[News Roundup] CSEC/City arena deal UPDATED: Third Party Facilitator

[Sainters7]

Nm

[Mass_nerder]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Yeah I have a feeling that this deal is dead until construction costs come down.

Then maybe talks start up again.

Which could be another 2-3 years based on production capabilities and shipping capacity for structural steel. Assume similar timelines for fixtures.
I have a project that's been waiting 5 months for two slider door assemblies that should have taken 6 weeks max.

[GioforPM]

So if I’m reading that right CSEC agreed to step away from 50-50 and cover reasonable cost increases. And the most recent increases were $19M but the City was covering $9M, so almost the original 50-50 split. That doesn’t sound outrageous.

I am thinking like others that this is a revenue issue and not a cost issue.

[Hack&Lube]

This stinks of Darth Gondek altering the deal

[Locke]

MOD EDIT: Removed quote screwing up the page.

Yes. That is my least favourite as well.

[Manhattanboy]

Well today was a royal kick in the gondeks.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by OldDutch

The only thing kinda odd here is the need to “get in front of this” the way the mayor did.

Just gives off weird vibes. Grandstanding vibes.

I would think a proper strategy is to let the Flames actually cancel and then I am sure the media comes calling and you give comment then. Nothing is lost by letting it happen and it dares the Flames to actually do it in writing. Maybe it wouldn’t have gotten there?

I voted for the Mayor but knew I didn’t agree with the way she operated. The mayor seems to love a pulpit, and sometimes that can make things worse.

I would say that is PR 101, no?

control the message before the Flames can leak their side of the story and have the City sit silent. The City was notified that CSEC intended to terminate the contract and jumped out in front of the news story.

Nothing she wrote could be considered false or misleading. If anything, CSEC response is worse - it's clearly just a cost and supply chain issue as opposed to changes to the deal or demands made by the City.

Better yet, it's transparent - which is something we kind of all want from Government no? What if CSEC leaked this and the City didn't respond?

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

Yeah I have a feeling that this deal is dead until construction costs come down.

Then maybe talks start up again.

Said everyone 10 years ago. Market timing is part of the issue here, but I think the City has that egg on their pants.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

So if I’m reading that right CSEC agreed to step away from 50-50 and cover reasonable cost increases. And the most recent increases were $19M but the City was covering $9M, so almost the original 50-50 split. That doesn’t sound outrageous.

I am thinking like others that this is a revenue issue and not a cost issue.

They way I'm reading CSEC's position - I think they have concerns about these "infrastructure and climate costs" as being reasonable and needed in the first place.

I guess I'd have to see some additional details on what these climate and infrastructure costs are for exactly to properly form an opinion. Sounds like solar panels are desired - but what constitutes the infrastructure improvements? Sidewalk or road widening? Urban Realm improvements? It's all relative to what was specified in the July 2021 agreement @$608.5M. I presume they have a detailed Work Breakdown Structure and associated costing that adds up to that $608.5M as an exhibit to that agreement.

It would seem that these climate change and infrastructure costs never made it in to that WBS schedule. Bunk's comments provide some interesting context in that it might have been discussed as and left as a condition of occupancy, but not legally documented as such in the WBS and agreement. So it would seem CSEC has reviewed these costs and ultimately said - I'm not paying for this - it's not necessary. So let's see what these details are first before assigning blame?

[#-3]

Without getting into too much detail, less then a week ago I had a drink with someone who was actively quoting some pretty major construction costs for this project, timing seems to match up with this statement a little bit. Honestly I'd be shocked if they didn't have a little bit of sticker shock at that moment. I think there is a good chance if they take a breather and requote in 4-6 months some of that sticker shock will have gone away, but who knows they might burn too many bridges by the time we get there.

[RoadGame]

Originally Posted by Bunk

There’s a lot of conjecture about “moving goalposts”. Just factually incorrect. Climate elements like solar panels were agreed to by the applicant in the approval. They did not have to agree to do it, there is no mechanism to require it.

Bunk - can you comment on this in contrast with the language in the CSEC statement about the city insisting on adding solar to the scope? I appreciate your uniquely qualified to speak on this points and I am hoping there is a factual way to rebut the torrent of City-bashing from those I know outside of CP who will side with the Flames' owners no matter what.

Fwiw Capital Power recently disclosed a roughly 15% capex overrun on solar in construction so I wonder if the 4M cost is an increase from suppliers over a previously agreed budget (my interpretation and extrapolation of Bunk's post) or if the solar actually is net new scope as CSEC suggests.

[Gemnoble]

I heard somewhere that the Flames' lease with the Dome ends in 2033 or something.

So there's a few years left before a decision is forced upon the City and CSEC

[N-E-B]

While I think the majority of the blame is on Gondek here, I do understand being frustrated by the decision to completely destroy the arena deal. What a clown show of a franchise.

If I had season tickets I’d be cancelling them.

[Manhattanboy]

Of course there’s another significant stakeholder here - the Stampede. Will be interesting how they react - would think this throws a wrench into their expansion plans.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

While I think the majority of the blame is on Gondek here, I do understand being frustrated by the decision to completely destroy the arena deal. What a clown show of a franchise.

If I had season tickets I’d be cancelling them.

Yeah, but… you don’t

[The Yen Man]

So reading that release, CSEC agreed to cover cost overruns, the city kept adding new things in saying CESC also had to pay for it. That is not bargaining in good faith, and CSEC called them out on their bs. Thanks Gondek. Guess your legacy will be one of quashing a done deal for a new facility that would have revitalized that part of town, and a bunch of virtue signaling bs. What an embarrassment.

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Yeah, but… you don’t

This is true. Alas, I am not a season ticket holder.

But I am some random boob on an Internet forum. That’s got to count for something, right?

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

This is true. Alas, I am not a season ticket holder.

But I am some random boob on an Internet forum. That’s got to count for something, right?

As a previous season ticket holder who bailed after many years in the Gulutzan / resale value below STH cost, it counts for me!

[InternationalVillager]

Seems like the Flames used the latest cost increase as a nice out to nix the deal.

The real issue is that the project has now increased to $634M. They don't want to pay for the cost overruns or just feel that they are too much.

[Table 5]

They should drag this out for a few more years so we can get the final cost to a cool $1B.