Quote:
Originally Posted by NiklasSundblad
The problem with this analogy is that houses generally hold their value and you can sell them. If that were the case with stadiums and arenas the city could just sell the Saddledome and use the sales revenue to fund a new arena, instead of paying an additional 25 million dollars to make it go away.
Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk
|
A few observations:
(1) the Flames don't own the Saddledome;
(2) most people don't use their homes to generate hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue each year.
I mean, ultimately, the issue for the Flames is simple. Investing $500 million into building and owning a new arena will likely generate enough extra revenue to justify the investment. If not, then building a new $600 million arena is not a good idea and it's time to explore other options was expensive arena or no arena).
If the Flames can't find a way to make the franchise viable in Calgary, then they will have to sell it or attempt to move it. So be it. However, for all of the reasons that ave been discussed ad nauseum in this thread, not being able to make it work in Calgary, one of the stronger NHL markets in North America, would not speak highly of the ownership group's business acumen and/or commitment to the City. Again, so be it.