[News] New Arena - Plan B - Victoria Park

[ToewsFan]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

We had one and it failed.

Really? When?

[Barnes]

Nice to hear Eric Francis enjoyed his business trip to Nashville. I wonder what his CSEC per diem was.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by toewsfan

really? When?

1991 - 2000

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by Barnes

1991 - 2000

It is now the daycare across from Eau Claire on the way to Prince's Island.

[powderjunkie]

Eric Francis: Nashville's successs shows what Calgary could enjoy: A thriving arena as its heart, hub

Journalists don't normally write their own headlines, but I'm not sure about columnists?

They do that with the help of a $2 improvement tax on every ticket.

How long have the Flames knew they would need a new building? We know it's at least 10 years. Why does a ticket tax have to only be after the fact.

$2 on every Flames game and big concert. $.50 on every Hitmen, Roughnecks, or other event. $2M a year, easily, based on very conservative event numbers and paid ticket numbers. Of course, making it a fixed % (ie. 2%) would be more effective, but for simplicity let's stick with round numbers (outlined in horrible format below)

NSFW!

15000 41 2 1230000
10000 25 2 500000
6000 45 0.5 135000
$1865000

With any foresight back in 2006, they'd be sitting on $22M (probably $30M by the time they get anywhere on this). Not a huge sum, but by no means insignificant.

Whenever the new building arrives, I think an interesting part of the deal could be a transparent 'new building fund' to be built in advance of this same debate in the 2060's (when I will hopefully be an old man still yelling at clouds). Let's say we've got 40 years - start with the $2/$0.50 for the first ten years, then increase by $1/0.50 every decade. Boom, we're well on our way with $140M (NPV yadda yadda yadda, not really considering interest or taxes, but the numbers are intentionally conservative) towards the replacement.

Semantics, but I would still view this as a user fee, rather than an owner contribution - they are still going to get face values as high as possible - this is just another service fee, convenience charge, ticket tax, GST, bear patrol tax that already go onto every ticket.

[NiklasSundblad]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I hate to belabour this subject but the "analysis" prepared by administration CSEC on CalgaryNext is not properly done (and I've mentioned this in this thread several times before with a detailed explanation as to why). If administration Flames' ownership was truly interested in preparing a fair financial analysis of the project, they would have hired qualified consultants to pro forma both scenarios (with and without CalgaryNext) and compare them - similar to what is being done right now for the Olympic bid facilities. I don't think administration Ken King is capable of preparing a proper analysis without outside expertise.

As illustrated by Bunk's comment, the mind of the mayor's office long before the project was introduced (which admittedly King and the Flames botched immensely).

For your consideration.

Is it not enough that CSEC is asking for a massive public handout, but you also think the city should pay for and complete all their homework too?

[Smartcar]

I think this is a good analysis of the situation. I'm not 100% sure where I sit other than I don't think we taxpayers should put in any cash, maybe land and infrastructure depending on the $$ and how much ticket prices will go up relative to normal inflation.
http://everydaytourist.ca/2017/2017/...-victoria-park

[jayswin]

The Calgary Sun is basically on the Flames payroll at this point, with almost daily articles aimed at swaying public opinion to get more money for Flames ownership in the arena deal.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2017/05/19...y-for-edmonton

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The Calgary Sun is basically on the Flames payroll at this point, with almost daily articles aimed at swaying public opinion to get more money for Flames ownership in the arena deal.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2017/05/19...y-for-edmonton

As a conservative this is why conservative media will never be taken seriously.

[You Need a Thneed]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The Calgary Sun is basically on the Flames payroll at this point, with almost daily articles aimed at swaying public opinion to get more money for Flames ownership in the arena deal.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2017/05/19...y-for-edmonton

It talks about stadium shows, but even CalgaryNext would have done nothing to address that. That facility would never be used for a stadium kind of concert.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

It talks about stadium shows, but even CalgaryNext would have done nothing to address that. That facility would never be used for a stadium kind of concert.

Not sayin' you're wrong but can you explain why not?

BC place is basically a covered barn and they get some big events like Timberlake, Pink Floyd, Taylor Swift and others.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Not sayin' you're wrong but can you explain why not?

BC place is basically a covered barn and they get some big events like Timberlake, Pink Floyd, Taylor Swift and others.

The stadium tours are looking to sell more than 45000 tickets per show or they tend to skip that city. Apparently that's actually the reason most stadium tours skip McMahon as opposed to the NIMBY narrative.

Apparently McMahon concert seating goes down to about 30000 from 36500 for football. As the proposed field house was supposed to be about 30000 seats that would mean it would probably be like 22000 for concerts, which isn't much more than any hockey arena "in the round" set up.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Not sayin' you're wrong but can you explain why not?

BC place is basically a covered barn and they get some big events like Timberlake, Pink Floyd, Taylor Swift and others.

The whole point of CalgaryNext was that the Stamps would use the fieldhouse for games and practices, but otherwise it would be a public-use athletic facility.

The argument in favour of combining the Stamps' stadium with the fieldhouse is that it would give the athletic community in Calgary the facility it needs for nearly 365 days a year, with a few minor disruptions for football games.

The setup and teardown required for a large-scale concert would not fit within this mandate for the facility.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The stadium tours are looking to sell more than 45000 tickets per show or they tend to skip that city. Apparently that's actually the reason most stadium tours skip McMahon as opposed to the NIMBY narrative.

Apparently McMahon concert seating goes down to about 30000 from 36500 for football. As the proposed field house was supposed to be about 30000 seats that would mean it would probably be like 22000 for concerts, which isn't much more than any hockey arena "in the round" set up.

The CalgaryNext FAQ says that it would hold up to 50,000 for "special events", whatever that means.

Either way, very few huge stadium tours that draw more than 40,000 people are going to do two shows in Alberta. They'll pick one or the other and and not care where the people come from, as long as they buy tickets.

Edmonton is known in the music business to be a reliable place to sell tickets and t-shirts.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The CalgaryNext FAQ says that it would hold up to 50,000 for "special events", whatever that means.

Either way, very few huge stadium tours that draw more than 40,000 people are going to do two shows in Alberta. They'll pick one or the other and and not care where the people come from, as long as they buy tickets.

Edmonton is known in the music business to be a reliable place to sell tickets and t-shirts.

Didn't see that but it's kind of hard to believe anything in that presentation. I mean they had multiple pics of the football set up that looked like completely different buildings, lol.

One looked like there was like 8000 stamps fans at a game with half of them pressed up against a glass wall on one side, while others made it look like a legitimate 30k stadium. Nothing showed that there could be more than 30k seats for special events.

I don't know if anyone has the seat layout pic for football that actually looked decent (not a pic, just a layout of the seats) that was supposedly 30k and there was literally nothing that could be done to add even a few thousand, let alone 20k more seats.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by getbak

I didn't know Eric Francis was writing advertising now: http://calgaryherald.com/sports/hock...-its-heart-hub

Outside of the concert thing... which is entirely a different animal for Nashville than Calgary just due to logistics (Nashville is an easy fit on a concert schedule, Calgary/Edmonton are a long haul from basically anywhere else a concert would be), isn't this exactly what the Flames have now. The Flames are successful, the Red Mile gets going, businesses in the area are wildly successful. The arena itself makes no difference to that.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Didn't see that but it's kind of hard to believe anything in that presentation. I mean they had multiple pics of the football set up that looked like completely different buildings, lol.

One looked like there was like 8000 stamps fans at a game with half of them pressed up against a glass wall on one side, while others made it look like a legitimate 30k stadium. Nothing showed that there could be more than 30k seats for special events.

I don't know if anyone has the seat layout pic for football that actually looked decent (not a pic, just a layout of the seats) that was supposedly 30k and there was literally nothing that could be done to add even a few thousand, let alone 20k more seats.

Ha. Yeah, it is definitely hard to believe any of it. And I think it has a translucent roof/ceiling. I'm no engimineer but with all the whining about the Saddledome's roof being unable to accommodate Taylor Swift's light show, that sees like a bit of an issue as well.

[getbak]

Last year, they updated some of the renderings on their website, which don't look too bad (maybe if they had those to begin with, people would have been more open to the idea).

[Corral]

Originally Posted by jayswin

The Calgary Sun is basically on the Flames payroll at this point, with almost daily articles aimed at swaying public opinion to get more money for Flames ownership in the arena deal.

http://www.calgarysun.com/2017/05/19...y-for-edmonton

Seriously, does anyone read the Calgary Sun? I find it somewhat hard to believe it still goes to print.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Originally Posted by getbak

Last year, they updated some of the renderings on their website, which don't look too bad (maybe if they had those to begin with, people would have been more open to the idea).

Two sold-out events the same night in the respective venues would've been a logistical nightmare from a transportation angle. Even one singular venue or the other would've been problematic. I'm all for re-migitgation of the area, and it was a "nice try" by the Flames to extract public money.