[Resolute 14]

Yeah, sorry New Era, but "no ticket tax" means only that the increased ticket prices goes into the team's pockets rather than toward the arena. Don't sit there and try to pass this off as saving the fans money. It won't.

Anyway, reading that infographic, I think the Flames and city are actually presenting the same things, just looking from different ends of the spectrum. The city is presenting the up-front costs as 1/3 1/3 1/3 (and which may be disingenuous given I'm not sure who fronts the 1/3 covered under 'users'). The Flames are presenting the end-of-life costs. And while heavily biased, is logically sound. To their perspective, the user fees/ticket taxes is just ticket prices redirected from them to the arena. Likewise, the city's contribution is intended to be profitable to the city, and thus ultimately paid for by the team. Honestly, if it wasn't for the fact that the Flames have already spent several years fumbling this thing badly, this might have been a good rebuttal.

To me, the Flames really effed up here in how they presented the Oilers funding model. CSEC is clearly trying to wow us with the fact that they are offering to put $275 million up front against just $20 million from Katz. What they were hoping nobody would notice, however, is that they are trying to claim both rent/taxes and user fees as their contributions in the City's proposal while not offering the Oilers the same credit in their model. Based on their earlier arguments, the Flames should be noting that the Oilers will ultimately fund $258 million for Rogers Place.

Edit: And to join this to ComixZone's argument - the Flames are, in fact, trying to propose exactly the deal Edmonton got. Using their own pie charts, they claim that Edmonton funded $226 million toward that city's arena, and that the City of Calgary would fund $225 million to ours.