy Socguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 494
Good to see that most people here are not buying Ken King's garbage. From the details that have leaked so far, it's clear that the city has been serious about working with the Flames to build a new arena however, it's becoming more and more apparent that KK is intent on sticking it to the taxpayer.

I've always been vocal about the financial stupidity of the city paying to replace the 'dome when it's a private business who gets the profit, however, if there is a plan in place to recoup the expense then it may make some sense. From what I've seen so far, it appears that the Flames position is that the city should pay for a new building, maintain the building, collect no property tax and be stuck with it at the end of it's life while the Flames walk away with the operating profit. No wonder Ken K is trying to make this an election issue... maybe get a dummy in there who will bend over for them.

And to the people who are so afraid the Flames will move: Don't worry. They're not going anywhere.
First, they are in the West. The league is unbalanced already by too few teams in the West. If a team must move, it will be East to West.
Second: Calgary is a profitable NHL market on a continent where there are already more NHL teams than profitable NHL markets. The league doesn't like to release too many numbers but depending on who you believe anywhere from 5-11 NHL teams are operating at a loss. Why would the league allow Calgary to move before moving one of the many money losing teams? Spite would be the only possible answer...
Third: In the incredibly unlikely event that the Flames did decided to move, The only plausible destination would be Seattle. But once in Seattle they suddenly find themselves playing 3rd fiddle to both a NFL team and a expansion NBA team. Hmmm.... doesn't actually seem like such a sweet landing spot especially after paying an exorbitant relocation fee...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4048  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:17 PM
The Chemist's Avatar
The Chemist The Chemist is offline
恭喜发财!
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: 中国上海/Shanghai
Posts: 8,875
Hilarious that people are talking about Seattle given that Seattle's new arena is going to be 100% privately funded. Just because Edmonton's owner was able to extract hundreds of millions of dollars out of the City of Edmonton doesn't mean that Calgary's ownership group should expect to be able to do the same.
__________________
"Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature." - Michael Faraday (1791-1867)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4049  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:25 PM
Corndogger Corndogger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Calgary
Posts: 7,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Chemist View Post
Hilarious that people are talking about Seattle given that Seattle's new arena is going to be 100% privately funded. Just because Edmonton's owner was able to extract hundreds of millions of dollars out of the City of Edmonton doesn't mean that Calgary's ownership group should expect to be able to do the same.
We know that private money is financing 100% of Key Arena's redevelopment if approved. Apparently the group behind it is also offering $40 million for transportation improvements. Seattle is being mentioned because they want to attract an NHL team and a new NBA team to the arena so of course the Flames are going to come up.

The fact that Katz got a good deal is exactly why the Flames want one. The city and the Flames should go to the province and ask for the same amount of funding plus inflation that the Oilers group got. Knock that off the city's share, let the Flames keep the arena profits and call it a deal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4050  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:40 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 26,067
This article from The Hockey News is right on the nose!

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/articl...illionaire-owner-can-build-his-own-arena
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4051  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:44 PM
DoubleK DoubleK is offline
Near Generational
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socguy View Post
.
Third: In the incredibly unlikely event that the Flames did decided to move, The only plausible destination would be Seattle. But once in Seattle they suddenly find themselves playing 3rd fiddle to both a NFL team and a expansion NBA team. Hmmm.... doesn't actually seem like such a sweet landing spot especially after paying an exorbitant relocation fee...
More like 5th fiddle. The Sounders and the Mariners would be miles in front of an NHL franchise.

I bet NHL wouldn't average 10k in Seattle without severe ticket discounts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4052  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2017, 11:54 PM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socguy View Post
Third: In the incredibly unlikely event that the Flames did decided to move, The only plausible destination would be Seattle.
It's been plainly obvious for years (since the Thrashers relocated to Winnipeg and especially since Vegas received their team) that Seattle was going to be the next expansion location - barring an arena. If any teams are going to relocate, which would be surprising, they would be relocating to Quebec City.

The longer that QC is willing to pony up $500MUSD at the drop of a hat for an expansion team the longer they'll be used by the NHL as bait for Cities/Teams to develop new arenas in their own locations. In this week's instance, it's no coincidence that we got Seattle arena and Calgary arena news on the same day. Painfully obvious what the plan is from Calgary's ownership on this one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK View Post
I bet NHL wouldn't average 10k in Seattle without severe ticket discounts.
The Thunderbirds, Silvertips, and Chiefs each average between 4.5K & 6K for junior hockey in Washington. I think you're underestimating the power of the sports market, and general interest in hockey, in Seattle and the greater Washington State area.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4053  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 12:18 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
I'm sure there is. Why was Bettman in town yesterday? Did the Flames ask to fly up or was he already here on other business? Even though I think Bettman has been great for the league it's a mistake for the Flames to use him to get a new arena.
He was in town at the invitation of the flames, who arranged a meeting for this particular time. He's been coming up to Calgary regularly to see how he can squeeze more money from the City and the citizens of Calgary for some time now. Remember that event with B'nai B'rith where Ken King was recognizing him? Numerous pictures of King, owners, Murray, Bettman, all around Prentice. King even said it was so successful as they would have announced a public purse subsidy the day after the election, but they bet wrong and our hard earned dollars were saved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4054  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 12:45 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4055  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 1:26 AM
SteveP SteveP is offline
Reach for the heavens
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
Um, no it doesn't focus on the facts, the story focuses on the writers own opinion. He makes some good points but don't kid yourself, it's not about facts. For example
Quote:
And don’t get me wrong – new arenas are awesome – but only a slice of a city’s population actually uses them and those folks still have to pay to get in (and most likely pay stunning amounts for parking).
The same can be said about science centres, art galleries and music centres, expect that those venues are frequented by even less people.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4056  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 3:51 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveP View Post
Um, no it doesn't focus on the facts, the story focuses on the writers own opinion. He makes some good points but don't kid yourself, it's not about facts. For example

The same can be said about science centres, art galleries and music centres, expect that those venues are frequented by even less people.
And apparently only a portion of people get a university education also.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/articl...illionaire-owner-can-build-his-own-arena
Quote:
But Edwards and company need to pay for it themselves. Are the Flames going to leave Calgary over this arena flap? Ha ha ha…no. If there’s anything rich people hate more than spending their own money, it’s being a social pariah: what’s the point of hosting a gala if everyone boos you?

The Flames are bluffing and if the good people of Calgary are smart, they’ll call that bluff.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4057  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 3:54 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Excellent "to the point" article in MacLean's Magazine.

In arena talks, Calgary Flames owners spectacularly misread the shot
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/in-ar...s-owners-spectacularly-misread-the-shot/

Quote:
A large portion of the Calgary populace will view ceding the arena-building race to Edmonton not as a loss, but as a win: that Cowtown didn’t acquiesce to its hockey barons’ demands. Until the Flames owners can appreciate that, they’ll be stuck in their current saddle.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4058  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 4:39 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Looks like the Flames have garnered a lot of national attention, but I don't know if this is what they were hoping for.

https://twitter.com/carrietait/status/908182220942143488
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4059  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 4:44 AM
SteveP SteveP is offline
Reach for the heavens
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,310
So what's the deal Suburbia, you're going to fill the thread with quotes from people on the internet that agree with your point of view? Do you really care about this, or is it because they are attacking Nenshi?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4060  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2017, 6:37 AM
blacktrojan3921's Avatar
blacktrojan3921 blacktrojan3921 is offline
Regina rhymes with fun!
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Regina, SK
Posts: 903
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corndogger View Post
Of course the Flames are turning this into an election issue but so is Nenshi. I'd say Nenshi started it by unveiling his cultural district vision. One day he says a new arena is a vital component and the next that it's not absolutely necessary.
Seriously? XD

In any case. It is truly pathetic if the Flames are relocated because of an older stadium. The Coyotes have been struggling financially for years and they are still in Glendale. The Panthers have had attendance problems as well and they remain in Florida. Mr. Bettman is setting a double standard when it comes to Canadian teams.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Projects & Construction Updates
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:03 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.