[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[Senator Clay Davis]

The ticket tax has nothing to do with the coming price increases. The ticket tax will be added to the price increase. So while sure, STHs wouldn't mind a $3-5 tax, that will be on top of the 20-40% price increase in tickets. They'll be raising ticket prices 20-40% because that's just SOP for a new arena.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by WesternCanadaKing

I may be in a minority, but I'll miss the Dome and am not looking forward to the new arena.

I get the feeling it will be overly catered to commercial interests as opposed to the fan experience, and some of the energy of the Dome will be lost. That plus more expensive tickets and beer does not lend itself to a fun atmosphere...

Hope I'm wrong, but these sort of projects in Calgary tend to chase the short term dollar signs instead of seeing the bigger picture.

Trust me on this when I say... modern sports venue architecture is completely designed around the fan experience in this day and age, because the bottom line is that a happy fan experience keeps them coming back. It is literally the most important design philosophy for architects and clients in this game.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by WesternCanadaKing

Hope I'm wrong, but these sort of projects in Calgary tend to chase the short term dollar signs instead of seeing the bigger picture.

It's folksy, idealistic musings like this that cement the fact that a huge majority of hockey fans do not realize that the NHL is actually a profit-driven business

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

Your math was off. I fixed it for you.

Dress up the user fee how you wish, but it is a loan being secured by the taxpayer and being paid off by the taxpayer.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Muta

Trust me on this when I say... modern sports venue architecture is completely designed around the fan experience in this day and age, because the bottom line is that a happy fan experience keeps them coming back. It is literally the most important design philosophy for architects and clients in this game.

For high value clients, the seats stacked on top of the last set of luxury boxes for the plebs have far less consideration. So the 10,000 lower bowl, Loge, and box seats will be well looked after.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Dress up the user fee how you wish, but it is a loan being secured by the taxpayer and being paid off by the taxpayer.

No. It's. Not.
Supply and demand dictate.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Owners: 200m
Ticket tax: 100m
Province: 75m
Feds: 75m
City: Infrastructure and land grant

Done...

Or 200m owner
250 million ticket tax
Flames own building and pay tax on the land.

City - infrastructure to make Vic park livable that happens to benefit the arena
- land leased to flames at preferential rate ($0) but still receive tax on the land from the flames.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by GGG

For high value clients, the seats stacked on top of the last set of luxury boxes for the plebs have far less consideration. So the 10,000 lower bowl, Loge, and box seats will be well looked after.

Sometimes, but the fan experience is more than just a view (although sightlines are majorly important; if they weren't Barclay's wouldn't be such a craptacular experience for half the fans). The minute you arrive on the property to the minute you leave, that's the fan experience (including public transit arrival and departure, absence of wind tunnels to and from the building, lobby height and natural lighting, etc.). Knowing that experience from start to finish is what separates the good architects from the great ones.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Dress up the user fee how you wish, but it is a loan being secured by the taxpayer and being paid off by the taxpayer.

From my understanding the 250M would be fronted by the Flames owners so it isn't a loan secured by taxpayers. It is a user fee paid by the users paid back to the owners who fronted the money.

Isn't that what people really want? The people that want and use the arena will pay off the ticket tax. If it makes the concert/game/event more expensive then that cost is still being covered by the users.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The ticket tax has nothing to do with the coming price increases. The ticket tax will be added to the price increase. So while sure, STHs wouldn't mind a $3-5 tax, that will be on top of the 20-40% price increase in tickets. They'll be raising ticket prices 20-40% because that's just SOP for a new arena.

They'll increase ticket prices, but its not as simple as a blanket increase of 20-40%. I'd guess black seats increase by 100%, green seats by 50% and everyone else by 0-10%. And this is because the new stadium does two things:
1) Results in a lot less "bad seats"
2) Results in more luxury boxes

Say the owners put up $200m. If you make the assumption that none of this is altruistic (which is an extreme, but still reasonable assumption) and the flames need a return on investment of 8-10% on that you end up with a revenue requirement of $16-20m per year. And you're right - that is really only allocated only to flames ticket holders. But I don't think they get allocated equally.

A huge portion of that is going to be felt by luxury boxes because that's the raison d'etre of a new stadium. Id assume the flames add 75 boxes at 12 seats each (900 seats) and remove 2000 cheap seats (blacks and greens) to get the capacity down to ~18,000.

New revenue: 75 boxes x 250,000 = $19m
Loss of revenue (green + black seats): $35 x 2000 seats x 41 games =-$3m
Price increase for everyone else = $0-4m
Net revenue per year: $16-20m

High end return requirement: 8% x $200m = $16m
Low end return requirement: 10% x $200m = $20m

As you can see, it leaves C$0-4m to be split between 15,000 or so non-luxury box seats, which is $0-6/seat per game. That works out to 10% on orange seats and 2% on the most expensive seats.

The caveat is that if you currently have black or green seats, you probably end up seeing a larger increase than everyone else. That's because what black and green seats are in the saddledome will no longer exist - the worst sight lines in the new stadium will be what you get with Orange seats today, so I'd assumes those will probably be the cheapest price point in the new stadium.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

That's because what black and green seats are in the saddledome will no longer exist - the worst sight lines in the new stadium will be what you get with Orange seats today, so I'd assumes those will probably be the cheapest price point in the new stadium.

Sight lines on the end will not be better in a new arena. They will be worse because rows will have more leg room and thus be further away and the lower bowl will be almost double the rows. Row 12 of the 2nd bowl in the saddledome is equivalent to row 25 from the ice. This would be top of the lower bowl and stepped way back. 25 rows from the ice will in a new building have to pay lower bowl prices for seats further away. Double or triple the price for a worse view.

[monkeyman]

So does anyone really think major concerts and other acts will actuality adjust their prices down when stopping in Calgary? Or do you think its more likely they'll just tack on the ticket tax to thier existing ticket prices?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

So does anyone really think major concerts and other acts will actuality adjust their prices down when stopping in Calgary? Or do you think its more likely they'll just tack on the ticket tax to thier existing ticket prices?

Do major concerts and other acts actually have one fixed ticket price that they charge in every venue they visit?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Do major concerts and other acts actually have one fixed ticket price that they charge in every venue they visit?

Most of the shows I've been to that played Calgary/Edmonton (pre new arena) were the same price for similar seats.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Most of the shows I've been to that played Calgary/Edmonton (pre new arena) were the same price for similar seats.

Similar seats, similar arenas, similar markets. But they aren't charging the same price for shows at MSG, I'll bet.

[btimbit]

As long as it has flamethrowers I'll be happy

[WesternCanadaKing]

Originally Posted by Tyler

It's folksy, idealistic musings like this that cement the fact that a huge majority of hockey fans do not realize that the NHL is actually a profit-driven business

A profit driven business that can't pay for its own venues apparently.

Its gonna be more expensive in every way, making it more inaccessible to people with less money. No, I'm not looking forward to that. Not to mention I get to pay twice, once with my ticket, and again with my taxes. So I get less hockey, less beer when I'm there, the city has less money for infrastructure projects we badly need, and I'm meant to be excited about it.

Got it.

[Alberta_Beef]

Originally Posted by WesternCanadaKing

A profit driven business that can't pay for its own venues apparently.

Its gonna be more expensive in every way, making it more inaccessible to people with less money. No, I'm not looking forward to that. Not to mention I get to pay twice, once with my ticket, and again with my taxes. So I get less hockey, less beer when I'm there, the city has less money for infrastructure projects we badly need, and I'm meant to be excited about it.

Got it.

most profit driven business don't have a public element though. This isn't a typical business and can't be treated as such

[Stay Golden]

This project would make a lot of sense. Just keep KKing completely away from any decisions on it and especially the presentation. PPT presentations are a walk in the park and he absolutely made a cluster junk out of it.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

most profit driven business don't have a public element though. This isn't a typical business and can't be treated as such

I dunno. I tend to agree with him. The business model for the NHL is a bit screwy because their costs are too high (players make too much IMO).

Professional hockey should go the way of the NFL, where all owners pool an annual sum that helps subsidize stadiums.

In this instance the owners will put in a pile of their money to build a new building, but don't forget the massive equity growth they'll get for the team. They'll sink $200MM into the building, but if they turned around the day it was built they'd massively profit.