New Downtown Calgary Arena

[McBoo]

Originally Posted by suburbia

My understanding is that the new arena in Edmonton doesn't really have the ancillary animal facilities within its vicinity, and this was a major hurdle. According to the CFR folks, Edmonton did put in a bid, but this reality was a major consideration for the CFR.

Rogers has lots of space (in the attached coummunity arena) to house the livestock.

Oilers Entertainment did negotiate but declined to bid.

Only bidders were Red Deer (and good on them) and Saskatoon.

Pro-cowboys did this to themselves. Look at the arena size and local sponsorship pool - you can bet prize money will be down, and likely by quite a bit.

Only winner really, is Red Deer itself.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by geotag277

Even if the feds give less than half of 2010, it's hard not to see how that would benefit Calgary.

And again, we don't need any new arena, period. Not for the olympics and not for hockey. We can use that money for something useful, like infrastructure.

You're getting off topic. This thread shows that there is demand for a new arena. I just don't see the Olympics helping that cause. $500 million is but a fraction for the overall cost of the games. That won't cover any legacy infrastructure project. The province will have to spend 2 to 3 times as much and probably an equal amount from the city of Calgary and it institutions ( universities for example)

[O-tacular]

I still feel this would be a missed opportunity if we don't at least try kicking the can for a new arena. Even if it only funds 20 million or something to get the ball rolling. A spark to help the Flames and the city come together.

[Calgarian]

The new arena isn't factored into the Olympic costs IIRC, not sure about the football stadium...

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Calgarian

The new arena isn't factored into the Olympic costs IIRC, not sure about the football stadium...

If CSEC is expecting something for both they need a reality check.

[geotag277]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

You're getting off topic. This thread shows that there is demand for a new arena. I just don't see the Olympics helping that cause. $500 million is but a fraction for the overall cost of the games. That won't cover any legacy infrastructure project. The province will have to spend 2 to 3 times as much and probably an equal amount from the city of Calgary and it institutions ( universities for example)

In the context of this thread, it would make the most sense for Calgary to spend all incoming Olympic money (city + provincial + federal) on things other than an arena, therefore, even with an olympics bid, I would be advocating for no new arena, and further, IOC is on the side that there is no new arena necessary.

So as far as I'm concerned, the olympics bid is irrelevant.

[Bad Grizzly]

Do you seriously believe that they would host the winter Olympic games using a 40 year old arena that already hosted them?

Originally Posted by geotag277

Seems like a new arena isn't even necessary, considering the IOC themselves have come out and said the arena is fine. The main problem seems to be related to ski jumping, and the IOC has already suggested Whistler for those events.

Therefore, even if we get the olympics, I still wouldn't want to put a dime towards a new arena.

One angle I think people miss is that Calgary would be getting a bunch of funds from the provincial and Federal governments that would not otherwise be available. Calgary as a city can redirect most of this towards infrastructure projects. For the 2010 winter olympics, the Federal government gave Vancouver more than a billion dollars. The IOC is going to give about 900 million to the host city, which should just about cover the security costs. The provincial BC government paid about 1 billion in 2010.

So Calgary will have about 3 billion dollars coming it's way in funding - do the residents of Calgary really care if the Olympics lose money in this case? Security paid by IOC and billions of funding for infrastructure that might not be otherwise available.

And we don't even need a new arena or potentially any new facilities.

I think the case for Calgary's benefit becomes pretty clear throwing some of these numbers around. I can see why Edmonton (and, indeed, the rest of Canada) would throw a fit, since it will inevitably result in redirected provincial/Federal dollars, but Calgary stands to gain quite a bit IMO.

[Bad Grizzly]

Originally Posted by geotag277

In the context of this thread, it would make the most sense for Calgary to spend all incoming Olympic money (city + provincial + federal) on things other than an arena, therefore, even with an olympics bid, I would be advocating for no new arena, and further, IOC is on the side that there is no new arena necessary.

So as far as I'm concerned, the olympics bid is irrelevant.

I doubt anyone actually believes that. Yeah, the IOC said that, but it's only talk to keep Calgary engaged in bidding for the Olympics.

[msmariner]

Originally Posted by Bad Grizzly

I doubt anyone actually believes that. Yeah, the IOC said that, but it's only talk to keep Calgary engaged in bidding for the Olympics.

Why not. Vancouver used a 15 and 40 year old arena when they hosted. Plus they used a 30 year old BC place which wasn’t renovated till after they used it for the olympics

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by McBoo

Rogers has lots of space (in the attached coummunity arena) to house the livestock.

Oilers Entertainment did negotiate but declined to bid.

Only bidders were Red Deer (and good on them) and Saskatoon.

Pro-cowboys did this to themselves. Look at the arena size and local sponsorship pool - you can bet prize money will be down, and likely by quite a bit.

Only winner really, is Red Deer itself.

Huge win for Red Deer. They may now recognize the opportunity they have with both Edmonton and Calgary in their catchment pool. If they can leverage CFR and build out their infrastructure just a pinch more, they could position themselves for other larger events. This is not a bad thing for Calgary, as a good chunk of economic impact will come to Calgary via travel and some hotel/restaurant if Red Deer can be positioned as a day-trip destination. Tourism Calgary should start advertising for the CFR.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

If CSEC is expecting something for both they need a reality check.

They are far more likely to get something for a stadium, instead they decided the arena is the hill to die on...

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by msmariner

Why not. Vancouver used a 15 and 40 year old arena when they hosted. Plus they used a 30 year old BC place which wasn’t renovated till after they used it for the olympics

Exactly. If the IOC is serious about bringing down the cost of the games, they won't go with stupid bait and switch tactics.

[CrossedTheTracks]

Originally Posted by Bad Grizzly

Do you seriously believe that they would host the winter Olympic games using a 40 year old arena that already hosted them?

Yes. (Though I don't think that to the exclusion of, "we need an additional rink with substantial seating.)

Men's hockey, women's hockey, figure skating, and speed skating each require (or at least, strongly desire) international-sized ice surfaces. Curling is more flexible on the ice surface configuration, but needs an arena of some sort.

Given the increased demands of those events (some of which didn't exist in 1988), we're going to need everything we used in 1988, and more, to host the Olympics. If it wasn't for wounded civic pride, it would make a ton of sense to send one of those events to Edmonton.

[HomeInMyShoes]

If South Korea and Japan can figure out how to share a World Cup, how can Calgary and Edmonton not figure it out?

[geotag277]

Just another reminder for those complaining about our Saddledome not being appropriate to host the Olympics, it is currently listed at the 6th largest ice hockey arena in the entire world by seating capacity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ice_hockey_arenas_by_capacity

If you include the even larger even more unwieldy arenas that had to be demolished for financial reasons, it would still be in the top 10.

The biggest problem with the Saddledome is that the city has agreed to cover all maintenance costs, which is a perpetually money losing proposition. It's not a good deal for the city, and the Flames are - even without a new arena - already getting a sweetheart deal in the form of millions of dollars a year in free maintenance for the building.

[suburbia]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Yes. (Though I don't think that to the exclusion of, "we need an additional rink with substantial seating.)

Men's hockey, women's hockey, figure skating, and speed skating each require (or at least, strongly desire) international-sized ice surfaces. Curling is more flexible on the ice surface configuration, but needs an arena of some sort.

Given the increased demands of those events (some of which didn't exist in 1988), we're going to need everything we used in 1988, and more, to host the Olympics. If it wasn't for wounded civic pride, it would make a ton of sense to send one of those events to Edmonton.

Best to share with Vancouver - particularly for the first round, where you only play against other teams within your own group. Keep the group with Canada in Calgary - but both groups will be solid however you cut it. Give Whistler ski jumping, so Vancouver / Whistler become a bit of a hub. That makes more sense than adding Edmonton when Vancouver/Whistler are already in play.

[Calgarian]

Originally Posted by geotag277

Just another reminder for those complaining about our Saddledome not being appropriate to host the Olympics, it is currently listed at the 6th largest ice hockey arena in the entire world by seating capacity:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ice_hockey_arenas_by_capacity

If you include the even larger even more unwieldy arenas that had to be demolished for financial reasons, it would still be in the top 10.

The biggest problem with the Saddledome is that the city has agreed to cover all maintenance costs, which is a perpetually money losing proposition. It's not a good deal for the city, and the Flames are - even without a new arena - already getting a sweetheart deal in the form of millions of dollars a year in free maintenance for the building.

They don't care about the overall capacity, they want box seats. Flames make money in the current arena, they can just make more if they con us into building a new one for them.

[Bad Grizzly]

Originally Posted by HomeInMyShoes

If South Korea and Japan can figure out how to share a World Cup, how can Calgary and Edmonton not figure it out?

I'm sure they can, but why involve Edmonton? Edmonton is only needed for its arena, and that's where the only two sports that people care about (hockey and figure skating) happen. It would be a waste of money for Calgary to share with Edmonton.

[Bad Grizzly]

Originally Posted by CrossedTheTracks

Yes. (Though I don't think that to the exclusion of, "we need an additional rink with substantial seating.)

Men's hockey, women's hockey, figure skating, and speed skating each require (or at least, strongly desire) international-sized ice surfaces. Curling is more flexible on the ice surface configuration, but needs an arena of some sort.

Given the increased demands of those events (some of which didn't exist in 1988), we're going to need everything we used in 1988, and more, to host the Olympics. If it wasn't for wounded civic pride, it would make a ton of sense to send one of those events to Edmonton.

No it wouldn't, it's an incredibly stupid idea. Wounded civic pride for some maybe, but from a financial point of view it would be an complete waste of money for Calgary to host those events in Edmonton. Host all the glory sports, the only ones people care about in Edmonton, while splitting the cost of the Olympics? No thanks.

[topdog]

Originally Posted by Bad Grizzly

No it wouldn't, it's an incredibly stupid idea. Wounded civic pride for some maybe, but from a financial point of view it would be an complete waste of money for Calgary to host those events in Edmonton. Host all the glory sports, the only ones people care about in Edmonton, while splitting the cost of the Olympics? No thanks.

I usually don't agree with anything bad grizzly says, but he is right on this point. It would be a bad idea to cohost, there's little benefit in it for Calgary.