[News Roundup] CSEC/City arena deal UPDATED: Third Party Facilitator

[Monahammer]

Personally, I am elated that the negotiations have broken down. Hopefully we can get a much better arena out of this than the ugly hunk of crap CSEC cornered the city into.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Calgary not on the rise... hm.

http://blog.oxfordeconomics.com/cont...-more-moderate

Someone better tell oxford economics that.

Compared to the rest of Canada, which is a low bar...the comparison made here was New York and the Las Vegas strip. The funding model suggested doesn't work in Calgary. Flames deal is the best the city is gonna get if they want an arena.

[Badgers Nose]

... so when is the $200M Saddledome roof repair required? Who owns that?

Does that give the Flames an easy out of town? When the roof becomes dangerous the Flames can say 'we tried building a new area' and 'we don't have a place to play in Calgary.'

It just seems like such a mess that the City created all because of some late stage additions. I mean, we are a few months from when shovels were supposed to be in dirt, right?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

... so when is the $200M Saddledome roof repair required? Who owns that?

Does that give the Flames an easy out of town? When the roof becomes dangerous the Flames can say 'we tried building a new area' and 'we don't have a place to play in Calgary.'

It just seems like such a mess that the City created all because of some late stage additions. I mean, we are a few months from when shovels were supposed to be in dirt, right?

Agreed. But don’t worry there are nets installed to catch the crumbling debris that will fall from the roof so no worries lol

This was an unfortunate and seemingly very avoidable breakdown. It really looks stupid for all involved. Like really, the city couldn’t just pay the $20 and move on? Stupid. You already had Csec on the hook for overruns which is huge. Pretty stupid all the way around. CSEC would have stood to gain on franchise valuation by at least $100MM too. So silly.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Part of the issue in designing a new rink is that it's not just a rink with seating...it needs to house exercise equipment, guest facilities, lounge for players and families etc etc...that needs intense cooperation from the Flames front office (ie CSEC). "Building" something without them would be stupid if they want them as tenants.

Good article in the Athletic on the competition in facilities (paywalled) and how it affects attracting free agents:
https://theathletic.com/3018496/2022...r-free-agents/

Gondek is out of her mind if she thinks that the City can build and design something and then go to the Flames and say "Here it is...how much are ya gonna pay us to rent it?".

Not trying to start an argument about it, but wasn't this one of the original proposed models? That the City build an arena and lease it to the Flames?

[VladtheImpaler]

Ironic timing for this Athletic piece:

https://theathletic.com/3018496/2022...shared-article

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by VladtheImpaler

Ironic timing for this Athletic piece:

https://theathletic.com/3018496/2022...shared-article

I was mocked a while back for suggesting that arena amenities for players plays a big role in signing/keeping players, but I recall Iginla gushing about the facilities in Pittsburgh and the comfort of the dressing room.

I think it really does make a big difference. These guys spend a lot of time at the arena. I think it is especially true in cold climates if the arena can also be more like a club house for players for rest, recreation, and relaxation, and isn't just a concrete brick that they want to leave as quickly as they possibly can.

[OldDutch]

Bold moves by Gondek. I like it. It will probably sewer her chances at re-election if nothing is moving by then, but she has a few years.

So lets see where this bold move takes us. Right now the pressure is all on her to find one, and get a better deal. Also coax a jaded prime tenant to take part. One that would be happy to make her the first single term Calgary Mayor in modern history.

Odds are long, unnecessary, and stacked. I am fascinated and how this hail Mary throw is going to go.

[Buzzard]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Personally, I am elated that the negotiations have broken down. Hopefully we can get a much better arena out of this than the ugly hunk of crap CSEC cornered the city into.

You're not the only one...

[FormerPresJamesTaylor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I was mocked a while back for suggesting that arena amenities for players plays a big role in signing/keeping players, but I recall Iginla gushing about the facilities in Pittsburgh and the comfort of the dressing room.

Who then promptly signed in Boston

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

Bold moves by Gondek. I like it. It will probably sewer her chances at re-election if nothing is moving by then, but she has a few years.

So lets see where this bold move takes us. Right now the pressure is all on her to find one, and get a better deal. Also coax a jaded prime tenant to take part. One that would be happy to make her the first single term Calgary Mayor in modern history.

Odds are long, unnecessary, and stacked. I am fascinated and how this hail Mary throw is going to go.

don't worry.
she's said "There are still many interested parties … that want to see this move forward."

Now we'll see which ones those are.

And some on council have her back

Ward 9 Coun. Gian-Carlo Carra said the desire to come to the table with a partner is something that is "absolutely there."

He also said they will build with "whatever partner they find."

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Compared to the rest of Canada, which is a low bar...the comparison made here was New York and the Las Vegas strip. The funding model suggested doesn't work in Calgary. Flames deal is the best the city is gonna get if they want an arena.

Who wants a new arena in Calgary more? The city or the Flames?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by carmenshoes

Don't the flames have a lease in the Saddledome? What happens when the lease is over?

They'll lease the new Events Centre that was built without CSEC involved.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

They'll lease the new Events Centre that was built without CSEC involved.

So your idea of a better deal for taxpayers is where the city pays 100% instead of 50%?

[Remember1989]

This really feels like the outcome that happens between two bad parties. Wouldn't want to be negotiating with either of them.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So your idea of a better deal for taxpayers is where the city pays 100% instead of 50%?

Depends on economics. You keep a much larger share the pie when you build it 100% (broad strokes).


As another poster mentioned, if nothing else, this whole thing hopefully kills the old awful location/design. Can't believe they came up with something worse than CalgaryNext

[Freeway]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So your idea of a better deal for taxpayers is where the city pays 100% instead of 50%?

Plan A:
-City pays 40% and owns building
-CSEC pays 60%, operates building via lease and gets profits for doing so as fee for operating building

Plan B:
-City pays 40% and owns building
-Someone else (Oak View? AEG?) pays 60%, operates building via lease and gets profits for doing so as fee for operating building
-CSEC is a tenant of the "Someone else" group within the building, books dates from them and gets the revenue for those dates within the building

[Amethyst]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

So your idea of a better deal for taxpayers is where the city pays 100% instead of 50%?

Possibly. It also depends on what money is coming in from rent and other things and what other expenses are involved.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Locke

Okay...but this is a very naïve worldview.

Arenas and Homeless shelters are not mutually exclusive. Did anyone suggest that a homeless shelter would not be built because of the construction of an arena?

This seems like an 'out of left field' strawman.

We should build Hospitals too.

The other thing, and I know the economics of it are murky, but revitalizing our downtown core would really help our Property Taxes from stagnating which is typically how the City receives most of its revenue and funding for things.

So sometimes to have one (homeless shelter) you need the other, being revenue generating, tax-paying properties.

Linear thinking like this isnt really the answer.

It's not really a strawman, it was directed to a post earlier in the thread that used similarly linear (read: bad) thinking.

Originally Posted by Moneyhands23

Congrats to all those who voted for this glorious woke Mayor ��

I don't live in Calgary, but if the Saddledom suffers any structure problem the town will be pretty dead without it and the team.

Sounds like the city has a mayor/council that is a lot like the disaster we have here in Victoria. It's been 4 years or anti business socialist garbage. Next they will be spending all your tax dollars on bike lanes and homeless hotels.

Of course things aren't that simple.

It's going to take a lot more than a new arena to revitalize the downtown core, though. We already have one. There needs to be a lot of new development surrounding it, too, to attract people to the core. It's dead in the evenings. What's that going to look like, and who's going to fund it?

[GioforPM]

I am not a Gondek hater but the “other parties” struck me as a pretty weak attempt to apply pressure. I think they are both negotiating from weakness, frankly.