[News] Calgary, Alberta, & CSEC agree in principle to $1.223bn Event Centre + infrastructure

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Demzy84

I mean, the arena itself is not costing $1.2B. That is the total cost of the entire project. The Arena is about $874M but that also includes the on site public realm, which I assume is the parking, indoor and outdoor gathering areas etc…

I'm curious how public the "public realm" will be(and the amenities available), just like the "community" rink. How much value do Calgarians get for those "public" features, related to the cost?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Sorry, not in finances so I didn't really grasp the discount rate.

When they say it is a discounted rate, it is basically a present value calculation.

They intend to pay over 35 years. If they were to make a one time payment today that is equal to the total 35 year payment stream, how much is that worth in ‘today’s dollars’

There are 4 main pieces to calculating the present value

Payment amount, term, escalation, and internal rate of return

The amount of each payment and term are simple.
- We know it’s 35 years
- 1% is the escalation they are assuming. That is, they would be agreeing that the actual lease payment they make would increase 1% every year
- 5% is the internal rate of return. How much could they earn on that money each year if invested. It’s kind of like the return they expect and find acceptable on their investments. Every company has their own IRR they use when doing present value analysis


Comparing the 1.% to historical inflation is pretty favourable
5% seems pretty modest for an IRR.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by BrownDrake

Houston

Houston has no arena to offer Murray Edwards.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

The City is not spending 1.2 billion dollars on an arena, and to say it is doing so is disingenuous.

I think my previous posts indicating or acknowledging the funding split should be enough to avoid being called disingenuous, and you’re usually pretty fair so I take offence. I was just lazy with my words.

To rephrase with precise language in search of some sort of answer: can anyone name one city-led project totalling over or even around $1 billion with the majority of it being publicly funded that would be an example of a “worse way” to spend the money?

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by getbak

What's the exchange rate? It looks like today a billion Pounds is $1.7 billion Canadian.

Also, it looks like the Tottenham stadium was built between 2015 and 2019, so inflation also needs to be considered.

This deal also includes demolition of the old building and development of the surrounding area.

Fast moving thread. I didn't realize the cost of demo was included in this deal. That is huge, but the I'm still not convinced entirely that this type of project is with 1.2 billion+

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by BrownDrake

Houston

Edwards would probably have to sell, to Fertitta. So much for his Pro Sports team ownership hobby.

Fertitta, would then be competing to be the 5th/6th best sports draw in town, not just fans but commercial suites/sponsors too.

Funny, you said plenty of teams.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Fast moving thread. I didn't realize the cost of demo was included in this deal. That is huge, but the I'm still not convinced entirely that this type of project is with 1.2 billion+

Listening to CBC yesterday it sounded like details like the demo weren't figured out yet. It was on previous deals. I get the feeling a lot of this has just been really roughly costed and rushed. Smith rushed it for the election, and the city rushed it because "#### ya, grab that free money beofre someone changes their mind!"

[nik-]

I mean who hasn't spontaneously bought an $800 mil arena every once in a while

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

They spent all the money on one of the projects (the Arena) and left nothing for the field house and the Arts Common (assuming all this money is coming from existing funds and no new taxes).

Yes, but that's how important hockey is, certainly far more important than all the other sports combined in Calgary. Though at least the Arts Commons phase 1 expansion is funded already. It's the field house that will probably be pushed back for many more years.



https://www.artscommons.ca/act/about

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I think my previous posts indicating or acknowledging the funding split should be enough to avoid being called disingenuous, and you’re usually pretty fair so I take offence. I was just lazy with my words.

To rephrase with precise language in search of some sort of answer: can anyone name one city-led project totalling over or even around $1 billion with the majority of it being publicly funded that would be an example of a “worse way” to spend the money?

Thanks for calling me (usually) pretty fair. I try to be.

I think wording is important, though, as one can easily say "double the price of the last arena deal", as one of my partners did this morning having only seen a headline, and I called him out on that.

Speaking frankly, I have no idea how other municipalities spend their money (and kinda don't care) but someone did comment on the Titans receiving $1.2B in Public Financing earlier today. That only gets you 9 home games...
Is that worse?

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...blic-financing

According to Stephenson and Wegner, financing for the project includes the largest public subsidy for a stadium in United States history of at least $1.26 billion.

[Jordan!]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Over $4 billion in Tempe when you include the lawsuit.

What lawsuit?

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Slava

Yeah, and you're not wrong. But the thing is while the city needs an arena, the Flames/CSEC also need an arena. So you would hope that the deal would be pretty even when you look it from that side of things. Obviously, given the outcome, the Flames walked away from the last deal and the city begged them to come back to the table.

To me that makes a lot of sense. The Calgary Flames franchise needs a new arena in a viable market for NHL hockey. The City of Calgary needs a new event center / Arena with capacity between 15-20,000 in the City of Calgary. In my mind one of those parties has a few more options and that speaks to how this got done.

[Yeah_Baby]

I can *sort of* buy the idea that a new venue does keep some entertainment dollars in Calgary (and by extension Edmonton). Because folks would be less inclined to fly to Vancouver or Seattle or wherever for acts that as John Bean said see it being worth flying over the Rockies because they can hit up both cities.

But there is something to be said for local dollars being spent locally, but just differently.

[fotze2]

Originally Posted by Nufy

People were fighting about the over priced Finger trap bridge a few years back due to the unique architecture.

I think I'd have to vote for Danielle Steele if they pulled Calatrava out from behind the podium as designers.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by accord1999

Yes, but that's how important hockey is, certainly far more important than all the other sports combined in Calgary. Though at least the Arts Commons phase 1 expansion is funded already. It's the field house that will probably be pushed back for many more years.



https://www.artscommons.ca/act/about

Well it is considered far more important by some. Too bad about the field house, cost right now is 250 million, was expected to be used by almost every type of amateur athletic organization one could think of and actually would have been utilized by a broad socio-economic cross section of Calgarians compared to the more narrow band that will frequently utilize the new NHL arena.

They spent 20% of the field house budget on a practice arena for the Flames. I wonder in the “community” rink who has first right of refusal for ice time, the community or CSEC? It really should be described as a NHL practice facility that can be occasionally used by the community.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

. I wonder in the “community” rink who has first right of refusal for ice time, the community or CSEC? It really should be described as a NHL practice facility that can be occasionally used by the community.

"Sorry, Darryl. You can't schedule practice then. We have toddler skating lessons at that time. I get you in at 10:30 pm because the beer league game was cancelled."

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by TrentCrimmIndependent

1.2 is asinine. That's two arenas by fairly recent standards.

That should be a McMahon replacement and Saddledome replacement on the same plot of land.

A 1000 seat community rink doesn't explain the extra 5-600 million on this price tag.

Must be some state of the art plaza and parking facility..

When we were talking Calgary Next 5-8 years ago that was probably that price. Inflation has creeped since then.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

"Sorry, Darryl. You can't schedule practice then. We have toddler skating lessons at that time. I get you in at 10:30 pm because the beer league game was cancelled."

‘You get to share the ice with the Glendale Hawks Div 3 Pee Wee team. If any of their pucks come over from their horseshoe drill please send them back.’

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

"Sorry, Darryl. You can't schedule practice then. We have toddler skating lessons at that time. I get you in at 10:30 pm because the beer league game was cancelled."

I asked a buddy of mine who is an Oilers season ticket holder if he ever saw the community rink being used on game nights as you can see into it. He genuinely seemed confused by the question, talking about “why would you fight traffic to rent that arena on game nights”. So you can probably eliminate most nights where there are activities going on in the NHL arena from times the community actively uses the community arena.

Community times probably come down to non-event evenings and days where the Flames/Wranglers/Hitmen are not using it for practices or morning skates.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by Nufy

Change arena to "Multi-purpose Arts and Culture Centre" with state of the art acoustics and lighting that will bring world class entertainment to the city...

Make a difference now ?

End of the day, it's still 18,000 seats around an oval surface.

I just want to know what brought it up 2x from the last proposal/assessment, aside from a couple measly tack ons.

Like this has got to be the biggest price tag on a new arena for any NHL city, no? (All 'infrastructure' included)