Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

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.

It's almost like people value different things depending and what they want their tax money spent on. Crazy concept, I know.

Like I said, I don't really like that my taxes are going towards things like the library or bike lanes, but I understand it. Just like you guys don't like your money going towards road infrastructure or help build an arena. At the end of the day, it's all your opinions vs. my opinions.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Moving is definitely the most complicated of the possibilities. It brings the political aspect in as well. Have fun dealing with Canadian fans and politicians wondering how the Coyotes can be a financial sieve and keep getting the league to bend over backwards for them, while allowing a financially solvent team to move. I seriously doubt the league wants anything to do with a relocation.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

It's almost like people value different things depending and what they want their tax money spent on. Crazy concept, I know.

Like I said, I don't really like that my taxes are going towards things like the library or bike lanes, but I understand it. Just like you guys don't like your money going towards road infrastructure or help build an arena. At the end of the day, it's all your opinions vs. my opinions.

I like how you try to group these.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Lol we all support road infrastructure. As an aside, it's going to be really funny when some of the supporters of the arena getting big public funding can't afford to go to the new arena when the price increases occur. Sad trombone incoming.

[Table 5]

9th avenue parkade and innovation center

Spoiler!

I'm a fan of all those except for this monstrosity. It's looking like the 70's era building that one would demolish before building a nice piece of architecture.

In the end though, CMLC has been great for this city. Personally I find the request to remove them more egregious than the $70M.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

It's almost like people value different things depending and what they want their tax money spent on. Crazy concept, I know.

Like I said, I don't really like that my taxes are going towards things like the library or bike lanes, but I understand it. Just like you guys don't like your money going towards road infrastructure or help build an arena. At the end of the day, it's all your opinions vs. my opinions.

I mean, there's a pretty fundamental difference between bike lanes, libraries, and road infrastructure, on the one hand, and an arena that will be used almost exclusively by a small cabal of billionaires, on the other.

[Cappy]

To say Calgary has lost that "can do" spirit is based solely on sports stadiums.

As mentioned on here a few times, there have been countless projects built in the last decade to extinguish that thought.

I moved here roughly 20 years ago, and this city has changed (for the better) far more in the last decade than the first. The urban core and inner city is one of the best in North America given our population.

Have we lost swagger? if by swagger you mean millionaire junior oil and gas execs blowing countless millions on parties, corporate events, and chuckwagon canopies? sure.

Alberta, and Calgary, had it super good for quite a while. $120.00 barrel oil does that to a petrostate. We still have it far better than countless cities and states in North America. This "swagger" is merely a callback to when our own opulence led to our current problems.

Jim Prentice wasnt wrong when he said we all needed to look in the mirror. He was just the wrong person (Party) to say it.

[The Familia]

Originally Posted by BMStrikesAgain

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.

These are all good examples and I would agree that Calgary is not a "can't do" city. We have already done a lot to enhance, beautify, and develop the city and continue to build it in a positive and meaningful way.

I would argue that the area Calgary fails in is large scale sporting infrastructure. Yes we built two brand new YWCA rec centres, Harvie Passage/bike lanes/riverwalk, and continue to refurbish outdoor parks. What we are lacking is a modern proper outdoor stadium for football/soccer, an indoor arena capable of hosting MULTIPLE sports and events, an indoor field house (or two), more outdoor turf fields like shouldice with small grandstands, a revamp of Foothills and Glenmore Park (new track facilities), and finally maintaining our Olympic infrastructure which is starting to resemble Sarajevo.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by 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.

This is all correct for Houston, except that Aeros did play in the toyota center for a few years until the Rockets owner kicked them out.

If anyone is going to throw around the relo threat, you really need to do some homework. Houston is not an option today for relo. It is only an option for a sale of the team if they could cut a deal with Fertitta. There are other cities in the same boat.

It doesn't mean Flames would never leave, or more likely, be sold. But it would take quite a bit of time and effort.

But the Flames won't play in the Saddledome forever. And no pro sports owner will fully fund the construction of a new arena in Calgary so if you're going to keep an NHL team, it's simply a question of how much you're willing to spend.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by nik-

I like how you try to group these.

I grouped them because that's where I prefer the money spent.

[Monahammer]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

It's almost like people value different things depending and what they want their tax money spent on. Crazy concept, I know.

Like I said, I don't really like that my taxes are going towards things like the library or bike lanes, but I understand it. Just like you guys don't like your money going towards road infrastructure or help build an arena. At the end of the day, it's all your opinions vs. my opinions.

Whoooooosh.

It's not an opinion - roads, libraries, and bike lanes are all publicly owned, operated, and maintained infrastructure that everyone in the city can use for free. The arena deal creates a publicly owned and maintained facility that is operated by a multi million dollar corporation and only the select high paying customers will get to use it.

None of what I just said was an opinion. That is what is happening here. If you still don't see the difference then the conversation is pointless.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

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.

I don't think the NHL is going to expand again any time soon, so the expansion fee bonus probably isn't a huge factor. It's always been prudent for the NHL to keep some cities on the backburner in the event relocation is necessary. It gives cities negotiating power in events like this and also prevents folding as an option. Much more expansion, and they would be giving that up.

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

This is all correct for Houston, except that Aeros did play in the toyota center for a few years until the Rockets owner kicked them out.

If anyone is going to throw around the relo threat, you really need to do some homework. Houston is not an option today for relo. It is only an option for a sale of the team if they could cut a deal with Fertitta. There are other cities in the same boat.

It doesn't mean Flames would never leave, or more likely, be sold. But it would take quite a bit of time and effort.

But the Flames won't play in the Saddledome forever. And no pro sports owner will fully fund the construction of a new arena in Calgary so if you're going to keep an NHL team, it's simply a question of how much you're willing to spend.

If Feritta wanted an NHL team, he could probably get one easily and he did express interest before. If it helped get him a favourable deal from the City to build a new facility, it's quite possible he would do it. It's not uncommon for teams to play out of old arenas until the new one is complete. The Toyota Center might not be ideal, but it wouldn't necessarily be a permanent home.

It's hard to know what is going on behind the scenes. It's not in anyone's best interests to make relocation discussions public (see Jim Balsillie). Not too many people saw Winnipeg as a realistic destination before it happened. Things can happen very fast if the people involved see an opportunity present itself. It's easy when there isn't an apparent opportunity to point out all the reasons why something won't happen, but when there is an opportunity, the mind set usually changes from "we can't", to "how can we".

Bettman said Houston is very much on the radar despite those issues and I am sure he would move heaven and hell to get a team there.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Lol we all support road infrastructure. As an aside, it's going to be really funny when some of the supporters of the arena getting big public funding can't afford to go to the new arena when the price increases occur. Sad trombone incoming.

Not me. I support funding the arena and I don't know if I will ever get season tickets again or even go to live games frequently. I'm pretty happy attending 10 games or so a season and the price changes would have to be pretty massive to make a big difference there.

[iggy_oi]

The NHL sure seems to like negotiating deals and then trying to reneg after the fact. This whole ordeal is eerily reminiscent of when the league extended the CBA last summer and tried to change the terms of the agreement before the start of the season. The players called their bluff then, Calgarians need to do the same now.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

The NHL sure seems to like negotiating deals and then trying to reneg after the fact. This whole ordeal is eerily reminiscent of when the league extended the CBA last summer and tried to change the terms of the agreement before the start of the season. The players called their bluff then, Calgarians need to do the same now.

I know labor issues stuff is dear to you but please don't try to take this thread there. This is a different topic.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I know labor issues stuff is dear to you but please don't try to take this thread there. This is a different topic.

My comment had very little to do with labour issues. I’m pointing out that the league, or to be more specific the league and one of its franchises have now twice in the last year negotiated agreements and subsequently tried to reneg on those deals. Both times now a bunch of posters have inexplicably come running to their defence with the same silly arguments that we will lose if we don’t give in to their demands. It’s worth pointing out even if you don’t care for the person posting it

[Toonage]

This isn't the NHL negotiating the deal.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't think the NHL is going to expand again any time soon, so the expansion fee bonus probably isn't a huge factor. It's always been prudent for the NHL to keep some cities on the backburner in the event relocation is necessary. It gives cities negotiating power in events like this and also prevents folding as an option. Much more expansion, and they would be giving that up.



If Feritta wanted an NHL team, he could probably get one easily and he did express interest before. If it helped get him a favourable deal from the City to build a new facility, it's quite possible he would do it. It's not uncommon for teams to play out of old arenas until the new one is complete. The Toyota Center might not be ideal, but it wouldn't necessarily be a permanent home.

It's hard to know what is going on behind the scenes. It's not in anyone's best interests to make relocation discussions public (see Jim Balsillie). Not too many people saw Winnipeg as a realistic destination before it happened. Things can happen very fast if the people involved see an opportunity present itself. It's easy when there isn't an apparent opportunity to point out all the reasons why something won't happen, but when there is an opportunity, the mind set usually changes from "we can't", to "how can we".

Bettman said Houston is very much on the radar despite those issues and I am sure he would move heaven and hell to get a team there.

What's stopping him? I don't see Bettman trying hard at all to get a team in Houston.

The point about Houston is that as things currently stand it would have to be a sale not a relo. Edwards won't be leasing space in Toyota Centre at some great discounted rate, and Fertitta not interested in giving up prime dates unless he owns the team.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

The point about Houston is that as things currently stand it would have to be a sale not a relo.

Isn't that a distinction without a difference? How often does a team relocate to a new city without also changing owners?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Isn't that a distinction without a difference? How often does a team relocate to a new city without also changing owners?

Yeah. I am assuming a move to any other city is a sale. And that would have its attractions to the owners too. I’m assuming the Flames owners aren’t averse to being paid out.

I can’t recall a move without an ownership change.