Flames to announce plans to announce arena plans in the... future...

[Jer Bu]

Originally Posted by Tyler

True. Every drop of profit goes back into the team, the rink or the community.

You make your money as an owner if/when you decide to sell your share (happens rarely).

I am not sure what that statement on putting profits back into team, rink, etc is based on. The flames have various commitments as the manager of the dome, and they raise a ton of money outside of profits (like 50/50, etc) for charities through the Flames Foundation.
I am hoping there are numbers somewhere that you are seeing and I am not. I can find numbers on how much the Flames Foundation has donated to charity since they arrived - around $32M.

The Forbes estimate of operating income may be the closest any of us will get to understanding how much money the Flames make. Even it is likely off in many cases as actual profits would never be released by a private company...
...because they are a business

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Seriously guys, if I had the time I'd sit down and work up a formula (alas I do not).

I think we can all agree there is an amount the city could kick in where it makes economic sense to fund a new arena.

I think we can all agree that there is an amount the city could kick in where it makes no economic sense to fund a new arena.

Based on these two agreed upon facts we can infer a third, there is an equilibrium amount that the city should kick in to fund a public arena.

The question then become what is that amount.

Given Calgary's unique factors I think that amount is closer to 0% than it is to 100% or even 40%.

You'll need to ask questions like:

How many Calgarians travel for concerts that are by-passing the city?

How many non-Calgarians come to events that are held at the Saddledome? Then how many more would come due to the new arena?

How much do surrounding businesses have increased sales on event nights? What percentage of those is spent by non-Calgarians? What are alternative sources of entertainment? Would the event money be spent in its entirety on alternate entertainment?

Would a new arena create jobs? How many temporary, how many permanent, if any at all? Are these jobs at the cost of other employment opportunities?

How much money does team personnel bring into the area? Property taxes on condos and houses, food, entertainment, etc. would this increase with a new arena?

Will property taxes on a new arena be more or less than the Saddledome?

Would there be any new municipal taxes or fees with a new arena? A luxury box tax, or a ticket surcharge that is not at the Saddledome?

Would a new arena attract more Calgarians than the Saddledome? The "bathroom lines are too long, concourse is too crowded, I prefer to watch at home than go to that dump" crowd.

What is the cost of a new arena? We are having a discussion on how much the city should pay for a new arena without knowing how much the arena would cost. That's kind of important.


At the end of the day the city should help pay for an arena to the cost of the benefits it's receiving. Measure the benefits and you have the city's contribution.

Again that's likely closer to $0 than $200,000,000.

[Jer Bu]

We (Calgary) should aim to be like these guys:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidwhe...-world-series/

"What really sets the $357 million downtown stadium apart, though, is its distinction as the only privately financed major league stadium built in the last four decades. And that is turning into a curse for other teams across the country that have been trying to convince state legislators and voters that tax money is needed to build new stadiums."

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Jer Bu

We (Calgary) should aim to be like these guys:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidwhe...-world-series/

"What really sets the $357 million downtown stadium apart, though, is its distinction as the only privately financed major league stadium built in the last four decades. And that is turning into a curse for other teams across the country that have been trying to convince state legislators and voters that tax money is needed to build new stadiums."

Exactly, theirs was a perfect deal, imo

While the team did pay for construction of SBC Park, it also benefited from significant public contributions. The park sits on city-owned property at the foot of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, near downtown. It's probably some of the most expensive real estate in the country, and the Giants get to use it for free. The city also kicked in $80 million in infrastructure improvements.

http://news.minnesota.publicradio.or...j_sanfranpark/

[Senator Clay Davis]

The city should be willing to provide support infrastructure and that should be the extent of it. Build a new train station right at the arena? Great. Build a new overpass or a new road or two for the arena? Fine.

But a new arena itself is designed for one purpose, to maximize revenue for the owners. These are almost undisputed facts about new arenas: There will be fewer seats than the current arena in order for there to be more luxury boxes, and tickets will cost more, usually starting around 10% more and going up over time.

If this city or province for instance had no issues, contributing to an arena is more tolerable. With the debt growing, infrastrucute projects badly needed (particularly for a rapidly growing population), and the rising age of the population (and subsequent skyrocketing health care costs), contributing significant dollars to making billionaires richer is an utterly impossible sell.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

So exactly what the city/province didn't do with the new film studio, where the major tenant put up but $10M of the total cost - while the city, economic development Calgary and the province threw in the other $218M?

That is the project that the not for profit Calgary Economic Development actually owns and operates and is able to profit from correct? The project that CED can then use profits from the project for further economic development in Calgary correct? Perhaps if the Flames were a not for profit organization it would be a valid comparable.

[Bingo]

man I'd love to look inside this discussion for actual news on the arena and not a back and forth on public funding ...

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by Bingo

man I'd love to look inside this discussion for actual news on the arena and not a back and forth on public funding ...

Bingo, you have the power..

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bingo

man I'd love to look inside this discussion for actual news on the arena and not a back and forth on public funding ...

But that's a critical component. If they had public funding the arena would already have been announced. But clearly there's some pretty staunch opposition to any public funding of an arena, which is why the situation is in a holding patern. Flames owners will not be expending any of their own money until they have exhausted all means to get public dollars.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

But that's a critical component. If they had public funding the arena would already have been announced. But clearly there's some pretty staunch opposition to any public funding of an arena, which is why the situation is in a holding patern. Flames owners will not be expending any of their own money until they have exhausted all means to get public dollars.

I'm well aware of that ... just tired of two extremes treating the issue like it's black or white when as most of life its going to be and is a shade of gray

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm well aware of that ... just tired of two extremes treating the issue like it's black or white when as most of life its going to be and is a shade of gray

I hear you, and I've already suggested this thread should be deleted or locked until there is actually something to announce. Otherwise we pretty much can only be a debate about the amount of public dollars (if any) because that's the only concrete thing we can assume about a new arena is that owners will want the public to pay for some or most of a new building. Otherwise there's pretty much nothing to talk about.

[Jer Bu]

A debate on a message forum about something people seem to care about?

THE HUMANITY!

There is clearly lots to talk about - judging the by posts here.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Bingo

man I'd love to look inside this discussion for actual news on the arena and not a back and forth on public funding ...

Maybe one of these years the Flames will put an actual proposal forward, and we can have something tangible to react to. Until then, not much else to talk about.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm well aware of that ... just tired of two extremes treating the issue like it's black or white when as most of life its going to be and is a shade of gray

I've been trying, I really have.

Alas, I made the fundamental mistake of being reasonable in an internet argument (not debate, argument as each side simply says the other is wrong and ignores facts that don't support them).

Perhaps we should change the thread title (again) to New Flames Arena: Should there be any public funding?

[EYE_Overstand]

If Katz got such a sweet heart deal, then the owners in Calgary probably have at minimum the same expectations.... Well that's what I would assume

[Sgrath]

Not to forget that almost all economic impact assesments are of dubious benefit to start with.

Love the quote from this article http://www.macleans.ca/economy/econo...-sounds-leach/

"The fact that the technique we use to evaluate the benefits of spending in general only makes sense when we know the spending is beneficial should raise more than a few flags.Economic impact analysis is a wonderful tool for confirming your pre-existing biases and for justifying anything. "


Of course the problem is the article is great for confirming my pre-existing bias that the city should not be paying for a new arena.

[jesters91]

For something a little different...

Ticket sales for big-name shows are soaring despite rising ticket costs. Taylor Swift raked in $150 million on her recent tour, making it the highest-grossing tour by a country artist. And the highly anticipated Jay Z and Beyonce "On the Run" tour is expected to gross $100 million for just 19 shows.

"The economy is on the upswing and that means more bands are on the road, which means more tours, which means more events for venues," says Jessica Boudevin, managing editor of Venues Today.

"Venue vendors are feeling very positive about the state of the industry," she says.

Francis says the top grossing events for Monument Sports included Justin Timberlake, Cher, two back-to-back sellouts from Katy Perry, two World Wrestling Entertainment events and three Monster Jam shows.

Check below for more rankings:

High-grossing venues with capacity of 15,001 to 30,000

A little surprising who comes in at #20...??

http://wtop.com/541/3662536/Local-ve...ghest-grossing

[Resolute 14]

That is actually not that surprising. Edmonton gets a ton of concerts that pass Calgary by because of the roof.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That is actually not that surprising. Edmonton gets a ton of concerts that pass Calgary by because of the roof.

Please quantify a 'ton' will you? 5 a year? 10 a year?

[Senator Clay Davis]

It's somewhat surprising Edmonton is on the list and Vancouver isn't, but I would guess that has to do with GM Place and BC Place splitting some of the bigger shows which would drive down the earnings.