HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #4181  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 7:32 AM
jeffwhit's Avatar
jeffwhit jeffwhit is offline
effete latte-lifter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Aalborg, DK
Posts: 3,686
I can't express how frustrating it is that property tax is being characterized all of a sudden as "paying back" anything. That is part of the deal when you own property in a city. If you don't want to pay it, build the arena in unincorporated Buttfuck AB. Oh no one lives there to come to games and pay for concessions? No shit. That's the deal.
__________________
Arts!: Click to listen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4182  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 11:58 AM
H.E.Pennypacker's Avatar
H.E.Pennypacker H.E.Pennypacker is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffwhit View Post
I can't express how frustrating it is that property tax is being characterized all of a sudden as "paying back" anything. That is part of the deal when you own property in a city. If you don't want to pay it, build the arena in unincorporated Buttfuck AB. Oh no one lives there to come to games and pay for concessions? No shit. That's the deal.
KK, Edwards, and company are cheap sticklers when it comes to wanting to pay any sort of property tax. This includes their own personal residences where the savings may be only a few hundred dollars. It's ridiculous.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4183  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 3:41 PM
Zmonkey Zmonkey is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 708
http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/201...a-park-developments-parking-revenue.html

So the flames want free policing, free transit, all the parking revenue (which I think is off site), and to control what gets put around the building? All on top of paying no property tax?

Wow, Ken King thinks the more details that get out there he is going to look better?

How are city services suppose to be funded, if business just ask to not pay any tax?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4184  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 4:42 PM
Calgarian's Avatar
Calgarian Calgarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 25,179
This is making me want to boycott the Flames this year, what a bunch of shady crooks CSEC are...
__________________
Git'er done!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4185  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 5:39 PM
patm patm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 639
Again it's clear they won't to get a deal done. They threw this hail mary out hoping that everyone would trip over themselves to keep the Flames in town but now that this has clearly back fired they will wait until the election to see if anything changes (it won't) and then they will put the team up for sale.

Lets just hope some local group steps up.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4186  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 6:09 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by patm View Post
Again it's clear they won't to get a deal done. They threw this hail mary out hoping that everyone would trip over themselves to keep the Flames in town but now that this has clearly back fired they will wait until the election to see if anything changes (it won't) and then they will put the team up for sale.

Lets just hope some local group steps up.
I don't know if they really want to put the team up for sale - they all make a lot of money off the sports and entertainment corporation, leveraging getting an arena for a full year so they can make money off it outside of the hockey dates, and also from all the consession and beer sales. Further, many of their other businesses are Flames suppliers, so amounts spent on those things get written off the Flames finance sheet as expenses, but get driven into other companies that profit on their own financials. An example would be the video / production company the Flames use. It is owned by Ken King and others. That is a very small example, but there are numerous others. What they also are able to do is negotiate contracts for their own companies, and then lean on the Flames proper to provide advertising for a discount. So example, a major company wants IT / telecom infrastructure. TELUS says $5M. The specific Flames owner who owns the company trying to secure the contract says, I'll pay $4M, and then to counter-balance, we'll give you an exceptional deal for sponsorship / advertising through the Saddledome / Flames. So the Flames then look like they didn't really get much and the dollars don't show on their books, but the Flames owner makes a net $1M on the books of his own company. To be clear, I'm listing TELUS and a fictitious contract here just to demonstrate how it works.

That being said, some pieces of the Flames ownership group are getting older and it is not clear if the team is a multi-generational play for them. Would indeed like to have some of the pieces sold to fresh ownership blood, however, because of how the NHL works, even if someone has the money, they will only sell to those who fit within their clique. This is a more complex issue than those on the outside realize.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4187  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 7:15 PM
Socguy Socguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by patm View Post
Again it's clear they won't to get a deal done. They threw this hail mary out hoping that everyone would trip over themselves to keep the Flames in town but now that this has clearly back fired they will wait until the election to see if anything changes (it won't) and then they will put the team up for sale.

Lets just hope some local group steps up.
A deal will get done... eventually... You're right that they're just using the owners playbook of trying to exploit feelings of civic pride and love for the Flames to gouge the public purse. Make no mistake, they are still negotiating. if they were serious about giving up they would not have spent the money to advertise their their offer. They are definitely interested in a new arena and once it becomes clear to them that the city will not just bend over to these tactics, they will quietly slink back to the table with a better attitude.

You are right that if a few of the owners are planning on selling that having a new arena would boost the paper valuation of the team considerably. Still, using public money to increase the value of a private asset is a terrible misuse of public tax dollars. With the right guys in office, I have faith that the only way a new arena gets built is if any city investment is treated as such and compensated accordingly.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4188  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 7:28 PM
Black Star Black Star is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
This is making me want to boycott the Flames this year, what a bunch of shady crooks CSEC are...

KK is making Katz look like a Saint.

Wait....Katz is a Saint

KK does seem to suffer from a case of Douchebaggery tho.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4189  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 9:38 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 26,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgarian View Post
This is making me want to boycott the Flames this year, what a bunch of shady crooks CSEC are...
Yeah me too. Though unfortunately they will only use any downturn in fan support as an example of why they need a new arena.

P.S. Will you start your boycott by changing your avatar?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4190  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 9:44 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 26,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by patm View Post
Again it's clear they won't to get a deal done. They threw this hail mary out hoping that everyone would trip over themselves to keep the Flames in town but now that this has clearly back fired they will wait until the election to see if anything changes (it won't) and then they will put the team up for sale.

Lets just hope some local group steps up.
Good. Let them sell it. Any new ownership group that would willingly move one of the league's top 10 most profitable teams would have to be complete morons.

Based on this whole bungled mess even if a deal were struck I have no faith that CSEC would build anything befitting our city. We'd end up with some POS generic arena whose sole focus is maximizing corporate boxes. Even looking at their terrible Google Sketchup mockups it's clear that the actual experience for fans outside the lower bowl will be garbage.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4191  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 10:15 PM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
This is among the clearest articulations on the deals on the table (or not on the table) that I've seen. Watch / listen in entirety. Very helpful and fact based:
https://twitter.com/GlobalCalgary/status/911301602375458817
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4192  
Old Posted Sep 22, 2017, 10:51 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 26,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbia View Post
This is among the clearest articulations on the deals on the table (or not on the table) that I've seen. Watch / listen in entirety. Very helpful and fact based:
https://twitter.com/GlobalCalgary/status/911301602375458817
Yes, great explanation by Nenshi.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4193  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2017, 5:16 AM
dg66 dg66 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 213
Agreed. I share his point of view of public funding for the arena, but he's still bot getting my vote. I would love to see him get the boot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doug View Post
Arrogant, dishonest and narcissistic. Nenshi tried to take credit for the vision while lying about the deal that was on the table. The Flames had no choice but to show their hand. Neither side benefits from this becoming an election issue. The best outcome would be Nenshi's defeat and no City arena contribution beyond land and infrastructure.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4194  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2017, 6:07 AM
Socguy Socguy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 494
Opps! Metro is reporting that the Flames didn't include all that they were asking for in their disclosure to the public: They also wanted a veto on Vic park developments along with a cut of Stampede parking revenue!

http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/201...a-park-developments-parking-revenue.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4195  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2017, 5:12 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 26,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Socguy View Post
Opps! Metro is reporting that the Flames didn't include all that they were asking for in their disclosure to the public: They also wanted a veto on Vic park developments along with a cut of Stampede parking revenue!

http://www.metronews.ca/news/calgary/201...a-park-developments-parking-revenue.html
Quote:
"The city’s proposal is just not workable (or even for that matter ’fair’) based on other arena deals in comparable cities,” King said.
And there it is! We want what Katz got! Wwwaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4196  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2017, 5:38 PM
Northern Northern is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 233
Quote:
Originally Posted by dg66 View Post
Agreed. I share his point of view of public funding for the arena, but he's still bot getting my vote. I would love to see him get the boot.
Him and Dru Farell. I wish that mouthpiece went away too.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4197  
Old Posted Sep 23, 2017, 9:21 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 26,136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern View Post
Him and Dru Farell. I wish that mouthpiece went away too.
Let me guess, you hate "libtards" and public art?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4198  
Old Posted Sep 24, 2017, 2:11 AM
McMurph McMurph is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 468
I've been a flames fan since they first arrived in Calgary but today I walked past some jerseys in a store and actually had a visceral reaction of hate similar to what I've always felt with the leafs. Way to go Ken.

Nenshi was surprisingly diplomatic in that video. The flames have been shamelessly manipulative in how they frame their argument. As for Bill Smith... any word yet on his position? I know he was refusing to release a donor list. Given the company he keeps I wouldn't be surprised in the least if the owners are amongst his donors.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4199  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2017, 12:47 AM
Doug's Avatar
Doug Doug is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
Let me guess, you hate "libtards" and public art?
The following is a more articulate insight into the the failures of the current City Council:

http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/nelson-its-time-for-the-real-calgary-to-rise-again


Nelson: It's time for the real Calgary to rise again

Chris Nelson, For The Calgary HeraldCHRIS NELSON, FOR THE CALGARY HERALD
More from Chris Nelson, For The Calgary Herald
Published on: September 18, 2017 | Last Updated: September 18, 2017 3:00 AM MDT

Cheer up, Calgary. Yes, we might lose our hockey team, but look on the bright side: we’ve got ourselves another cute-coloured garbage bin to admire.

Once we dubbed ourselves “Canada’s Energy Capital” and “Heart of the New West,” but now we could pick “Garbage Can Central” or soon enough, “Former Home of the Calgary Flames.”

Inertia is spreading. We still talk a lot, but the doing part has lost impetus, replaced with a creeping pessimism once alien to our make up.

Take the slow-motion debacle regarding a new sports arena that would host, among other things, the Flames.

With the owners declaring they were pulling out of talks, we had a wake-up call this impasse is reaching a critical juncture after years of endless blather, alongside the usual haughty lectures we get from our mayor on every issue he doesn’t support or propose.

Counn. Diane Colley-Urquhart is right in describing the process as poisoned and that we’re back to Square 1.

“We’ve wasted two years of navel-gazing and in-camera meetings. This is not about rich hockey players and billionaires, this is about what’s best for the city,” is how she put it.

It’s the same with the “will we or won’t we” Olympic bid – lots of chatter, but no binding decision: ring roads, flood projects, even secondary suites all get stalled in similar fashion. This city’s turned into one giant debating den, the type of place where our mayor excels, but outside of which little gets done, except social experiments such as green bins and bike lanes.

Who knows, maybe the lack of action on a new arena and the dawning realization of what this will lead to might give us a much-needed civic election issue, because here again, there’s a state of listless inevitability. Nenshi’s approval rating is certainly on the downslope, but his main rivals aren’t exactly going for the jugular.

In Coun. Andre Chabot’s case, that’s to be expected — it’s difficult enough battling a sitting incumbent in civic politics, but to criticize the mayor means you need to challenge many policies he oversaw and on which you voted in favour.

As for Bill Smith, who carries the business crowd hopes, someone should remind him the vote is in four weeks, not four months, seeing his campaign’s been so lacklustre. Maybe he’s banking on name recognition, figuring there are more Bill Smiths in the phone book than Naheed Nenshis? That would match today’s do-little mood down to a perfect T.

Why is this happening? Is it just the fault of city hall’s current crop, or the long, drawn-out drop in energy prices, or our NDP government’s debilitating mother-knows-best attitude, or the constant opposition from every other part of Canada to any proposal emanating out of Calgary?

We’re better than this, and if those representing us can’t bring some energy and action to the table, then we should kick them out and replace them with others who can.

For decades, this city has been the economic engine of Canada, the can-do place where people who wanted to make something of their lives looked for inspiration.

Last edited by Doug; Sep 25, 2017 at 1:10 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4200  
Old Posted Sep 25, 2017, 1:01 AM
suburbia suburbia is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 6,271
Insightful fact-based investigative reporting regarding the arena / the math

C'mon Calgary: Flames billionaire owner can build his own arena
http://www.thehockeynews.com/news/articl...illionaire-owner-can-build-his-own-arena

Quote:
If King, Edwards and crew truly care about the city of Calgary, they’ll use ownership’s money to build a new facility. That’s what the Toronto Maple Leafs did, that’s what the Montreal Canadiens did and, more recently, that’s what the Vegas Golden Knights did. Heck, that’s what Seattle plans on doing and they don’t even have a team yet – though the timing of Calgary’s gripes does seem a little on the nose, regarding Seattle’s announcement, doesn’t it?
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 9:31 AM.

     

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