Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[Locke]

Originally Posted by nik-

Your emotional appeal has convinced me. We should cave to all of the demands of billionaires to improve the value of their private asset or else we might end up as Mad Max territory.

I like it!

We can name the new Arena the "Rockatansky Thunderdome!"

[Joborule]

Transplant is not wrong that although relocation is a last resort option for the Flames, it's still is an option that they WOULD do if a deal cannot be reached to satisfy their needs. No one though the Seattle Supersonics would leave, but they have been without a team now for over a decade. Hopefully though with the renovated arena, they'll come back some point this decade. And even in the NHL in the mecca of hockey being Canada, both Winnipeg and Quebec City moved because of economics and lack of new arena.

So Calgary isn't immune to what happened to Winnipeg and Quebec City here. Highly doubt it would ever get to that point since the market here is strong enough, and the interest in a new arena is also strong enough that there is a deal to be made. But Flames are going to do what every other ownership for every league has done for ages, and get the best possible deal they can for themselves since they always have leverage to pull it off.

But this is a different situation on where a deal has already been made - for the most part it seems. Sounds like some of the minor details that weren't solidified due to it being rushed is where the impasse is currently. But that shouldn't be a big enough issue that they can't come up to an agreement and proceed forward. Plus costs of materials right now is probably playing a role too.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Macman

Yeah $70 million is a lot of money from taxpayers but it's money well spent in this case and Calgary needs these facilities/infrastructure. Governments waste a lot more amounts than this and have nothing to show for.

It's really interesting to see posts like this when people spend their entire existence complaining about bike lanes, the peace bridge, or the library. If we're asking our governments to waste less, then this is literally the place you plant that flag on.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Transplant is not wrong that although relocation is a last resort option for the Flames, it's still is an option that they WOULD do if a deal cannot be reached to satisfy their needs. No one though the Seattle Supersonics would leave, but they have been without a team now for over a decade. Hopefully though with the renovated arena, they'll come back some point this decade. And even in the NHL in the mecca of hockey being Canada, both Winnipeg and Quebec City moved because of economics and lack of new arena.

So Calgary isn't immune to what happened to Winnipeg and Quebec City here. Highly doubt it would ever get to that point since the market here is strong enough, and the interest in a new arena is also strong enough that there is a deal to be made. But Flames are going to do what every other ownership for every league has done for ages, and get the best possible deal they can for themselves since they always have leverage to pull it off.

But this is a different situation on where a deal has already been made - for the most part it seems. Sounds like some of the minor details that weren't solidified due to it being rushed is where the impasse is currently. But that shouldn't be a big enough issue that they can't come up to an agreement and proceed forward. Plus costs of materials right now is probably playing a role too.

Removing CMLC isn't minor.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bourque's Twin

Not sure what tweets / votes weren't genuine.

Chabot definitely wanted the right things for Calgary, and the reason he didn't gain popularity is because he wasn't a "Trendy Liberal".

Most people demonize politicians they disagree with.

Very generally speaking, I've found those who say "people only feel this way because _____ is liberal/conservative" are just as informed and in touch with politics as the people who really do like/dislike someone solely because they're a liberal/conservative.

It's just another presentation of baseless partisanship.

[Infinit47]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Transplant is not wrong that although relocation is a last resort option for the Flames, it's still is an option that they WOULD do if a deal cannot be reached to satisfy their needs. No one though the Seattle Supersonics would leave, but they have been without a team now for over a decade. Hopefully though with the renovated arena, they'll come back some point this decade. And even in the NHL in the mecca of hockey being Canada, both Winnipeg and Quebec City moved because of economics and lack of new arena.

So Calgary isn't immune to what happened to Winnipeg and Quebec City here. Highly doubt it would ever get to that point since the market here is strong enough, and the interest in a new arena is also strong enough that there is a deal to be made. But Flames are going to do what every other ownership for every league has done for ages, and get the best possible deal they can for themselves since they always have leverage to pull it off.

But this is a different situation on where a deal has already been made - for the most part it seems. Sounds like some of the minor details that weren't solidified due to it being rushed is where the impasse is currently. But that shouldn't be a big enough issue that they can't come up to an agreement and proceed forward. Plus costs of materials right now is probably playing a role too.

I have a real issue with their supposed demand that CMLC be removed as developer. Ignoring the offense of the other items, CMLC is there to make sure the project is designed and built to serve us, Calgarians. If CSEC designed the building it would be all about how it can best serve the team.

If you want public money you better damn well be ready to accept some design changes meant to benefit the public, not your bottom line.

[PepsiFree]

The removal of CMLC is definitely the most ridiculous request to me. More so than the $70M. Based on what they've done so far, I don't think there's a single Calgarian aware of CMLC's work that would want anyone else running the project in that area.

It seems like CSEC is playing a really stupid game. If it's a play to get to the next council, who knows how that shakes out. I don't necessarily think it's a guarantee to go in their favour.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by nik-

Removing CMLC isn't minor.

Originally Posted by Infinit47

I have a real issue with their supposed demand that CMLC be removed as developer. Ignoring the offense of the other items, CMLC is there to make sure the project is designed and built to serve us, Calgarians. If CSEC designed the building it would be all about how it can best serve the team.

If you want public money you better damn well be ready to accept some design changes meant to benefit the public, not your bottom line.

CMLC isn't minor to me either. But again, don't understand the context on why that request is even being made. Out of the four items leaked, the other three could be taken into consideration if it makes sense for both the Flames and city, but CMLC I find as necessary in running the project here from the outside.

Only way I would be okay with CMLC being pushed aside is if the Flames themselves are going to be the owner of the arena, and invest signifcanly more money from there end for this. I find that highly unlikely, so don't expect the city to submit on that one. But yeah, would be really interested in why that request has been made. Is it a power move by Flames? Is CMLC being unreasonable on the function of the arena itself? Or is it for innocuous reasons, and not a big sticking point?

[nik-]

Seeing as they've requested more money as well, clearly the second isn't happening. This is just a power play by the Flames. It's not a surprise though, they've acted like a pretty piece of #### organization through this entire process.

[Strange Brew]

A few people have said this, but everyone should really wait for a few more facts before getting fully on the outrage train. This is a leak that obviously came from the city's side based on nature of the info presented.

Now I get the principles behind the issue here and I share in the distaste for taxpayer's money being selectively targeted to private business. And maybe the full picture doesn't portray CSEC in any more positive a light.

But it's entirely likely there's some more to the story here.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Joborule

CMLC isn't minor to me either. But again, don't understand the context on why that request is even being made. Out of the four items leaked, the other three could be taken into consideration if it makes sense for both the Flames and city, but CMLC I find as necessary in running the project here from the outside.

Only way I would be okay with CMLC being pushed aside is if the Flames themselves are going to be the owner of the arena, and invest signifcanly more money from there end for this. I find that highly unlikely, so don't expect the city to submit on that one. But yeah, would be really interested in why that request has been made. Is it a power move by Flames? Is CMLC being unreasonable on the function of the arena itself? Or is it for innocuous reasons, and not a big sticking point?

I wouldn't rule out CSEC wanting to give the contract and work to a friendly corporation. Surely Edwards and other top brass at the Flames have friendly relationships with companies that could do the work in place of CMLC. Funneling that work to a friend would be advantageous.

[Jiri Hrdina]

I have conflicting feelings on this:
- I think the city is badly behind in terms of sports facilities. I think the CFL is going to die within the decade, if not sooner, so investing in McMahon probably doesn't make sense. But I think sports, including pro sports, is an important part of the fabric of our culture and we have a football stadium that is basically next to unusable, complete lack of a nice ball diamond (though Okotoks is close enough and that's a gem), and a hockey stadium reaching end of life. So do we care about these things as a city or not?
- I don't think threats of the Flame leaving are hollow. If they don't replace the Dome i think the Flames will leave eventually. Perhaps that's OK. That's something we all have to decide for ourselves, but I don't dismiss it as easily as others do
- I don't think T99's comments about the city are out of line. I think this city has lost some of it's optimism and swagger - and that manifests itself in what we think we can do. I find we often find reasons not to do things.

That being said
- If what is reported is true, the Flames are asking for too much. Moreover, the timing is just stunningly poor and suggests a total lack of empathy for what's happening outside their priviledged bubble
- It's never felt good that billionaires are able to get public bucks for their facilities. It feels a lot less good now with what's happened in the last 1+ years and the economic struggles cities and individuals are facing. The precedent has been long established elsewhere and thus the Flames' owners expect to get theirs too. But the world has dramatically changed and maybe the view on this should change too.


So where do we go from here? No idea.
I wish the city and Flames had come out and simply said that some of the dynamics of the project are changing, including the costs, and they are taking some time to re-evaluate together as partners.

But we are back to pointing fingers which is the dynamic that has been a problem with this thing from Day 1.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by transplant99

There are cities offering sweetheart deals RIGHT NOW who have arenas in place.

And no...this market is not "healthier" than other markets investigating adding an NHL team, but keep telling yourself that if it helps you sleep at night.

The Flames could relocate right now and ownership would be in a better financial position. Houston and Portland are very much in play as we speak.

Im not advocating for anything here. There are just realities that some seem to want to ignore though.

One of those without any doubt is...IF the team leaves, there will not be one coming back for a long long long time. Some people are OK with that, some are not. Both sides have reasons for their stance.

My personal view comes down to this.

If this city wants to consider itself somewhat modern, a destination for tourism, and among the best in Canada/NA, then it has to have things like modern arenas AND stadiums where large scale events like sports, concerts, and a plethora of other forms of entertainment can occur.

It would be embarrassing as a city to not have these things IMO, but realize others see it differently.

I agree with you and I don't think it's fear mongering at all. There are a few cities that would probably bend over backwards to accommodate the Flames owners. I'm not saying it's smart or economically prudent to do so, but it's the nature of the beast and if you want the things that you mentioned, you have to deal with the devil. If someone is fine not having them, than I can totally respect sticking to principles, but there are certain risks that come with that (not having an NHL team, not being a destination for world class events, etc...). These things do have indirect effects that are not easily measured by dollars in and out (community pride and luring talented people to city to name two). If given the choice between a city with amenities and one without, the one with amenities wins out almost every time.

Originally Posted by Joborule

Transplant is not wrong that although relocation is a last resort option for the Flames, it's still is an option that they WOULD do if a deal cannot be reached to satisfy their needs. No one though the Seattle Supersonics would leave, but they have been without a team now for over a decade. Hopefully though with the renovated arena, they'll come back some point this decade. And even in the NHL in the mecca of hockey being Canada, both Winnipeg and Quebec City moved because of economics and lack of new arena.

So Calgary isn't immune to what happened to Winnipeg and Quebec City here. Highly doubt it would ever get to that point since the market here is strong enough, and the interest in a new arena is also strong enough that there is a deal to be made. But Flames are going to do what every other ownership for every league has done for ages, and get the best possible deal they can for themselves since they always have leverage to pull it off.

But this is a different situation on where a deal has already been made - for the most part it seems. Sounds like some of the minor details that weren't solidified due to it being rushed is where the impasse is currently. But that shouldn't be a big enough issue that they can't come up to an agreement and proceed forward. Plus costs of materials right now is probably playing a role too.

I agree, except I don't think relocation is as much of a long shot as you. The Flames were more than ready to use that option before and I don't think they would be playing hardball like this if it wasn't a chip that they were willing to use again. I think they know full well how their recent demands will be received and could hurt goodwill with the residents and fanbase. The fact that they are willing to do that makes me even more concerned about their future intentions if they don't get a favourable deal. If they are that unworried about it, they probably aren't that committed, at least the way the current deal is structured. I honestly don't think the CSEC makes this demand if they didn't already have an exit plan as a contingency.

I don't think it's fear mongering, but rather just a harsh possible reality. Calgary wouldn't be the first city that happened to, and wouldn't be the last.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I have conflicting feelings on this:
- I think the city is badly behind in terms of sports facilities. I think the CFL is going to die within the decade, if not sooner, so investing in McMahon probably doesn't make sense. But I think sports, including pro sports, is an important part of the fabric of our culture and we have a football stadium that is basically next to unusable, complete lack of a nice ball diamond (though Okotoks is close enough and that's a gem), and a hockey stadium reaching end of life. So do we care about these things as a city or not?
- I don't think threats of the Flame leaving are hollow. If they don't replace the Dome i think the Flames will leave eventually. Perhaps that's OK. That's something we all have to decide for ourselves, but I don't dismiss it as easily as others do
- I don't think T99's comments about the city are out of line. I think this city has lost some of it's optimism and swagger - and that manifests itself in what we think we can do. I find we often find reasons not to do things.

That being said
- If what is reported is true, the Flames are asking for too much. Moreover, the timing is just stunningly poor and suggests a total lack of empathy for what's happening outside their priviledged bubble
- It's never felt good that billionaires are able to get public bucks for their facilities. It feels a lot less good now with what's happened in the last 1+ years and the economic struggles cities and individuals are facing. The precedent has been long established elsewhere and thus the Flames' owners expect to get theirs too. But the world has dramatically changed and maybe the view on this should change too.


So where do we go from here? No idea.
I wish the city and Flames had come out and simply said that some of the dynamics of the project are changing, including the costs, and they are taking some time to re-evaluate together as partners.

But we are back to pointing fingers which is the dynamic that has been a problem with this thing from Day 1.

This is sort of where I'm at, although I think the can-do spirit is still alive and well, and lots of things have been accomplished, just not so much in the sports genre, for want of a better term. I mean if you add the Olympic bid in there, that's another example of not getting sports things done (although that was hardly Nenshi's fault).
And let's not forget the CSEC came to an agreement with the City, so at one point everything was fine, but now the City is somehow not a good partner!
Like you said horrible timing for the ownership group.

[Monahammer]

who are these cities clamouring to pay billionaires to locate a hockey franchise there?

I saw Houston used earlier. Tillman Fertitta is the primary user of the arena there. This guy has a history of being a cheap ####### who does not play nice in the sandbox- I give it slim to no chance that he would be willing to let another franchise of any sport (none the less hockey) encroach on the use of the Toyota Centre. In fact, when the toyota centre was built the Aeroes were specifically cut out of the deal and use of the facility by the former rockets owner.
So is the city of Houston going to build another arena for this purpose? (not likely) Are the flames owners willing to play deep second fiddle on a building they will have no say over, and definitely won't be getting any of the associated land ownership and development benefits they would get out of a new project here? I would bet not given their history of control.

So where are the flames relocating to?

Edit: Portland was mentioned too- can't see it working in portland either. Arena is owned by the same ownership group that owns and runs the Trailblazers, so NHL would be second or third fiddle (Portland likes it's college basketball too.)
Plus the winterhawks are a long established WHL franchise with a solid fan base and low overhead. Who's in a rush to give that up?

Neither of these seem like a better scenario than the existing one for the flames, and certainly not a better scenario than the deal they originally came to here. I suspect even a much worse deal for them than was originally settled on would still be preferable to either of these scenarios.

[BMStrikesAgain]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Calgary, the can't do city.

https://calgarylibrary.ca/read-learn...ntral-library/
central library opened in 2018

Spoiler!

Studio bell home of the national music center opened in 2016

Spoiler!

telus sky opened in 2019

Spoiler!

9th avenue parkade and innovation center

Spoiler!

St Patrick's Island Bridge opened 2014

Spoiler!

east village - river walk - patrick's island park redevelopment

Spoiler!

harvery passage lookout - opened 2018

Spoiler!

calgary, the can't do city only if ur not paying attention and think a hockey arena should be top priority.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Relocation with the current ownership group is an empty threat, if they don't want to pay for more in arena costs then they aren't going to want to pay $100 million for a relocation fee, unless it's for a homerun market (of which there are none, outside of Toronto 2). If they are done with Calgary then I imagine they are selling.

[Jordan!]

Sorry guys. I started following and opening my heart up to The Flames again.. This is my fault. Legit curse. 2000 Move to Portland, 2009 Coyotes saga, 2021 Flames again.

It's what I do.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Relocation with the current ownership group is an empty threat, if they don't want to pay for more in arena costs then they aren't going to want to pay $100 million for a relocation fee, unless it's for a homerun market (of which there are none, outside of Toronto 2). If they are done with Calgary then I imagine they are selling.

I still think there are huge problems with the idea of selling and moving from the calgary market. Especially when the expansion fee has been set at a very attractive number. If more billionaires want to enter the game, the other billionaires would prefer to get a pound of flesh (500 million) from them.

And again, a guy like Fertitta isn't going to buy a hockey franchise. Allen's group might... but I don't see there being huge upside for them so unless one of the family scions is a big hockey fan it is unlikely.

So, are they going to sell to Quebecor? That seems like an enormously futile decision for the league.

[powderjunkie]

Step 1 before approving a move is seeking alternative local ownership. I'm sure local portfolios have taken a hit, but there are still several billionaires around these parts (Shaws, Southerns, Mannix come to mind for starters).

I'd call their bluff and see if we can't get some more competent ownership out of this! (on and off the ice)


I understand the frustration of another delay, but CSEC are most responsible for fumbling this time after time. The Saddledome still serves it's function well enough. There isn't that much urgency. Let's let this new world shake out a bit before replacing luxury items unnecessarily.