New Downtown Calgary Arena

[wave46]

Originally Posted by patm

If Chapters or Indigo were one of the most popular entertainment options within the city limits and something that hundreds of thousands of Calgarians have invested a lot of passion and interest into, you would be wanting people to subsidize them too if they threatened to leave.

If they're so popular, why not make those who enjoy it pay for it?

Kind of like the Leafs or the Canadiens?

I think we'll have to agree to disagree here.

[Northern]

Originally Posted by wave46

IMO there has to be a line where we say 'no'. This election might be it.

Winnipeg and Quebec City did it. Montreal let the Expos go.

I don't want to go they way many cities in the US have - declaring bankruptcy and cutting municipal services because they're stuck paying for empty stadiums. The best ones are the ones that taxpayers are paying for but have been demolished for years (Veterans Stadium in Philadelphia).

And now Quebec is putting public money into a new arena to try and get a team back. LA and Baltimore refused to put money into a new stadium, and lost their NFL teams only to put public money into a new stadium to get their teams back again. MLB wanted the Expos to move anyhow. They were the league's choice for contraction.

[SteveP]

Originally Posted by Northern

It's true and that's one of the common refrains out there, but it's very misleading. You and I don't have any more ownership over the library or music centre than we do over the new arena. So what difference does it make?

Excellent point.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Northern

And now Quebec is putting public money into a new arena to try and get a team back. LA and Baltimore refused to put money into a new stadium, and lost their NFL teams only to put public money into a new stadium to get their teams back again. MLB wanted the Expos to move anyhow. They were the league's choice for contraction.

All of those were silly IMO. Especially Quebec. Just because others do it, doesn't make it right.

I am opposed to all public funding of pro sports venues.

[Tobyoby]

Originally Posted by Northern

Well said. Me feeling exactly. I'm not overly happy with the way the Flames are trying to get every dollar they can, but at the same time if it's going to cost me the taxpayer a couple of bucks a month extra on my taxes I'm fine with it, because I would actually use it....unlike some of the venues the city gives money to.

A couple of bucks a month? Are you crack or something?? We're looking at 400Mil by the time the dust settles. Get a new calcuator, yours is broken.

[Northern]

Originally Posted by wave46

All of those were silly IMO. Especially Quebec. Just because others do it, doesn't make it right.

I am opposed to all public funding of pro sports venues.

It doesn't matter if others do it and you don't think it's right and I think it's right. In the end, history will repeat itself and city like Calgary will be wanting a team, and people will want to see concerts, and we'll have to go through all this anyway with twice the effort.

As far as funding any pro sports venues, it's your choice obviously, but as I mentioned before you don't have any more ownership or stake in a library or music center than I do in a new arena. It's our tax money going to the things we plan to get use out of.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by Northern

It doesn't matter if others do it and you don't think it's right and I think it's right. In the end, history will repeat itself and city like Calgary will be wanting a team, and people will want to see concerts, and we'll have to go through all this anyway with twice the effort.

As far as funding any pro sports venues, it's your choice obviously, but as I mentioned before you don't have any more ownership or stake in a library or music center than I do in a new arena. It's our tax money going to the things we plan to get use out of.

I accept the will of democracy, certainly.

If people vote for a candidate who wants to subsidize a private venture, that's the will of the people.

I can certainly disagree though. That's where I'm coming from.

[BlaineN]

Whatever happens, I hope a happy medium can be worked out. Losing the team would really suck for Calgary, and I agree fully with Habanero, Calgary might look good to the leftist crowd for a while, but over time the loss of a team and no prospects for being part of the concert loop would suck. Coming from a city that didn't have an NHL team it was great to come here and have that option.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Habanero

One thing for sure, if we did actually lose the Flames it would be a blow to the city in many ways. For decades we'd have to drive up to Edmonton to watch a concert or catch an NHL game, and I'm not prepared to do that.

Yeah, Calgary might get some short lived limelight for standing up to the big bad billionaire owners, but after that quickly dies off the city would for decades look like a backwater city without the facilities to make it a world class city. I'm definitely not voting for Nenshi this time around, because I'm not willing to chance losing the team and the chance of a new arena. The taxpayer cost for me having a new arena is about the same monthly cost as my landscaping recycle bin which I rarely use, or about the same as was donated to the Library, which I will probably visit once.

i pray this comes down to a two person race in the election so we can get rid of Nenshi.

You're looking at this too emotionally. At the end of the day the Flames are a business and business in Calgary is good. This is a textbook example of a sports franchise trying to scare up support to subsidize their business at the expense of the taxpayer.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by Doug

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.

This may as well have been written with a crayon lol. What is wrong with conservatives in this city? they are all ready to string Nenshi up (and anyone else left leaning) over taxes, now he's doing a bad job because he won't commit to a brutal deal for the Flames or commit to sending billions on Olympics? people need to sit back for a minute and think about priorities in this city. Do we want shiny new toys that will cost us all a pile of money (while not really doing anything for our quality of life), or do we want prudent spending that will benefit the whole city as a whole and make life here easier. Conservatives are always the first to bitch about taxes, but are also the first to bitch when something doesn't work perfectly.

[Northern]

Originally Posted by Tobyoby

A couple of bucks a month? Are you crack or something?? We're looking at 400Mil by the time the dust settles. Get a new calcuator, yours is broken.

WFT kind of answer is that? no I'm not on crack. We have about half a million households in Calgary. If each househould pays say 3 bucks a month extra in tax it's 36 bucks a year, so about 360 bucks over 10 years. That gives around 180 million from taxpayers. Which is what I'd be fine paying.

[patm]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

You're looking at this too emotionally. At the end of the day the Flames are a business and business in Calgary is good. This is a textbook example of a sports franchise trying to scare up support to subsidize their business at the expense of the taxpayer.

Business in Calgary is good?

Business in Calgary just sucks a little less than a year or two ago. It's by no stretch good. Pretty much every marker will tell you that at this point. On top of that, unless some big shake up happens, business in Calgary is unlikely to stay at "just sucks a little less" for long when you're looking at an arena for the next 35 years.

The Flames themselves were on the receiving end of revenue sharing from the league.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Northern

And now Quebec is putting public money into a new arena to try and get a team back. LA and Baltimore refused to put money into a new stadium, and lost their NFL teams only to put public money into a new stadium to get their teams back again. MLB wanted the Expos to move anyhow. They were the league's choice for contraction.

A western team can't move to the eastern conference because they already have an extra team over the west. Quebec city is of zero consequence. Seattle doesn't have a playable arena yet and those who are proposing the renovations aren't asking for public money. Any way you dice it the Flames are staying put.

[Habanero]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

You're looking at this too emotionally. At the end of the day the Flames are a business and business in Calgary is good. This is a textbook example of a sports franchise trying to scare up support to subsidize their business at the expense of the taxpayer.

I'm less emotional then the people spouting vitriol against the Flames. I'm simply looking at it from a personal, and maybe selfish point of view. I want an NHL team here, and I want a new arena for concerts. That's it, that's all it's about, nothing more nothing less. Most of the people against it are talking about upset they are, with some even saying how angry they get looking at a Flames jersey...like seriously. Those people need to realize this is all business and not to take it personally.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by patm

Business in Calgary is good?

Business in Calgary just sucks a little less than a year or two ago. It's by no stretch good. Pretty much every marker will tell you that at this point. On top of that, unless some big shake up happens, business in Calgary is unlikely to stay at "just sucks a little less" for long when you're looking at an arena for the next 35 years.

The Flames themselves were on the receiving end of revenue sharing from the league.

Business for the Flames has been lucrative in Calgary. Who cares if they received some subsidies from the NHL. CSEC makes more money on the entertainment end anyway (concerts etc.)

Plus this market is known to be one of the top 10 in the league. Somewhere like Seattle has no track record and no guarantee. Look at this the way you would any investment. As a business owner would you really choose to uproot your entire operation, sell your assets like the Stampeders and lose all your current business contacts etc in the city, over an arena subsidy that you could easily pay out of pocket and still make a killing? If they want to cut off their nose to spite their face they aren't very good business people. Based on the fact the owners are billionaires I can't see that being the case. The only reason they're threatening and drawing this out longer is that they are counting on reactions like yours and others where emotion clouds reason.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Habanero

I'm less emotional then the people spouting vitriol against the Flames. I'm simply looking at it from a personal, and maybe selfish point of view. I want an NHL team here, and I want a new arena for concerts. That's it, that's all it's about, nothing more nothing less. Most of the people against it are talking about upset they are, with some even saying how angry they get looking at a Flames jersey...like seriously. Those people need to realize this is all business and not to take it personally.

I also enjoy going to see hockey games and seeing the occasional concert. Does that mean that CSEC deserves to never pay property taxes and for the city to shell over hundreds of millions of dollars they will never see again because... I like the Flames.... and trickle down economics? Hell no! Murray Edwards doesn't even pay tax in Calgary or Canada for that matter because he lives in London. So fuck him and his greedy demands for a cash handout. This situation represents everything that is wrong with our modern society. It is quite literally the top 1% demanding the other 99% pay them even more money and thank them for it or they take their toys and leave. This is a pathetic temper tantrum Ken King and the Flames are throwing and I'm not having it! Not after clawing our way out of a recession the last 2 years that the ownership of CSEC barely felt at all and is so tone deaf they don't even recognize how bad they look for it.

[Chinook Arch]

Yeah, that Habanero is really emotional about, good thing you're not

Originally Posted by O-tacular

I also enjoy going to see hockey games and seeing the occasional concert. Does that mean that CSEC deserves to never pay property taxes and for the city to shell over hundreds of millions of dollars they will never see again because... I like the Flames.... and trickle down economics? Hell no! Murray Edwards doesn't even pay tax in Calgary or Canada for that matter because he lives in London. So fuck him and his greedy demands for a cash handout. This situation represents everything that is wrong with our modern society. It is quite literally the top 1% demanding the other 99% pay them even more money and thank them for it or they take their toys and leave. This is a pathetic temper tantrum Ken King and the Flames are throwing and I'm not having it! Not after clawing our way out of a recession the last 2 years that the ownership of CSEC barely felt at all and is so tone deaf they don't even recognize how bad they look for it.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Chinook Arch

Yeah, that Habanero is really emotional about, good thing you're not

I am emotional about it. But it comes from looking at the FACTS. Supporting a new arena out of fear of losing the team clouds people's judgment and team owners count on that. I don't give blanket support to everything CSEC proposes just because I like the Flames. I look at who pockets the money at the end of the day and the long history of sports franchises holding cities ransom for new stadiums and arenas. I expected more from the Flames.

[McMurph]

People seem to forget that we have an arena. The desire for a new arena is entirely so that the flames can make more money. It's a 500 million dollar investment to increase profit. The threat of moving the team is nothing more than extortion.

And yes, I know about concerts. Seriously though, this is about hockey and the profit owners can make from it. The flames are filling the saddledome, selling plenty of jerseys and making money from it. If they want to squeeze more money out of a shiny new building they can build it themselves. Or they can rent it from us should the city decide it's a worthwhile investment.

[patm]

Originally Posted by McMurph

People seem to forget that we have an arena. The desire for a new arena is entirely so that the flames can make more money. It's a 500 million dollar investment to increase profit. The threat of moving the team is nothing more than extortion.

And yes, I know about concerts. Seriously though, this is about hockey and the profit owners can make from it. The flames are filling the saddledome, selling plenty of jerseys and making money from it. If they want to squeeze more money out of a shiny new building they can build it themselves. Or they can rent it from us should the city decide it's a worthwhile investment.

I think that's the issue.

They're filling the building and selling a lot of merchandise, interest in the Flames is as high as it has been since '07 and the team is as good as it ever has been in the last 28 years but the Flames are not seeing increased profits and are still a middling team revenue wise that received revenue sharing from the league.

They clearly don't think that a 500 million dollar investment into keeping this team in Calgary is a good move and will probably sell the team if they don't get a sweetheart deal like Edmonton.