[News] Ken King: Flames' owners no longer pursuing new arena with City of Calgary

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by Bunk

What do you understand "to be paid back" means? As I said before - I think that's through tax revenues generated from the district, not from the owners, so that would not be asinine at all - it's how a CRL works.

On the Library vs Arena question, from that post I quoted earlier from Druh Farrell she talks about this exact thing:



http://www.electdruh.ca/a_new_arena

Do people think this is actually an unreasonable stance and perspective?

So the debate were having is between a public building everyone can use for free but few do (I don't believe that 6.2 million figure and even if it is true I'd like to see a breakdown of how they came to it, it sounds questionable) or a private facility which promotes large amounts of community involvement and inclusivity.

Do you ever think that maybe those who can't afford to attend flames games still enjoy watching the team on TV? Maybe they enjoy reading about them in the paper or online? Without a team here, these same people you're championing for will lose it all the same if they leave (I highly doubt they're going anywhere).

If you still aren't convinced of the money pissed away with this library what would you do in this situation then. If you could go back in time and either spend the money on a library or cleaning up the creosote soaked land that's leeching into the bow river? I get if you don't agree that an arena is the best use of money, but to defend another library of all useless places is something I'll never understand.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Cecil Terwilliger

Lol. Are you serious right now? It has probably tripled in value in the previous 25 years but a one year 6% decrease somehow proves it's a bad investment.

Given the risk and amount of the original investment...it's not that good either. Rule of 72 would suggest an annual return of about 4.5% to triple initial investment in that timeframe.

Not a junk bond by any stretch, but that's a low rate of return.

Both sides have a point. It's not a venture that the Flames cannot afford to finance on their own. It's also a venture that the city of Calgary should avoid buying into.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Not taken aback, ready to lay down their hammer. This is like Christmas frickin' Day for him (ok, Maybe not Christmas, but you know).

Among the best things that could have happened following his District Plan announcement last week, this is probably beyond his wildest hopes. Mr. Popular, Gary Bettman even weighed in. It enables him to say what he really wants to say, which is the deal they are prepared to offer.

If I were him - or the City representative, this is what I'd do and say:

- I'd have a huge press conference tomorrow morning:
- I'd lay out the deal they were prepared to offer - hmmmm, I bet it's something like 1/3 public contribution through land and CRL, 1/3 ticket tax, 1/3 direct owner's contrtibution. That's the obvious sweet spot for a fair deal.
- I'd talk about how this is a fair proportion between, private, public and users themselves
- I'd talk about how the Edmonton Arena deal can't work here, Edmonton's downtown called for desperate measures and they had office tenants at the time that could make the debt deal work. Here, there is no such tenant: 30% vacancy
-I'd talk about the Seattle privately financed deal, and that this deal is far more generous from the public.
- I'd talk about how this is a predictiable tactic and welcome the Flames back to the table at any time to participate in the grand plans for Victoria Park

And that's not going to go well for the Flames, I predict.

I can't wait for you to be right again.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

Given the risk and amount of the original investment...it's not that good either. Rule of 72 would suggest an annual return of about 4.5% to triple initial investment in that timeframe.

Yep and you get to, you know, own a pro sports team. No point in making it out to be a bad investment. It's just fine with great intangible benefits.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Yep and you get to, you know, own a pro sports team. No point in making it out to be a bad investment. It's just fine with great intangible benefits.

So it's a below average investment with some pride and legacy attached.

That's fine but at the end of the day all of the owners would be wealthier men if they simply walked away and cut ties.

Playing chicken with people in that position probably isn't going to end well.

[FBI]

I'm not sure I've ever seen getbak swear on here before.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Its certainly busier on Flames game nights

Tuesday in January Vs. Tuesday in January with a Flames game there is a large bump

Depends what you're talking about. In a pub? Of course. In a fine dining restaurant? Nope, not really. I guess we should have been talking specifics instead of generalizations. There's certain businesses on 17th that actually see less business on Flames games nights and are busier when they aren't playing. There's certain crowds that populate certain restaurants that aren't big hockey fan crowds. There's lots of industry people that will drink on 17th regardless. Is the Ship dead on a Tuesday with no hockey in the winter? Hell no, it's punk rock bingo night. If we want to talk sports pubs that actually have TV screens well of course those are going to be affected by televised and local sports events, sports fans comprise a huge portion of their customer base. I've worked in restaurants that were near the dome and saw little to no increase in traffic on Flames nights. Pretty hard to generalize. Not every Calgarian is a Flames fan. Lots of Calgarians will still go out to eat and drink in the winter.

Saying 17th Ave will be dead without the Flames is a broad generalization and is definitely hyperbole. It's one of the busiest parts of the city for eating and drinking. Hockey fans are not the only people in the city who go out to eat and drink.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Corral

When its time to show your cards, the Flames will lose.

Nenshi and other councillors who side with him score points with at least 90% of Calgary citizens by taking a hard line against spending their money on hockey players and their owners. I'm assuming 100,000 people really care enough about the Flames in this city to worry about a threat that the team is sold and moved. And that is generous. And corporate Calgary has probably figured out that if the City pays for a substantial portion of the rink ... it is going to repaid to the City in the form of higher business tax or special commercial property tax levies. So I think the overwhelming majority of residents and taxpayers in this City support the position no municipal funding towards this.

Why can't the Flames find a corporate sponsor to fund the majority of this anyways in exchange for naming rights? Hmmm ... like the CNRL Centre.

Well Scotiabank just stupidly gave MLSE $800 million to put their name on an arena. They could have just built their own arena and have had $350 million left over.

So essentially, Scotiabank please build us an arena for $450 million and we'll let you call it Scotiabank Centre for free for the life cycle of the property (say 40 years). Plus we'll give you the opportunity to earn profit from events in the arena over the 40 years. I'm no accountant but in the end it might work out to 40 years of naming rights for roughly $0/year.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

Depends what you're talking about. In a pub? Of course. In a fine dining restaurant? Nope, not really. I guess we should have been talking specifics instead of generalizations. There's certain businesses on 17th that actually see less business on Flames games nights and are busier when they aren't playing. There's certain crowds that populate certain restaurants that aren't big hockey fan crowds. There's lots of industry people that will drink on 17th regardless. Is the Ship dead on a Tuesday with no hockey in the winter? Hell no, it's punk rock bingo night. If we want to talk pubs that actually have TV screens well of course those are going to be affected by televised and local sports events, sports fans comprise a huge portion of their customer base. I've worked in restaurants that were near the dome and saw little to no increase in traffic on Flames nights. Pretty hard to generalize. Not every Calgarian is a Flame fan. Lots of Calgarians will still go out to eat and drink in the winter.

Saying 17th Ave will be dead without the Flames is a broad generalization and is definitely hyperbole. It's one of the busiest parts of the city for eating and drinking. Hockey fans are not the only people in the city who go out to eat and drink.

Well I certainly never said it would be dead...I said its busier, it is

playoffs you can times that by 10

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by DJones

So it's a below average investment with some pride and legacy attached.

That's fine but at the end of the day all of the owners would be wealthier men if they simply walked away and cut ties.

Playing chicken with people in that position probably isn't going to end well.

There should be a choice between playing chicken and bending over.

[zamler]

Done reading every page and I've realized something shocking. I don't have a library card anymore.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Well I certainly never said it would be dead...I said its busier, it is

playoffs you can times that by 10

Well my original comment was directed at this silly comment

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

17th Avenue and Stephen Avenue would be ghosts towns without the Flames.

That comment is clearly false IMO. Saying the busiest restaurant/bar/pub section of the city would be dead without the Flames is ridiculous. The comment assumes that only Flames fans go out and they only go out when the Flames are playing. Two assumptions that are clearly false.

Obviously 17th ave as a whole is busier in the playoffs. That cannot be questioned.

I've worked in many places where the Stampede was a much bigger difference maker in driving sales and revenues than Flames games.

The last restaurant I worked in the owners actually wanted the Flames out of the playoffs as soon as possible. The only additional business it would bring would be post-game drunken idiots who'd have to be turned away at the door or kicked out because they were too drunk to be in a real restaurant. Every restaurant has different clientele and AlpineOracle's comment showed a real lack of understanding of the different types of restaurants/bars/pubs and the different clientele that visit 17th ave regularly.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by DJones

So it's a below average investment with some pride and legacy attached.

That's fine but at the end of the day all of the owners would be wealthier men if they simply walked away and cut ties.

Playing chicken with people in that position probably isn't going to end well.

Don't bother with these guys they see the owners have made millions and think wow that is so good! they should be happy those greedy bastards

Obviously no understanding of the market and what it has done in the last 40 years

I don't think the city should pay the full tab either...just getting annoyed with all the pilling on

These guys lost money for a decade as I enjoyed games on TV for free

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Matty81

New owners might be the best thing in the long run. Nenshi will be gone in 5-10 years. Flames are bigger than any of them. Wonder if Garrett Camp is a flames fan?

No local ownership is going to step forward and purchase the team without the prospect of a partially funded arena at least, unless an owner steps forward with the idea of moving the team.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Why is it we want new owners? Ours spend to the cap in a smaller NHL market while giving a lot back to the community. I think we are pretty lucky to have The owners we have.

No new investors will purchase the team without a new arena, and any local group would have far shallower pockets than our current group and we could enjoy spending 20 million less a year on players and get to be he new Coyotes of the NHL.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

There should be a choice between playing chicken and bending over.

The reality is that this isn't about bending over. It's about how bad a city wants to keep its team. People talk about the bad deal in Edmonton but I don't see any indication of the hardships going on right now up there because they put money into an arena. In fact things have never been more positive up there in regards to downtown development and vibe. The bottom line is that if the mayor and this city want to to pound on their chests and say; "See we showed them. We stuck it to those billionaires and didn't cave in. We are a smart progressive city." then they also have to live with the indignity of being the largest Canadian city without an NHL franchise.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by SmoggyFlamesFan

This is all bull####. Can we just freaking make a deal already? I could care less about this city if the flames aren't in it. This is honestly upsetting, and the fact that alot of people could care less if they leave or not makes my blood boil. KK is as much to blame for this as Nenshi. I get that we don't want to bend over backwards with public funding, but what else does it go towards? A space bridge? A half a million dollar stick and stone art exhibit? A giant statue of a head in front of the bow building? I'd much rather spend public money on an arena (even if not a large sum) than on all that useless crap. For that vote alone I will not be voting Nenshi back in.

If it makes you feel better the giant head was privately funded by the developer of the Bow. It's also the coolest of the group...

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I don't believe that. I had a library card about 20 years ago, I never cancelled it, are they still counting me?
Makes me wonder about the other stats.

Are you personally >33% of Calgary's population? Put down the fork!

[robaur]

This is the argument that I am puzzled over. I'm obviously not as wealthy as the owners are but still relatively well off.

If someone with a net worth of $5 million has no issue spending $250K on a new Ferrari, a depreciating asset that will one day be worth $0.....then why would Flames ownership who have probably a combined net worth over $5 billion have an issue spending $250m on a new stadium.... it's pocket change to them.

The ratio of 5% is the same...I just don't get it. If I was worth $5 billion and hockey was truly my hobby, I would just spend the money without a care and build a new stadium.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The reality is that this isn't about bending over. It's about how bad a city wants to keep its team. People talk about the bad deal in Edmonton but I don't see any indication of the hardships going on right now up there because they put money into an arena. In fact things have never been more positive up there in regards to downtown development and vibe. The bottom line is that if the mayor and this city want to to pound on their chests and say; "See we showed them. We stuck it to those billionaires and didn't cave in. We are a smart progressive city." then they also have to live with the indignity of being the largest Canadian city without an NHL franchise.

I hate Edmonton and thinks it's a pretty crappy city. That said, I was up
There for both GNR and Metallica and stayed across from that new ice district and downtown was light and day different from when I was there 3-4 years ago. For once in my life, I was actually jealous of Edmonton. The amount of new pubs and restaurants around that area and the revitalization of th existing ones kind of Blew me away.