CalgaryNEXT Discussion pt. 2

[Tyler]

There's too much opportunity in the West Village for development in conjunction with an Olympic bid. They will fight as hard as they can for their original location. While I can certainly see the merit in Plan B, money will ultimately triumph here.

Remember all those condos and buildings in KK's original proposal?

What do the Olympics need? Athletes village. Convention Centre. Global broadcast centre. Awards plaza, etc

You can't build all that on the Stampede grounds, nor would Flames ownership ever want to.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

I will be sad for one day. After that, the team I will hate more than Edmonton will be the Seattle Flames.

Then I will take a break from hockey for one season max - you know, about the same time that the Calgary Cowboys, or the Calgary Killers, or whatever that new NHL franchise is named. Maybe it will be the Calgary Hurricanes. Maybe I will even change my tune and say that I couldn't be happier that we got Lindholm instead of Monahan.

This comes from a fan of the Flames since 1981. The team is free to move on to another location. I will be free to snap my fingers like Beyonce, and start singing the lyrics to Irreplaceable.

Don't for a second believe that I will be alone. Sad to see the Flames leave? For sure. I will get over it though, you can also be sure of that.

The Flames leave town you'll be cheering for the Oilers for quite some time. If the current ownership can't make it work I don't see a long line of others to give it another go, not without a new building with a sweetheart lease they can get in other cities. Calgary will suffer the same fate as the Jets. You'll have to hope that some major billionaire wants to blow money on a sports team in a second rate city who let their team exit the scene previously. Don't think for a second the NHL would also be complaint in letting a team relocate to Calgary so soon after the Flames left. You'll see Quebec get a team before Calgary. If the Flames move to Seattle, you'll see Portland get a team before Calgary. The city of Calgary will lose their hockey team and that will be that. You'll be pinning for another one for a decade or more. Don't take for granted what you have. Ask the people of St. Louis how they are enjoying their football season.

I am not suggesting that you support any arena proposal, but taking the petulant stance that the Flames can gtfo is just plain silly. You're cutting your nose off to spite your face.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I like how people assume the NHL will actually allow someone to move the Flames. Remember the BOG has to actually approve it, and I would strongly suspect they don't let it happen short of a massive relocation fee or Toronto 2. This is not a failing market, this isn't Edmonton with little to no corporate support (relative to Calgary). Unless the Flames are going to Toronto 2, it's the emptiest threat there is, no market offers upside and many markets offer big risk. If the Flames owners want to be out hundreds of millions to prove a point....good for them to take that loss.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Tyler

There's too much opportunity in the West Village for development in conjunction with an Olympic bid. They will fight as hard as they can for their original location. While I can certainly see the merit in Plan B, money will ultimately triumph here.

Remember all those condos and buildings in KK's original proposal?

What do the Olympics need? Athletes village. Convention Centre. Global broadcast centre. Awards plaza, etc

You can't build all that on the Stampede grounds, nor would Flames ownership ever want to.

Just spitballing here, but why not?

Convention Centre - Existing Calgary Convention Centre or BMO Convention Centre
Global broadcast centre - Existing Calgary Convention Centre or BMO Convention Centre (whichever wasn't picked above)
Awards plaza - New amphitheatre on the grounds over in the Youth Campus
Athletes Village - West Village development

I guess my point is, why assume that you need an arena to spearhead development of the West Village? Heck, it does the opposite by sucking up the majority of the best land (on the river, closest to downtown and furthest from the noise and darkness of being butted up against Crowchild and the hill).

Puting the Athletes Village on the West Village is a great plan. Love it. Take some fed funding to clean up the site and get some developers involved to turn that great plot of land into what it should be after the Olympics...a great mixed residential and commercial district. i.e. a lot more condos and other mixed development that the paltry few in KK's original proposal.

Just say no to a huge box on a prime beautiful piece of river-front real estate close to downtown. The last piece, at that.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Just spitballing here, but why not?

Convention Centre - Existing Calgary Convention Centre or BMO Convention Centre
Global broadcast centre - Existing Calgary Convention Centre or BMO Convention Centre (whichever wasn't picked above)
Awards plaza - New amphitheatre on the grounds over in the Youth Campus
Athletes Village - West Village development

I guess my point is, why assume that you need an arena to spearhead development of the West Village? Heck, it does the opposite by sucking up the majority of the best land (on the river, closest to downtown and furthest from the noise and darkness of being butted up against Crowchild and the hill).

Puting the Athletes Village on the West Village is a great plan. Love it. Take some fed funding to clean up the site and get some developers involved to turn that great plot of land into what it should be after the Olympics...a great mixed residential and commercial district. i.e. a lot more condos and other mixed development that the paltry few in KK's original proposal.

Just say no to a huge box on a prime beautiful piece of river-front real estate close to downtown. The last piece, at that.

I agree. The Stampede area is a great place for olympic infrastructure. It also allows the Stampede to have far more infrastructure for them in the future.

The athletes village doesnt need to be next door, but if it does, the north stamps area/remington/victoria park site work well with their current area development plan

[Tyler]

Follow the money trail. Who stands to benefit more from building on the Stampede grounds?

The Stampede, or individual investors/speculators/Flames ownership?

The West Village will be a redevelopers dream. Cheap or free land with guaranteed government dollars for clean-up coming if we are to secure the Olympics (see Toronto Pan Am games as an example).

The Flames owners already hate that they have to play out of a stadium on land they don't own and give up revenue to the Stampede. That's one of the biggest drivers of them wanting to get off the grounds.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Follow the money trail. Who stands to benefit more from building on the Stampede grounds?

The Stampede, or individual investors/speculators/Flames ownership?

The West Village will be a redevelopers dream. Cheap or free land with guaranteed government dollars for clean-up coming if we are to secure the Olympics (see Toronto Pan Am games as an example).

The Flames owners already hate that they have to play out of a stadium on land they don't own and give up revenue to the Stampede. That's one of the biggest drivers of them wanting to get off the grounds.

But who holds the ultimate leverage in the situation?

The City owns the Stampede land and the West Village land. All means of development runs through City Hall.

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Originally Posted by New Era

The Flames leave town you'll be cheering for the Oilers for quite some time. If the current ownership can't make it work I don't see a long line of others to give it another go, not without a new building with a sweetheart lease they can get in other cities. Calgary will suffer the same fate as the Jets. You'll have to hope that some major billionaire wants to blow money on a sports team in a second rate city who let their team exit the scene previously. Don't think for a second the NHL would also be complaint in letting a team relocate to Calgary so soon after the Flames left. You'll see Quebec get a team before Calgary. If the Flames move to Seattle, you'll see Portland get a team before Calgary. The city of Calgary will lose their hockey team and that will be that. You'll be pinning for another one for a decade or more. Don't take for granted what you have. Ask the people of St. Louis how they are enjoying their football season.

I am not suggesting that you support any arena proposal, but taking the petulant stance that the Flames can gtfo is just plain silly. You're cutting your nose off to spite your face.

If in some apocalyptic scenario the Flames left, I'm sure there would be regret and some may feel that they indeed cut off their nose to spite their face. But in end, I think many people are looking at the current Flames, and the mess that is the CalgaryNEXT proposal and are realizing that a pro-sports franchise really isn't vital thing in a city with many more entertainment options than it had when the team first arrived.

I also don't think I'm alone in feeling that the fun of attending games live no longer outweighs the personal and community costs of hosting the franchise, particularly with what CSE has proposed for the project. It's just not hard anymore to say, "I don't want to pay."

In short, letting the Flames go doesn't feel like cutting off one's nose at all; it's more like, the Flames: Take them or leave them, and if it's leave them: Meh, it was fun while it lasted.

[automaton 3]

I'd bet there is an out clause for Rogers in the event of any of the Canadian market teams relocating, and that the NHL would quickly step on any potential moves.

[Calgary4LIfe]

Originally Posted by New Era

The Flames leave town you'll be cheering for the Oilers for quite some time. If the current ownership can't make it work I don't see a long line of others to give it another go, not without a new building with a sweetheart lease they can get in other cities. Calgary will suffer the same fate as the Jets. You'll have to hope that some major billionaire wants to blow money on a sports team in a second rate city who let their team exit the scene previously. Don't think for a second the NHL would also be complaint in letting a team relocate to Calgary so soon after the Flames left. You'll see Quebec get a team before Calgary. If the Flames move to Seattle, you'll see Portland get a team before Calgary. The city of Calgary will lose their hockey team and that will be that. You'll be pinning for another one for a decade or more. Don't take for granted what you have. Ask the people of St. Louis how they are enjoying their football season.

I am not suggesting that you support any arena proposal, but taking the petulant stance that the Flames can gtfo is just plain silly. You're cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Couldn't disagree more.

1) The Flames would be fools to leave Calgary. Sweetheart deal on another arena doesn't mean squat - just ask the Glendale Coyotes. Calgary is a moneymaker, even if they don't make AS much money as they wish.

2) If they leave, I would of course be upset - I have cheered for this team since they moved here, and I grew up with this team. The history this organization has is important to me. It isn't like I wouldn't give a crap.

3) Sorry, you can cheer for the Oilers in a Flames leaving town scenario, but that's not the way I roll.

4) Why do you come across as an ass by insinuating my thoughts and actions are petulant? Quit being an ass by insulting quoted posts in this passive-aggressive way you have, and you will find yourself involved in more discussions and less alterations.

5) I am not cutting my nose off to spite my face. The Flames would be gone. I don't agree with giving them all the money in my wallet and getting down on my hands and knees begging them to stay. If they chose to leave for greener pastures, there is little I could (or would) do to stop them.

6) Doubtful the NHL would allow them to move. Calgary is a moneymaker. Those idiots up north had more to lose by Katz' stupid threats about relocation because of the money he was going to pour into the city in other areas. If they did fall for the 'we are moving to Seattle' bit, then they all deserve to get canned.

7) If for an instant Calgary does lose the Flames, you really believe it would take a decade to get another team - either through expansion or relocation? You are kidding yourself. This isn't Winnipeg. There is a tonne of corporate support in a hockey mad city that spends money.

Flames aren't leaving, and no amount of bluffing would make me think otherwise. If they do, well, nothing I can do to stop them. I am not going to march down to Nenshi's office and demand they give rich billionaires what they want. If I ever march down to Nenshi's office to demand anything, it is to demand he do more to help people like the homeless, or the people that are falling behind and need a bit of support to not become homeless. Or any other area of great need around the city that is underfunded and actually helps someone who needs it most.

I was 100% on board with even a 50/50 split at the start of all of this. I bet you can guess where I fall now. If you think that is me being petulant and cutting off my nose to spite my face, then there is little we can discuss.

[united]

From the concert thread:

Originally Posted by East Coast Flame

Bruno Mars playing Vancouver, Edmonton and Winnipeg in July next year - skipping Calgary.

[Benched]

BRUNO MARS?!?!?!!

OH GOD NO. We are missing Bruno Mars! Give them their money! BUILD! BUILD! BUILD! GO! GO! GO!



/greentext in case it wasn't obvious

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by East Coast Flame

Bruno Mars playing Vancouver, Edmonton and Winnipeg in July next year - skipping Calgary.

Originally Posted by united

From the concert thread:

2014's tour, didn't have Edmonton or Vancouver.

Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Calgary

http://globalnews.ca/news/1083118/br...nadian-cities/

[Alpine Fisher]

Bruno Mars is so short. I am sure even the Saddledome roof could support a harness to lift him up or make him fly or whatever they need to do to make his show more entertaining.

[ZedMan]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Don't you think that is exactly what he is implying?

No, I think he's clumsily trying to extend the narrative they've had from the start emphasizing the benefits of a new arena to the city as a whole beyond the Flames/Stampeders. He's trying to say that even without the Flames a new arena would have all these shiny benefits.

[Frequitude]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Follow the money trail. Who stands to benefit more from building on the Stampede grounds?

The Stampede, or individual investors/speculators/Flames ownership?

The Stampede, but above both by far it would be the current and future citizens of Calgary who would benefit the most. Dropping a massive box on prime river front real estate instead of on the already existing fairgrounds which will be there long term and near the already established entertainment district is bad city planning.

Fortunately, we the citizens have all of the leverage (other than relocation threat) because we control the land and the owners want our money. So I'm sure as hell going to argue for what I want.

If the owners want to finance the full billion and a half, then they can have at 'er. Who am I to get in the way of a free market transaction. I'd still prefer to not put a big box in the West Village but I'd have no right to meaningfully complain.

Originally Posted by Tyler

The West Village will be a redevelopers dream. Cheap or free land with guaranteed government dollars for clean-up coming if we are to secure the Olympics (see Toronto Pan Am games as an example).

It sure will be. And a big part of that is because it's a dream slice of land to develop.

Originally Posted by Tyler

The Flames owners already hate that they have to play out of a stadium on land they don't own and give up revenue to the Stampede. That's one of the biggest drivers of them wanting to get off the grounds.

The only revenue they give up on the grounds is parking revenue. So ya, there's certainly that. However I'd say the bigger reason the owners want the West Village is because its their best shot to get the most public money to build the largest money making facility possible.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

2014's tour, didn't have Edmonton or Vancouver.



http://globalnews.ca/news/1083118/br...nadian-cities/

Interesting, so in 2014 the Saddledome was adequate but in 2016 it isn't.

Does anyone know what happened in the preceding two years that made the Dome unsatisfactory for Bruno Mars?

[TheAlpineOracle]

I like how some people have argued that not having a new rink will not prevent a lot of big name acts and events from coming, but when it's starting to actually demonstrate that this is in fact true, they revert back to, "So and So sucks, who cares if they play Calgary anyways".

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

Interesting, so in 2014 the Saddledome was adequate but in 2016 it isn't.

Does anyone know what happened in the preceding two years that made the Dome unsatisfactory for Bruno Mars?

Well, a lot depends on the sound set up, which changes from tour to tour.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Well, a lot depends on the sound set up, which changes from tour to tour.

Sounds like a bunch of hogwash.