[News] Ken King: Flames' owners no longer pursuing new arena with City of Calgary

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Are you Seriously saying that you don't think Calgary would not need some sort of civic centre just because they don't have a hockey team? Any city of our size needs a venue to hold 17-20,000 people. Our rink has about a 5 year shelf life left, ten if we are lucky.

The Flames not being here would not chance the requirment for some sort of new venue at all. What it changes is we are now on the hook for 100% of the cost and the cost of operations and overhead.

Yes, I'm actually quite curious about what you think the stadium is used for. So hockey and lacrosse, concerts, what else exactly needs 17-20k (which a new stadium wouldn't hold btw) capacity? Look at the events they host, concerts and hockey. The odd trade show is just as well hosted in the Corral!

There's plenty of facilities for hosting events on the Stampede grounds.

Sure a stadium is nice, and a fancy new one would be great. But without the Flames the city isn't going to spend +400M to host concerts...

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Are you Seriously saying that you don't think Calgary would not need some sort of civic centre just because they don't have a hockey team? Any city of our size needs a venue to hold 17-20,000 people. Our rink has about a 5 year shelf life left, ten if we are lucky.

The Flames not being here would not chance the requirment for some sort of new venue at all. What it changes is we are now on the hook for 100% of the cost and the cost of operations and overhead.

honest question as I have no clue on the ageing of buildings, what possibly could happen to it in the next 5-10 years to make it un-usable?

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

honest question as I have no clue on the ageing of buildings, what possibly could happen to it in the next 5-10 years to make it un-usable?

It's already basically unusable for any concerts with a stage setup, and last year they basically has to cancel a concert because of 5-10 cm of snow (Eric Church agreed to play acoustic which it wouldn't have done). If we were getting the volume of concerts we used to we likely would have seen a lot more of this last year.

Aside From the fact that it is 28 years old, I've also heard rumours (not sure if true or Not), that the roof was damaged and there was a bunch of patchwork repairs, and Then the flood and similar patchwork repairs occurred. Fully planned on a new stadium so there was really no point in throwing buckets of money into it. Eventually a lot of work needs to be done, and there's no real point in doing that given the age of the stadium.

[Willi Plett]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

It's already basically unusable for any concerts with a stage setup, and last year they basically has to cancel a concert because of 5-10 cm of snow (Eric Church agreed to play acoustic which it wouldn't have done). If we were getting the volume of concerts we used to we likely would have seen a lot more of this last year.

Aside From the fact that it is 28 years old, I've also heard rumours (not sure if true or Not), that the roof was damaged and there was a bunch of patchwork repairs, and Then the flood and similar patchwork repairs occurred. Fully planned on a new stadium so there was really no point in throwing buckets of money into it. Eventually a lot of work needs to be done, and there's no real point in doing that given the age of the stadium.

City should be able to fix it under the art budget, no?

[littlereddevil]

Originally Posted by dino7c

you guys are all acting like your girlfriend just dumped you...

"won't miss her anyways"

"I will just date Austin Matthews"

"Girls are a waste of time anyway, I can spend the time doing something wise like studying Viking history"

lol

I beg to differ. Don't you know I'm 1/4 Icelandic and Norse???

[getbak]

Originally Posted by thealpineoracle

aside from the fact that it is 28 years old

34.

[TheOnlyBilko]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Rolling on the floor laughing! I honestly don't care if they leave. Also don't care if they stay.

Says the guy who is on this board for hours, everyday, reading & posting about the Flames

[TheOnlyBilko]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Empty office buildings right now. But that's right City continue on this path. At least San Diego, having lost its NFL team, still has its beaches and climate.

San Diego is actually one of the most beautiful, nicest city's around

[TheOnlyBilko]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The owners don't have enough luxury boxes to sell, ticket prices aren't high enough, and Jay Z won't come here.

Woe is us.

Eminem won't come here either and he is confirmed to play Edmonton in 2018, so there's that too

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Sad. One group wants to protect Calgarians, the other wants to charge the ticket buyer more and raid the pocketbook of the taxpayer for the same product dressed up with a few more bells and whistles.

I'm not opposed to a fair deal, a new arena is a pure luxury and one of questionable value at that. If King and Co want to start putting up a stink and making noise, I say let them, because I can't see how this doesn't backfire spectacularly in their faces.

You're asking a city full of people who had to re-examine their financial situation and undergo some pretty difficult times all around to raid their city tax revenue for more luxury boxes, more expensive seats, and maybe a fancy new jumbotron. It just seems tone-deaf.

I'm quoting this because I'm sure many missed it, but this is the most important post in this thread. To add on it to, I'm kinda of blown away how many people are willingly letting themselves be emotionally manipulated by ownership....and not just that, but seem to be happy to be emotionally manipulated so long as they get the arena. The Flames are willing to use you to get what they want. Me, personally, would be offended beyond belief if someone tried to do that to me. I'd also add if they get what they want here, why wouldn't they emotionally manipulate you to get even more later? Seems to me they'd be idiots not to do it if it already worked.

But the arena is not the cure all people think. Concerts are still going to skip Calgary. That's not up for debate, I hope. The average fan? Hopefully they enjoy the audio lags on Sportsnet, because with the guaranteed price increase in tickets they'll be priced out before long, assuming they aren't already. I fully get the rich fan supporting this, the Edmonton arena sounds like it's separated the plebs from them so there's definitely incentive for the rich fan. Average fan though? No, not even close. The average fan subsidizes rich owners and rich fans. How anyone who isn't wealthy supports this is peculiar to say the least.

The only guarantee a new arena brings is the Flames make more money, off the backs of "loyal fans" paying more money for essentially the same thing. But all the other arguments being made in support of an arena? Just hopes and dreams mostly. What's most concerning is people who want a mayor who will capitulate to the Flames. Do people really think that mayor is going to only capitulate to the Flames? You might love Bill Smith for giving the Flames an arena, but will you still love him when he sends property taxes higher to capitulate to developers? Something tells me not so much.

[CF84]

Originally Posted by nik-

Until 25 years from now when they want another new arena and then the current mayor is the new Nenshi and it starts over again.

This isn't Nenshi, this is a municipality trying to avoid the pattern of bad arena deals for their cities.

Awesome. Calgary will be one of the only cities that avoids building a new arena! Sure Madison Square Garden is older, but every other arena is at least 10 years newer than the Saddledome.

Calgary will also be the stupid city that lost it's NHL team because of pride.

[Fire]

Are the people who are angry about the Flames wanting the city to pay for a large portion of the arena still bitter that the Flames owners didn't pay for the Saddledome?

After about 5 more years in the dome the Flames will be struggling to remain a cap team. After the 10 year mark they will probably be forced to sell.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

When Ken King says they had unproductive meetings, I know he is 100% right on that.

*snip*

TO me it's very clear what needs to go on in an arena deal. Instead of corrupt olympic bids (isn't it funny corrupt people attract to corrupt people) keep it closer to home. The proposition of 1/3 owner, 1/3 ticket tax and 1/3 city funding is the ultimate hybrid to a solution.

So you know he's 100% right, then propose the same deal the city has reportedly proposed as the solution?

The deal the Flames have now walked away from and it is the city that is being unproductive and unreasonable?

The city recoups in that they can end up with ownership of the building in property in due time

This is not a benefit, and people need to stop pretending like it is. The city gains nothing from owning the building and gives up property tax. Then they are left with a building that has no value at the end of the life cycle.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

According to news reports, Murray Edwards is no longer a resident of either Calgary or Canada, from which one can reasonably assume that he also pays taxes to neither.

What he is worth is likely not relevant. What is relevant is that (putatively) a non-resident, non-taxpayer is expecting taxpaying citizens of both Calgary and Canada to pay for his toys.

Personally and professionally, I object to that if it is the case.

His company's do pay taxes, millions and millions of taxes.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

This has been discussed and it's a relatively weak argument. Nobody is privy to the language in the contract but I'm sure the NHL fully considered that a team could be added or subtracted over the duration of the deal. I don't think for a second that they would stand in the way of a team relocating because of the TV deal as they could easily offset that with moving the Coyotes to Quebec who is waiting with open arms. That contract is great and all but the NHL survived fine without it and they would do fine with a little less change seeing they would be gaining a large US market.

If you think that a billion dollar TV contact does not have very specific clauses about the exact amount of games televised from current Canadian teams then there is no hope for you. It is a certainty that should a Canadian team leave then SN will have the ability to re-open the contract for negotiation and they may even have the ability to walk away. Would the NHL board tempt this fate?

The TV contact is probably the best tangible example of why relocation will never happen.

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by CF84

Awesome. Calgary will be one of the only cities that avoids building a new arena! Sure Madison Square Garden is older, but every other arena is at least 10 years newer than the Saddledome.

Calgary will also be the stupid city that lost it's NHL team because of pride.

I don't know how many times this needs to be repeated in this thread but there is nothing holding the owners back from building a new arena all they need to do is pay for it.

That this most basic point is somehow lost shows just how warped our understanding of this issue is.

The crazy train is going off the rails for the arena supporters.

[CF84]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

I'm quoting this because I'm sure many missed it, but this is the most important post in this thread. To add on it to, I'm kinda of blown away how many people are willingly letting themselves be emotionally manipulated by ownership....and not just that, but seem to be happy to be emotionally manipulated so long as they get the arena. The Flames are willing to use you to get what they want. Me, personally, would be offended beyond belief if someone tried to do that to me. I'd also add if they get what they want here, why wouldn't they emotionally manipulate you to get even more later? Seems to me they'd be idiots not to do it if it already worked.

But the arena is not the cure all people think. Concerts are still going to skip Calgary. That's not up for debate, I hope. The average fan? Hopefully they enjoy the audio lags on Sportsnet, because with the guaranteed price increase in tickets they'll be priced out before long, assuming they aren't already. I fully get the rich fan supporting this, the Edmonton arena sounds like it's separated the plebs from them so there's definitely incentive for the rich fan. Average fan though? No, not even close. The average fan subsidizes rich owners and rich fans. How anyone who isn't wealthy supports this is peculiar to say the least.

The only guarantee a new arena brings is the Flames make more money, off the backs of "loyal fans" paying more money for essentially the same thing. But all the other arguments being made in support of an arena? Just hopes and dreams mostly. What's most concerning is people who want a mayor who will capitulate to the Flames. Do people really think that mayor is going to only capitulate to the Flames? You might love Bill Smith for giving the Flames an arena, but will you still love him when he sends property taxes higher to capitulate to developers? Something tells me not so much.

You say it's people being emotionally manipulated, however I dislike Calgary, as a city, and would be fine if the team moved away.

You don't know about how big a difference an arena makes when a band is deciding weather they will make a stop through your city. I've toured across North America for years in bands and although we only got to theatre size, the venue was always a factor when booking shows. Bands remember bad experiences from a difficult load-in to horrible acoustics to an uncomfortable green room. The Saddledome has a bad reputation in the industry so why wouldn't a new arena encourage new entertainment to stop through?

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...omes-drawbacks

Calgary would once again become a viable option for bands and entertainment, if a new arena was built.

[calgaryblood]

It has been proven over and over that concerts don't add any economic benefits to cities so why are bands/concerts still used as a reason on why we should build a new arena using tax payer money?

Who cares which band comes here for the night, sucks up our money and spends it elsewhere.

[Boreal]

Ken King is a silver tongued corporate grifter. Yes he is the front man for the Flames ownership group & the city has a responsibility to structure the conditions to develop an entertainment district for civic benefit, not optimal corporate benefit.

They get one shot to do this right.

Obviously the city's "vision" or control of the district does not align with the Flames. Ken's statements yesterday are obviously a power play for the Flames own worship to have more control over the arena & entertainment district development.

Ken & the owners have little interest in understanding community development & apparently less interest in adhering to the process challenges any land developer faces with a project of this magnitude.

Ken's brother Rick King was no different when he pontificated about developing land outside of Saskatoon 6 years ago.

https://issuu.com/ccgazette/docs/20110915-complete

[IMG][/IMG]

King said too often regulations unduly restrict development. "That's not free enterprise," he said, "let the developers spend their millions of dollars and let the free enterprise system pick out the best developments."

The "free enterprise system" he references is the management of public trust & public investment. Ultimately developers of his ilk want to utilize the public to externalize any & every risk or cost in their pursuit of optimal profit.

Burke is also ignorant to the challenges of municipal development. He said earlier this year that he was shocked the City didn't thank them for CalgaryNext.

Even Richard Peddie, former CEO of MLSE, said the Flames need to bring more to the table.

https://m.soundcloud.com/invisiblecitypodcast/ep006
(23:51 - 26:47).

[the-rasta-masta]

I have been on the Flames side for most of this, and I believe there is a big public benefit to having a new arena and creating an entertainment district around this new development.

But, after listening to King on the radio yesterday, I just felt like I was being manipulated and the whole approach was immature and transparent. It's totally clear that an arena isn't a great investment when the anchor tenant, who can afford it if they wanted to, is unwilling to foot the bill themselves. If a new building makes the Flames so incredibly viable compared to the Saddledome, then why don't they build it? To be totally honest, as a fan, I still love the Dome and I'm not entirely sure a new building changes my game experience in any large way. All it does is change the bottom line for the Flames. I think what the city has offered as a structure sounds incredible fair.

Imagine if a restaurant came up to you and asked you to give $200 to them. When you ask whats in it for you, they say they are going to build a new dining room and its going to allow them to charge you $20 more for the same steak you've got in front of you. Are you going to pull out your wallet?