[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

So if I'm reading this correctly, you think Winnipeg is a more stable, and likely successful market than Calgary since it sounds like you think Calgary as a market is headed for collapse.

I don't think that at all. I was completely against Winnipeg getting a team again, and think it is a long term loser, certain to fold or move as it becomes a perennial bottom feeder. While it has a very substantial owner, committed to his community, the reality is that the team cannot generate the revenues to remain competitive, especially with a 35% operating penalty for generating those revenues in Canadian dollars while paying out a large percentage of expenses in American dollars. Winnipeg is loser. Period. Trying to compare Calgary to Winnipeg is exactly the reason it may fail as well.

Do I see a Calgary collapse in the future? Sadly I do see it happening to some extent. I know too many people in Calgary that have been unemployed for two years or more as the market for jobs tightens thanks to a failing O&G marketplace. I worked in the O&G sector for over a decade and know where the profitability numbers are, and with the price of oil, the future doesn't look good. With a total lack of economic diversification, Calgary is going to struggle. People like to think about Calgary as being similar to Houston or Denver, but I think Calgary is headed more toward the level as Oklahoma City.

Well you certainly know we've reached the desperation portion of trying to get public money when we've arrived at the "trashing your own city phase" of arguments. Sounds like you don't particularly like Calgary at all. Perhaps you are the one who should move to a "better market"?

I have already moved on to a "better market" for me and the lifestyle of my family. The Calgary that was "my own city" doesn't exist any more. The city has grown and changed to the point where the Calgary that currently exists is very different from the one I consider my city. I have great memories of Calgary, still have plenty of friends and ex-colleagues there, but the city is not the same one I remember. I can only speak to the city that exists right now, and do so in ways that based on the realities the current city faces.

Let's get something straight. Calgary, when booming, is a great market. When Calgary isn't booming, the place is, in your words, Winnipeg. That is what happens when you have an economy based on one market or product. If the O&G sector does not bounce back, and oil does not return to the $60 a barrel range (minimum), the potential for Calgary to remain a viable marketplace is negatively impacted. This is the reality that the city faces.

If Seattle were the homerun market you seem to think it is, why is there not a team there already?

For the exact same reason the Supersonics left. The current building is not viable for a professional sports team. This is the only reason there is not a basketball or hockey team there right now. The building is not capable of generating the revenues to support a major league franchise.

This is the point that Calgarians need to understand. If the Flames believe they can no longer be viable in the building they are currently in, and the league would fully vet this assumption, Calgary will be off every list for future expansion or relocation until the building issue is resolved. There is no Flames-move-and-Calgary-gets-an-expansion-team-or-relocation-of-an-existing-team scenario. The Flames leave and Calgary is without a major league team until they build an arena capable of supporting a major league team.

There are multiple franchises currently underwater financially, yet the apparently great market of Seattle remains vacant. Surely if this market were as exceptional as you make it out to be, there would be owners knocking down the door to come. But yeah, that's not what's happening. The renovated Key or new arena in Seattle will be entirely for a basketball team, the hockey team will be second fiddle in it's own building by a wide, wide margin. It's an empty threat market with a much higher likelihood of failure, and a virtual guarantee to make less money than Calgary.

You know for certain what the renovations are looking like? You are certain they will not be good for a hockey team? Considering Seattle has been talking about a hockey team as a co-tenant I seriously doubt they are going to do anything that would marginalize the viability of the building to support a hockey team.

As to Seattle, the city has three times the population of Calgary. Seattle has a GDP of just over $231B USD, or $311B CDN. Metro-Seattle has the economic might of Microsoft, Boeing, Amazon, Weyerhauser, Starbucks, and Northwest Seaport Alliance behind it, showing string diversification. That is without mentioning the military and government impact on the economy as well.

To Calgary's strength as a market, the GDP of the City is pegged at a number just over $115B CDN, or a shade over $85B USD.

I mentioned this already, but as you are one of the staunchest liberals on this board by a significant margin, you would go ape#### if any other private business that was already profitable was demanding a taxpayer handout to charge even more money and become even more profitable.

You don't know me, nor my politics. Don't mistake my disdain for the American political system and the bassackward way American "conservatives" view things for my take on everything or Canadian politics. I'm all about a fair system for everyone. I'm for effective systems and good governance, and I don't care whether those are handled by government or corporations (in the United States the line between each is extremely blurred which makes the political theatre too much at times). Do things that are good for everyone and provide value to the city and her citizens, and do so as cheaply as possible.

Having lived in many cities around North America I can tell you that a local professional sports team is extremely important to the city's reputation and the level of pride people have in their city. Having something that brings people together, regardless of the many things meant to divide us, is something that provides great value to a city. Too many on this board don't remember what it was like to not have a NHL team, and how painful it was to have to watch Edmonton or Vancouver.

Sports though? I bet you're cool with the city going bankrupt to fund CalgaryNEXT. Sports fries logic from brains, it's pretty amazing how much it blinds us sometimes.

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. Calgary should bankrupt itself to build a facility! Do what ever it takes!

My position has always been to make sure the city has venues that can support the interests of the community. The Flames and Stampeders both have some of the worst facilities in their respective leagues. The city of Calgary does not have a venue capable of holding a major concert act let alone a stadium show. Calgary doesn't even have a fieldhouse for crying out loud. This is a need. The city could use a well designed entertainment district, one with actual anchors that draw people to the location. My support of CalgaryNext was because it checked off many of the needs of the city in this regard. Was the proposal perfect? No. But the concept was one worthy of future exploration and negotiation.

My problem with plan B is that is it an empty plan. It focuses on checking one box. Many of the other problems still exist and are not addressed. I think Calgary needs to do everything it can to get the biggest bang for its buck, and I believe that comes from a multi-purpose facility with an integrated entertainment district like those that have been built in other cities around the world. Plopping an arena on a cramped piece of land just north of where the current arena is doesn't address many of the concerns the team has, nor address many of the entertainment challenges that face the city.

It is funny that you should say, "Sports fries logic from brains, it's pretty amazing how much it blinds us sometimes." All you have to do is look through these threads and see some of the ridiculous things said about the team, by people who at the same time are cheering their brains out for the team. They want to draw a line in the sand, and if the team doesn't comply, then #### 'em, let them move. This is a growing sentiment and a "cut-off-ones-nose-to-spite-their-face" type comment. It is not aligned with any sort of logic, especially when these same people are suggesting another team would just slide right into Calgary in a matter of months. That just isn't happening. The Flames leave and Calgary will be without a team for a good long time, probably long after a new arena is built. That is the reality to face, and people are not facing that reality. That is my biggest problem here to be honest with you. People are ignoring the reality of losing a team is very often a permanent state.