CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Bingo

If the city takes a pass they take a pass. I think the fact that they haven't done so though says they won't and there will be a counter.

The counter was "This doesn't work for us, come back with Plan B"... which is all the city should do until CS&E comes to them with something in the ballpark of what they'll accept.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by hah

Why don't the owners re model the Saddledome? The Rangers remodeled MSG and it was one of the oldest buildings in the league and I believe they funded it themselves. The leafs funded the Air Canada Centre. Can this model work in the smaller Calgary market?

The MSG reno cost a billion dollars, so it wasn't exactly a cost saving measure.

The problems with the Saddledome are mostly inherent in the design of the building, so there's not really anything that can be fixed by a renovation.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Parallex

The counter was "This doesn't work for us, come back with Plan B"... which is all the city should do until CS&E comes to them with something in the ballpark of what they'll accept.

however the plan B they wanted tested was putting lipstick on a pig and was shot down from all angles almost immediately.

plus I don't think they've actually accepted or rejected anything. I watched a lot of the last hearings and the questioning was a lot more "How will this work?" and a lot less of "this won't work".

Time will tell though.

If the city doesn't have an interest in an updated football stadium and getting the West Village mess cleaned up I think that's totally fine. They can go build their own field house.

I'm not sure that's the case though. It may be an opportunity they don't want to pass up.

The Flames won't make money on football, so maybe they should pop their own plan B where they just build their own hockey rink by Cross Iron Mills and get on with it. Would suck for hockey fans, but we'd still go.

[getbak]

For what it's worth, in the letter that came with the Season Ticket package, it says that they have responded to the City's request for more information on CalgaryNext as well as a "Plan B" alternative for an arena-only option.

[Flash Walken]

Wasn't King adamant there was no plan b?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Wasn't King adamant there was no plan b?

He was originally, but then the city asked for one. It's his signature on the letter.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Bingo

plus I don't think they've actually accepted or rejected anything. I watched a lot of the last hearings and the questioning was a lot more "How will this work?" and a lot less of "this won't work".

http://agendaminutes.calgary.ca/sire...6115521266.PDF

In summary, the CalgaryNEXT concept is not feasible in its present form and alternative development concepts, locations, and financial models should be investigated.

[Bingo]

wasn't that the initial response?

I'm talking about the hearings with King where they did Q&A with him.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Bingo

wasn't that the initial response?

I'm talking about the hearings with King where they did Q&A with him.

It's the only response to the only proposal (That I've seen anyways).

[RM14]

20oz draft beer in Edmonton now costs $11. Not surprised, but this fact alone makes me not want a new arena at all anymore.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by RM14

20oz draft beer in Edmonton now costs $11. Not surprised, but this fact alone makes me not want a new arena at all anymore.

What was it in Rexall?

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by TheoFleury

Disagree. There are several markets the Flames could move to if the city/province doesn't help at all. There's a brand new arena in Quebec City as well as several less appealing options. But they will seem a lot more appealing the longer this drags out. Obviously that isn't what they want to do but at the end of the day this is all mostly about money. Sentimentality, history, culture, etc. all eventually lose out to the need for more money.

The backdraft from a new ownership group replacing the departing one, would be so strong, it would help with the move costs to Q.C.

There is not a better location than Calgary available to the group. An above average GDP populace, that's first choice of the major four leagues.

Do you hate money? If so, you'd be the perfect adviser for this existing ownership group.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by getbak

What was it in Rexall?

$8.25 or $8.50

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

The backdraft from a new ownership group replacing the departing one, would be so strong, it would help with the move costs to Q.C.

There is not a better location than Calgary available to the group. An above average GDP populace, that's first choice of the major four leagues.

Do you hate money? If so, you'd be the perfect adviser for this existing ownership group.

It doesn't stop owners from playing the card though.

You can say many of the same things about Edmonton (rivalry aside) but the threat of relocating to Seattle played somewhat of a role there.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...deal-1.3740345

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by Cappy

It doesn't stop owners from playing the card though.

You can say many of the same things about Edmonton (rivalry aside) but the threat of relocating to Seattle played somewhat of a role there.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...deal-1.3740345

This one?
https://amateursport.wordpress.com/2...ion-blackmail/
The same strategy they apologized for?
Please.

What industry vertical does the Flames ownership operate in? Oh, is it Oil & Gas? How is that perceived in Calgary? Warmly ? And how would their brands be affected by going nuclear with their negotiations?

Bit different, when you're a greasy drug store owner, with national reach. Our ownership needs Calgary.

[nik-]

Which is why it would be more laughable if they tried to play that card. It's in the playbook though, we just haven't got to that point yet.

When you start hearing about buildings being an impact on market viability, that's code for a relocation threat. So far it's just been done via Bettman. Lets see if it changes.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

This one?
https://amateursport.wordpress.com/2...ion-blackmail/
The same strategy they apologized for?
Please.

What industry vertical does the Flames ownership operate in? Oh, is it Oil & Gas? How is that perceived in Calgary? Warmly ? And how would their brands be affected by going nuclear with their negotiations?

Bit different, when you're a greasy drug store owner, with national reach. Our ownership needs Calgary.

Just because he apologized doesn't mean it didn't send a message (hence, the Mayor's comments i alluded to)

I don't think Quebec City or Seattle would care where the owner made his money. Nor would the CNRL "Brand" be affected by moving a team. It's not in retail. Consumers don't purchase CNRL gasoline. TransCanada isn't going to say "you can't ship your oil in my pipeline Mr. Edwards! Flames for Life!"

Also, I am not saying that the Flames would pull the trigger and move. I agree that it would not be in their best interest, but that doesn't mean they wouldnt pull the page out of the book of public-funding.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

This one?
https://amateursport.wordpress.com/2...ion-blackmail/
The same strategy they apologized for?
Please.

What industry vertical does the Flames ownership operate in? Oh, is it Oil & Gas? How is that perceived in Calgary? Warmly ? And how would their brands be affected by going nuclear with their negotiations?

Bit different, when you're a greasy drug store owner, with national reach. Our ownership needs Calgary.

The oil and gas industry doesn't work that way. They don't "need" Calgary - that's simply where the business is. Certainly they need employees (in a good economy) but it's not like the city has any say in that. The city has no control over their industry's regulations - that's the province and, to a lesser extent, the feds.

Really, I don't see how their other businesses affect this situation one way or another.

BTW, Edwards, Riddell and Markin are heavy in oil and gas, while Markin is more of a real estate man and McCaig is a trucking guy (albeit the latter two are obviously dependent on oil and gas just like almost everyone else in the city).

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by RM14

20oz draft beer in Edmonton now costs $11. Not surprised, but this fact alone makes me not want a new arena at all anymore.

With the cost of tickets and food, the value proposition of attending a live sporting event is definitely not what it used to be. Not unlike the Movies, at some point these things become so expensive and inconvenient, that it's more enjoyable to watch on your tv or computer at home.

Of course Rogers is doing a bang up job of turning everyone off of watching their product as well, so the fan is kind of screwed from both ends.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Table 5

With the cost of tickets and food, the value proposition of attending a live sporting event is definitely not what it used to be. Not unlike the Movies, at some point these things become so expensive and inconvenient, that it's more enjoyable to watch on your tv or computer at home.

It's also why I laugh when Europeans complain about the cost of football tickets.