|
View Poll Results: Do you support the current version of CalgaryNEXT?
|
|
Yes
|
   
|
163 |
25.39% |
|
No
|
  
|
356 |
55.45% |
|
Undecided
|
  
|
123 |
19.16% |
11-25-2016, 10:52 AM
|
#2921
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis
For about 50% of what they were hoping to get for them. Imagine the apocalyptic headlines if Super Bowl tickets had to be marked down 50% to move. People would be writing the NFL's obit.
|
people paying $100 for endzone seating, in the leagues worst market, shows that demand is not dead for Grey Cup. Which was the point made earlier.
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 10:58 AM
|
#2922
|
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RM14
people paying $100 for endzone seating, in the leagues worst market, shows that demand is not dead for Grey Cup. Which was the point made earlier.
|
For the biggest game of the season, you're paying less than a regular season game between Calgary and Columbus
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 10:59 AM
|
#2923
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Maryland State House, Annapolis
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RM14
people paying $100 for endzone seating, in the leagues worst market, shows that demand is not dead for Grey Cup. Which was the point made earlier.
|
Demand usually isn't dead when you keep lowering the price to get to an acceptable level where you can actually move the tickets. But to be fair, it's not just a CFL problem either, live sports in general has a serious pricing issue. I don't think there's a market in the league you could see $170 tickets for unless the home team was playing. Which is probably the future of the Grey Cup, that way they can still sell tickets for $170.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 11:00 AM
|
#2924
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cappy
For the biggest game of the season, you're paying less than a regular season game between Calgary and Columbus
|
I assure you, you can get into the 2nd level of most Flames games for less than $100 per seat
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to RM14 For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 11:07 AM
|
#2925
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis
Demand usually isn't dead when you keep lowering the price to get to an acceptable level where you can actually move the tickets. But to be fair, it's not just a CFL problem either, live sports in general has a serious pricing issue. I don't think there's a market in the league you could see $170 tickets for unless the home team was playing. Which is probably the future of the Grey Cup, that way they can still sell tickets for $170.
|
I agree, it gets tricky when organizers for event like the Grey Cup try to anticipate maximum revenue. I think they look at the secondary market from year to year and realize they are losing out on some cash.
Media headlines love the phrases "Sold Out" or "Tickets Available". In this case, there are indeed tickets available, but even hardcore sports fans are not paying $600-$700 for seats for most events. I am a hardcore Stamps fan and would never pay that even if Stamps were hosting at McMahon.
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 04:38 PM
|
#2926
|
|
Celebrated Square Root Day
|
It's funny how quickly the CFL's rule for hosting a grey cup "must be able to seat 50000+" was tossed aside for this grey cup as CFL attendance continues to plummet.
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 06:01 PM
|
#2927
|
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North of the River, South of the Bluff
|
I was being a bit of a dismissive jerk earlier. However, a significant part of this project is building a top notch stadium for a team in a league that isn't really that big.
I have to admit I only go to two games a year, in the summer to have some fun. If someone asked me to pay more in property tax to sit in a nicer stadium for those few times I would say no.
That is why I am all over plan B, focus on the flames. Stamps can go nice but cheap somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 06:10 PM
|
#2928
|
|
Lifetime Suspension
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Void between Darkness and Light
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin
It's funny how quickly the CFL's rule for hosting a grey cup "must be able to seat 50000+" was tossed aside for this grey cup as CFL attendance continues to plummet.
|
Which is why the stamps owners don't want to pay for a stampeders stadium. They know it's a losing proposition.
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 06:24 PM
|
#2929
|
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Which is why the stamps owners don't want to pay for a stampeders stadium. They know it's a losing proposition.
|
Has a profitable stadium even been constructed in Canada?
|
|
|
|
|
11-25-2016, 08:08 PM
|
#2930
|
|
Celebrated Square Root Day
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
Which is why the stamps owners don't want to pay for a stampeders stadium. They know it's a losing proposition.
|
The Flames are the Stamps owners, but yeah pretty difficult to justify a nice stadium for what use they'll get out of it. That's why the fieldhouse/stadium hybrid idea with public use actually makes sense, but they're still asking for too much money from taxpayers overall.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 06:54 PM
|
#2931
|
|
Some kinda newsbreaker!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
|
News Updateon HNIC they say there might be a breakthrough. King says they have made progress
Ken King told Hrudey that he is very encouraged by the city's determination for a new arena and he believes there could be a deal made.
The city wants the arena in the East village, the Flames want it in the proposed location
Last edited by sureLoss; 11-26-2016 at 07:06 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 06:56 PM
|
#2932
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sureLoss
on HNIC they say there might be a breakthrough.
Ken King told Hrudey that he is very encouraged by the city's response and he believes there could be a deal made.
|
Lots of moving parts but it's getting closer. Some people won't be happy but this will be a good thing for the city.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 07:20 PM
|
#2933
|
|
Some kinda newsbreaker!
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
|
should also be noted that both Maclean and Hrudey didn't believe that the city would contribute any money while Nenshi was mayor, so both seemed a little surprised that King said that progress was made.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 07:24 PM
|
#2934
|
|
First round-bust
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: speculating about AHL players
|
Maybe the owners have agreed to contribute more? That doesn't explain the taxpayers' side, though.
__________________
Need a great deal on a new or pre-owned car? Come see me at Platinum Mitsubishi — 2720 Barlow Trail NE
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 07:24 PM
|
#2935
|
|
Franchise Player
|
By East Village I'm assuming they mean the Stampede Grounds? There isn't space in the East Village is there?
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 07:27 PM
|
#2936
|
 Posted the 6 millionth post! |
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygeologist
By East Village I'm assuming they mean the Stampede Grounds? There isn't space in the East Village is there?
|
Basically the land south of the tracks.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 07:29 PM
|
#2937
|
|
Franchise Player
|
So the city wants the arena in the East Village and the Flames want it West. Doesn't sound like they are close at all.
I would take everything Ken King says with a grain of salt.
But God bless you for caring.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to chummer For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 07:50 PM
|
#2938
|
|
Franchise Player
|
City has publicly stated its preference for Plan B, which right now is considered a stand alone arena on Stampede. This is still within the "Rivers District" CRL which has paid for East Village stuff, so that's why someone might shorthand it as an "East Village" location, even though south of the tracks is The Beltline.
I imagine no direct cash in that project, only land. I could even see a scenario where they give the flames a little surplus land in the vicinity to develop with long term revenue upside (retail and/or hotel). That'd be the sweetener.
Then City would contribute cash for McMahon renovation and build the field house as originally planned at Foothills.
I'll reiterate I have NO special or insider knowledge, this has just been my instinct based on what I think makes sense. I also think there is a deal to be made.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Last edited by Bunk; 11-26-2016 at 07:57 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 09:14 PM
|
#2939
|
|
Scoring Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk
City has publicly stated its preference for Plan B, which right now is considered a stand alone arena on Stampede. This is still within the "Rivers District" CRL which has paid for East Village stuff, so that's why someone might shorthand it as an "East Village" location, even though south of the tracks is The Beltline.
I imagine no direct cash in that project, only land. I could even see a scenario where they give the flames a little surplus land in the vicinity to develop with long term revenue upside (retail and/or hotel). That'd be the sweetener.
Then City would contribute cash for McMahon renovation and build the field house as originally planned at Foothills.
I'll reiterate I have NO special or insider knowledge, this has just been my instinct based on what I think makes sense. I also think there is a deal to be made.
|
Ugh...my lack of knowledge is really going to show when I as these questions...
Why would the city contribute cash for a McMahon renovation, but have concerns (at least optically) with contributing cash directly to a hockey arena?
Who owns the land at Stampede? The City? So, the stampede lands are city owned? I'm obviously confused.
|
|
|
|
|
11-26-2016, 09:19 PM
|
#2940
|
|
Self Imposed Exile
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacFlame
Ugh...my lack of knowledge is really going to show when I as these questions...
Why would the city contribute cash for a McMahon renovation, but have concerns (at least optically) with contributing cash directly to a hockey arena?
Who owns the land at Stampede? The City? So, the stampede lands are city owned? I'm obviously confused.
|
I THINK its because McMahon is owned by the University, maybe?
The Stampede has a 100 year lease from the City or something on the Stampede lands, so the Stampede has pull. Additionally, I imagine the City want's to work with the Stampede board as much as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Kavvy For This Useful Post:
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:04 AM.
|
|
