Flames to announce plans to announce arena plans in the... future...

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by rohara66

The new dome will 100% have an ‘arena district’.

Maybe not a hotel/casino like the insiders have posted but it will have additional restaurants and bars. And long term a hotel and casino (or whatever they decide on) makes total sense. East village will have loads of people living in it one day, they will sustain the arena district eventually.

I feel like Calgary needs another 1 million people to fill all these new master planned "districts" they want to build. East Village, Eau Claire, Victoria Park, West Village, Bridgeland, Curry Barracks, Westbrook etc. I think they are starting to be spread a little too thin, and none of them will reach potential if all are a go.

[korzym12]

Doesn't anyone care that the NHL signed a 10 year, $2 billion contract with NBC in 2010?

This solves all funding shortfalls

[Azure]

Originally Posted by korzym12

Doesn't anyone care that the NHL signed a 10 year, $2 billion contract with NBC in 2010?

This solves all funding shortfalls

Two questions.

Do the Flames get access to any of that money?
And if so, can they use it to fund their arena, versus year-to-year costs of running the team?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by flamesfan2.0

I really hope your not talking about this lol..


I really think its time to move past the "stampede" look, we are now a major city. I would love to see something real modern and world class..

There's also Athens' Peace and Friendship Stadium - but no glass:

[rohara66]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I feel like Calgary needs another 1 million people to fill all these new master planned "districts" they want to build. East Village, Eau Claire, Victoria Park, West Village, Bridgeland, Curry Barracks, Westbrook etc. I think they are starting to be spread a little too thin, and none of them will reach potential if all are a go.

I tend to agree that planned districts like those mentioned are a little hokey.

But this arena is going to be downtown (or just on the outskirts) so it’s not going to fail like some of these arena districts that are built out in the middle of nowhere. The entire east end of downtown has people living in it already (with tons more coming) and bringing 20k people to the area a couple times a week will only help it out even more. They don’t even need to build out the district (or whatever you want to call it) immediately, just please allow for a couple restaurants/pubs/bars around the rink so there are some damn option before/after flames games. The current setup of Duttons (good luck getting a table) or the casino (uggg) is downright embarrassing.

[korzym12]

Originally Posted by Azure

Two questions.

Do the Flames get access to any of that money?
And if so, can they use it to fund their arena, versus year-to-year costs of running the team?

I don't have those details. It's up to the NHL...but if these new arenas really do generate more revenue as all owners claim, then the NHL shouldn't hesitate in providing assistance.

MacDonald's did this too. They paid the costs to modernize the restaurants owned by individual franchise owners.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by korzym12

Doesn't anyone care that the NHL signed a 10 year, $2 billion contract with NBC in 2010?

This solves all funding shortfalls

$6.7 M per year per team, assuming it is all available to be divided.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Azure

Two questions.

Do the Flames get access to any of that money?
And if so, can they use it to fund their arena, versus year-to-year costs of running the team?

The Flames will get 1/30th of that money, or $6.67 million per year, but it just goes into their general revenue, and the players essentially get half of it.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by Azure

The seats above the press boxes cost what? $35 a seat? If you have 18,000 'prime' seats, and 3,000 more 'press box seats'....you're adding approximately. $100,000 per game in ticket revenue, plus concession revenue.

Over 48 games, that is $5 million in additional revenue, and over a 30 year lifespan for the arena, it equals over $150 million in ticket revenue alone. I would imagine concession revenue is also quite a bit per game, as fans up there tend to be rowdy and drink a lot.

Still not worth it? Considering it gives middle/lower class people the ability to buy tickets, I would absolutely say it is worth it. Not everyone can afford to pay $100/game for a single ticket, and if they go with the AVERAGE family of 4, the cost of going to a game can be up to $400. If you buy Sportchek Zone tickets or upper level seating, the cost is around $200/game.

But it all depends on demand. If there is a 10,000 person waiting list for season tickets, and a waiting list for suites....plus good demand for game packs and single game tickets...it is worth it. But obviously if there isn't much demand for more than 19,289 tickets, there isn't much point in adding the additional 2,000 seats.

That's assuming you can sell all of the seats, and again, remember, those seats you are adding are the furthest away seats, and may not give a good game experience. You get more revenue from those seats, but you also have to pay more cleaners, consession workers, ushers, etc, to work the extra seats. The seats you add bring in less revenue, but the cost of servicing them is the same as any other seat.

The big reason why those extra seats cost so much to build, is that the roof spans are bigger, the whole building becomes taller. More stairs are required to get people up higher, and the stairs have to be wider, because they must handle more people. More people wanting concessions and bathrooms means that more of those are going to be required, meaning more space down below is required to handle those things. More entry doors, more ticket checkers, etc.

Your calcuations say $150 million in ticket revenue alone, but it might cost an additional $100 million or more just to build those seats.

[Vinny01]

I read an article in an Edmonton newspaper that predicted their population to more than double to 2.3M in 33 years. Seems pretty crazy but I am thinking if that is the case with Edmonton that Calgary will likely grow at the same or greater rate during that time.

[Joborule]

At the rate Calgary is going, it should be at 2 million in 15-20 years.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by fotze

I am thinking that the economics of that look a tad better.

If the economics of building a new arena don't make sense than don't build a new arena.

[Reaper]

I like the notion of a movie theatre attached to the new arena. If the game is sold out then the option of having one or two theatres attached to the building available to show the game on the big screen could generate some nice coin.

[timun]

Originally Posted by flamesfan2.0

I really hope your not talking about this lol..


I really think its time to move past the "stampede" look, we are now a major city. I would love to see something real modern and world class..

Maybe he's thinking of the Scandinavium in Gothenburg:

[Table 5]

That is the best name for a stadium ever.

[getbak]

Both of those are older than the Saddledome. The one in Russia was built as the pool for the 1980 Olympics and the one in Sweden opened in 1971.

The Velodrome for the London Olympics is probably the nicest modern example of a saddle-shaped building:




It's safe to say that the new building in Calgary won't look like that though.

[The Yen Man]

Love the Saddledome, but it's seriously time to move on from that design. Everytime I go to to a Flames game, I feel like I time warped back into the 80's and 90's. I really hope they ditch the faux historical stuff and go with a state of the art, modern looking arena. I've always hated the look of brick. It looks like a house your grandparents would live in.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Love the Saddledome, but it's seriously time to move on from that design. Everytime I go to to a Flames game, I feel like I time warped back into the 80's and 90's. I really hope they ditch the faux historical stuff and go with a state of the art, modern looking arena. I've always hated the look of brick. It looks like a house your grandparents would live in.

Is that because you went on Retro night?

Also, I think the Saddledome was pretty mondern when it was created in 83, I don't think it's intentionally historical, I think it's just old now.

[Boniman]

Forgive me if I'm wrong but I think one of the main reasons Calgary loses out to Edmonton for many large concerts is the Saddledome roof structure cannot support the rigging due to its shape. A future building probably should steer away from that. Like I said I don't know this for a fact.

[Pierre "Monster" McGuire]

I don't know, I'd still like them to stick with the saddle shape building, but more much more modern.

It's distinctly Western, which is a huge part of the Calgary culture. I say embrace it. Calgarians shouldn't try and act like their New Yorkers.

What would say Calgary is now a major hub in western Canada more than sticking with the cowboy culture, but updating the building to look modern?