Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Doesn't the Edmonton figure include land?
|
Yeah, so? What is your point? The land would be part of the City of Calgary's contribution to project as well. What is your point?
Quote:
|
The upfront cost is a pretty meaningless as you want to covert it to NPV to properly assess future costs. We don't know if the 50/50 deal proposed is worse. Ticket tax is clearly an owner contribution. So the superficial argument that Katz would use is the Oilers paid 250 million and the city paid 230 million so it was a 50/50 deal.
|
I think your math is off. The Oilers, after 35 years, will have paid just over 48% of costs. The City of Edmonton pays a hair under 52% of costs. What matters most here is the city is on the hook for $587.2M up front, and then has to carry the loans until those monies are paid back. Katz puts up $26.5M and gets a 35 year interest free loan.
Quote:
|
Details matter, right now as proposed the Flames deal could be similar to the Edmonton deal or marginally better but the offer without details is how Katz would frame the Edmomto deal. I do agree that lends itself to the ownership willing to do the 1/3rd deal
|
You're right, details do matter. That's why I want to see the details of this purported 50:50 deal. Because the details of the Edmonton deal were absolutely brutal for the city. I can't believe the Flames would have anything remotely draconian like that, but you never know until those details are available.