[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by troutman

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/spo...427494533.html

I had a good chuckle at this;

"If only we were more like Winnipeg," said nobody in Calgary ever. Until this week.

If Investors Group Field is a poster child for anything it's that crappy engineering and construction yields a crappy facility.

[sureLoss]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I don't think they offered that, but if you can find reference to it that would be great.

My understanding is the NHL (MLB, NBA, etc.) do not open their books for any independent auditors - and never will.

If anyone knows any different, i would be interested in knowing.

During one of the CalgaryNEXT discussions in council, one councilor (I think it was Farrell) asked if CSEC would open up their books to the city. Ken King said he thought that would be appropriate under the condition of a confidentiality agreement with the city. Heard it with my own ears.

Whether King sticks to that commitment with this Plan B arena is another question though.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I had a good chuckle at this;



If Investors Group Field is a poster child for anything it's that crappy engineering and construction yields a crappy facility.

They built the whole thing, and then realized that they didn't have a spot for the media... how does that possibly happen?

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

They built the whole thing, and then realized that they didn't have a spot for the media... how does that possibly happen?

Visit play-by-play guys to Rogers Place suggest the location to call the game from in that barn is about the same as calling it from Leduc.

[Canehdianman]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

It has piping doesn't it??... I knew it, they're adding piping to the arena!!

An arena would be pretty gross without piping.

Be-dazzling, however, would add a lot of appeal!

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by RM14

Of course they could. Or the city could keep it and sell it someday and tell the Stampede to beat it. Stampede hasn't exactly been amazing managers of the event grounds.

I have plenty of criticisms of the Stampede, but what have they managed poorly?

Like it or not, they are an important stakeholder in this discussion. They have their own development plans that may or may not align with Plan B arena. Stampede can make just as much claim to civic and economic benefit as anyone (Youth Campus, conferences, etc.)

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

They built the whole thing, and then realized that they didn't have a spot for the media... how does that possibly happen?

When it's someone elses money there is less impetus to get it right the first time.

People that work in an interdepartmental capacity can surely identify with the 'not my problem' philosophy.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

I have plenty of criticisms of the Stampede, but what have they managed poorly?

Like it or not, they are an important stakeholder in this discussion. They have their own development plans that may or may not align with Plan B arena. Stampede can make just as much claim to civic and economic benefit as anyone (Youth Campus, conferences, etc.)

I just rarely see things moving forward. Their Agrium events center is pretty nice I guess.

* the Casino they were terrible at running
* Mainstreet, and thinking Margarita was a good anchor
* BMO expansions taking decades
* Their Hotel idea that never happened
* Horse races at Stampede Park are long gone
* no plan for coke stage which is in a terrible spot

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

That's definitely incorrect. All teams have audits. KPMG is the Flames auditors in Calgary.

I'm not saying they don't get audited. I'm saying they are a private business, therefore their income and revenues are not required to be disclosed like public companies or governments.

I can pull up CNRL's prospectus and MD&A and look at what the company is doing.

I cannot do that on Joe's plumbing.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

During one of the CalgaryNEXT discussions in council, one councilor (I think it was Farrell) asked if CSEC would open up their books to the city. Ken King said he thought that would be appropriate under the condition of a confidentiality agreement with the city. Heard it with my own ears.

Whether King sticks to that commitment with this Plan B arena is another question though.

Oh yes, I remember that!

Thanks, Sureloss.

[Corral]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I'm not saying they don't get audited. I'm saying they are a private business, therefore their income and revenues are not required to be disclosed like public companies or governments.

I can pull up CNRL's prospectus and MD&A and look at what the company is doing.

I cannot do that on Joe's plumbing.

Lets not pretend looking at a prospectus, MD&A or even audited financials tells you much of anything truly revealing when it comes to corporate books. 30 minutes with Joe over a coffee or beer would be way more informative about how Joe's Plumbing is doing - assuming you trust what Joe has to say. And there is the real problem for this arena negotiation.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by RM14

This is nuts.. These used to be things long-term season ticket holders could strategically get over time and seniority and be proud about. This is a dirty level of nickel-and-dimeing every little thing.

the new reality. for every person that says it's dirty nickel and diming, there are 10 people willing to pay the extra to get those perks.

sucks, but that the way it is now. wait until you have the beer options. if you don't want the low quality draft, you'll pay $10-$12 for a can of beer. likely more, since it will be 5 years from now when the new arena finally opens.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I'm not saying they don't get audited. I'm saying they are a private business, therefore their income and revenues are not required to be disclosed like public companies or governments.

I can pull up CNRL's prospectus and MD&A and look at what the company is doing.

I cannot do that on Joe's plumbing.

True, but thats their right as a Private Business.

Damn that Joe's Plumbing! A public menace he is!

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Locke

True, but thats their right as a Private Business.

Damn that Joe's Plumbing! A public menace he is!

I'm not arguing that it's a bad thing...... except when that business claims it cannot compete in the market unless the taxpayers kick over a few hundred million dollars.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I'm not saying they don't get audited. I'm saying they are a private business, therefore their income and revenues are not required to be disclosed like public companies or governments.

I can pull up CNRL's prospectus and MD&A and look at what the company is doing.

I cannot do that on Joe's plumbing.

They definitely don't need to disclose them, but they are readily available. Handing it over to the city would not be an issue.

I suspect the Flames financials are barely breakeven, more likely in a loss. They report all of CSEC in there.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I'm not arguing that it's a bad thing...... except when that business claims it cannot compete in the market unless the taxpayers kick over a few hundred million dollars.

You have to use common sense.

People are pissed because Nenshi is playing Hardball. Why wouldnt he?

They give you no information then you give them none in return.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by RM14

I just rarely see things moving forward. Their Agrium events center is pretty nice I guess.

* the Casino they were terrible at running
fair. that's why they sold it and got out of the casino business. I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty sure they came out ahead on that deal.

* Mainstreet, and thinking Margarita was a good anchor
fair. But, as they say with jazz, sometimes it's about the notes you don't play. The concept was sound. In the real-world it wasn't going to play out. It probably shouldn't have gotten to a public stage before it failed, but that was one of the only ways to really test the momentum. While it wasn't solely their decision, hitting pause on the project was the right move. Otherwise we would probably be looking at Eau Claire 2.0 (in concept there aren't many reasons that should be such a failure, etither).

The idea isn't dead. 17th avenue is coming through. Smart design around a new arena could be a catalyst. It's a great opportunity. Doesn't mean it's more worthy of tax dollars.

* BMO expansions taking decades
debatable. Still the best conference location in town, but it's not without its problems. Going too big before demand warrants gets a lot of businesses in trouble. Much like the concerts skipping town debate, it's a matter of how many lost opportunities they've had. I'd guess not very many.

* Their Hotel idea that never happened
see casino. They've realized the core competencies of their business. Running a hotel isn't one of them. Partnering with someone could make sense, but ironing out mutual benefit isn't a piece of cake. Hotelier would rather be a few blocks further away and have total control.

* Horse races at Stampede Park are long gone
good riddance. What public benefit did horse racing provide? Other than assembling some of society's grungiest people away much of the time?

* no plan for coke stage which is in a terrible spot
It delivers a poor concert experience. But it drives gate attendance. Enough people seem to think it's worth $18. A good problem to have. Rather than lipstick on a pig or make an expensive change that will only pay dividends for 10 days a year, why not wait and make the change properly when it fits into larger development plans? Between 17th ave and their Corral redevelopment, it would seem almost certain that it will happen soon.

[powderjunkie]

I'm very ambivalent about Stampede. I know for a fact that they are often poorly run and managed. But I also know most of the senior leadership to be very strong and competent people. My conclusion is that it is a surprisingly complex organization, with a structure unlike nearly any other (especially when you consider the volunteer/committee side of things).

We used to joke that we'd screw up a one horse parade. But they don't. Year after year, they successfully execute a giant parade (95% driven by volunteer committee). And a hell of a lot of other stuff over the 10.5 days. It may feel rinky-dink at times. At times it is. But, visit PNE, CNE, K-Days, most state fairs, etc., and you'll see that Stampede is a world-class* ($0.25 in swear jar) temporary festival.


Why am I de-railing this to a Stampede discussion? Because they have floated a Corral redevelopment plan that will seek government funds. Despite my personal misgivings about the org (though I'm sure I come across as a staunch defender right now), I am not immediately opposed to public funds for several reasons:

1. Stampede is a not-for-profit org. All money gets invested straight back into the org, who's mission statement is directly aligned with a public good (although debatable how worthy it is).

1b. Nobody is getting rich by one-day selling the organization (including increased valuation through a shiny new asset), because nobody owns it. Sure, some board members do well through back-door dealings and side-contracts. But it's getting better as there are actually more and more rules in place. It's not really any different than any other comparable size org.

2. Obviously, they could not, and would not ever play the 'threaten to leave if we don't get our way' card.

3. It's generally an accessible venue. A number of events throughout the year are free. Most others cost less than $20. There are plenty of ways to get in cheaper to the 10 day event. The barriers to entry are much less significant than a Saddledome event. I would think Stampede Park sees more visitors overall, and more unique visitors than the Dome, but I've never checked the numbers.

4. I won't really go the jobs/economic benefit route, because I don't think it's a slam-dunk argument here, either. But, they do more full-time and part-time employment, and the tourism component for Stampede is a lot more legit.

5. Civic identity/pride. Easy to scoff at, easy to hate. That's fine. We can be a generic city know for chinook winds and once hosting the Olympics instead. You can argue that it's 10 days of drunken debauchery for wannabee urban cowboys. Being a fake cowboy may be silly. But, wearing a shirt with another man's name on it is too. And it happens for 122 other big teams in North America already.

How many cities transform for 10 days each year around a unified theme? Where you can walk the streets and see a tangible difference in what people are wearing. That they are gathering in their communities over pancakes. Mardi Gras. Rio Carnival. Oktoberfest. Coachella. Burning Man. Glastonbury. In many ways, we are probably a notch below most of these, but in many ways - especially the local community sense - Stampede is right there with them.


This is a long way of asking which plan is more worthy of public money? I'm a bigger Flames fan than Stampede fan, but I'll have my taxes go to the latter any day of the week (with the eternal caveat that the projects/plans have to make sense)

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

* the Casino they were terrible at running
fair. that's why they sold it and got out of the casino business. I can't say for sure, but I'm pretty sure they came out ahead on that deal.

The Stampede owns the casino currently. They sold it in 2008, the owner went into receivership and they bought it back in 2010. They own the casino side of the business and Paul Vickers owns the entertainment side.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

They definitely don't need to disclose them, but they are readily available. Handing it over to the city would not be an issue.

I suspect the Flames financials are barely breakeven, more likely in a loss. They report all of CSEC in there.

Again, my point is not that they don't have the financials or that they are not readily available. The point is that sports teams are loath to release these details (given their monopolies, competition is not the issue).

As someone mentioned up top, if they don't show you the financials its about whether you trust them - I don't.

You're suggestion that they break even or are at a loss is purely speculation.