Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Makarov]

Rule of Thirds Financing

City of Calgary pays $185M. Period. All other slushed costs outlined in their slide are on the City. Flames pay $185M. Period. Ticket Surcharge is $185M, and stays in place until that amount is recovered. City owns the building. Flames have exclusive use of the building and receive all revenues. City can recover their contribution through the imposition of a 1% entertainment tax, like they do in many of the US cities. This tax stays in place until that $185M is recovered. All revenues are recovered through use taxes and surcharges. Everyone gets what they want and what they need.

This is a win-win for everyone. City gets a recovery scheme for their investment. They also get a helluva deal on the "rent" the Flames are paying upfront in the tune of that $185M. If the City was forced to pay for the whole building, and then lease it out based on competitive rates ($3.5M per year in Edmonton) it would take the City 52.8 years to recoup that money. There is something in there for everyone to love, and something in there for everyone to hate.

Sorry, but I think that is a brutal deal for the City. How is $185 million (let's say $370 million including the ticket tax) a "helluva deal" for rent from the Flames when the building costs $550 million to develop (plus generates zero property tax). It's just the City taking a guaranteed and horrific loss on its investment.

And why on earth should the local hotel industry have to subsidize the Flames?

EDIT: for some reason, I thought you proposed a hotel tax.

In any event, my point remains the same.

In any event, municipalities are creature of provincial legislation. They only have whatever tax authority granted to them by the province.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Bingo

This is the stuff that I don't like.



Shill?



There are 1000s of pro city comments in this section, 1000s, are they city shills? The guy has a difference of opinion, let that stand on merit and discuss what you do or don't agree with.



Labeling him as a shill is the weakest form of argument existing.

New Era has consistently twisted himself into a pretzel to make this the city's fault no matter what , short of the city just giving the flames a new rink he basically thinks it's a bad idea. If that's his position then we have all heard enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Par]

Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks

How? Pay less then 100% of costs but keep 100% of revenue? How is that a bad deal?

The Flames pay their share + they pay the property taxes(so the city gets it money back through ticket sales, ticket sales that will come from Flames games.) And have not heard what the Flames have to say.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

This is turning into a bad drama playing out in public. Like a dysfunctional couple yelling at each other over money issues in a restaurant.

See, this is something I've been saying for a while now. We've got the head of the CSEC dealing with the head of the City, maybe we need different people sitting in the seats talking this over.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

New Era has consistently twisted himself into a pretzel to make this the city's fault no matter what , short of the city just giving the flames a new rink he basically thinks it's a bad idea. If that's his position then we have all heard enough.

There are 10x that many people doing the exact same the other way.

Guess what! You can ignore him then!

Try it.

[rotten42]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

New Era has consistently twisted himself into a pretzel to make this the city's fault no matter what , short of the city just giving the flames a new rink he basically thinks it's a bad idea. If that's his position then we have all heard enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No...he just has a different point of view and you are all butt-hurt over it. Clearly you can't tolerate that somebody else sees things different than you. Maybe the internet isn't a safe place for you.

[GGG]

I think NewEras position is the Edmonton deal set the market and Calgary if they want to keep the flames Needs to have its deal approach the dumpster fire in the North. He is "willing" to pay close to that price to keep them.

So fair to him becomes better than a dumpster fire. It's a reasonable position to take, not a shill.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by Par

The Flames pay their share + they pay the property taxes(so the city gets it money back through ticket sales, ticket sales that will come from Flames games.) And have not heard what the Flames have to say.

I don't understand what you are saying here?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think NewEras position is the Edmonton deal set the market and Calgary if they want to keep the flames Needs to have its deal approach the dumpster fire in the North. He is "willing" to pay close to that price to keep them.

So fair to him becomes better than a dumpster fire. It's a reasonable position to take though, not a shill.

See, I dont see that. I think the 'Edmonton Deal' as largely acknowledged as an outlier as opposed to a benchmark.

[Gaskal]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

King has called a press conference for 11:30 AM MT.

"We've agreed to build the new arena with the City's proposal, and by the way, here's Jaromir Jagr."

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by rotten42

No...he just has a different point of view and you are all butt-hurt over it. Clearly you can't tolerate that somebody else sees things different than you. Maybe the internet isn't a safe place for you.

I'm sorry, but NewEra and IAmNotKenKing are a totally different breed than simply having a different opinion. Estrada has a different opinion and I find his takes to mostly be fine, if misguided (IMO of course). NewEra, who doesn't even live in Calgary and seemingly looks for every reason to bash the city, is actually a decent poster outside these types of threads, but he's so absurd in this thread it's pretty sad actually. And he pot shots and goes after posters as much as anyone.

In some ways I'd kinda like to make a deal, me and the other posters who are on the other side (but it's wrong to say we want no city contribution) will stay out of these threads if NewEra and IAmNotKenKng do too. I think that's actually fair. But when they make the posts they does, they're basically quasi trolling.

[Par]

Originally Posted by Makarov

I don't understand what you are saying here?

What I am saying is that the City will get there money back through property taxes and the Flames will take all the risks of trying to fill the arena for events(what happens if there not enough events, other than the Flames home games, there are no guarantees for the Flames.)

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Bingo

There are 10x that many people doing the exact same the other way.

This not true.

[Makarov]

Originally Posted by GGG

I think NewEras position is the Edmonton seal set the market and Calgary if they want to keep the flames Needs to have its deal approach the dumpster fire in the North. He is "willing" to pay close to that price.

My response to that is that the relative bargaining positions are very different in this case.

[FlamesNation23]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

King has called a press conference for 11:30 AM MT.

Does anyone know if this is being streamed somewhere? I want to watch this

[calgaryblood]

No wonder the Flames didn't want the details released.

They come out looking really bad and likely have helped Nenshi in the election and in the eye of Calgarians over this arena issue.

That deal is more than fair.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

New Era has consistently twisted himself into a pretzel to make this the city's fault no matter what , short of the city just giving the flames a new rink he basically thinks it's a bad idea. If that's his position then we have all heard enough.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And that isn't my position. My position is a fair deal for all, which is not what the majority of this board want. I want a deal that works for the Flames, the City and the tax payers. Unfortunately there are circumstances that make this very difficult, like a refusal to understand or even acknowledge the structure of the Edmonton deal. But I digress counselor, precedent doesn't matter in most people's world, right? Excuse me, but I have some shillery to move on to.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by FlamesNation23

Does anyone know if this is being streamed somewhere? I want to watch this

No video but this will provide the audio.

http://player.sportsnet960.ca/

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

This not true.

Are you asking me to go back and count them? It's an estimate. You don't see this site as having a lean towards the city in this debate?

Either way at least you responded instead of just thanking every post that takes a pot shot at me.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by New Era

And that isn't my position. My position is a fair deal for all, which is not what the majority of this board want. I want a deal that works for the Flames, the City and the tax payers. Unfortunately there are circumstances that make this very difficult, like a refusal to understand or even acknowledge the structure of the Edmonton deal. But I digress counselor, precedent doesn't matter in most people's world, right? Excuse me, but I have some shillery to move on to.

Listen, the Edmonton was an absolute disaster. Katz basically put up 50 million of his own capital for a 600 million project. That is absolutely ridiculous. if that deal is "fair" to you, then you and I have a very different definition of fair.