[News] CalgaryNEXT Announcement. New arena details emerge.

[stone hands]

I almost need to re-listen to the part where he met with the mayor of Arlington. Did he insinuate that the mayor said "I am not going to pay for overages" and didn't, then when asked about who paid for the overages, he said the city? What is he trying to say here? I'm thinking I have to have mis-heard that

The more I hear Ken talk the more reprehensive about the idea. He touts $450 Mil as if it's coming directly from the owners. He also mentions the ticket tax as if its a burden on the flames?? Also that owning the arena would be a good thing for Calgary when most studies show that stadium ownership for a city is not a good deal?

Though its expected for a radio station with very close ties to the flames so I'm sure questions were vetted, I was sad not to hear any hardball questions. The one I did hear about revenue sharing was deflected completely into how the funding for the arena would be structured(without mentioning the cleanup at all, again)

[bax]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

After reading the entire thread, here are my conclusions:



1) The flames may or may not need a new arena in the near future, but probably need one within the next 20 years. That gives the team up to 12 years to start an arena project.

2) The $200m fieldhouse is primarily going to be an amateur facility, so it should be built in a place that encourages maximum amateur participation. If that location is different from the optimal location for the Flames new arena, the field house and hockey arena should be built separately rather than put them together to save a few dollars.

3) From the point of view of the city, it may be too early to develop the west village area while the east village development has a long way to go. If the flames want help from the city to develop the area, it should be done on the city's timeline rather than the flames.



Conclusions:

1) Fieldhouse should be in an area that is optimal for amateur sports. If Stampeders want to ride along, they should pay for all upgrades required to make it a dual facility. They should also be doing it on the city's timeline, since the city would be doing the Stampeders a favor by letting them tag along for incremental costs only.



2) If the flames want to build this arena in the west village, they should wait until the city is ready to develop the land. Could be upwards of a decade given that focus should be on East Village right now.



3) When the West Village is ready to be developed, the frame of funding changes in favor of the flames: for a $550m event and sporting facility, the flames and ticket holders are paying $450m. Very generous of the flames in my opinion. Environmental remediation, and infrastructure would be done as part of development rather than done for the flames. I think its pretty fair for the city to pay $100m - there are some public benefits for the arena and event center, and it would help kickstart development. And the city would have to build public transport infrastructure anyways at that time.

I agree with a lot of this, but a couple things:

1) 20 years? The Saddledome is one of the worst arenas in the NHL today. In 10 years it will be even worse than it is today.

2) I'll admit I'm no expert on this, but where else would be a good central location for a field house? I don't think West Village is a particularly bad location for amateurs.

[bax]

Originally Posted by stone hands

I almost need to re-listen to the part where he met with the mayor of Arlington. Did he insinuate that the mayor said "I am not going to pay for overages" and didn't, then when asked about who paid for the overages, he said the city? What is he trying to say here? I'm thinking I have to have mis-heard that

The more I hear Ken talk the more reprehensive about the idea. He touts $450 Mil as if it's coming directly from the owners. He also mentions the ticket tax as if its a burden on the flames?? Also that owning the arena would be a good thing for Calgary when most studies show that stadium ownership for a city is not a good deal?

Though its expected for a radio station with very close ties to the flames so I'm sure questions were vetted, I was sad not to hear any hardball questions. The one I did hear about revenue sharing was deflected completely into how the funding for the arena would be structured(without mentioning the cleanup at all, again)

The ticket tax is a burden to the flames no?

The money comes out of the revenue they generate from selling the tickets. The market will dictate what the tickets sell for, it's not like they find their price and then add an addition 10% on top of it or anything.

[Northendzone]

ken king was on the Fan this morning taking your calls - i did not hear anything earth shattering.

i wish i was as well spoken in public as him.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by bax

The ticket tax is a burden to the flames no?

The money comes out of the revenue they generate from selling the tickets. The market will dictate what the tickets sell for, it's not like they find their price and then add an addition 10% on top of it or anything.

They are going to increase the price of tickets to offset the cost. I can guarantee you they aren't eating 250 million dollars in ticket sales

[Fighting Banana Slug]

I think it fair to say that the ticket tax is "private" funding, while the CRL and the other $200 mil is "public". You can argue the net cost of both the ticket tax and the CRL, but ultimately I think it breaks down that way.

I too don't fully understand the problem with the fieldhouse in WV (other than it takes up too much space). Is the Talisman centre in a bad spot because it is in Erlton? Central is good, no?

[bax]

Originally Posted by stone hands

They are going to increase the price of tickets to offset the cost. I can guarantee you they aren't eating 250 million dollars in ticket sales

That would have happened in a new arena anyway

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by stone hands

They are going to increase the price of tickets to offset the cost. I can guarantee you they aren't eating 250 million dollars in ticket sales

They will actually.

They can only raise ticket rates to a point that the market will bare regardless of tax. If tickets go up an average of $10 to cover the tax and people still pay it, that's $10 that the Flames could have raised tickets for pure profit.

They are absolutely eating $250 mil in ticket sales, no matter how you spin it.

[stone hands]

True, it's private funding no doubt, I have no qualms about that. It's just postured in such a way to seem like it's a direct commitment from the flames and framed in opposition to people thinking that the pubic is taking on a lions share of the funding(which they are)

[PepsiFree]

No they aren't.

The Flames are paying $450 million.
Public? $440...

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

No they aren't.

The Flames are paying $450 million.
Public? $440...

So the land clean-up is going to be done by volunteers? Cool.

[getbak]

Legal experts believe the province could force Domtar to pay for the creosote cleanup, even though they no longer have operations in Alberta: http://calgaryherald.com/news/politi...te-experts-say


To win it would likely require a long and costly court fight.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

So the land clean-up is going to be done by volunteers? Cool.

and we don't need to fix the infrastructure around there either apparently

[YYC in LAX]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

So the land clean-up is going to be done by volunteers? Cool.

Bake sale and bottle drive OR:

A former government official says Alberta’s contaminated sites legislation was drafted over two decades ago with an eye to making Domtar Corp. clean up the mess at a former wood preserving plant in Calgary where experts have estimated close to two million litres of toxic creosote and pentachlorophenol leaked beneath the surface.

Calgary Herald: http://calgaryherald.com/news/politi...te-experts-say

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

So the land clean-up is going to be done by volunteers? Cool.

Do you really think that is a Flames cost to shoulder?

I am surprised the lack of attention the city has received in how they dealt with the original purchase. I believe the Herald indicated that the City purchased the land in 2009 (not ancient history by any stretch), that there were concerns about the cost of clean up and the due diligence conducted, the City purchased the land anyway and took the environmental liability to boot.

That is brutal. Why were they in such a hurry to purchase the land? In particular, if you believe the line of thinking that East Village needs to be complete before West Village? What good is the provincial indemnity, if it only applies if the land isn't developed? What was the plan?

[PepsiFree]

I think you guys are confusing things that are related to this project, and things that are related only to the development of WV regardless of any specific project.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by getbak

Legal experts believe the province could force Domtar to pay for the creosote cleanup, even though they no longer have operations in Alberta: http://calgaryherald.com/news/politi...te-experts-say


To win it would likely require a long and costly court fight.

While they might be able to go after Domtar, it is my understanding that the city had indemnified Domtar in this regard. As such, any loss that Domtar incurs could be recouped on the indemnity claim (assuming that the loss is covered by that indemnity). I hope I am wrong on what the City provided when they purchased this land...

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Do you really think that is a Flames cost to shoulder?

I am surprised the lack of attention the city has received in how they dealt with the original purchase. I believe the Herald indicated that the City purchased the land in 2009 (not ancient history by any stretch), that there were concerns about the cost of clean up and the due diligence conducted, the City purchased the land anyway and took the environmental liability to boot.

That is brutal. Why were they in such a hurry to purchase the land? In particular, if you believe the line of thinking that East Village needs to be complete before West Village? What good is the provincial indemnity, if it only applies if the land isn't developed? What was the plan?

If they want to use land that needs to be cleaned up and isn't in the plans for government spending any time soon, yes

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by stone hands

If they want to use land that needs to be cleaned up and isn't in the plans for government spending any time soon, yes

I think that would only make sense if the Flames purchase the land. I think their offer would be around -$200 million.

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I think you guys are confusing things that are related to this project, and things that are related only to the development of WV regardless of any specific project.

They go hand in hand. You can't have one without the other, which is why this 890Mill figure is disingenuous. They are forcing the city's hand to redevelop this area for them when there is no immediate need or available funding other than "the flames want this"

It needs to be remediated no doubt but not for this