Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Matty81]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

I assumed nothing. I was asking a question, hence the ?.

Let's say ticket prices go up 50%, how much of that will likely be ticket tax and how much will be profit?

I don't think the city wants to demolish the dome. Flames owners are insisting on that... Which sucks imo.

[Erick Estrada]

Well the city is paying for the demolition cost so I don't understand why that's an issue for the Flames. According to the pie charts it looks like a pretty fair deal but there has to be some catch as I can't understand why the Flames would just walk away from it.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Makarov

Isn't that called "running a sports franchise"?

More simply it's just "running a business."

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by Par

If you carefully examine that deal, it is a bad deal for the Flames.

The City own the Saadledome, so including demolition cost is just bogus(the Saddledome is the responsibility of city.) So they should be responsible for the demolition costs anyways.

The $30 Million for the land is a alright deal but that land would need to be developed anyways in the future.

The city gets it's money back in property taxes.

This is a bad deal for the Flames, it is no wonder that the Flames walked away. The Flames should just wait 2-3 years for the new arena, by that time the oil prices will go up and the economy will be better and the city may make a bid at the Olympics.

It does not matter who owns the Saddle Dome its demolition is required for the new Arena, so therefore its part of the cost of the Arena.

Even if the land needs to be redeveloped it carries a $30million value, that does not change.

The city collects property taxes anyways, thats how the city is funded, generally.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Waiting for someone at work so I had a few minutes to whip this up.

You guys don't think they saw all this coming?

Back away from negotiations in a splashy way by walking the commissioner out (their biggest mistake in my mind) and then what? They expected a megalomaniac mayor to bite his tongue and not come out with details?

Nenshi loves to talk, they knew he's be shooting back in a variety of ways. King et al have been frustrated for months at the slow pace of the negotiations, this gets it right out in the open which had to have been their plan.

To each their own on what public money should be included but regardless of the landing point I think the CSEC wants to see this moving and not being snail paced through endless private meetings.

[nik-]

lol

4D chess?

[Backlunds_socks]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You guys don't think they saw all this coming?

Back away from negotiations in a splashy way by walking the commissioner out (their biggest mistake in my mind) and then what? They expected a megalomaniac mayor to bite his tongue and not come out with details?

Nenshi loves to talk, they knew he's be shooting back in a variety of ways. King et al have been frustrated for months at the slow pace of the negotiations, this gets it right out in the open which had to have been their plan.

To each their own on what public money should be included but regardless of the landing point I think the CSEC wants to see this moving and not being snail paced through endless private meetings.

Well hopefully CSEC gets less public money now.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Par

The City own the Saadledome, so including demolition cost is just bogus(the Saddledome is the responsibility of city.) So they should be responsible for the demolition costs anyways.

It's not bogus if the Flames are insisting on it as a precondition to the deal. I'd agree with you otherwise but if the City had plans for the Saddledome post-Flames occupancy then they shouldn't be forced to demolish it without compensation. Maybe there's some wiggle room on the $$ amount.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You guys don't think they saw all this coming?

Back away from negotiations in a splashy way by walking the commissioner out (their biggest mistake in my mind) and then what? They expected a megalomaniac mayor to bite his tongue and not come out with details?

Nenshi loves to talk, they knew he's be shooting back in a variety of ways. King et al have been frustrated for months at the slow pace of the negotiations, this gets it right out in the open which had to have been their plan.

To each their own on what public money should be included but regardless of the landing point I think the CSEC wants to see this moving and not being snail paced through endless private meetings.

Really it's mission accomplished as if they don't make the announcement this week the project is still under the rug and now it's in the news and being discussed again.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by Bingo

You guys don't think they saw all this coming?

Back away from negotiations in a splashy way by walking the commissioner out (their biggest mistake in my mind) and then what? They expected a megalomaniac mayor to bite his tongue and not come out with details?

Nenshi loves to talk, they knew he's be shooting back in a variety of ways. King et al have been frustrated for months at the slow pace of the negotiations, this gets it right out in the open which had to have been their plan.

To each their own on what public money should be included but regardless of the landing point I think the CSEC wants to see this moving and not being snail paced through endless private meetings.

Based on everything else CSEC has done regarding this project, I would answer 'NO'.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Flame On

Why are the indirect costs being included? Is that part of the City's 1/3?

I mean the city wants an entertainment district there, and presumably any 17th ave. extensions and green line station and infrastructure improvements, they'd have to do anyway, so they're passing that off to the Flames part of the deal and then saying "hey look at this as part of the Flames invoice and by the way we want all that money back as part of property tax reimbursement"?

Or am I getting that wrong or something??

The city is saying that beyond the $185M (33%) they're contributing to the arena, they're putting in $150M + on top to have the required infrastructure in place.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Hot_Flatus

If I were a STH I would be budgeting double what i'm currently paying when this building opens (or if it ever does).

As a STH, I'm going to enjoy the next few years in Dome, as now that I've seen the city's take (reasonable as it is), they're viewing this deal in a bubble of what makes sense in the city and ignoring what other cities our size are willing to do for professional sports teams. Unless the city makes significant steps towards where the Flames are coming from - I don't believe they'll stay in Calgary.

I'm not saying I disagree with the city, I just look at what Edmonton did, I look at what other cities are doing/will do...and I lose all faith that this franchise will stay in Calgary unless a huge shift occurs. Sure, it won't be today or tomorrow - but as ticket prices for the dome go up, and the experience goes down due to the aging building, profits will shrink and eventually the on-ice roster will suffer. Fans will abandon the team the way they did in the 90s, and the appetite to move the Flames from Calgary to elsewhere will return.

So, barring some huge shift in negotiations...I'll just hope we win a cup in the next few years.

[bob-loblaw]

Put Treliving in charge of negotiating this. It would be done and fair value for all.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by calf

But they keep everything else from operating it. And demanded that the dome is demolished/unusable for competing events. The city could use the dome as an extra olympic venue, stampede events/competitions, etc.

The City should build a 20,000 seat concert hall on it.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Yeah that had me curious too.



I thought the land was a swap with the Stampede board for the land under the Saddledome. That wouldn't be an expenditure if so.



Yet that gets muddied because of the olympic bid where the city has the Dome and the Corral still in use meaning they can't knock it down because the city needs to use it.



Either way not sure those two costs should be considered part of the city's contribution if the above is correct.

Those would seem like negotiating points not deal breakers.

[mrkajz44]

My favorite part is the fact that the one page info-graphic from the city was substantially better presented than the entire CalgaryNEXT proposal.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

Well hopefully CSEC gets less public money now.

You do realize that if the Flames magically didn't exist in our reality, that space is going to be developed anyway. The city wants the LRT Green line station, the 17th ave. extensions, the entertainment district, which probably means a new stadium, maybe the destruction of the Dome etc. etc.

In no world is public money not going to be spent.

With the Flames on the deal it should be mitigated for the city, not entirely but somewhat. But they are trying to tie all the costs of the project to the Flames and get the money back for it its crazy.

[Azure]

Still don't agree with the city contributing anything beside infrastructure(roads, transportation options) and the land to build it on.

Bloody billionaires acting like they're poor all of a sudden.

[Par]

Originally Posted by calf

But they keep everything else from operating it. And demanded that the dome is demolished/unusable for competing events. The city could use the dome as an extra olympic venue, stampede events/competitions, etc.

That is true but from aside the 41 Flames games(the lacrosse and the hitmen won't generate enough revenue), there won't be a lot of other shows at the new arena(Calgary is not Vegas), so the Flames are taking a lot of risk here.

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

As a STH, I'm going to enjoy the next few years in Dome, as now that I've seen the city's take (reasonable as it is), they're viewing this deal in a bubble of what makes sense in the city and ignoring what other cities our size are willing to do for professional sports teams. Unless the city makes significant steps towards where the Flames are coming from - I don't believe they'll stay in Calgary.

I'm not saying I disagree with the city, I just look at what Edmonton did, I look at what other cities are doing/will do...and I lose all faith that this franchise will stay in Calgary unless a huge shift occurs. Sure, it won't be today or tomorrow - but as ticket prices for the dome go up, and the experience goes down due to the aging building, profits will shrink and eventually the on-ice roster will suffer. Fans will abandon the team the way they did in the 90s, and the appetite to move the Flames from Calgary to elsewhere will return.

So, barring some huge shift in negotiations...I'll just hope we win a cup in the next few years.

So they are going to sabotage their own product and bottom line in anger at the city?

The flaw in your argument is that it would cost more to move (reloc fees and lost revenue) than it would to fork over cash to build a new building. Seems like the city has the flames by the short and curly's on this one.