Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
There was a compromise on increasing costs.
The city gave up their project manager so that CSEC could get theirs, they'd split the increase in costs known at the time, and in exchange CSEC agreed to take on future cost overruns.
|
That's true but context here matters, doesn't it? That really isn't much of a fair trade given the extremely high cost inflationary environment, IMO anyway- doesn't seem like the city is being very reasonable in this regard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
The city might as well pay for the whole thing if every stage CSEC wants to they can just say 'we're walking away unless you pay this now and you better take it because it's the best deal you're gonna get' and people suggest they take it.
|
I agree it's poor form and negotiating in bad faith by employing this tactic by CSEC. City may end up paying 100% of it in the end anyway so still seems to me like a massive strategic blunder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roughneck
That's a Peace Bridge. That's five full cycle track networks. That's over 57 blue rings.
If it's just a rounding error, the billionaire could pay for it. But they don't want to, because they have half a business brain.
|
Just my opinion of course but the value of a new stadium for the Flames very easily eclipses the value of all those things multiple times over. Like, I just can't see myself watching live action shots of 57 blue rings for the next 50 years on my TV multiple nights every winter. Also, this point is getting beyond the basic scope of what I was getting at, which is a pretty basic failure of leadership (both public and private) to get an otherwise nominal amount of cost bridged. Pretty straightforward but understand and appreciate and respect there are some that didn't want the City involved in the first place.