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

[saillias]

Dear god please make Nenshi pick up the proposal from his desk and ****ing show it to council already so we can stop with the endless hypotheticals.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

I highly doubt Flames ticket prices going up are going to offset the revenues from their Oil businesses. Net, net, they have to be losing revenues right now.

They are losing a lot of value on their investments, same as every other energy investor. Flames tickets going up 3% is not even remotely material for the business. It's keeping up with inflation.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by heep223

They are losing a lot of value on their investments, same as every other energy investor. Flames tickets going up 3% is not even remotely material for the business. It's keeping up with inflation.

That's not the point. The point is that this project is just as viable as it was before.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That's not the point. The point is that this project is just as viable as it was before.

This is true IMO. And if they can afford to be investing in this down turn, the ROI on this project should go up if they start it now, as the return will remain the same, but the cost will go down.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

That's not the point. The point is that this project is just as viable as it was before.

Agreed. I was initially responding to the comment from a poster, that the savings in build cost that comes from being in a recession makes up for the financial loss for ownership from said recession.

[Calgary4LIfe]

I thought the Nenshi quote about not being worried of the Flames moving was probably an answer to a question he was asked. I don't see why he would just offer up that statement without being asked. I don't think the ownership group will be playing that card. Like Nenshi said, the ownership group is committed to Calgary. Katz wasn't. Katz doesn't lose sleep over how Edmonton perceives him. I am sure Calgary's ownership group does care as they have lots of ties to this city.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Cleveland Steam Whistle

This is true IMO. And if they can afford to be investing in this down turn, the ROI on this project should go up if they start it now, as the return will remain the same, but the cost will go down.

That assumes they'll be able to sell all the extra luxury boxes they stuff in, which doesn't seem like a foregone conclusion in this oil price environment to me, but I could be off base.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

That assumes they'll be able to sell all the extra luxury boxes they stuff in, which doesn't seem like a foregone conclusion in this oil price environment to me, but I could be off base.

You are correct, but all of what I said assumes that current economic environment will eventually return to a more normal state, where worries about selling the luxury boxes etc.... will not be an issue. Those don't need to be sold until the project is finished, assuming the ownership group can afford to invest in the down turn, which is the point. Given all the positives of this build are in the future, taking advantage of lower costs in the present where all the costs for this project are consumed means bigger ROI overall.

But to your point, if this is a permenant down turn in the economy and the Oil industry, then yes, there is no benefit. Although there is nothing at the moment to suggest we should fear that as a reality.

[J pold]

Originally Posted by Locke

Why? While its true that a poorer economy typically lowers construction costs the owners are all Oil men. Their finances would be strained by lower oil prices.

I work in commercial real estate and I can tell you that low oil prices has had an immediate and swift impact on our business. Right now any decision making, even from fundamentally stable companies, has ground to a complete halt.

[Enoch Root]

Again...

Five to seven year build-out, and a 30 year life.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by J pold

I work in commercial real estate and I can tell you that low oil prices has had an immediate and swift impact on our business. Right now any decision making, even from fundamentally stable companies, has ground to a complete halt.

Yeah, and I'm not surprised one bit. I've found commercial real estate in Calgary to be obscenely expensive and the cost/value of that real estate isnt dropping at the same rate as people's/businesses' incomes or anything else.

Heres an idea:

Instead of asking Nenshi and the City for money the Flames should go to the City of Edmonton's council and ask them for money. They seem to enjoy writing cheques for money that will never be paid back. Its like a borderline fetish for them.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Again...

Five to seven year build-out, and a 30 year life.

I dont know, I think if you're building something as massive as what I believe they're imagining you're going to want to extend that lifetime somewhat.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont know, I think if you're building something as massive as what I believe they're imagining you're going to want to extend that lifetime somewhat.

Why do we put any lifetime on a building? Shouldn't we want it to be a permanent fixture like MSG?

European castles have been standing for centuries, but we can't make a 1/2 billion dollar stadium last for more than 30 years?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Locke

I dont know, I think if you're building something as massive as what I believe they're imagining you're going to want to extend that lifetime somewhat.

Longer only strengthens my point.

Adding more years onto 30 wouldn't materially change the NPV though.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Why do we put any lifetime on a building? Shouldn't we want it to be a permanent fixture like MSG?

European castles have been standing for centuries, but we can't make a 1/2 billion dollar stadium last for more than 30 years?

Sure, but it makes no difference even if we did that. MSG recently went a massive update (I went on the tour this summer, cool building) that basically costs what a new rink would, so it's not like they made it and haven't done anything to it.

The only reason they don't do new in a city like New York and that facility is the history of keeping it the same, and the fact that there is no where better or equally as good to build a new rink, might as well keep the old location. So when you do that, you refurbish as to minimize the down time and keep your ability to host events. But cost wise and building lifetime length hasn't actually been extended with projects like MSG, you still have to "re-do it" every 30 years or so.

[Mattman]

If it can withstand the 30 consecutive Stanley Cup championships starting when it opens, then I'd say its a pretty good building.

[RM14]

Even MSG's future is up in the air. It only has a 10 year lease and Penn station might get a complete overhaul which would include destroying MSG.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by RM14

Even MSG's future is up in the air. It only has a 10 year lease and Penn station might get a complete overhaul which would include destroying MSG.

Even so, its over 50 years old, in 10 years it'll be 60, thats double the life-expectancy of an arena. You cant complain about that!

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by RM14

Even MSG's future is up in the air. It only has a 10 year lease and Penn station might get a complete overhaul which would include destroying MSG.

Is there an article on this? Not that I don't believe you but good lord, that was a $1 billion renovation that made it one of the most state of the art arenas out there. It's unfathomable to me that this may be the case, but it is New York, I guess.

[nik-]

Considering what they destroyed to build MSG, anything could happen.