Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community - View Single Post

powderjunkie · 11-15-2016, 08:58 PM

The good ole' merry ground of the two most annoying arguments of the arena: the 'big acts' we miss out on and the relocation threat.

1. We miss out on less than 5 shows a year specifically because of the roof. I think it's actually closer to 1-3 on average, but let's go ahead and assume it's 5. Economic impact? Debatable whether they really exist, and negligible if they do. Personal impact? Sure, but it's pretty much the definition of 'first-world problem'. This is absolutely an argument that can be plugged into the pro/con list of a new building, but IMO it is at the very bottom of the list in 6pt font with an * saying *this point is worth about two pennies in the grand scheme of things.

2. It's been pointed out several times that it would almost certainly be a poor business decision by the Flames and the league would never allow it. The more obvious point often overlooked is the relocation fee. Does anyone actually think they would plug at least $100M into a move that would have an uncertain impact on their operating revenues and total franchise value? When the alternative is a similar additional investment in Calgary to achieve more certain benefits - including an increase in franchise value that would come close to paying off this investment instantly. The move threat is simply pathetic.

11-15-2016, 08:58 PM	#2877
powderjunkie Franchise Player Join Date: Dec 2011 Exp:	The good ole' merry ground of the two most annoying arguments of the arena: the 'big acts' we miss out on and the relocation threat. 1. We miss out on less than 5 shows a year specifically because of the roof. I think it's actually closer to 1-3 on average, but let's go ahead and assume it's 5. Economic impact? Debatable whether they really exist, and negligible if they do. Personal impact? Sure, but it's pretty much the definition of 'first-world problem'. This is absolutely an argument that can be plugged into the pro/con list of a new building, but IMO it is at the very bottom of the list in 6pt font with an * saying *this point is worth about two pennies in the grand scheme of things. 2. It's been pointed out several times that it would almost certainly be a poor business decision by the Flames and the league would never allow it. The more obvious point often overlooked is the relocation fee. Does anyone actually think they would plug at least $100M into a move that would have an uncertain impact on their operating revenues and total franchise value? When the alternative is a similar additional investment in Calgary to achieve more certain benefits - including an increase in franchise value that would come close to paying off this investment instantly. The move threat is simply pathetic.