Evan Woolley's motion to reconsider Flames Arena funding fails 4-11

[nik-]

Originally Posted by kevman

People moving to Edmonton to watch the Oilers play if the Flames leave town is quite possibly the worst arena argument I've heard yet. And that's saying alot considering how bad these arguments are to being with!

It's literally laughable.

[Matty81]

For me another issue that the economic models do not capture is impact on attracting indirect discretionary investment/spending. A big 4 sports team is a headliner profile wise. I genuinely think it's something a lot of people with choice consider when they decide where they want to travel, live, invest and start businesses/work.

There are folks who do not value sports as highly certainly but for me having had the experience of living in a smaller city and a bigger one, entertainment options are one of the primary differentiators in favor of the larger centre offsetting often worse commutes, higher cost of living etc.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by stone hands

just stop. you're wrong on so many levels. there will not be a mass exodus from calgary if the flames leave. you are severely overestimating their popularity AND importance to the average calgarian. do you seriously think a significant number of people who own houses, have families, have jobs and lives in calgary are going to move to EDMONTON, of all places, simply because they have an NHL team?

calgary having the flames is icing on an already delicious cake. will it suck if they are forced to leave? yep. are they going to be taking a large number of the 1.3M people who live here with them when they go? absolutely not. just stop.

Ok, your story, you can tell it anyway you want. One thing I do know is they did leave you have zero cause to be upset or gripe about it, you and any other fans who are ridiculous enough to think that drop in the bucket wil do anything to move the transit protect forward. You would end up with neither and if that were to happen (I don't think it will anyhow) don't come on here down the road and whine about it.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by nik-

It's literally laughable.

No, what's laughable is if it happened how many of you would be whining about losing your team. You really think many people are not jumping ship if the Flames leave? Boy are some people naive.

[Torture]

Originally Posted by Matty81

For me another issue that the economic models do not capture is impact on attracting indirect discretionary investment/spending. A big 4 sports team is a headliner profile wise. I genuinely think it's something a lot of people with choice consider when they decide where they want to travel, live, invest and start businesses/work.

There are folks who do not value sports as highly certainly but for me having had the experience of living in a smaller city and a bigger one, entertainment options are one of the primary differentiators in favor of the larger centre offsetting often worse commutes, higher cost of living etc.

Somebody call all the economists that have studied arenas and come to the same conclusion, Matty81 thinks they forgot to capture indirect discretionary investment and spending. That will probably change the equation!

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by RM14

Was told by the organization 2 years ago that the owners have never taken profits/dividends.

Doesn't mean those profits aren't retained in the corporation to reduce tax implications and invested to make further gains.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

No, what's laughable is if it happened how many of you would be whining about losing your team. You really think many people are not jumping ship if the Flames leave? Boy are some people naive.

I just want to know if you're leaving when the Flames leave

[stone hands]

if only they could have re-invested the profits from an initial investment of 16M in 1980s money to 450+ today into their private enterprise to construct a building to further expand said profits instead of relying on taxpayers who may or may not give 1 single f about pro sports to do it for them

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by nik-

I just want to know if you're leaving when the Flames leave

We know you won't. One can easily look through your history and see you don't give two craps about the Flames, you are here for the drama. You are hilarious.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Doesn't mean those profits aren't retained in the corporation to reduce tax implications and invested to make further gains.

Of course or earnings (or losses) impact the ability to re-invest in the operations, the building, or the community. That's what should be happening.

[stone hands]

today in: ridiculous arguments brought forth by dissentowner, no true scotsman has joined the fray

[nik-]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

We know you won't. One can easily look through your history and see you don't give two craps about the Flames, you are here for the drama. You are hilarious.

Of course I wouldn't, because leaving the city you live in because your sports team moves is an idiotic decision.

I can cheer for a team without being dumb about it.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by stone hands

today in: ridiculous arguments brought forth by dissentowner, no true scotsman has joined the fray

Today in: people who are on this board for drama and are not actually not Calgary Flames fans are naive enough to think a drop in the bucket will get the transit actually done and could care less about the team the board was built to discuss. It is quite obvious that money is not moving the needle on the total cost so if you really were here as a Flames fan you wouldn't be hoping the team leaves town. How boring must your life be you have to hand out on a forum of a sports team you obviously could not give a rats ass about?

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by nik-

Of course I wouldn't, because leaving the city you live in because your sports team moves is an idiotic decision.

I can cheer for a team without being dumb about it.

Except your posting history makes it pretty clear you are not a fan of the team. You love the drama though. I am done here for this topic, not arguing with people who don't even care about the Flames.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Matty81

For me another issue that the economic models do not capture is impact on attracting indirect discretionary investment/spending. A big 4 sports team is a headliner profile wise. I genuinely think it's something a lot of people with choice consider when they decide where they want to travel, live, invest and start businesses/work.

There are folks who do not value sports as highly certainly but for me having had the experience of living in a smaller city and a bigger one, entertainment options are one of the primary differentiators in favor of the larger centre offsetting often worse commutes, higher cost of living etc.

Over and above this, with other centres such as Airdrie and Balzac increasing their commercial amenities the impetus for people living in the surrounding area to make a trip to the city is much smaller then it was. One of the only reasons I ever come to Calgary is to watch hockey or to go to a concert, and when I do I almost always eat and drink before and after, sometimes I get a hotel ect...


If the Flames, or bands I liked did not come to Calgary I might not go and visit more then once a year.

[stone hands]

Zealot, the word you’re looking for is zealot

[nik-]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Except your posting history makes it pretty clear you are not a fan of the team. You love the drama though. I am done here for this topic, not arguing with people who don't even care about the Flames.

Not falling for comically transparent fear mongering doesn't mean you're not a fan of the team. I eagerly await your next angle. This isn't going well for you.

[PepsiFree]

I like the Flames. I’m also not crazy about public funds for an arena. And I also think the current green line plan is dumb.

I don’t like this move because of the intended re-distribution of the funds. But I’m not overall opposed to revisiting the agreement in light of the UCP’s ideological wealth redistribution fiscal conservatism.

If that means the Flames leave... eh. Who knows, maybe them leaving would force Calgary to develop some sort of identifying culture. Maybe not. It’s just an NHL team tho, at the end of the day.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Today in: people who are on this board for drama and are not actually not Calgary Flames fans are naive enough to think a drop in the bucket will get the transit actually done and could care less about the team the board was built to discuss. It is quite obvious that money is not moving the needle on the total cost so if you really were here as a Flames fan you wouldn't be hoping the team leaves town. How boring must your life be you have to hand out on a forum of a sports team you obviously could not give a rats ass about?

Not wanting your team to leave and not want to spend public dollars on an arena are not mutually exclusive positions.

A consequence of not spending public dollars may or may not be the team leaving but that doesn’t make the position conflict.

Also raising taxes to fund the green line and raising taxes to fund an arena are two completely independent discussions.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That's not even remotely relevant to the topic. Unlike the motivations of "billionaires" as it relates to sports ownership.

Confused me too. My point was, I have no clue what motivates, say, a particular owner to buy a team (although I've dealt with Murray Edwards and he's dollars and cents focused to the nth degree). I think just saying "billionaires want to show off" (implying they don't care if it's a money loser) is too broad by far. I'm pretty sure it wasn't the motivation of, say, Harley Hotchkiss.