New Edmonton Arena Construction will begin in March 2014

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Muta

I don't know about multi-sport, but the project might be further along than most people think.

I won't probe too deep, but is there anything more than a hunch behind that?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

I would suspect when it is all said and done that Katz is looking for about a 750 million dollar package from the City of Edmonton and the province of Alberta. Katz is willing to run the arena for free and collect the profits from the arena. The Oilers would play rent free under Katz's proposal and at the end of the day Katz would spend around zero dollars on the arena (the original proposal was for Katz to pay 5.5 million to rent the arena for 35 years and keep all the profits, with the City of Edmonton giving him 20 million for "advertising", but Katz came back and said that he needed 6 million from the city to pay for running the arena, so at the end of the day he appears to need 500K a year from the City to run the arena). Thankfully, he has taken that ridiculous request off the table, and agrees that he should be required to pay the equivalent of 1% of the value of the building in rent per year.

I would be shocked, absolutely floored, if the Flames do not ask for money from the City and the Province for their new sports facilities. Then the Flames will be in the same dog and pony show that Katz is conducting up in Edmonton.

This is why there's no way the province should do it, putting a billion or more dollars into hockey arena's would be a stupid way to spend money.

but then again Katz gave over $400,000 dollars into the PC parties coffers to help them win the election when they desperately needed cash so I expect that Redford will be there with a big smile on her face as she thanks daddy.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I won't probe too deep, but is there anything more than a hunch behind that?

I would call it... an educated hunch.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

To answer his question though:




Abso-freaking-lutely.

Time for the government to step in then and give a massive handout to a billionaire sports owner.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Woah buddy. Deep breath.

That's just Eddy being Eddy. He enjoys the attention.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

This is why there's no way the province should do it, putting a billion or more dollars into hockey arena's would be a stupid way to spend money.

but then again Katz gave over $400,000 dollars into the PC parties coffers to help them win the election when they desperately needed cash so I expect that Redford will be there with a big smile on her face as she thanks daddy.

Considering that's the case, it would be more surprising if the province doesn't give money, after the help Katz provided.

Shouldn't be done, but if it is to Edmonton, Calgary has to get it as well.

[EddyBeers]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...d-s-long-finds

The book, released last month by Routledge, aims to help governments and taxpayers to reduce hidden subsidies to team owners by allowing them to compare stadium deals for their cities against those elsewhere. The average public-private partnership worked out to cost cities 78 percent and the teams 22 percent, she wrote.

The public is at a disadvantage in negotiating those deals with sports teams and leagues, which have a monopoly on the supply of franchises and opaque finances, Long writes. The total cost of sport facilities has received little attention from researchers in part “because most economic analyses demonstrate that sports facilities produce very few or no net new economic benefits relative to construction costs alone, and so, in this sense, more accurate cost estimates would only serve to reinforce a case already made.”

[Hockey Fan #751]

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...476/story.html

If a downtown arena gets city approval, the Katz Group hopes to push ahead this spring with $2-billion worth of nearby development at the same time the new facility is being built.

Their plans include a 26-floor luxury hotel, two condos at least 35 storeys tall, two office towers reaching up to 32 storeys and six other buildings, along with an open-air plaza in the current parking lot on the south side of 104th Avenue.

Main anchor tenants are expected to include a VIP theatre complex, a grocery store and the headquarters of a major telecommunications company, according to a 60-page overview of the district by the Katz Group and partner WAM Development Group.

[T@T]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

I would suspect when it is all said and done that Katz is looking for about a 750 million dollar package from the City of Edmonton and the province of Alberta. Katz is willing to run the arena for free and collect the profits from the arena. The Oilers would play rent free under Katz's proposal and at the end of the day Katz would spend around zero dollars on the arena (the original proposal was for Katz to pay 5.5 million to rent the arena for 35 years and keep all the profits, with the City of Edmonton giving him 20 million for "advertising", but Katz came back and said that he needed 6 million from the city to pay for running the arena, so at the end of the day he appears to need 500K a year from the City to run the arena). Thankfully, he has taken that ridiculous request off the table, and agrees that he should be required to pay the equivalent of 1% of the value of the building in rent per year.

I would be shocked, absolutely floored, if the Flames do not ask for money from the City and the Province for their new sports facilities. Then the Flames will be in the same dog and pony show that Katz is conducting up in Edmonton.

Of course the flames will ask(and likely get) it's called big business.

101 even!

[VERVE]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

I would suspect when it is all said and done that Katz is looking for about a 750 million dollar package from the City of Edmonton and the province of Alberta. Katz is willing to run the arena for free and collect the profits from the arena. The Oilers would play rent free under Katz's proposal and at the end of the day Katz would spend around zero dollars on the arena (the original proposal was for Katz to pay 5.5 million to rent the arena for 35 years and keep all the profits, with the City of Edmonton giving him 20 million for "advertising", but Katz came back and said that he needed 6 million from the city to pay for running the arena, so at the end of the day he appears to need 500K a year from the City to run the arena). Thankfully, he has taken that ridiculous request off the table, and agrees that he should be required to pay the equivalent of 1% of the value of the building in rent per year.

I would be shocked, absolutely floored, if the Flames do not ask for money from the City and the Province for their new sports facilities. Then the Flames will be in the same dog and pony show that Katz is conducting up in Edmonton.

According to the original ‘agreement’ discussed almost a year ago, the Oilers must pay operating and maintenance costs of the new arena estimated to be over 10 million dollars per year. The Oilers will receive all concerts and other non-hockey related revenues 11 months of the year. Not including keeping the sales of parking fees, the Oilers will also receive food and beverage sales which may bring in 20 million. Katz will not pay the 100 million money upfront (as once thought) to build the arena but will pay 5.5 million per year for 35 years (the total mortgage plus low interest will then be about 200 million). Perhaps there is a lesser rental fee incorporated within the 5.5 million payments-not clear. The City will pay 2 million per year for advertizing in the arena (for a decade). The Katz group tried to make a lot of concessions behind closed doors but the final straw was when they insisted on an extra subsidy from the City at around 6 million. This essentially covers their 5.5 million loan payment. Katz reasoning is that the city will benefit much more in tax dollars from surrounding businesses called the CRL (community revitalization levy) than what the City had projected. In a recent meeting, the Katz group has withdrew this 6 million subsidy and hopes that if the taxes received by the city is above their initial projection, then any extras might be put into a reserve fund to help offset any costs incurred by the Katz group.

The proposed 2 billion dollars worth of arena/business/entertainment district will feature hotels, condos, office towers, casino, Wintergarden pedway across 104 ave., restaurants and shops all situated in the heart of downtown. The city hopes the arena district will help revitalize downtown and slow urban sprawl which the city has had very little success developing in the past.

The Katz group also insisted to have the City as their main tenants in the yet to be build high-rise offices around the arena. This might be an impossible scenario since all government-related functions or events for ex. tenancy/leasing must be put out for tender. As well, the Katz group wanted a share of the Casino profits but this is a provincial jurisdiction and not a municipal affair.

Katz had spent over 30 million so far on preliminaries such as land purchase but may consider this cost as part of his initial 100 million contributions towards the new arena.

Hopefully, in the end, it results in a win-win situation for both the City and the Katz.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by VERVE

Hopefully, in the end, it results in a win-win situation for both the City and the Katz.

How is what you described any kind of win for the city? It sounds like a massive loss to me.

Essentially they are paying for half an arena, and benefiting very little from it.

[VERVE]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

How is what you described any kind of win for the city? It sounds like a massive loss to me.

Essentially they are paying for half an arena, and benefiting very little from it.

The City will not participate in such a fashion if their numbers indicates massive losses. The city will benefit from the CRL (community revitalizaion levy) which is projected (depending which group is doing the numbers) to be worst case=45 million per year and best case= 80-100 million/ yr or approx. 1.6 billion over 20 yrs of tax revenues. The City's goal of trying to revitalize downtown for decades may finally be answered with the arena district which the councillors are hoping it will be a success. This will decrease urban sprawl which costs the city billions to finance the infrastuctures. The arena district will attract tourists and businesses to the downtown area. It is not a loss.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by VERVE

The City will not participate in such a fashion if their numbers indicates massive losses. The city will benefit from the CRL (community revitalizaion levy) which is projected (depending which group is doing the numbers) to be worst case=45 million per year and best case= 80-100 million/ yr or approx. 1.6 billion over 20 yrs of tax revenues. The City's goal of trying to revitalize downtown for decades may finally be answered with the arena district which the councillors are hoping it will be a success. This will decrease urban sprawl which costs the city billions to finance the infrastuctures. The arena district will attract tourists and businesses to the downtown area. It is not a loss.

The point is, you wouldn't have to fund an arena to do the same thing. If the city spent $100 million in the area, but not build a rink, It would probably do as much or more to revitalize the area.

[VERVE]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

The point is, you wouldn't have to fund an arena to do the same thing. If the city spent $100 million in the area, but not build a rink, It would probably do as much or more to revitalize the area.

I have lived here most of my life and I have seen the many proposals and development in the area-some worked ok while others fall away after a period. It is not so simple as spending 100 million to build more of the same and get different results.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by VERVE

I have lived here most of my life and I have seen the many proposals and development in the area-some worked ok while others fall away after a period. It is not so simple as spending 100 million to build more of the same and get different results.

If what you say is true, then it's also no guarantee that an arena will do any better.

But also, when has anywhere near $100 million (even that is half of what the city of Edmonton would be putting into a new arena) been spent on previous revitalization attempts?

[VERVE]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

If what you say is true, then it's also no guarantee that an arena will do any better.

But also, when has anywhere near $100 million (even that is half of what the city of Edmonton would be putting into a new arena) been spent on previous revitalization attempts?

Firstly, the City welcomes the arena in downtown and supports it because they know the benefits are worth it. No, building the arena district is not more of the same. The City has tried to build up Churchhill square (twice), allow for residential condos in downtown and encouraging businesses to develop in the area but nothing is guarantee to succeed. The City and private investors have never taken on such a big development of monstrosity proportions (2 billion dollars worth) probably no one would dare dream and implement it.

Here is a guy like Katz who has a vision to enhance both the city and his hockey team and dare to dream big. I don't see any other big thinkers willing to take the reins. How many more big museum, art galleries, large shopping malls etc can we build to enhance our livelihood and wellbeing? I attend the museum and art gallery once a year that I contributed through my taxes to build.

Some of my taxes are used to subsidized or assist private businesses like the Dell call center. The City built it on 3 acres of land and renting to Dell for 1 dollar per year. Dell left within 2 years and the building sat emptied for a year and a half. Katz is not the first businessman to ask for assistance nor will he be the last-at least in this case, his dream for an arena district will benefit more than just a few art gallery/museum goers who attend maybe once a year.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by VERVE

Some of my taxes are used to subsidized or assist private businesses like the Dell call center. The City built it on 3 acres of land and renting to Dell for 1 dollar per year. Dell left within 2 years and the building sat emptied for a year and a half. Katz is not the first businessman to ask for assistance nor will he be the last-at least in this case, his dream for an arena district will benefit more than just a few art gallery/museum goers who attend maybe once a year.

His dream will benefit at most the 80,000 people who attend an Oilers game each year. Did the museum have a previous home in Edmonton? If not the comparison is weak to begin with, as building a new museum added a new activity to the city. There is already an existing hockey arena, so it is not like those 80,000 people who benefit from the new arena do not have an existing complex in which to attend Oilers games. How much did the museums cost? Were they in the 700-800 million dollar range? What private businessman owns the museum?

Fact of the matter is that there have been countless studies done on sports arenas and economic benefits. The economic benefits are almost nil.

[VERVE]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

His dream will benefit at most the 80,000 people who attend an Oilers game each year. Did the museum have a previous home in Edmonton? If not the comparison is weak to begin with, as building a new museum added a new activity to the city. There is already an existing hockey arena, so it is not like those 80,000 people who benefit from the new arena do not have an existing complex in which to attend Oilers games. How much did the museums cost? Were they in the 700-800 million dollar range? What private businessman owns the museum?

Fact of the matter is that there have been countless studies done on sports arenas and economic benefits. The economic benefits are almost nil.

Don't be so myopic. There are people who will visit and spend money not just on the arena but on casino, hotels, restaurants and other retail outlets. It is not just an arena being built.

You said: "There is already an existing hockey arena, so it is not like those 80,000 people who benefit from the new arena do not have an existing complex in which to attend Oilers games. ..."
Ummm...the Oilers are playing in the new arena not the old, hence, this ongoing discussion between Katz and the city...

The ownership of the museum belongs to the city and so will be the arena. The point is my taxes also contributes to other facilities that I have no say in ex. museum, art galleries, Citadel theatre, private businesses like Dell, South common infrastructures etc... Why should this be any different than Katz's goal except it might not be politically and socially viewed as acceptable to spend taxes on.

Your point about studies of arena/entertainment district such as the one planned will have virtually no impact economically (?) is horse hockey. On the contrary, one example is the Columbus Blue Jackets arena/entertainment district which is highly successful in attracting visitors and creating spinoffs in the service industries. It was rated a recommended sight to visit by TripAdvisor.

[Tinordi]

Dear Verve,

You don't know what you're talking about.

Sincerely,

Evidence based analysis

[getbak]

The NHL should do what the NFL has done and take a percentage of league revenue and set it aside for arena construction/improvement projects: http://www.fieldofschemes.com/news/a...tablishes.html

Teams can borrow against this fund, dollar for dollar matching their own investment, up to $200 million. Then, the money is repaid from the new revenue generated that would normally go into revenue-sharing.

The NFL takes 1.5% of revenue to fund the fund. They have much higher revenue, but their buildings also cost a lot more to build, and generally aren't shared with other permanent tenants.

2% of $3B in revenue would put $60M a year into a similar fund for the NHL.