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

[Barnes]

On the off chance that Ken King himself or a representative of CSEC is reading this thread and that offer is truly believed to be fair by CSEC, I offer only one comment for future consideration...

When designing the Seattle uniform, Section 8(j) of the United States Flag code prohibits the use of the American flag on athletic uniforms.

In Canada it is merely tacky and gauche.

[CorbeauNoir]

Originally Posted by Barnes

On the off chance that Ken King himself or a representative of CSEC is reading this thread and that offer is truly believed to be fair by CSEC, I offer only one comment for future consideration...

When designing the Seattle uniform, Section 8(j) of the United States Flag code prohibits the use of the American flag on athletic uniforms.

In Canada it is merely tacky and gauche.

I know you're being tongue-in-cheek but is that a recent prohibition? MLS uniforms used to have the US flag on them until a couple of years ago.

[Wormius]

I love how the thread has turned from hoping that King's threat was a bluff to designing their new jerseys.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir

I know you're being tongue-in-cheek but is that a recent prohibition? MLS uniforms used to have the US flag on them until a couple of years ago.

There are no consequences for breaking any of the flag code rules but it's specifically noted in it's own section re. commercial use. The CPR got a tonne of flack for this one and quickly changed it.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Barnes

When designing the Seattle uniform, Section 8(j) of the United States Flag code prohibits the use of the American flag on athletic uniforms.

Call the flag cops...

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I love how the thread has turned from hoping that King's threat was a bluff to designing their new jerseys.

Ken King please read

[FireGilbert]

Originally Posted by Wormius

I love how the thread has turned from hoping that King's threat was a bluff to designing their new jerseys.

What looks worse on a red jersey, the blue Alberta flag or the green Washington flag?

[MrDJZak]

I want to side with the Flames so badly, but based on everything I've read in the news and here it's really hard to.

What if the Flames ownership really want to leave Calgary for a new city? Could this all be done to make the city look bad so the Flames don't look like the bad guy when/if they pack up and go? Maybe that's just crazy talk. I hope so.

[BACKCHECK!!!]

The fact that the Flames can't even convince a forum of self-selected *Flames fans* to back any of their arena proposals should tell you enough about the merit of those proposals.

[NiklasSundblad]

I wonder if Bettman advised ownership to walk away from the table entirely, or if it ownership's own decision and they called Bettman in because he's so good with the public /s... I ask because this type of tactic has always been Bettman's go-to strategy. He's presided over 3 lockouts, was completely fine with scrapping a whole season, and everyone is already resigned to another one at the conclusion of this CBA. It's his style to not actually negotiate anything.

Sent from my EVA-L09 using Tapatalk

[Senator Clay Davis]

Well with the Flames offer out there now and it being disapproved by some of the stauncher pro-arena folk, it's back into a holding pattern until the election is over. And when Nenshi wins then the fun starts, will the Flames ramp up the rhetoric, or will they come back to the table, tail between their legs, ready to compromise given the public will have effectively spoken. I suppose that all depends how much Nenshi wins by. But it's not really shocking the CSEC bungled something in the process yet again, as I said before even if you support the arena fully it has to be worrying how bad the CSEC has been in just getting something done. Far, far worse than Edmonton's effort.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Well with the purported Flames offer out there now and it being disapproved by some of the stauncher pro-arena folk, it's back into a holding pattern until the election is over. And when Nenshi wins then the fun starts, will the Flames ramp up the rhetoric, or will they come back to the table, tail between their legs, ready to compromise given the public will have effectively spoken. I suppose that all depends how much Nenshi wins by. But it's not really shocking the CSEC bungled something in the process yet again, as I said before even if you support the arena fully it has to be worrying how bad the CSEC has been in just getting something done. Far, far worse than Edmonton's effort.

There is no confirmation their offer is out there. And if this is the Flames offer, how is it far, far worse than Edmonton's?

The Rogers Place deal was finalized as a $483.5M project, with the Katz Group paying $132.5M, and $112.8M of that as rent over 30 years. A ticket tax would recover $125M over time. So Katz got an arena built with $19.8M of up front funding, and 30 years to pay $112.8M, meaning the Oilers are leasing the arena for $3.76M a year.

The Winter Garden / Ford Hall component was added at a cost of $56.8M, with the city paying $25M of it in infrastructure costs. The Katz Group paying for $31.7M of the costs, but $25M of it in rent over 35 years, or $715K a year. The Katz Groups up front money on this component was $6.7M.

So in a $613.7M deal, the Katz Group had to put up $26.5M dollars, with the City of Edmonton covering the rest directly, through loan guarantees, or cost recovery mechanisms.

Yeah, the purported Flames deal of 50% was far, far worse.

I still believe the deal to be worked out is the 1/3 which both sides mentioned around the time the deal broke up. Both sides mentioned it, and Nenshi even discussed some of the sticking points. There was too much smoke here for this not to be the deal both sides were working on.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by New Era

There is no confirmation their offer is out there. And if this is the Flames offer, how is it far, far worse than Edmonton's?

The Rogers Place deal was finalized as a $483.5M project, with the Katz Group paying $132.5M, and $112.8M of that as rent over 30 years. A ticket tax would recover $125M over time. So Katz got an arena built with $19.8M of up front funding, and 30 years to pay $112.8M, meaning the Oilers are leasing the arena for $3.76M a year.

The Winter Garden / Ford Hall component was added at a cost of $56.8M, with the city paying $25M of it in infrastructure costs. The Katz Group paying for $31.7M of the costs, but $25M of it in rent over 35 years, or $715K a year. The Katz Groups up front money on this component was $6.7M.

So in a $613.7M deal, the Katz Group had to put up $26.5M dollars, with the City of Edmonton covering the rest directly, through loan guarantees, or cost recovery mechanisms.

Yeah, the purported Flames deal of 50% was far, far worse.

I still believe the deal to be worked out is the 1/3 which both sides mentioned around the time the deal broke up. Both sides mentioned it, and Nenshi even discussed some of the sticking points. There was too much smoke here for this not to be the deal both sides were working on.

If King and his cronies are actually this delusional into thinking this proposal is "fair", this is the first time I am actually resigning myself to the fact the team will likely leave.

I've talked about how awful this Edmonton deal was and it's surprising that this is being one-upped by CSEC. The city is not going to get them back from the ledge with a 1/3 1/3 1/3 proposal that is still a sweetheart deal like the Edmonton proposal.

Sad to say but don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out guys. It's almost at the point of spite that I don't want a cent going to these rich jerks now. It is clear now that all the years of this team sprouting off about how much they love the community was a complete lie. Fans should actually start boycotting games and leaving the building half empty to send these guys a message.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Barnes

AFAIK CRL money is borrowed and allocated by the City to the CMLC. The CMLC sells the upgraded land to developers and the City repays the loan on the borrowed funds from the new property taxes collected.

An arena anchor helps this immensely. 17th ave connected to 4th st, expanded BMO Centre, an arena, and entertainment venues directly around the arena fills out the area nicely. The eastern portion like the Remington lands, bus barns etc, yah. Not for awhile but, a realization of essentially what was to be the Stampede's Stampede trail vision, only a modern version of it with an arena would be my ideal solution.

In the East Village, CMLC spent $357 million on infrastructure and has attracted $2.7 billion in development.

An arena anchor tenant does not help a CRL zone immensely. They can be successful with or without an Arena.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by New Era

There is no confirmation their offer is out there. And if this is the Flames offer, how is it far, far worse than Edmonton's?

The Rogers Place deal was finalized as a $483.5M project, with the Katz Group paying $132.5M, and $112.8M of that as rent over 30 years. A ticket tax would recover $125M over time. So Katz got an arena built with $19.8M of up front funding, and 30 years to pay $112.8M, meaning the Oilers are leasing the arena for $3.76M a year.

The Winter Garden / Ford Hall component was added at a cost of $56.8M, with the city paying $25M of it in infrastructure costs. The Katz Group paying for $31.7M of the costs, but $25M of it in rent over 35 years, or $715K a year. The Katz Groups up front money on this component was $6.7M.

So in a $613.7M deal, the Katz Group had to put up $26.5M dollars, with the City of Edmonton covering the rest directly, through loan guarantees, or cost recovery mechanisms.

Yeah, the purported Flames deal of 50% was far, far worse.

I still believe the deal to be worked out is the 1/3 which both sides mentioned around the time the deal broke up. Both sides mentioned it, and Nenshi even discussed some of the sticking points. There was too much smoke here for this not to be the deal both sides were working on.

Doesn't the Edmonton figure include land?

The upfront cost is a pretty meaningless as you want to covert it to NPV to properly assess future costs. We don't know if the 50/50 deal proposed is worse. Ticket tax is clearly an owner contribution. So the superficial argument that Katz would use is the Oilers paid 250 million and the city paid 230 million so it was a 50/50 deal.

Details matter, right now as proposed the Flames deal could be similar to the Edmonton deal or marginally better but the offer without details is how Katz would frame the Edmomto deal. I do agree that lends itself to the ownership willing to do the 1/3rd deal

[Redlan]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Yeah you Calgarians get a pretty good deal jamming up our doctors offices, and municipal services like swim lessons to the point where locals can't get in them. Besides my lunch dollars are spent in Calgary, I wouldn't get too on your high horse trash panda.

Nice! And go to your own Costco stores!

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

If King and his cronies are actually this delusional into thinking this proposal is "fair", this is the first time I am actually resigning myself to the fact the team will likely leave.

I've talked about how awful this Edmonton deal was and it's surprising that this is being one-upped by CSEC. The city is not going to get them back from the ledge with a 1/3 1/3 1/3 proposal that is still a sweetheart deal like the Edmonton proposal.

Sad to say but don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out guys. It's almost at the point of spite that I don't want a cent going to these rich jerks now. It is clear now that all the years of this team sprouting off about how much they love the community was a complete lie. Fans should actually start boycotting games and leaving the building half empty to send these guys a message.

Did you even look at the Edmonton proposal? A 50:50 is still better than the shaft the City of Edmonton took. I'm not in support of a 50:50, but holy crap, that is infinitely better than getting a $600M+ project rolling with 4% of the required cash up front. Edmonton fronted 96% of the cost with the hopes of recouping 42.8% through recovery mechanisms over the next 35 years!!! That means Edmonton will eat 52% of the costs to build the arena, after fronting almost all of the money.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by New Era

Did you even look at the Edmonton proposal? A 50:50 is still better than the shaft the City of Edmonton took. I'm not in support of a 50:50, but holy crap, that is infinitely better than getting a $600M+ project rolling with 4% of the required cash up front. Edmonton fronted 96% of the cost with the hopes of recouping 42.8% through recovery mechanisms over the next 35 years!!! That means Edmonton will eat 52% of the costs to build the arena, after fronting almost all of the money.

I have been blabbering on to all the CSEC apologists about Katz and his $20M upfront fee for the better part of this week thinking it can't get any worse than that.....boy was I wrong.

The best part is this is the offer we know of. You can guarantee CSEC has some easter eggs in there that will amount to the same thing as Edmonton where they put nothing up and actually owe substantially less to begin with.

It may be time for a very public CalgaryPuck fan protest complete with burning effigies of CSEC key figures.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by MrDJZak

I want to side with the Flames so badly, but based on everything I've read in the news and here it's really hard to.

What if the Flames ownership really want to leave Calgary for a new city? Could this all be done to make the city look bad so the Flames don't look like the bad guy when/if they pack up and go? Maybe that's just crazy talk. I hope so.

They are trying to provoke fear that they will leave. That's the whole point of all of this. Convince people they will leave so people will support giving them more money.

Spoiler Alert - they aren't really going to leave.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by GGG

Doesn't the Edmonton figure include land?

Yeah, so? What is your point? The land would be part of the City of Calgary's contribution to project as well. What is your point?

The upfront cost is a pretty meaningless as you want to covert it to NPV to properly assess future costs. We don't know if the 50/50 deal proposed is worse. Ticket tax is clearly an owner contribution. So the superficial argument that Katz would use is the Oilers paid 250 million and the city paid 230 million so it was a 50/50 deal.

I think your math is off. The Oilers, after 35 years, will have paid just over 48% of costs. The City of Edmonton pays a hair under 52% of costs. What matters most here is the city is on the hook for $587.2M up front, and then has to carry the loans until those monies are paid back. Katz puts up $26.5M and gets a 35 year interest free loan.

Details matter, right now as proposed the Flames deal could be similar to the Edmonton deal or marginally better but the offer without details is how Katz would frame the Edmomto deal. I do agree that lends itself to the ownership willing to do the 1/3rd deal

You're right, details do matter. That's why I want to see the details of this purported 50:50 deal. Because the details of the Edmonton deal were absolutely brutal for the city. I can't believe the Flames would have anything remotely draconian like that, but you never know until those details are available.