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

[peterh]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Is the Tsuu T'ina band likely to even contribute the 200 million dollars that the City has offered so far? Let alone even more? And donate the land and build the infrastructure required? If so, more power to them I guess. Doesn't seem remotely plausible to me.

Once the province doesn't complete the ring road in time and the band gets the road and land back, sure they can just hand over some previously owned provincial land to Ken King for free and fund it with a toll on the road.

[Flash Walken]

You know you've reached the bottom if the barrel when calgarians start postulating on the potential for a working relationship with the local Indian band.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This is so stupid.

Sportsnet has the rights to broadcast all 82 flames games. If you think a loss of 36 national broadcasts would not at least jeopardize the deal as it currently exists I don't know what to tell you.

Even without a provision in the contract, my company would fight tooth and nail to recover a 15% reduction in accessible revenue, including litigation. For the NHL, even the prospect of losing the terms of that deal as they currently exists would have a negative impact on league wide revenue. Losing it entirely and having teams negotiate regional tv deals would be a huge, huge step back for the league.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'm not sure you're right either. I know national broadcast rights for sports down here are negotiated on the whole sport and national market, not on the existence of certain markets. So if the Los Angeles Rams leave for St. Louis, or dissolve all together, the contract doesn't change or get re-opened. Just like if a team is added through expansion, the deal is not re-opened or renegotiated. So unless there was a clause in the contract that would allow Rogers to re-open, they have to deal with the changes in the landscape. I could see getting something on the regional contract, but the national contract is what it is.

[Ice_Weasel]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Because it goes into the pockets of business owners, not into the city's public funds. It's great that it benefits local businesses, but it would be at a cost to the city as a whole as the city would still be short money for public services.

"pockets of business owners" - and just who do you think own the businesses along 17th avenue? (hint: Calgarians...who live here, and pay taxes here).

There is not some magical pool of capital that the City draws from to pay for public services. The city needs a tax base, or the pool runs dry. How do you maintain a tax base? You invest in it. Build things that promote business, not turn it away. Invest and create a city that is pro-business and incents mid-high income earners to want to live here. Like it or not, this is what creates money for public services...the money does not create itself.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This is so stupid.

Sportsnet has the rights to broadcast all 82 flames games. If you think a loss of 36 national broadcasts would not at least jeopardize the deal as it currently exists I don't know what to tell you.

Even without a provision in the contract, my company would fight tooth and nail to recover a 15% reduction in accessible revenue, including litigation. For the NHL, even the prospect of losing the terms of that deal as they currently exists would have a negative impact on league wide revenue. Losing it entirely and having teams negotiate regional tv deals would be a huge, huge step back for the league.

IIRC the national deal and the local deal to show any particular team are entirely seperate things.

IE the local deal is with the team, the national deal is with the league.

[JFK]

I think even Sean Chu would laugh at Ken King if he mentioned building on Tsuu T'ina land.

Might be the worst and least thought out idea in any of these threads.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by morgin

But it was a scaled down show because of the roof, so people chose to spend proportionally less on dinner and drinks to account for the fact it wasnt as good as the Edmonton setup.

It wasn't scaled down it was the same stage. But had a 4 pillar frame to hang stuff from.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by JFK

I think even Sean Chu would laugh at Ken King if he mentioned building on Tsuu T'ina land.

Might be the worst and least thought out idea in any of these threads.

Okay, why would that be? Dazzle us with your brilliance bro.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by peterh

Once the province doesn't complete the ring road in time and the band gets the road and land back, sure they can just hand over some previously owned provincial land to Ken King for free and fund it with a toll on the road.

Even accepting your premise (which I don't), that will be a hell of a toll to recover 300 million plus borrowing costs over the life of this arena. Not sure the Flames will like the effect on attendance caused by an arena accessible only be 60 dollar toll road.

But as I said, if it works for the parties involved, more power to them. No reason for the City to enter an agreement that does not work for it.

[morgin]

Originally Posted by GGG

It wasn't scaled down it was the same stage. But had a 4 pillar frame to hang stuff from.

Post-fact world man. It's out there now that it was scaled down. Can't hold me accountable for that, I just say things.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by transplant99

IIRC the national deal and the local deal to show any particular team are entirely seperate things.

IE the local deal is with the team, the national deal is with the league.

Sportsnet will be broadcasting 36 national flames games this season.

[JFK]

Originally Posted by New Era

Okay, why would that be? Dazzle us with your brilliance bro.

First of all it's hilariously impractical and considering we know the Flames want to be downtown/central it would be the worst bluff in recorded history.

Beyond that look at the history of the cities SW ring road and the Tsuu T'ina land. Have fun negotiating that deal over the next 60 years.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Not sure what your point is. I fully agree with the writer of the article.

I don't have a problem with a limited City contribution, but if Murray Edwards (who according to news reports is no longer either resident in Calgary or Canada so no longer pays taxes to either) wants to waggle his butt somewhere he is certainly able to do so himself, without use of MY money. Like the movie: build it and they will come - and if they don't - well, too bad it was a crappy investment.

Love the Flames. Beginning to really dislike the ownership, their arrogance and their threats to move. This is, if I'm correct, the THIRD time they have threatened us (even if KK says there is no threat, having Bettman there WAS a threat).

It's an article related to the arena issue, which is relevant here.

I am just surprised that the hockeynews wrote (or published) an article critical of the NHL over this issue.

It's not hard to look at our own local sports personalities and see that their bias is showing. Their jobs are tied to the Flames. So when a mainstream sports site/paper/etc. writes an article like this, it is surprising.

[Bigtime]

On twitter now from journalist Carrie Tait but not confirmed:

"Flames proposal: No rent, no property tax, no profit sharing, money from the city w/o it paying it back - municipal source."

https://twitter.com/CarrieTait/status/908371279891320832

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by New Era

Okay, why would that be? Dazzle us with your brilliance bro.

The urban logistics of putting an arena that far out of the city center in and of itself make it an awful idea. The build-in-the-middle-of-nowhere-and-have-everyone-drive-in approach to arena construction is dead and gone whether you like it or not. Ask the Senators how well playing way the hell out in Kanata has been working out for them, I think they've just had to rip out a couple thousand seats to keep their attendance percentage looking respectable.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Sportsnet will be broadcasting 36 national flames games this season.

Is that relevant? This is Sportsnet's choice is it not? They could also elect to show other games on those nights? They have the national broadcast rights, so they could choose to show another game from another team on those nights instead could they not?

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by JFK

How much? What's the dollar figure? What are these people spending on restaurants and hotels?

Figures not anecdotes. What's the economic impact of a major concert in a major city.

It's not just solely about things you can measure easily. As some others have mentioned in this thread having an NHL team in Canada and being able to attract big name concerts affects a cities reputation in ways that cannot be easily quantified.

The reputation of a city can influence the decision to move here, live here and stay here. People looking to locate to a vibrant big city from smaller towns or cities in Canada may be influenced by the city's reputation. If I'm a hockey fan and/or a music fan the presence of the Flames and ability to attract concerts may play into my decision to move here vs Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal. It can affect the decision of immigrants, people looking to relocate within Canada, students looking to go to University in a large city. How can we quantify this? We really can't easily but that doesn't mean the city's reputation in these areas is irrelevant.

If Calgary wants to be seen as a competitor to the large cities in Canada I think both having an NHL team and having the ability to attract concerts are important. How important? Hard to say. I know for me if the Flames left and we didn't replace the Saddledome and thus couldn't attract concerts I would be less likely to stay here long term. I'm a big Flames fan and music fan and then identity of the city would take a large hit in my mind if the Flames left and the Saddledome was not replaced. I know it's not the same for everyone.

I think some people are ignoring or downplaying the city's reputation if they think a new arena isn't important. Note that this doesn't mean I want billionaire handouts. But some people seem to think the Flames bring nothing and a new arena is irrelevant and I think that's a very shortsighted and narrow view.

On a global scale now that the Olympics are an ancient memory the only reason most people have heard of Calgary is the Flames and/or the Stampede.

[Firebot]

Originally Posted by JFK

Think so? Doubtful.
Calgary is one of it's most consistent, loyal and reliable fan bases. They know the money this franchise brings in and they can count on it. Leave the successful team alone and get over the arena hurdle.

The board of governors aren't going to ignore the 500 million dollar expansion fee Seattle would have to pay because Calgary can't get it's arena done in a timely manor. It's ludicrous to think otherwise. Sorry, but it really is.

People need to get off their high horse. Calgary is a decent market, but a small market nevertheless.

https://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/

Calgary ranks #16 out of all NHL teams. Middle of the pack. Right next to Anaheim and Minnesota for crying out loud. It's also middle of the pack in revenue.

#16 Calgary Flames $410 M -6% 7% $121 M $18 M

Calgary Flames are movable, period, especially without an arena with shiny boxes. Calgary Flames have no marketability past Alberta, it's a local market. You can also bet that should the Flames move, the NHL will believe that a good portion of fans will ultimately still watch and buy jerseys, similar to how fans Winnipeg and Quebec didn't stop simply watching hockey.

If an NFL team can move out of LA one of the biggest markets in the world, an NHL team can move out of Calgary.

Calgary needs a proper arena, and the Flames ownership purchasing it on its own makes absolutely no business sense for the owners while putting itself i debt for higher than the team's value, when the city will get great value from it being built. Calgary just built a library at 245 million, and that isn't going to be generating value to the city like a new arena would. Arenas and stadiums to me are a large part of the city's identity, and right now we have a 35 year old saddle arena and a run down 60 year old football stadium. But look, we have a nice 25 million$ bridge that caters to Bronconnier and friends, a cool 245 million$ library, and some sticks on rocks.

This is embarrassing. Calgary is being mocked by Edmonton of all places now because city council wants a free arena, while at the same time they want the Olympics back here.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by dammage79

Im sure what supercedes Kerr having a job is the amount of Charity work he gets to do with the Flames as well, he does some really good charities.

Keep in mind in the unlikely event that the Flames do leave, a lot those charities that keep rinks open and equip kids will evaporate.

If you remove some vitriol from this whole thing, a whole lot of people are going to lose out more than just some fans.

Not entirely - most of those charities are supported by the community, they just happen to use the Flames or Flames personalities as the face.

Just because the Flames leave, doesn't mean minor hockey and the other various causes taken up by Flames related charities disappear.

If anything, the City can take some of the 200 million and spray a few more rinks around the city.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir

The urban logistics of putting an arena that far out of the city center in and of itself make it an awful idea. The build-in-the-middle-of-nowhere-and-have-everyone-drive-in approach to arena construction is dead and gone whether you like it or not. Ask the Senators how well playing way the hell out in Kanata has been working out for them, I think they've just had to rip out a couple thousand seats to keep their attendance percentage looking respectable.

That is the least of the problems with this idea. Why is the band going to give 300 million dollars to the Flames?