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

[Buff]

Originally Posted by midniteowl

So is it smart to trust Rachel Notley? Honest question.

Is she a politician?

Can you trust any politician? I wouldn't.

[442scotty]

Lots of back and forth here. I’d be shocked if they actually put shovels in the ground this time.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by zamler

I won't believe the arena is going to be built until it is built.

I've seen the Fountainblue in Vegas start and stall and start and mostly be stalled since 2008. I won't believe the arena is happening until we're watching the first game in it!

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

I do understand but I am confident you would not even if I explained it.

Just go with it cost 5 bucks a person and feel good about that rudimentary math.

Don’t give me this “I understand it but you won’t if I explain it”. That’s nonsense


I am absolutely genuinely asking you to explain it

He doesn’t explain it, so I’m curious how you will


I’ll get you started

He does reference 538 million and 5% (which is the IRR they said they use as NPV). Ok. Over 35 years, that translates to a year 1 value of ~27.58 million

2022 property tax revenue to the city was 2.005 billion. The city is budgeting for avg 5.1 percent per year in growth in this over the next 3 years

https://www.calgary.ca/content/dam/w...ns-budgets.pdf


Over to you

[InternationalVillager]

Most people carry on in their lives as if nothings happened wasting $5 here or $10 there and the cumulative sum is much greater than a $1,000 purchase that they spend way more time thinking about.

This is similar. I bet that 99% of the population has no clue how City of Calgary spends their tax dollars but I'm sure in the last 5-10 years, they've spent a lot more than $550 million as part of their budget. And all of a sudden now, there is a whole uproar about this one time item that if just split up within the budget and spread across multiple years, most people wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Most people carry on in their lives as if nothings happened wasting $5 here or $10 there and the cumulative sum is much greater than a $1,000 purchase that they spend way more time thinking about.

This is similar. I bet that 99% of the population has no clue how City of Calgary spends their tax dollars but I'm sure in the last 5-10 years, they've spent a lot more than $550 million as part of their budget. And all of a sudden now, there is a whole uproar about this one time item that if just split up within the budget and spread across multiple years, most people wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.

Perhaps different situations are different. It's the recipient. This isn't an overpass.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by nik-

What the actual Christ?

AI tries to meme

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by InternationalVillager

Most people carry on in their lives as if nothings happened wasting $5 here or $10 there and the cumulative sum is much greater than a $1,000 purchase that they spend way more time thinking about.

This is similar. I bet that 99% of the population has no clue how City of Calgary spends their tax dollars but I'm sure in the last 5-10 years, they've spent a lot more than $550 million as part of their budget. And all of a sudden now, there is a whole uproar about this one time item that if just split up within the budget and spread across multiple years, most people wouldn't even raise an eyebrow.

If CSEC was putting up the construction money upfront and the city was paying into over 35 years then it would be a way better deal lol

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Buff

I've seen the Fountainblue in Vegas start and stall and start and mostly be stalled since 2008. I won't believe the arena is happening until we're watching the first game in it!

Fountainblu is supposed to actually finally open this year if I'm not mistaken.

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Who would have thought, the most vocal conservative / anti-government spender in the politics threads is over the moon about this deal.

I feel like the only way you could like this deal more is if Elon was the one getting the arena.

Also, as a pretty active poster on ideas for fixing the drug/homeless crisis in the city, you seem to scoff at the idea of a new addiction center?

Well, because HE deems that hockey is important to him, so that’s why he thinks everyone else should get stuck with the bill for it.

He’s probably the type of guy who goes to dinner with a bunch of people, eats all the appetizers and only pays for his own meal.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

The Flames being unable to sell tickets for chunks of the 2021/2022 season probably had something to do with the revenue situation.

And those are not the stakes, you have as much of an idea of knowing that the Flames would leave as I or anyone else has that a private entity could have built the arena. Puzzling how now is the time they would leave for sure and not 2017.

I am sure if the Arizona deal falls apart where I understand the taxpayer is paying 10% and the owner is paying 90% we could maybe entice Arizona to Calgary for a 30% taxpayer 70% owner paid arena, maybe even better than that.

The AZ deal is not 90% financed by the owner. There are $500-750mln of tax breaks involved.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by nik-

Perhaps different situations are different. It's the recipient. This isn't an overpass.

Isn't the City of Calgary the owner and the CSEC would be tenant via lease? I haven't seen any lease terms yet. That may shed more of a light as to how good of a deal this is.

Also- who gets to host the concerts/revenues from those events? Is it 100% all going to CSEC? I'm pretty sure the City would be in line to receive part of a ticket tax etc.

Originally Posted by Bonded

If CSEC was putting up the construction money upfront and the city was paying into over 35 years then it would be a way better deal lol

Yes- it would be. I believe in Canada- Cities are not allowed to issue municipal bonds? I thought that would have been a better way to fund projects like these.

[Major Major]

In my mind, the deal is sound as it appears now.

From the city POV, they are getting over double the economic output vs their input. The pricetag is far more realistic for a truly transformative project. Were people hoping they would say no to the provincial money? It's only really available now and probably not super negotiable. It is free money for the city... They're going to do what it takes to secure it as they should.

I think it is odd how they framed it as the province is paying for the infrastructure. It makes waaaay more sense to look at it like this.

City maintains original arena contribution + money for needed infrastructure that they would have paid for eventually anyway.

CSEC maintains original arena contribution + 10% or so

Province pays for the inflation/scope gap between the original project and new one + community rink

Now if you look at the economic impact as just arena, you could say that it is better spent elsewhere probably. But if you look it as the missing critical piece of a transformative district, making hospitality/service industries in the area viable, it is a great thing.

I also think that people's interpretation of arena economics as non money makers for a city is out of date. There is a pretty large and growing subsection of traveling fans that want to see their team in a new arena. I think that is an upward trend though I have no numbers to back it up.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by nik-

Perhaps different situations are different. It's the recipient. This isn't an overpass.

Isn’t there literally an overpass linked to this deal?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

I just don't look at Calgary as being some wonderful unicorn market. Corporate dollars have shrunk significantly here, and the fanbase just isn't as rabid as it is up North (*yuck* E=NG)

If a new building launched Edmonton into a Top 5 revenue franchise (at least according to Forbes), then the Flames would be in a similar spot. Shrunk corporate dollars are still significantly more than Edmonton, and are a bigger driver of revenue in a new building than the great unwashed in the upper decks. Even if it isn't a unicorn market, bottom third to top third vs. relocation fee and rent without operating rights...why is that perceived threat scary?



The fear of Edwards not selling the team but moving to Houston (or a market lesser than Houston) is nonsensical and this deal would represent a failure on behalf of the people negotiating on behalf of the city if that's what was considered.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Mr. Coffee

Isn’t there literally an overpass linked to this deal?

If we want to get nitpicky it's an underpass.

[InternationalVillager]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Isn’t there literally an overpass linked to this deal?

Don't call it an overpass. It's an underpass.

This is where we're at....at the moment.

[Infinit47]

We don't know all the details yet, so the deal could end up being financially better for the city than it first appears. Or of course it could get worse. Either way I want to see the details before I turn on my rage-o-matic.

Second, let's not pretend this $570mil investment from the city will have zero return. It will undoubtedly spur some level of economic returns to the city. It's very unlikely the city will recover it's full investment or actually make any money, but that's not really the bar for public investment.

Instead of building an arena in the middle of a parking lot that really is only good for the owner the city is trying to upsize the project to create a usable public space - at least that's my take on it.

I'd rather have the city spend $570mil and end up with a great public space than have the city and CSEC go 50-50 on a building that ends up being Saddledome 2.0...a lonely building surrounded by parking lots.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Fountainblu is supposed to actually finally open this year if I'm not mistaken.

Yes, but I won't believe it until it is complete.

[InternationalVillager]

I think a $10 ticket tax would help recover a vast majority of the outlay of funds over a 25-30 year building lifespan.