Quote:
Originally Posted by JerryUnderscore
It's only an owner contribution if they allow the ticket price to remain static and the city takes their 5% from there.
However, Oiler's tickets went from $185.43 last year to $207.27 this year (an increase of 12%). I think ticket sales at any new Calgary arena could be increased by 5% without many people squawking about it.
However, even if we want to say 5% is too much and would decrease the number of people attending events, we could probably reduce that ticket tax to something closer to 3%. A 5% tax would allow the city to recoup their invest on Flames games alone, so a 3% tax might still make it financially feasible for the city when you consider all the other events.
|
I don't want to go over this again but any user fee / tax is an owner contribution because there is a maximum price a user will pay for a given good which is the intersection of the supply / demand curve. If the city had a 100% tax on tickets would the flames owners be able to charge the same pre tax amount? Of course not ergo the tax is an owner contribution.
The ticket price in a new Calgary arena will already be being increased by 10-20% with the entire press level catagory being eliminated. So any city tax will reduce the amount the flames can increase.
Now there is an argument that people make the decision based on the face value and not the post fee cost. And I would agree for single game tickets this may be true up to a point. However season ticket holders who are the majority of the customers will only look at the final all in 45 game cost and divide that amount to evaluate if their per game cost is worth it.
Given the above can we please stop bringing up this ridiculous notion that any arena based ticket tax is anything but an owner contribution