Wanna blog? Start your own hockey blog with My HockeyBuzz. Register for free today!
 
Forums :: Blog World :: Todd Cordell: On the proposed arena deal for the Calgary Flames
Author Message
Todd Cordell
Location: Barrie, ON
Joined: 02.10.2014

Jul 23 @ 11:23 AM ET
Todd Cordell: On the proposed arena deal for the Calgary Flames
Donovan
Calgary Flames
Location: Princeton, ON
Joined: 09.20.2015

Jul 23 @ 11:31 AM ET
I agree but well flames fan or not, they are busy saving money and making money on the back of the team/s....before the expansion they were willing to move in a flash to seattle, ken king does rule with an iron fist and so he should. Making it far as he has without being that would only get him let go.
Eersel
Edmonton Oilers
Location: City of Failures, AB
Joined: 12.15.2011

Jul 23 @ 12:11 PM ET
As much as I love the Saddledome, this will be a nice upgrade for the city.

Hopefully they make the stairs a little shorter... I've seen so many people trip and drop their beer trying to go up the steps in the Saddledome.
rmull905
Calgary Flames
Joined: 02.27.2007

Jul 23 @ 12:21 PM ET
There are a million macroeconomic factors to take into consideration with this deal outside the taxpayer bill. Frankly, the Alberta economy is still in the toilet, so, provided this creates jobs, brings small business back to downtown, even temporarily, and revitalizes an old part of town, I'm all for it. Downtown has had vacancy rates as high as 30% at times, and the service industry in particular has been destroyed in Calgary (and Alberta generally) since O&G industry was impacted in 2015.

The location proposed under the fieldhouse/complex deal was way more complicated, and came about during an election, so it basically had 0 chance to move forward.

Taxpayers won't get their money back, but if the economy here rebounds over a period of a few years, and people can enjoy events that they have otherwise had to travel to Vancouver or Edmonton to watch, the costs will be forgotten pretty quickly.
HockeyCanadian
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Calgary, AB
Joined: 01.31.2011

Jul 23 @ 12:28 PM ET
The skyline is going to look quite odd without the saddledome...wish it could be re-purposed. The cost of demolishing it is included in the proposal I believe, but you are right we are paying most of the bill:

Consider that Calgary plans to pay $12.4-million just to knock down the Saddledome under this plan. The Flames owners, meanwhile, will receive about US$20-million as their share of the expansion fee coming from the new Seattle franchise. They received about US$16-million as their cut of the Las Vegas fee a couple of years back. They will kick in $1.4-million of the demolition costs.

This is not a good deal but it needs to be done so bad I'm not sure how much fight is left from the taxpayers. Good perspective from the national post article on the subject which is where the above is from.
zipfel
Calgary Flames
Location: Calgary, AB
Joined: 04.24.2016

Jul 23 @ 12:34 PM ET
The city is desperate and broke. I don't mind my tax dollars going to something like this as opposed to where it is normally squandered. Such as high class art circles and vertical steel beams.
farooge
Nashville Predators
Location: Nashville, TN
Joined: 08.25.2006

Jul 23 @ 12:44 PM ET
The viability and value of the actual building is determined by a number of factors.

We got lucky; ours is the center of a lot of things and, IMO, worth 10x the cost to Nashville ... but I felt the exact same way back when it was being built.
Kevin R
Calgary Flames
Location: E5 = It aint gonna happen.
Joined: 02.10.2010

Jul 23 @ 12:54 PM ET
The city is desperate and broke. I don't mind my tax dollars going to something like this as opposed to where it is normally squandered. Such as high class art circles and vertical steel beams.
- zipfel

& bike lanes I never see bikes on & Rapid Bus Routes & overpasses spending $100mill
down 14th Street that has buses with very few riders, let alone riders going to the 70% vacant downtown.
Hunkulese
Calgary Flames
Location: QC
Joined: 09.30.2006

Jul 23 @ 12:57 PM ET
I think it's hilarious how everyone becomes a professional economist and feels qualified to have an educated discussion about these kinds of deals because they read a one-page report somewhere that said arenas were bad.
tincup
Calgary Flames
Location: AB
Joined: 07.21.2006

Jul 23 @ 1:08 PM ET
I think it's hilarious how everyone becomes a professional economist and feels qualified to have an educated discussion about these kinds of deals because they read a one-page report somewhere that said arenas were bad.
- Hunkulese


I think Calgary tax payers are a hell of a lot more educated on this subject than you are. This one topic, you should probably just be quite.
Todd Cordell
Location: Barrie, ON
Joined: 02.10.2014

Jul 23 @ 1:08 PM ET
I think it's hilarious how everyone becomes a professional economist and feels qualified to have an educated discussion about these kinds of deals because they read a one-page report somewhere that said arenas were bad.
- Hunkulese


There are a billion different reports suggesting as much. All I'm saying is billionaires should be asked to front more of the bill than the public
LordHumungous
Vancouver Canucks
Location: Greetings from the Humungous. Ayatollah of rock and rolla!
Joined: 08.15.2014

Jul 23 @ 1:29 PM ET
As much as I love the Saddledome, this will be a nice upgrade for the city.

Hopefully they make the stairs a little shorter... I've seen so many people trip and drop their beer trying to go up the steps in the Saddledome.

- Eersel

Hopefully they don't cheap out on the upper levels like they did at Rogers centre in EDM. Yipes...
Hunkulese
Calgary Flames
Location: QC
Joined: 09.30.2006

Jul 23 @ 1:32 PM ET
There are a billion different reports suggesting as much. All I'm saying is billionaires should be asked to front more of the bill than the public
- ToddCordellCGY


There are also plenty of reports out there suggesting the opposite. It's not something that can be summed up in a paragraph or two or a pretty infographic. Each city's situation is also completely different so 99% of people cheering or complaining about the deal or the Internet really have no idea what they're talking about.

Just because a billionaire is a billionaire doesn't mean they should be footing the bill. The cities benefit a lot more from new arenas than the billionaires do.
MABster
Calgary Flames
Location: Canada, AB
Joined: 10.02.2006

Jul 23 @ 1:57 PM ET
Any proposal by any group who were not going to build a new arena, with or without a fieldhouse, on the current Stampede grounds/ Victoria Park had a 99.9% chance of being turned down by the City of Calgary.
Without a new arena there, that entire site becomes sea of asphalt and desolation-- except for 10 days a year in July.
The other applications and plans were far more creative and extensive, but the Stampede board can't charge $16 per car to park if it went anywhere else, and the two train stations that are there would become dusty and cob-webbed.
It's almost too bad that the flooding a few years back didn't contaminate the site somehow. We'd have a new building already if they had been forced to give up on Victoria Park.
HockeyCanadian
Toronto Maple Leafs
Location: Calgary, AB
Joined: 01.31.2011

Jul 23 @ 2:00 PM ET
There are also plenty of reports out there suggesting the opposite. It's not something that can be summed up in a paragraph or two or a pretty infographic. Each city's situation is also completely different so 99% of people cheering or complaining about the deal or the Internet really have no idea what they're talking about.

Just because a billionaire is a billionaire doesn't mean they should be footing the bill. The cities benefit a lot more from new arenas than the billionaires do.

- Hunkulese


I think people just want due diligence done and hold the gov't accountable for the spending of their tax dollars. This is a highly conservative city after all and not exactly prone to writing blank checks to liberal gov'ts or the likes of SNC like some other provinces without accountability....We've seen by the Olympic vote that we don't trust city council to do the right thing. They caved, and then gave 4 business days for people to react.

I agree people get a bit crazy and there is a lot of misinformation out there and this needs to be done so bad for the city but comparing to other cities that have done this recently (which is really all people are doing, not trying to be economists), it looks like again city council missed the mark. As Todd says its not the worst but its certainly not the best deal possible. People in the end will forget about it just like anything political.
rmull905
Calgary Flames
Joined: 02.27.2007

Jul 23 @ 3:03 PM ET
For context, the Edmonton arena deal (per wikipedia anyways)

$279 million from the Community Revitalization Levy (CRL) and other incremental revenues (increased parking revenue, reallocation of existing subsidy paid to Northlands and new taxes from business in the arena)
$125 million from ticket surcharge on all events in the new arena
$137.81 million from lease revenue for the Arena
$23.68 million in cash from Edmonton Arena Corporation
$25 million from other government source

WhiteLie
Referee
Location: When youre 7 pages behind Dont bother catching up, you will never get that time back - Codes1087
Joined: 07.26.2010

Jul 23 @ 3:36 PM ET
Still not enough public details of the deal, but props to the Calgary gov't for negotiating what seems to be an above average deal

The good: Retaining the land and avoiding the operating/maintenance costs is a big win.

The bad: Exclusion of infrastructure and demo costs on the 50/50 split, operating fee paid to city likely doesn't cover lost property taxes,

I'd also be curious how the facility fee is paid out. There is big money to be made when cities can negotiate a percentage of revenue generated from concession, parking, ticket sales, etc.
LittleBroDougie
Calgary Flames
Joined: 03.03.2017

Jul 23 @ 4:12 PM ET
Anyone that vehemently hates this deal does not understand how business works. The owners were never and will never pay for more of the bill than the city.

The owners are making money off the sporting events either way in cities with a diehard fanbase such as the Flames.

The new arena becomes a attraction for tourists, acts, and musicians alike. Sure, the owners make more money off of it but in the end it helps the city to fund an exciting project because it puts them on the map.

As a taxpayer it sucks to foot the bill, but that's how this kind of economic system works. If you want nice things in the city, you got to pay for it.
Reveen.
Edmonton Oilers
Location: BC
Joined: 09.05.2016

Jul 23 @ 4:15 PM ET
nice to see you guys get a new rink
LittleBroDougie
Calgary Flames
Joined: 03.03.2017

Jul 23 @ 4:18 PM ET
Still not enough public details of the deal, but props to the Calgary gov't for negotiating what seems to be an above average deal

The good: Retaining the land and avoiding the operating/maintenance costs is a big win.

The bad: Exclusion of infrastructure and demo costs on the 50/50 split, operating fee paid to city likely doesn't cover lost property taxes,

I'd also be curious how the facility fee is paid out. There is big money to be made when cities can negotiate a percentage of revenue generated from concession, parking, ticket sales, etc.

- WhiteLie


I thought the estimated cost included the dome's takedown?
rmull905
Calgary Flames
Joined: 02.27.2007

Jul 23 @ 4:26 PM ET
Anyone that vehemently hates this deal does not understand how business works. The owners were never and will never pay for more of the bill than the city.

The owners are making money off the sporting events either way in cities with a diehard fanbase such as the Flames.

The new arena becomes a attraction for tourists, acts, and musicians alike. Sure, the owners make more money off of it but in the end it helps the city to fund an exciting project because it puts them on the map.

As a taxpayer it sucks to foot the bill, but that's how this kind of economic system works. If you want nice things in the city, you got to pay for it.

- LittleBroDougie


Agreed. Also why, short term, the Olympics likely would have provided a boost to the economy, despite impacts to tax payers. Small business in Calgary has been hit as hard, if not harder than the energy sector, and these type of initiatives have a way of bringing some of that back.
WhiteLie
Referee
Location: When youre 7 pages behind Dont bother catching up, you will never get that time back - Codes1087
Joined: 07.26.2010

Jul 23 @ 5:45 PM ET
I thought the estimated cost included the dome's takedown?
- LittleBroDougie


Doesn't look like it. Under the "Other Costs to the City" heading in the graphic they have $15.4 million vs $1.4 from CSEC in tiny tiny print for transactional and demolition costs, so I read it as excluded from the $550. No mention of additional infrastructure

Its unfortunately fairly standard practice that the teams contribute only to the capital costs of arena projects, as it really skews the optics on the deal. Especially when infrastructure like utilities, roads, etc to accommodate the size of these facilities can be a large amount of money that are not often publicized or well-tracked in the total project budget
BlackhawkMike
Chicago Blackhawks
Location: IL
Joined: 06.30.2011

Jul 24 @ 8:17 AM ET
Time to move back to Atlanta.
tincup
Calgary Flames
Location: AB
Joined: 07.21.2006

Jul 24 @ 8:23 AM ET
Time to move back to Atlanta.
- BlackhawkMike


Don't blame you. Chicago's awful !
DuranDuran
Calgary Flames
Location: Quito
Joined: 09.29.2015

Jul 24 @ 4:28 PM ET
https://thewincolumn.ca/2...ee-years-with-the-oilers/

Article talking about LucicĀ“s 3 year in Edmonton. Worth reading.
Page: 1, 2  Next