Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire
Are the people who are angry about the Flames wanting the city to pay for a large portion of the arena still bitter that the Flames owners didn't pay for the Saddledome?
After about 5 more years in the dome the Flames will be struggling to remain a cap team. After the 10 year mark they will probably be forced to sell.
|
That was a completely different situation. The Corral was undersized and outdated. It was completely unsuited as both an NHL and Olympic arena. The improvement from the Corral to the Dome was significant. For most fans, the improvement in the arena experience between the Dome and the new building will be minimal.
The Flames will see the biggest benefit from a new building. Why shouldn't they shoulder a significant amount of the cost?
Also, originally, the Flames were simply a tenant of the Saddledome and paid rent to the city for the use of the building. The Stampede board operated the building. The Flames received the revenue from in-arena advertising and ticket sales.
Do you think there's any chance the Flames would agree to go back to that arrangement if the city paid for the whole new building?
Also, what's going to happen in the next five years to suddenly kill the Flames' revenue? They still have one of the largest arenas in the league and have some of the highest ticket prices. Concession prices keep climbing too.