Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Table 5]

But...they are paying for some of it.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Table 5

But...they are paying for some of it.

I know. The poster was comparing it to the movie theater business and asking why would the city pay anything.

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by RM14

I know. The guy was comparing it to the movie theater business and asking why would the city pay anything.

But I don't see why we should pay a dime for someone else to make money?

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

But I don't see why we should pay a dime for someone else to make money?

Because. The City has said they want it in an entertainment neighborhood. Why do you think that is? Is there a benefit to the city having this facility in a certain place?

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by RM14

Why would CSEC pay 100% for something two parties have publicly stated they want.

The City of Calgary always states what they want everywhere in the City, its called Land Use Planning.

[Charsiu]

https://deadspin.com/what-the-nhl-is...oss-1818879619

An article opining on the NHL meddling in Calgary politics

[calf]

Originally Posted by Canehdianman

Some of these arguments truly boggle my mind.

We don't heavily subsidized any other form of for-profit entertainment.

We don't build theatres for Cineplex for free. We don't gift them land or offer them reprieves from property tax.

Not the theatres per se, but the production we sure do:
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/art...beandmail.com&

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-age...t-program.html

(I don't agree with it, but it sure does happen)

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by RM14

Because. The City has said they want it in an entertainment neighborhood. Why do you think that is? Is there a benefit to the city having this facility in a certain place?

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

The City of Calgary always states what they want everywhere in the City, its called Land Use Planning.

Rogerwilco gives you an answer there RM14. The City's function is to create short term and long range plans - that includes zoning and planning where they want major construction projects.

I will bet you dollars to cents that even Marlborough mall proves greater economic incentive to the city of Calgary then a new arena could. just an example.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by RogerWilco

The City of Calgary always states what they want everywhere in the City, its called Land Use Planning.

And their plan isn't attracting an investor as of today.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by RM14

And their plan isn't attracting an investor as of today.

Because they're dealing with a party that is obstinate because they're not getting the same toy the kid next door got.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

I will bet you dollars to cents that even Marlborough mall proves greater economic incentive to the city of Calgary then a new arena could. just an example.

Probably. And something other than an Arena would make a lot more money for the City in that lot for the proposed arena. But the City still wants an arena there.

Public sector accounting is not the same as private. Public entities are there to provide value and not maximize revenue.

[Rubicant]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Bell called Nenshi for comment. Nenshi with a great quote:


He says his recollection is “somewhat different.”

“It is fair to say he wasn’t making any overt threats. But he certainly did say: You know, if you screw this up the Flames are going to leave and that is going to be miserable and it’ll destroy your city,” says Nenshi.

“I remember very well saying to him: That would be an awful outcome but it’s not going to destroy my city.

“He intimated it is the end of a political career if you lose a hockey team. I said: Be that as it may, we’ve got a lot of work to do and we’ve got to make the right and the fair deal for taxpayers.”

http://www.calgarysun.com/2017/09/27...e5559822bbb2c5

The best analogy I can come up with for this negotiation is a toddler (flames) throwing a tantrum, while the parent (Nenshi) is neither giving in to the child's demands, nor getting flustered and engaging the child.

It's like the Flames are being smothered by reason.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Rubicant

The best analogy I can come up with for this negotiation is a toddler (flames) throwing a tantrum, while the parent (Nenshi) is neither giving in to the child's demands, nor getting flustered and engaging the child.

It's like the Flames are being smothered by reason.

That's awesome. Last night I had this negotiation with my toddler:

2YO: Cracker!
me: Sure, you can have a cracker, but you need to have some of these veggies first.
2YO: Cracker!!
me: Show me that you'll eat some veggies, and you can have a cracker
2YO: CRACKER
me: This isn't hard - veggies, and you get a cracker.
2YO: Cracker, and think of all the benefits, like I'll stop crying and whining*
me: sure, but you still need to have some veggies
2YO: Cracker, and I'll stop whining, and I won't move out*
me: Yeah, you still need your veggies, and you have it pretty good here, I don't think you'll be moving out. Pretty sure that grandma in Seattle or Kansas City wants your basketball playing cousin to move in before you.
2YO: Cracker.


*At this point I'm guessing what he's thinking

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by 442scotty

If you aren’t willing to make reasonable sacrifices to keep the flames in this city then you are not a true fan.

Originally Posted by 442scotty

The reality is.... if we want the Flames in our city they have to be able to make a reasonable profit. That means they pay and WE pay as well. That’s just the way it is.

Maybe I'm out to lunch here, but if a company isn't making a reasonable profit, they should look in the mirror and ask themselves what they could do better?

Perhaps if the NHL model is not conducive to making a reasonable profit while paying its own capital costs, certain changes should be made within the organization itself...

Maybe salaries should be lower; maybe ticket prices should be higher?

Or, perhaps the NHL has gotten away with public subsidies for far too long and have found an incredibly effective means of continuing to receive these subsidies from the public so as to continually maximize their profits without any need to build their own arenas.

In any event, neither situation entitles the NHL, or any organization to demand hundreds of millions of dollars from the public for capital costs.

[Looch City]

Be a true fan, bend over.

[Tyler]

Flames not making a profit? Don't buy it.

Druh Farrell‏
@DruhFarrell

Council heard from a respected sport economist on the estimated profit range for the team. They're doing nicely, thank you.

[MRCboicgy]

Just waiting for the "Tier I, Tier II" fan categories to drop.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Maybe I'm out to lunch here, but if a company isn't making a reasonable profit, they should look in the mirror and ask themselves what they could do better?

Perhaps if the NHL model is not conducive to making a reasonable profit while paying its own capital costs, certain changes should be made within the organization itself...

Maybe salaries should be lower; maybe ticket prices should be higher?

Or, perhaps the NHL has gotten away with public subsidies for far too long and have found an incredibly effective means of continuing to receive these subsidies from the public so as to continually maximize their profits without any need to build their own arenas.

In any event, neither situation entitles the NHL, or any organization to demand hundreds of millions of dollars from the public for capital costs.

Yeah this is it. Problem is that there is the hockey business and the arena business.

Maybe it's the arena business that really isn't profitable. Spending $500 million plus on an arena in Calgary may simply not be a good business decision for anyone.

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by MRCboicgy

Just waiting for the "Tier I, Tier II" fan categories to drop.

I'm a Flames fan through and through. But CSEC and the NHL are really testing me; thus far I've promised myself not to buy a new jersey this year (usually i'll buy a jersey or 2) and buy zero tickets, however I'll still take the free ones vendors give me. I'm also tempted to cancel my sportsnet and illegally stream the games.

[herashak]

Honestly the NHL is heading in the wrong direction if they need a municipality to pay for over 50 percent of an arena in a market that sells out constantly.