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

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

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.

lol, i guess google yielded no results?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

lol, i guess google yielded no results?

lol

nice try

[Hockey Fan #751]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

And as I already mentioned, because Winnipeg and Edmonton are both no good and were idiotic, we should be too? Or maybe we should be like the actually good cities like Montreal and Toronto and Vancouver whose arenas were 100% privately financed.

It's dangerous for the Flames to privately finance the building themselves given the size of this market. Most teams who have done this have ended up having to declare bankruptcy and/or sell the team and arena.

Toronto is the only team I can think of who hasn't had to do this. Among those who have: Columbus, Ottawa, Vancouver, Montreal.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751

It's dangerous for the Flames to privately finance the building themselves given the size of this market. Most teams who have done this have ended up having to declare bankruptcy and/or sell the team and arena.

Toronto is the only team I can think of who hasn't had to do this. Among those who have: Columbus, Ottawa, Vancouver, Montreal.

That's an interesting example and something to consider.

It could point to a lot of things. Are these no longer 'profitable' enterprises, or not 'as' profitable, necessitating a sale?

Is the building ownership a secondary concern compared to other financial investments and debts?

Are there examples of building ownership which contradict these examples?

[krazycanuck]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Has any guy here on CP ever pooped at the Dome?

Yes. Yes I have. Let me tell you, I was pretty thankful that there was no wait for a stall.

[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.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

That's an interesting example and something to consider.

It could point to a lot of things. Are these no longer 'profitable' enterprises, or not 'as' profitable, necessitating a sale?

Is the building ownership a secondary concern compared to other financial investments and debts?

Are there examples of building ownership which contradict these examples?

The Real problem is a bit of a broken model with Sports teams. They need these $400M buildings that should last 25 years, so setting aside, debt, future value of money and all of those other issues. They should all be either saving or allocating or paying back $16M/year for Facility costs. but 90% of them cannot really afford it. Meanwhile they have salary caps at $70M. If the Salary Cap was $56M (or 40% in stead of 50%), the top players were making $8M rather than $10M, and the teams were responsibly managing their funds, this would be a none issue for tax payers or patrons, the money would be there.

But expecting the type of responsibility we see in other private industries with Pro sports teams is a pipe dream, partly because there are seemingly limited numbers of teams, and far more fans/cities to go around.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Ok, but Calgary Transit's performance relative to Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto is beyond humiliating. It's a much, much bigger concern than a new arena, to so many more people than an arena most people might visit 20 times in their life.

So are roads, so are schools, so are more arenas for kids (and not millionaires) to play in, so are other more pressing issues. That anyone can prioritize a new arena when this city has a multitude of issues, ones that will only grow as the population does, is ridiculous. But if you'd like to pay for a new arena, PSLs are just for you, give the owners thousands of dollars for the right to buy tickets. That's essentially the same as taxpayers doing it, except PSLs allow choice whereas having your city decide for you does not.

Its interesting to me that people always say this about Calgary Transit.

I personally feel that transit needs to continue to grow, be made easier to use, more direct, and has to become an early priority in new communities rather than an after thought much like roads are now.

But all of that being said I have often heard that Calgary has a vary high per capita transit use for North American, and is one of the fastest growing next works (which is probably more about keeping up with population growth, than improving the system on an individual basis).

Have you extensively used transit in these other places?
I have only used transit in Osaka & Las Vegas, and only a couple of times each.

Osaka was in a whole different league when you look a frequincy, distribution, and accessibility, but the experience wasn't all that different, waiting for buses outside of subway stations, having to transfer a couple of times to get where you want to go. And over crowded at peak times.

Las Vegas, I think pales con comparison to Calgary. And in terms of size/geography the cities are pretty close, But vary vary different demographically. Much smaller train next work, and it seems like less frequinecy in bus's but that's a really hard thing to gauge if you are not using it day-in day-out. The do have 2 privately owned trams that don't connect to the public infrastructure, but thats a special situation that only works in Las Vegas, and Disney World

[ExiledFlamesFan]

Originally Posted by #-3

Its interesting to me that people always say this about Calgary Transit.

I personally feel that transit needs to continue to grow, be made easier to use, more direct, and has to become an early priority in new communities rather than an after thought much like roads are now.

But all of that being said I have often heard that Calgary has a vary high per capita transit use for North American, and is one of the fastest growing next works (which is probably more about keeping up with population growth, than improving the system on an individual basis).

Calgary's transit is used so much for a few reasons:
-big business downtown. Almost all of the head offices are concentrated downtown. We've got a huge population that works downtown M-F
-parking is unaffordable downtown. Second highest rates in N America after NYC

People take the c train/bus because they can't afford to park downtown, there aren't enough parking spaces.

Take a look at the future growth of the city and almost all of it is concentrated in 2 areas. The deep SE and the far north central. Calgary needs that NCSE lrt line built asap along with the 8th ave underground subway to aleviate the backup on 7th ave.

These projects are going to cost billions.

[Bunk]

This is interesting and (for the most part) very good quality debate on an important issue.

It's valuable to read. Cheers.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

You can't quantify civic pride. I challenge anyone to say that civic pride has ever been higher in this city than 2004. The buzz and energy in the city was even higher than during the Olympics or the Flames 2009 cup year. That buzz lasted for years after. Calgarians don't own the Flames and we should be thankful the Flames ownership has invested to provide this city with the Flames, Stamps, Hitmen, Roughneck, etc on an annual basis. These guys aren't greasy businessmen they are local men who are involved with this city. They don't stick their faces in the limelight like Jerry Jones or Katz. They don't do it for fame. They do it because they are proud Calgarians and want to give back because we all know there isn't a lot of money to be made on CFL, WHL, NHL, etc. I think Calgarians have been spoiled by having such a classy ownership group as how many disasters have we seen in Ottawa, Edmonton, Long Island, etc. heck if anyone follows football they would know Feterik was going to drive the Stampeders into the ground. I would caution Nenshi from alienating what is simply one of the best ownership groups in North America. You want to play hardball? Fine but please don't be an a-hole to these guys as they will be here when Nenshi is in Toronto or Ottawa and nothing more than a memory for Calgarians.

What on earth? They don't do it to make a lot of money?

Do you consider $231MM in 3 years a lot of money?

I do... are you going to go talk about "better investments" now? Guess so but they probably have a few professional investment advisers and pro-sports is part of the money making portfolio, not filed under charitable donations on their excel spreadsheets. Otherwise, what gives with the 10 years in a row of increasing prices on tickets? Why does the food cost so much?

I do want the city to play hardball and I don't really care if we use the Saddledome ongoing. If the reason a free agent doesn't sign here is because he doesn't like that his shower doesn't have the latest in bathroom technology, he may not be the type of free agent we really want anyway.

Could not agree more that the city needs the money for different projects like the CTrain or infrastructure, new rinks or facilities, etc. If the city didn't need more money they wouldn't be going ape raising our taxes over the next few years, or charging more for utilities.

Who gives a #### about 4-5 concerts that don't come around? Seriously.

And again I go back to why do we need the insanely expensive building? Will a 400-500MM arena not suffice? If the city is asked to chip in, I'd ask for a bit more leverage on architectural design. Maybe Edwards is confusing the oilpatch mentality where when I shoot you an AFE you're either in/out on my project... how about if you're sending the city a bill for a something around a $1B arena, maybe see what the financial appetite is first before unloading the grand master plan and then wondering why the city won't cough up the dough.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

And again I go back to why do we need the insanely expensive building? Will a 400-500MM arena not suffice? If the city is asked to chip in, I'd ask for a bit more leverage on architectural design. Maybe Edwards is confusing the oilpatch mentality where when I shoot you an AFE you're either in/out on my project... how about if you're sending the city a bill for a trillion dollar willy wonka arena, maybe see what the financial appetite is first before unloading the grand master plan and then wondering why the city won't cough up the dough.

You should probably just chill out until the Flames actually ask for something. The hyperbole is a bit out of control.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

You should probably just chill out until the Flames actually ask for something. The hyperbole is a bit out of control.

Point still stands though no?

And the Flames did send a letter asking for assistance, or did you miss the letter and the entire point of the discussion?

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

how would the flood have set things back?

That's an argument I've never understood.

The flames are teasing the idea of building a multi-sport facility that could run close to a billion dollars. Surely the cleanup cost would have been A) Insured and B) an amount not approaching a billion dollar sum.

I don't see what bearing the flood has at all on the proposal for new construction that apparently has been planned since before the flooding. Maybe the flood forced some adjustments to the design, but again, it's almost 2015.

It's not too hard to understand. They had 2 months to get their facility up and running for the NHL season after being completely destroyed. I don't think insurance is going to write a blank cheque to get things going again in that time frame. But either way, 100% of the organization focus was turned to getting the venue operational. I can see why a delay would occur and the flood was only last year.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Point still stands though no?

And the Flames did send a letter asking for assistance, or did you miss the letter and the entire point of the discussion?

Nope, you veered off a cliff with the bill for a something around a trillion dollar rink bit.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

Nope, you veered off a cliff with the bill for a trillion dollar rink bit.

Oh! I am really sorry. I will edit my post for clarity...

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Rhettzky

It's not too hard to understand. They had 2 months to get their facility up and running for the NHL season after being completely destroyed. I don't think insurance is going to write a blank cheque to get things going again in that time frame.

If potential lost revenues were also insured, insurance might've had incentive to help expedite things.

[Rhettzky]

Originally Posted by SebC

If potential lost revenues were also insured, insurance might've had incentive to help expedite things.

Yeah for sure, I have no idea though. But the point is a major natural disaster occurred last year and I could see it causing a year delay in this project announcement as the organizational focus would be elsewhere.

[Miniac]

nvm.

[stampsx2]

Anybody know what Nenshi means by there being a large amount of environmental contamination in the west village? What kind of clean up are they looking at?