I wonder whether anyone is willing to give King / Flames credit for this aspect of his presser - the suggestion that if you take the Flames completely out of the equation an arena / event centre is going to be built in Calgary anyway (the premise being there's enough public demand for such a piece of public infrastructure in a city the size of Calgary).
If that is the case, what other private business would help the taxpayers out in the way that the city is currently proposing the Flames do?
If the answer is - nobody, the city would have to build at 100% their cost, then in that context, the current city proposal is as unfair to the Flames as King says it is...is it not?
I don't profess to have nearly the detailed grasp of the whole battle that others here seem to have, but this seemed to me like a potentially valid point so I'm interested what others think.
Also, King is a poor speaker who uses parenthetical 'by the way' anecdotes to not answer any questions and that is extremely frustrating for people wanting to know actual information. But I didn't see a guy being completely condescending / arrogant etc. as others did. I saw a guy using what can actually be a very effective negotiating technique - the whole 'hey, if it can't work because your view is very different from mine then that's fine.'
Coupled with the earlier commitment to carry on in Calgary as long as possible - just not pursuing a new arena - can go a long way to disarming someone like the mayor from suggesting the owners are being infinitely unreasonable.
|