Quote:
Originally Posted by Frequitude
Completely agree. The City needs to come off of a 100% repayment based strategy.
However, ownership needs to come off of a 10%-20%* contribution strategy. Prepayment of rent does not constitute a contribution, it constitutes rent.
*To clarify, the time value of money certainly means upfront rent payment has an aspect of true contribution. $275M spread over 35 years at 4% has an NPV of about $150M. So it represents a $125M Flames contribution (25% of the $500M arena). Add in that the Flames' $500M ignores land value, Saddledome demo, and infrastructure tie-ins to get to my assumed 10%-20% contribution.
|
Oh yeah, I’m not meaning to come off as saying CSECs deal should be accepted - I just think Nenshi’s proposal is every bit as “crazy” as CSECs proposal because it’s completely disconnected from what the market would bear.
As much as this thread seems to paint this as CSEC being at fault, it really is an astonishing failure on both sides.