Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio
Firstly -- I don't image they would let the public use the facility willy nilly regardless. Concerts, trade shows, conferences, etc. pay a fee for a given venue. What do you honestly think will happen? You can just walk into YOUR publicly funded arena and do whatever you want?
Secondly -- A library is not comparable because it's not profit-generating and privately owned. An IKEA is more comparable.
Thirdly -- If an arena brings a lot to a city, then why is that tied to a sports franchise? Either an arena brings municipal value in its own merit, or it doesn't. Giving it AWAY to a business owner is just stupid. Either spend 500 million to build it, lease it, and operate it like a public facility (ie, like a library), or don't fund it and let's see if a private firm believes it has value in its own merit.
|
You just dont get it. I speak on a personal level citing my percived value and you come back with ikea relevance.
Your third point is more speaking to my point then yours. Most cities on any population level does have a facility, it might be a facility for a different level of sport but there almost always is a facility. Again mutual benefit between sport/entertainement/industry.
Who was to own CalgaryNext?