[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Tough to say. The Flames do not release their financials so we would be guessing at this point. It's easy to claim poor when we cannot actually see how poor one is.

It is also tough to sell the city on an arena when QC and Vegas are going full steam on a 500 million dollar payment just to get a team... I am assuming running a team must be pretty lucrative, but again, just speculation

Was it was private money that built arenas in Vegas and QC?

[Vinny01]

This proposed project will officially kill the CFL for me which I am okay with. Not a fan of the league at all but I go to 1-4 games a year (was a season ticket holder from 08-10) and the reason I like going is because the stadium is open. On a hot Saturday afternoon having drinks and watching football is a great time. Once they move the Stamps indoors I will likely never attend games anymore.

I understand the cost of a retractable roof for the 6-7 games a year the weather is nice enough to play outside doesn't make any sense. I also get that doubling this stadium as a field house is the only way to get the city/tax payers to pay for it. I will miss day drunk summer days at McMahon

[Coach]

I will say, I really don't care much about a retractable roof either way, but...

Why, when people talk about in here, is it only open for 8-10 days (or games)? If it's a field house that is usable by the public when the Stamps aren't using it (meaning it will be public far more than used for the stamps), why can't it be open most of the summer? Just as much as you'd like to sit in the stands with the roof open, I'm sure people would love to use the track and other things while the roof is open. It doesn't have to be closed just because the Stamps aren't using it.

[PeteMoss]

One thing I'll add is that owning the arena isn't always the best thing in the world.

If the city owns it, they'll have to pay the Flames or SMG/Global Spectrum/whoever to manage the thing and after those expenses there is limited profit from these arenas for the most part, coupled with the expenses that come with keeping an aging building up to date, the city may prefer the Flames own the place and take on that responsibility.

I was in accounting at an arena with about 10k seats that is/was one of the more successful buildings that size in North America and at the end of the day the profit that got paid back to the city was tiny each year and that's before things start falling apart as it was new when I was there.

[heep223]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This proposed project will officially kill the CFL for me which I am okay with. Not a fan of the league at all but I go to 1-4 games a year (was a season ticket holder from 08-10) and the reason I like going is because the stadium is open. On a hot Saturday afternoon having drinks and watching football is a great time. Once they move the Stamps indoors I will likely never attend games anymore.

I understand the cost of a retractable roof for the 6-7 games a year the weather is nice enough to play outside doesn't make any sense. I also get that doubling this stadium as a field house is the only way to get the city/tax payers to pay for it. I will miss day drunk summer days at McMahon

I am the opposite - I will go to way more Stamps games if it has a roof. I only really care about the Stamps down the stretch and into the playoffs when the weather is crappy. Sitting on a metal bench in -25C to watch the CFL isn't exactly my idea of a good time.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

One thing I'll add is that owning the arena isn't always the best thing in the world.

If the city owns it, they'll have to pay the Flames or SMG/Global Spectrum/whoever to manage the thing and after those expenses there is limited profit from these arenas for the most part, coupled with the expenses that come with keeping an aging building up to date, the city may prefer the Flames own the place and take on that responsibility.

I was in accounting at an arena with about 10k seats that is/was one of the more successful buildings that size in North America and at the end of the day the profit that got paid back to the city was tiny each year and that's before things start falling apart as it was new when I was there.

There is literally no benefit to the city owning the arena/flames keeping profits
-No Taxes
-Liabilities for maintenance/upkeep/disasters
-responsible for demolition at end of use

[Weitz]

It appears a petition has been launched by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation calling for no taxpayers money to the CalgaryNEXT project:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/08/25...ers-federation

[T@T]

Originally Posted by Weitz

It appears a petition has been launched by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation calling for no taxpayers money to the CalgaryNEXT project:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2015/08/25...ers-federation

I can see this project taking 10+ years at least, far too many people don't like it and won't support it. King claims no plan "B"(seriously doubtful) but they better create one fast or the saddledome will have to do for a long time.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

There is literally no benefit to the city owning the arena/flames keeping profits
-No Taxes
-Liabilities for maintenance/upkeep/disasters
-responsible for demolition at end of use

While the benefits aren't particularly attractive, "literally no benefit" is a bit much. Maintenance is typically paid by the tenant and at the end of the lifecycle, presumably the city has an asset it can sell/develop.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by heep223

I am the opposite - I will go to way more Stamps games if it has a roof. I only really care about the Stamps down the stretch and into the playoffs when the weather is crappy. Sitting on a metal bench in -25C to watch the CFL isn't exactly my idea of a good time.

Fair enough. The problem with the stretch drive for me is the NHL, and NFL are in full swing at that time and the CFL becomes even more irrelevant. The benefit that league currently has is the lack of competition in the summer where I may even watch the odd game on TV if nothing else is going on.

I am sure the hardcores will enjoy an updated stadium which is who I think the organization wants to please the most

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

There is literally no benefit to the city owning the arena/flames keeping profits
-No Taxes
-Liabilities for maintenance/upkeep/disasters
-responsible for demolition at end of use

My statement was explaining that even if the city gets the profits - they very likely won't be very high (i.e. likely not even enough to cover the property tax they could collect otherwise if the Flames owned it).

The Flames and/or arena manager/food services company will get all or a very high majority of most of the revenue:
Ticket revenue for all their events
All the in-building advertising
Concession sales
Merch sales

The city will have to pay the Flames (or another company) to manage the arena which isn't cheap. Concerts and most events don't generate a ton of profit for the arenas, unless you get lucky with some cheap concert selling way more than expected. Anything that is going to sell-out the place is going to take a huge portion of ticket sales (i.e. you aren't making much money off Taylor Swift being there despite the huge ticket sales).

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

My statement was explaining that even if the city gets the profits - they very likely won't be very high (i.e. likely not even enough to cover the property tax they could collect otherwise if the Flames owned it).

The Flames and/or arena manager/food services company will get all or a very high majority of most of the revenue:
Ticket revenue for all their events
All the in-building advertising
Concession sales
Merch sales

The city will have to pay the Flames (or another company) to manage the arena which isn't cheap. Concerts and most events don't generate a ton of profit for the arenas, unless you get lucky with some cheap concert selling way more than expected. Anything that is going to sell-out the place is going to take a huge portion of ticket sales (i.e. you aren't making much money off Taylor Swift being there despite the huge ticket sales).

I was adding to your post, not disagreeing. Add to that the Flames would get the profits as the manager of the arena and I'm not sure what, if anything, the city gets.

People have this imaginary benefit of the city owning the arena, like if you or I were given a house. It's free equity in a nice big building. Except for a city out doesn't work like that. The city cannot sell it to anyone except the tenant who clearly doesn't want to own it. They are also more responsible for all upkeep, disaster relief and demolition. All expenses with no benefit. In fact, tax paying buildings could've been built there so the cost of actually even greater

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

There is literally no benefit to the city owning the arena/flames keeping profits
-No Taxes
-Liabilities for maintenance/upkeep/disasters
-responsible for demolition at end of use

Maybe the City should insist on retaining naming rights (like it does for other City-owned recreation facilities).

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Maybe the City should insist on retaining naming rights (like it does for other City-owned recreation facilities).

That could be a great bargaining chip

[Fire]

Originally Posted by Bunk

Maybe the City should insist on retaining naming rights (like it does for other City-owned recreation facilities).

Will never happen. The Flames will not be giving up that revenue.

[TX_Flame]

Originally Posted by Cube Inmate

Leaving the stadium issue aside for a moment, let's assume the Flames owners foot the bill for a new arena by themselves. There's talk that owners go bankrupt when building their own buildings...so is there really even a business case for it?

What increase in revenue, on an annual basis, is needed to offset an initial cost of $450M amortized over (say) 25 years? It depends on the interest rates of course, but even at 0% interest they would need a minimum of $18M more / year (and more likely $25M+ to account for a reasonable interest / investment rate) to break even on a $450M arena.

I assume hockey-related revenues for the Flames are well in excess of $140M / year, given that the league-wide average is around that amount (based on the $70M cap). It seems reasonable to think that the increased ticket costs, luxury boxes, and (non-HRR) additional event revenue could easily add up to an extra $18-25M/year with a state-of-the-art building, especially if they're allowed to build it right next to downtown.

is it really uneconomical for them to pay for their own building? Are my increase-in-revenue assumptions inaccurate? Again, leaving the stadium issue aside--I'm perfectly willing to accept that building a CFL stadium is a money-losing proposition.

Essentially, they ARE paying for the arena themselves with $200M out of pocket & $250M financed to be paid back from a share of ticket revenues (ticket tax). The public funding is essentially for the fieldhouse/stadium.

[TX_Flame]

Originally Posted by Table 5

The difference is that many Arts simply do not survive without benefactors or public funding, and even then it's often on a shoe-string budget. That and most museums and performance halls are non-profit organizations.

CFL teams could answer to that description as well. The Flames are not the issue here. They are paying for the arena themselves with the $200M & the ticket tax.

[MrCallahan]

Would the Flames be willing to easy up a bit, and maybe offer the City a small percentage of the revenue it generates while being a tenant? Or could the City write that as a requirement in the lease agreement that any event that happens in the arena, requires a small portion of the revenue? and call it a "maintenance tax"? or something along those lines.

[peterh]

The Videotron Centre was entirely covered by the city and province which means some of the $8 billion dollars of equalization payments was used which furthermore means some your federal income tax dollars used for Quebec Cities brand new arena.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

This proposed project will officially kill the CFL for me which I am okay with. Not a fan of the league at all but I go to 1-4 games a year (was a season ticket holder from 08-10) and the reason I like going is because the stadium is open. On a hot Saturday afternoon having drinks and watching football is a great time. Once they move the Stamps indoors I will likely never attend games anymore.

Same. As a sport, CFL is better watched on TV. For me, the point of going to a Stamps game is to sit outside catching some rays and having beers. There's a reason the Labour Day classic sells out every year, and it isn't just because of the rivalry.