Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[flamesforcup]

delete

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by flamesforcup

"One of the reasons Calgary is in this situation right now is because so many other cities have so weakly capitulated when Bettman and their billionaire buddies have made the exact same threats," said National Post columnist Jen Gerson.

"Edmonton is the clear example of this. I mean, clearly, so much of Edmonton's flagging, sad, little ego is tied up in their hockey success that they needed to sign a scam of a deal to give a sweetheart arena over to (Oilers owner) Daryl Katz. And now all of a sudden the expectation is that Calgary is going to fall in line?"

"I'm afraid we're not that pathetic," she said. "We're just not that pathetic, as a city."

Reporter goes savage on Edmonton giving into Katz lol. Love it.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ena-1.4313740?

You totally Dion'ed.
https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3001

[flamesforcup]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

You totally Dion'ed.
https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=3001

oops

[Senator Clay Davis]

Almost 50% want the city to stand firm, even if it means the Flames leave town.

Following weeks of sparring between Mayor Naheed Nenshi, Flames president Ken King, and NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, 47 per cent of respondents in a new poll say city hall should stand firm in the arena fight, even if it means the Flames pack their bags and leave Calgary.

The debate recently hijacked the municipal election campaign, when King at a news conference with Bettman said the hockey team was no longer pursuing a Saddledome replacement with the city.

“At some point, there will be consequences that will have to be dealt with,” Bettman said.

At the Sept. 12 news conference, the NHL boss also urged Calgarians to speak out on the issue before the municipal vote on Oct. 16.

“You need to make your voice heard if you think the city is moving in the wrong direction,” he said.

Forty-seven per cent of respondents who participated in a Mainstream Research/Postmedia poll for the Calgary Herald/Calgary Sun say the city “should stand firm on its commitment to get the best arena deal for taxpayers,” even if that means the NHL team moves away from Calgary.

Thirty-nine per cent of people who answered the interactive voice response survey on their cellphone or landline said they don’t think the city should stand firm, while 14 per cent of the 1,000 respondents weren’t sure.

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...f-flames-leave

[GGG]

Link directly to the survey

http://www.mainstreetresearch.ca/are...portant-issue/

They first asked Is they city offer of 1/3,1/3,1/3 a fair deal which was roughly split 39/36/24. Though it does notention for unfair who it is unfair for. So in that 36% you likely have both pro and anti arena folks

On the leave the city question Nenshi supporters are 59/25 on the city should hold firm to get a good deal for taxpayers even if it means the flames leaving whereas Smith supporters are 39/51.

It's also the least important issue for 17% of Calgarians and only the most important thing for 8%

[Flamenspiel]

If anything the poll shows that that from a citizens perspective there is a lot more to Calgary then the hockey team. This is probably more inline with opinions in Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto, not so much Edmonton or Winnipeg.

[RM14]

Here is the only report I have ever seen that demonstrates economic impact derived from outside the province for a stadium. If I am reading it right, on page 8, Vancouver claims $22,000,000 annual impact from BC Place from sources outside the province.

http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2016/s...ency/pavco.pdf

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Flamenspiel

If anything the poll shows that that from a citizens perspective there is a lot more to Calgary then the hockey team. This is probably more inline with opinions in Vancouver, Ottawa, and Toronto, not so much Edmonton or Winnipeg.

New Flash: People who don't watch hockey don't care if Flames leave. More at 11

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by RM14

Here is the only report I have ever seen that demonstrates economic impact derived from outside the province for a stadium. If I am reading it right, on page 8, Vancouver claims $22,000,000 annual impact from BC Place from sources outside the province.

http://www.bcbudget.gov.bc.ca/2016/s...ency/pavco.pdf

Interesting find!

i note they use the following metrics for calculating economic impact:

¹ Economic impact is calculated using the BC Stats model and is based on estimated expenditures by organizers and visitors at events in the facilities; subsequent spending in the Province following the event; the multiplier effect through the economy of such spending. Projections for 2016/17 and future years are based on calculated estimates by PavCo management.

I am not a statistician by any means, but i would be interested in knowing more about the advantages/disadvantages to this type of calculation. I'm assuming this is how all economic impact studies are conducted.

[sureLoss]

CSEC is eyeing more than an arena

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/new...+Article+Links

The partnership that owns the Calgary Flames proposed a deal for a new arena that would give the private company a chance to transform into the real estate developer for a potentially lucrative new community, according to documents obtained by The Globe and Mail.

Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corp. (CSEC), which owns the Flames and other sports teams, made its first arena offer to the city in a letter and two-page list of terms Feb. 21. The documents provide a glimpse of the club's vision for a complex more extensive than just an arena.

As part of the proposal, the Flames' owners insisted on receiving an option to buy and develop land near the events complex, a slice of the Stampede Casino's revenue, all parking revenue from major events it would manage at the events complex and other goodies. The demands included the city of Calgary covering the cost of flood insurance, reimbursing the club for all provincial property taxes that may be imposed on the facilities, and requiring local ratepayers to pick up the bill for a public gathering place suitable for festivals next to the arena.

The documents underscore how the multimillion-dollar arena negotiations are – for both camps – about far more than a concrete structure in Victoria Park, an underdeveloped zone east of Calgary's downtown.

If Calgary acquiesced to the terms, for example, it would give some of Canada's wealthiest men business opportunities in part thanks to financial support from taxpayers. Further, some of the sticking points would affect the Calgary Stampede's balance sheet. The Stampede, which hosts the city's famous 10-day festival and other events, is a not-for-profit organization and parking and gambling revenue are important to its operation.

"Our proposals in the enclosed term sheet outline the minimum requirements for a robust competitive sports environment and the infrastructure needed to compete on the world stage from an entertainment perspective," Ken King, president of CSEC, said in the letter.

Any deal that is "not consistent" with the Flames' demands would be "a disappointment and would create an untenable environment," Mr. King wrote. The city rejected the deal.

The Flames and city bureaucrats continued negotiations after the February offer. Naheed Nenshi, who is campaigning for his third term as mayor, in a news conference last month said the Flames' subsequent pitch was "not particularly different" than the first.

Mr. King, in an interview on Friday, disagreed.

"The process evolved and we ended up in quite a bit different place than where we started," he said, declining to say what changed because negotiations are over. "It is quite academic what, if any, the difference was."

[Senator Clay Davis]

This really is all Edmonton's fault for capitulating to the Oilers, now the Flames expect the same treatment, and really they seem to be expecting more. A slice of the casino revenue is utterly hilarious though, sounds like mob #### really.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

This really is all Edmonton's fault for capitulating to the Oilers, now the Flames expect the same treatment, and really they seem to be expecting more. A slice of the casino revenue is utterly hilarious though, sounds like mob #### really.

Well, you wouldn't want the casino to accidentally burn down, would you?

[Reggie Dunlop]

Sounds almost as grandiose as CalgaryNEXT. What's with the "Festival Area?" And a 5,000 seat practice arena? They want taxpayers to build them a Corral adjacent to the original Corral?

Plus, it appears they want to put the Stampede out of business.

[Bunk]

I, for one, am having a hard time believing the Flames only released a portion of their actual demands!

[Roughneck]

Remember, the Flames don't need this, the city needs this. The Flames could make more money anywhere.

[monkeyman]

Yikes, this is deeply disturbing.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Remember, the Flames don't need this, the city needs this. The Flames could make more money anywhere.

Sure they can. Name three places that are not Toronto, Montreal or New York.

[calf]

Ken King is the guy who takes everyone's cash when you go out for dinner so he can pay by credit card, then doesn't leave a tip.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[kermitology]

I’m speechless.. that is unbelievable.

[calgaryblood]

Ken King and the Flames are a joke.

Hopefully Ken King is keeping so busy he can't meddle with hockey operations any more.