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

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by j_j

It's not a big leap to see how quickly that sentiment will also erode both the fan base and the team's performance.

- Fans want value for their ticket experience and can't get that when the food and facilities don't keep pace with the cost of the ticket or the alternatives like just staying home. This trend is already well underway with our football team regardless of their on-field performance. And it was happening in hockey too, but the strong story lines this year have started to win back the live audience.

- Top players, want to come to play for teams with quality stadiums with quality facilities. It's all part of the sales pitch. Especially in cap leagues where offering salary negotiation only takes you so far.

Exactly.

Also, the only thing keeping the arena full in Edmonton is the prospect of the new arena. If not for that, I would guess the number of STH would be drastically - critically - reduced by now.

I am in a similar boat where I have thought about cancelling my tickets over the last couple years, but the thought of an upgraded arena - especially one where I can train right into the building - keeps me paying.

You have to move forward to avoid falling backward.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The same planet where people think there is no benefit to the city to have a quality sports facility

Must be the same planet where paying to sit in a seat and watch hockey is a 'sports facility'.

It's an event centre. An entertainment centre.

I've actually been on Saddle Dome ice before, and I'd say I'm part of a small fraction of CP posters (the die hard of the diehardiest) flames fans around.

you go there, you sit in a seat, you eat bloating, fatty foods and you occasionally stand up only to sit back down again.

It's about as much of a 'sports facility' as my living room.

This is right up there with EE's assertion that it would improve the arts scene in the city.

It's an entertainment venue, simple as that.

[Clever_Iggy]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It is purely my opinion which is based on my interactions with a diverse group of individuals on a day to day basis. For example, in my office (a small office) only about 15% of the people actually follow the Flames and know what is happening. I've had many occasions where I try to make small talk at functions or events and to a large extent trying to talk about the Flames generally doesn't go anywhere.

About 85% of the people in your office are a bunch of losers.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The same planet where people think there is no benefit to the city to have a quality sports facility

Laugh. Nice try to conflate two issues to make them appear equal. One is a direct transfer of public value to private and people simply wishing that fact away because there's no " money" involved.

The other is a straw man that you've erected. I don't think a single person had argued that there's zero benefit. What I've argued with multiple peer reviewed ex post and ex ante economic analyses is unanimous agreement that the benefits are smaller than the costs to the public, that the benefits are almost always vastly overstated for the public, and that most of the benefits are privatized and that this is almost entirely rent seeking behavior by sports team owners.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

About 85% of the people in your office are a bunch of losers.

Not losers necessarily but rather interested in other things.

I think that trying to make a statement such as the Flames being one of the biggest sources of civic pride is akin to saying that the Calgary Stampede and the cowboy lifestyle defines this city.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Must be the same planet where paying to sit in a seat and watch hockey is a 'sports facility'.

It's an event centre. An entertainment centre.

I've actually been on Saddle Dome ice before, and I'd say I'm part of a small fraction of CP posters (the die hard of the diehardiest) flames fans around.

you go there, you sit in a seat, you eat bloating, fatty foods and you occasionally stand up only to sit back down again.

It's about as much of a 'sports facility' as my living room.

This is right up there with EE's assertion that it would improve the arts scene in the city.

It's an entertainment venue, simple as that.

Call it what you like, that doesn't change the point

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Laugh. Nice try to conflate two issues to make them appear equal. One is a direct transfer of public value to private and people simply wishing that fact away because there's no " money" involved.

The other is a straw man that you've erected. I don't think a single person had argued that there's zero benefit. What I've argued with multiple peer reviewed ex post and ex ante economic analyses is unanimous agreement that the benefits are smaller than the costs to the public, that the benefits are almost always vastly overstated for the public, and that most of the benefits are privatized and that this is almost entirely rent seeking behavior by sports team owners.

yeah ok

the cost benefit analysis would be a function of the cost, and since we don't yet know what that is, hard to argue that the costs outweigh the benefits.

And you have now admitted that there are benefits, so you can no longer argue (sensibly) that there should be no costs.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

yeah ok

Prove me wrong

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Prove me wrong

prove your assertion of unanimous agreement wrong?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

prove your assertion of unanimous agreement wrong?

I'm saying find me a peer reviewed economics paper or study on public subsidies for sports stadiums that disagrees with my above post.

[RM14]

Nenshi is all good with using taxpayer dough to send staff to the Grey Cup to support Calgary. I also noticed stamps flags were put up above traffic lights downtown at the city's expense. It shows the city of Calgary indeed supports the teams and they do see benefit in associating themselves with their brands/pumping civic prode. Not to mention how politicians are always ready for a cheesy mayor bet or opportunistic photo op in a local teams jersey when it's convenient.

No I don't support the city paying for the new stadiums, but like other people have mentioned I think there is a responsibility to the city to co-operate in an efficient way that enables Calgarians to have the best facilities possible.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

On what planet is giving taxpayer owned land away not considered using public money?

Depends on the magnitude of liabilities that come with it.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It is purely my opinion which is based on my interactions with a diverse group of individuals on a day to day basis. For example, in my office (a small office) only about 15% of the people actually follow the Flames and know what is happening. I've had many occasions where I try to make small talk at functions or events and to a large extent trying to talk about the Flames generally doesn't go anywhere.

I think that as fans we typically want to believe that the game is much more important than it actually is. As an example, I always thought that the minor hockey program in Calgary was huge with lots of support. There are ~150,000 kids in Calgary between the ages of 5 and 15 but only about ~13,000 play minor hockey.

What line of work are you in? Everyone around downtown seems to know that at least the Flames were supposed to suck this year but that they're doing really well.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Not losers necessarily but rather interested in other things.

I think that trying to make a statement such as the Flames being one of the biggest sources of civic pride is akin to saying that the Calgary Stampede and the cowboy lifestyle defines this city.

Were you not around in 2004? If you were, how could you say that the Flames aren't a source of civic pride?

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by heep223

What line of work are you in? Everyone around downtown seems to know that at least the Flames were supposed to suck this year but that they're doing really well.

Oil and gas exploration.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Oil and gas exploration.

K well thats definitely an anomaly then because the vast majority of people working in the energy sector are flames fans and attend flames games.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by heep223

Were you not around in 2004? If you were, how could you say that the Flames aren't a source of civic pride?

I was here for the cup run and I was down on The Red Mile with all the other fans. I'm not saying that the Flames (and other teams) are not a source of civic pride but I'm trying to contend that the Flames are not the single biggest source of civic pride. The prior poster stated that civic pride in Calgary has never been higher than during that 2004 cup run and I disagree.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I was here for the cup run and I was down on The Red Mile with all the other fans. I'm not saying that the Flames (and other teams) are not a source of civic pride but I'm trying to contend that the Flames are not the single biggest source of civic pride. The prior poster stated that civic pride in Calgary has never been higher than during that 2004 cup run and I disagree.

Well if you're going to use the Olympics or whatever as being higher to illustrate your point that's great, but civic pride was very very high in 04 and that was due to the Flames but I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

[Senator Clay Davis]

And so, Calgary will become just the latest market to be targeted by a profitable sports franchise that wants to increase its profits further by having public dollars subsidize its costs.

So far, the city’s elected officials have been quite cool to the concept. They have every reason to remain so, not least of which is the $5-billion TV contract the NHL signed last year that, according to a Forbes estimate released Tuesday, has pushed up the value of franchises by close to 20%

The situation in Calgary appears set to unfold in a typical fashion. Rather than straight-up ask the city to contribute funds to the construction of a new hockey facility, the Flames would instead promote their vision as an urban renewal project. There would be restaurants and condominiums and maybe a nice plaza to help reshape a downtrodden neighbourhood. Yes, the city would contribute land, or funding, or tax breaks, or some combination of all of that, but in the end there would be this whole grand vision where once there was just blight. (And also a new arena, paid for in part by public money.) This is, of course, more or less what happened in Edmonton, where resistance to public funding for its new arena was ultimately overwhelmed by the idea of downtown revitalization. (And also by Oilers owner Daryl Katz’s public dalliances with potential relocation sites like Seattle, which had all the subtlety of a sledgehammer.)

Sports, though, makes governments do crazy things. Over and over again, they fall victim to the false promises that franchises, and their stadiums, are said to bring. A new arena would have a positive economic impact of hundreds of millions of dollars, a study will inevitably conclude. But arenas don’t actually create new economic activity, beyond the construction phase. They simply move discretionary dollars spent on entertainment from one part of the city to another

In the Toronto suburb of Markham, plans for an NHL-sized arena that was to be half-funded by a new development levy were buttressed by studies that claimed a great economic boost from a new facility; the studies were never released, though, and when it became clear that the city was at best a long shot for an NHL team, public-opinion flipped and the proposed deal was killed. In Quebec City, an NHL-ready arena built entirely with public money should be open next fall, minus the niggling detail of an NHL team. In the meantime, the league has said that if it expands at all, it will be in the Western conference, which has two fewer teams than the East, and the arena’s operator, Quebecor, is now owned by someone who wants to become the country’s leading separatist. So that’s going well.

From Hamilton to Kansas City to Seattle, there are myriad examples of cities shovelling public dollars into arena projects so that prospective team owners don’t have to take on the risk of building the facilities themselves, but the emotions run even higher, and the potential for extortion is greater, when dealing with the potential loss of a franchise. (Hello, Edmonton.) In Miami, the threat of relocation from Marlins owner/loathsome individual Jeffrey Loria spurred Miami-Dade county in 2009 to kick in most of the $600-million used for construction of a new baseball stadium. Officials last year disclosed that the county acquired its funding from high-interest bonds — really high interest — that in one case will require payments of $1.2-billion on an initial bond of $91-million. Local taxpayers will still be paying off the loans more than 30 years from now. The Marlins, meanwhile, last week signed outfielder Giancarlo Stanton to a 13-year, US$325-million contract extension. That’s how these things work: taxpayers give owners money, owners turn around and give it to players. And if the owner decides that player costs are too high, payroll can always be slashed. You can’t slash arena costs, which is why it helps to have a city take on the burden.

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2014/...ild-new-arena/

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

I'm saying find me a peer reviewed economics paper or study on public subsidies for sports stadiums that disagrees with my above post.

You have already gone through those same arguments many times on these boards to the same pointless stalemates.

I have already responded to the relevant part of your post and going any farther with it until we actually know how much costs we're talking about is pointless.

Edit: and here they come again