[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[Regular_John]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

One big issue that the current proposal does not seem to handle is parking.

Renderings don't show a lot of parking space.

https://twitter.com/jaydorn/status/633703296956502016

/trolling

[CroFlames]

I hope the public who backlashes at the pricetag are happy to see Canada's 3rd or 4th biggest city be consistently stepped over for major events, including World Cups, Olympics, Concerts and other major events.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

I'm fortunate enough to come from a wealthy family. I go to dozens of Saddledome events every year. I just don't think it fair to make other people subsidize my entertainment.

I wouldn't feel too bad. You are subsidizing a lot of things around the city that are of no benefit to you.

[topfiverecords]

Geez guys, don't you think we all essentially paid for most of the Saddledome and McMahon in one way or another?

CS&E is putting up $450 million. Are you surprised that $250M they're going to reclaim by a ticket tax? The other $200M, the owners are obviously going to want a return on through general profits which we all pay for in tickets, concessions, merchandise, concert tickets, Grey Cup profits, etc etc.

The $200M from the City for the field house & communty rink is possibly fair, but it's the $240M CRL that I'd have the most issue with. This complex isn't giving anything to the West Village community that suggests they deserve to take $240M out of that fund. I'm not sure what the East Village CRL amount was for all of the public infrastructure but I doubt that area would have been as successful with $240M chopped off the top.

There better be operating funds going back to the City, such as the teams paying rent.

[firebug]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

$200 million direct from the city
$250 million ticket levy (the pretty word they use for tax)
$240 community revitilization levy (again, tax)

And that doesn't include infrastructure upgrades that will clearly be needed or the site cleanup.

Lets be real here and define tax as something somebody who never attends the facility would be on-the-hook for.

Ticket Levy: No, only those who voluntarily attend will pay this.
CRL - No, Only those who voluntarily own property in the area will pay this

Site clean-up: Yes, but ultimately I'm liable for this already. This shouldn't be factored into the NEXT project (a sunk cost). If anything, as this property is not earning any property taxes, the sooner the site is remediated and generating taxes the better off I am.
Fieldhouse: Yes, but I'm liable for this cost either way as the city will be contributing this amount regardless of the NEXT project.

So how, as a taxpayer am I worse off with this project?

[shermanator]

Does anyone have one of these?

[Royle9]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

You don't need to be wealthy to use and enjoy the bridge. Based on current ticket price trends, the cheapest seats at this new venue will probably be around $50 a ticket.

I think its a huge slap in the face to people who can't afford to go to arena events as is to make them pay for a new one.

If the Flames cannot make the project work with their own money / ticket taxes, it should not proceed. Simple as that.

The hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are better spent on things everyone in the community can enjoy. Libraries, parks, schools, transportation infrastructure, etc...

I'm fortunate enough to come from a wealthy family. I go to dozens of Saddledome events every year. I just don't think it fair to make other people subsidize my entertainment.

Valid point, but unfortunately if people cant afford to go then you don't go. It's that way currently at the prices we see and its going to be that way forever, sadly that's how the world works. Even the price of groceries goes up every year, its going to happen whether we want it to or not.

On the same note, there's people who would rather a complex/sports facility like this as appose to library's, swimming pools etc does that mean I should get upset every time the city opens a new one because I don't use it = waste of money? Its personal preference when it comes to what one want's to enjoy, either way the money is going to be spent. The increase in taxes on a personal level will hardly be noticeable to most, which again will happen for something anyway.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by HotHotHeat

So Flames ownership is willing to put up $200 million.

The organization is valued at $451 million, with the current arena accounting for $150 million of that. With a new building in place, seems reasonable the value of the team would jump by $100-150 making the Flames worth north of $600 million.

The benchmark for profiting off an 'event centre' is the Staples Centre, which pulls in $345 million annually. Even in the Flames pull in a third of that, their portion of the cost is recovered in well under 10 years.

Yea, I don't think so, Murray.

Revenue =/= profit

[Regular_John]

Did anybody catch what the take away on the future of the saddledome was?

I've always assumed it was to be demolished, but I saw a pick on twitter along the lines of "repurposed saddledome plans" and didn't catch what the details were.

[mesaywee]

Originally Posted by 1991 Canadian

You don't need to be wealthy to use and enjoy the bridge. Based on current ticket price trends, the cheapest seats at this new venue will probably be around $50 a ticket.

I think its a huge slap in the face to people who can't afford to go to arena events as is to make them pay for a new one.

If the Flames cannot make the project work with their own money / ticket taxes, it should not proceed. Simple as that.

The hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are better spent on things everyone in the community can enjoy. Libraries, parks, schools, transportation infrastructure, etc...

I'm fortunate enough to come from a wealthy family. I go to dozens of Saddledome events every year. I just don't think it fair to make other people subsidize my entertainment.

Paying an extra 10-20 bucks on a ticket to enjoy a new arena makes tons of sense. If you can't afford $50 dollars for a ticket to a flames game (I'm a student, I can't) You probably can't afford $40 to go to a flames game. Viewing a hockey game isn't a right.

What they're building will also be usable by the public. This city would benefit from a multi-sports complex.

It's also making a decrepit bus depot and a car dealership on polluted land into a world class facility and entertainment district.

[GullFoss]

I think the amount the flames are willing to pony up reflects the fact that the value of 100 new luxury boxes at $200k per year isn't that large.

Its is worth $15m per year after tax. Assuming a corporate discount rate of 7.5%, its worth about $200m. IE...we can't justify a new dome from an economic standpoint.

[dino7c]

everyone will complain

then they will drive to edmonton to see a concert, spend money on a hotel in that city, food restaurants ect. and drive home

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by firebug

Lets be real here and define tax as something somebody who never attends the facility would be on-the-hook for.

Ticket Levy: No, only those who voluntarily attend will pay this.
CRL - No, Only those who voluntarily own property in the area will pay this

In fairness, those are still taxes, even if they are targeted at users of the facilities/areas rather than the general public.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I hope the public who backlashes at the pricetag are happy to see Canada's 3rd or 4th biggest city be consistently stepped over for major events, including World Cups, Olympics, Concerts and other major events.

Highly likely the same people that lash out are not interested in major events coming to the city.

[troutman]

[Fire]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

One big issue that the current proposal does not seem to handle is parking.

Renderings don't show a lot of parking space.

Yeah, only 2500 spots according to that one picture. I guess it will be Calgary Transit for most patrons.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by jaydorn

Did anybody catch what the take away on the future of the saddledome was?

I've always assumed it was to be demolished, but I saw a pick on twitter along the lines of "repurposed saddledome plans" and didn't catch what the details were.

I would imagine that is just a proposal. Ultimately, the Dome is owned by the City, so what happens to it in the end will be the City's decision.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

In fairness, those are still taxes, even if they are targeted at users of the facilities/areas rather than the general public.

Do you mean "user fees", because that's what those are.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

$200 million direct from the city
$250 million ticket levy (the pretty word they use for tax)
$240 community revitilization levy (again, tax)

And that doesn't include infrastructure upgrades that will clearly be needed or the site cleanup.

See Tacopuck's comment.
The "tax" is money that otherwise doesn't exist.

[hockey.modern]

calgarynext.com will be live later today. Should expect better renderings and more detail