12-22-2017, 12:27 PM
|
#4401
|
Franchise Player
|
So season ticket holders should pay the entire cost of the arena, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 12:30 PM
|
#4402
|
Playboy Mansion Poolboy
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
|
First of all, how does anybody not buying a ticket get to use it?
Second, those will be the ticket prices. The Flames are not going to hold back; they will charge as much as the market will bear. So the only difference is how much taxpayer money is going to the Flames' profits?
If the Flames came back with an offer to freeze ticket increases, I would certainly be onboard with a taxpayer funded arena.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 12:34 PM
|
#4403
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Springbank
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
Actually if the Flames paid $600M on their own for a new arena, just on Flames ticket prices alone they would have recovered the cost in 18 years, and on a 30 year lifespan of an arena be up $484 million. Or about $16M per year over and above what they bring in now.
|
The Flames' owners are mostly in their 70s. So 18 years before seeing any money is a stretch for them.
But in any event, your finances make no sense IMO. Paying $600M would be on top of the expense of running the hockey team, and operating the property, then splitting HRR with the players. Are you suggesting the Flames have net profits of $70M per year on ticket sales alone?
Plus, as rich as they are, they can't afford $600M out of their pocket - it has to be financed, so add interest and fees.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to GioforPM For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 12:35 PM
|
#4404
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
That brings about a completely different question- what is so "bad" about the Saddledome to make it worth spending that much on a new arena.
I get it- the new arenas are way nicer. I just got back from Vegas and had a blast at the game. However we still had to wait in line for beer during the intermission; to the point where we didn't have time to hit the souvenir shop. What made the Vegas experience great was the sound and light shows. Both of those could be done at the Saddledome, but at the Dome there is a need to dampen things for the corporate crowd. A new Calgary arena tailored for the corporate crowd would still be not as flashy of a gametime show.
|
I am fine with the Dome. My two biggest complaints with Flames games these days are that the music/production is not really adding to the intensity of the games, and the crowd is very quiet on a lot of nights. It would be great if our building was intense to play in. I don't think a new arena solves that.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to RM14 For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 12:47 PM
|
#4405
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ken0042
First of all, how does anybody not buying a ticket get to use it?
Second, those will be the ticket prices. The Flames are not going to hold back; they will charge as much as the market will bear. So the only difference is how much taxpayer money is going to the Flames' profits?
If the Flames came back with an offer to freeze ticket increases, I would certainly be onboard with a taxpayer funded arena.
|
They watch their favourite team on TV (because there is an arena to host a team)
They go to other events
If the city hosts Olympics, or other events, everyone benefits from that as well.
I am constantly amazed how people don't see that they benefit from the arena, even if they aren't attending games.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:00 PM
|
#4406
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
And people who don’t give 2 red cents about hockey, a luxury leisure pastime? What about them
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:12 PM
|
#4407
|
First Line Centre
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stone hands
And people who don’t give 2 red cents about hockey, a luxury leisure pastime? What about them
|
Concerts, events, jobs.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:22 PM
|
#4408
|
Celebrated Square Root Day
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kipper_3434
Concerts, events, jobs.
|
The majority of the city doesn't go to concerts events or have jobs at the arena.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:38 PM
|
#4409
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by stone hands
And people who don’t give 2 red cents about hockey, a luxury leisure pastime? What about them
|
And we're back to this. As has been explained countless times already, public expenditures rarely, if ever, serve everyone. The very idea of public funding is that costs are shared in order to deliver things that otherwise wouldn't be viable, and different services serve different people.
And yes, some public projects are about leisure or quality of life. Not all are necessities.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:41 PM
|
#4410
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
So season ticket holders should pay the entire cost of the arena, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
|
Wow! user pay? what a novel concept!
To say TV viewers are getting a benefit from the arena is a huge reach. Technically a viewer in Calgary can cheer for any team (and watch that game from Calgary) - Calgary having a hometown team doesnt necessarily benefit a typical TV viewer.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:42 PM
|
#4411
|
#1 Goaltender
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
And we're back to this. As has been explained countless times already, public expenditures rarely, if ever, serve everyone. The very idea of public funding is that costs are shared in order to deliver things that otherwise wouldn't be viable, and different services serve different people.
And yes, some public projects are about leisure or quality of life. Not all are necessities.
|
Most are not private enterprises.
Last edited by Cappy; 12-22-2017 at 01:46 PM.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Cappy For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:55 PM
|
#4412
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cappy
Wow! user pay? what a novel concept!
To say TV viewers are getting a benefit from the arena is a huge reach. Technically a viewer in Calgary can cheer for any team (and watch that game from Calgary) - Calgary having a hometown team doesnt necessarily benefit a typical TV viewer.
|
Same arguments over and over. There tends to be a few hundred thousand people watching games and - in an amazing coincidence - they almost all reside in southern Alberta. It's almost like fans tend to have a connection with the geographically local team.
If 'TV fans' don't care about the Flames, why do we have this board? why do we have countless threads having the same discussions? why is there so much angst towards KK and Bettman whenever the idea of moving the team is brought up?
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:58 PM
|
#4413
|
I believe in the Jays.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
So season ticket holders should pay the entire cost of the arena, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
|
So fast food eaters should pay the entire cost of the restaurant, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
_____________________________
So shoppers should pay the entire cost of the department store, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
_____________________________
So movie goers should pay the entire cost of the cinema, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
______________________________
Etc. Etc. Etc. Consumers provide business revenue that cover the business cost.
You're implying fictional benefits or at best easily transferable intangible ones.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Parallex For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 01:59 PM
|
#4414
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cappy
Most are not private enterprises.
|
That is true, most aren't.
But we have to remember that the Flames (the team) and the arena are two different entities and two different businesses, even though they are intricately related.
And we also have to remember that only the very largest cities have the economics to make an entirely privately funded arena viable. Cities the size of Calgary can't, and thus choices have to be made.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 02:02 PM
|
#4415
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
So fast food eaters should pay the entire cost of the restaurant, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
_____________________________
So shoppers should pay the entire cost of the department store, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
_____________________________
So movie goers should pay the entire cost of the cinema, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
______________________________
Etc. Etc. Etc.
You're implying fictional benefits or at best easily transferable intangible ones.
|
These examples are pathetic. But sure, let's pretend that we want to watch people eating in a restaurant on TV tonight. And let's pretend that the economics of a restaurant and an arena are the same.
If you don't want to have a local team, just say that. But these arguments (over and over and over) are ridiculous
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Enoch Root For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 02:04 PM
|
#4416
|
Franchise Player
|
No one wants to read the same arguments over and over and over, for the umpteenth time. So I'm done.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 02:09 PM
|
#4417
|
#1 Goaltender
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: the middle
|
Why are people pretending like the options here are fully private or fully public?
The city currently has an offer on the table that is the second most generous offer any public entity has offered an NHL team in Canada. The city has an offer on the table that has the city and users being on the hook for more than half of construction debt.
This has absolutely nothing to do with financial viability or market size or anything else. It is the Flames owners wanting what Katz got, and are mad they can't get it.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 02:12 PM
|
#4418
|
I believe in the Jays.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
These examples are pathetic. But sure, let's pretend that we want to watch people eating in a restaurant on TV tonight. And let's pretend that the economics of a restaurant and an arena are the same.
|
Sure... while we're at it let's pretend that all those examples don't operate on exactly the same principle of season ticket holders & arenas. Users of all those facilities provide the revenue that justifies their operation... hockey shouldn't be one iota different.
|
|
|
12-22-2017, 02:13 PM
|
#4419
|
I believe in the Jays.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
No one wants to read the same arguments over and over and over, for the umpteenth time. So I'm done.
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Parallex For This Useful Post:
|
|
12-22-2017, 02:14 PM
|
#4420
|
Jordan!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chandler, AZ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
So season ticket holders should pay the entire cost of the arena, and the rest of the city gets the benefit for free.
That seems reasonable.
|
Will you even notice your personal higher taxes??
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:47 PM.
|
|