The time to build this arena was about 6 years ago. The Flames should have had a plan ready that they knew the City would accept so that the project could have been started when the economic downturn started.
Will costs increase in the future? Probably. But I can see both sides being nervous to proceed at this point, with costs increasing so much lately, supply chain issues, and the pandemic. You can complain about restrictions all you want and think they are overblown, but would you risk hundreds of millions of dollars when we could be a few months away from a variant that makes things worse? We're not going back to 2019 normal - what if our new normal becomes a world where 20000 people crammed into an arena for entertainment just doesn't happen anymore?
Maybe it's best to wait and see how things shake out.
And if the only way the Flames can succeed here is to have a puppet mayor who prioritizes an arena over anything else, then I am fine saying good-bye to them. The Flames are a nice to have, not a need to have, IMO.
If they spent 300M on a place for concerts that couldn't handle sporting events and as such had no consistent tenant, they'd be crucified.
Sorry let me clarify, if they built an event centre and concert hall which could do everything that they wanted the new building to do minus the Sports. If they would be crucified for that then they should be crucified for the current deal and we will never get a new event centre.
I believe the best for both sides is for the city to build what they want and the Flames to build what they want. This might even lower the cost of the building the City builds but might increase the cost of the building the Flames build. The added benefit of this would be that they would have the ability to hold more events because they would not be competing for space.
If the City can’t make a concert hall & event centre work where they new building was planned in close proximity to the Stampede grounds and Bell National music centre then they are admitting they need the flames to make a new building work. This would mean that they need the flames and can’t build a new building without them and thus should not make the flames the scape goat/bad guy.
The flames want a new place for them, their CFL team and their WHL team to play out of. If they can’t make a combined building work then they are admitting they need the city and as stated in the previous paragraph they should not make it look like it is the city’s fault. The biggest problem with the original Calgary next was the cleanup which needed to take place and I think if the city was taken out of this responsibility it could make the project viable.
That is my take from a distance without being closer to/in the room. Bottom line is they either build a building together or two/three separate buildings (field house).
The Following User Says Thank You to FranksandBean For This Useful Post:
Am I reading things wrong or did this deal get killed because of posturing on twitter. Not because of any unsolvable financial issues.
complicated.
I read it as the extra 12M was an excuse, and the team wanted to scuttle the deal partly due to uncertainties with Covid, but mostly due to huge cost increases to build the arena.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GordonBlue For This Useful Post:
Sorry let me clarify, if they built an event centre and concert hall which could do everything that they wanted the new building to do minus the Sports. If they would be crucified for that then they should be crucified for the current deal and we will never get a new event centre.
I believe the best for both sides is for the city to build what they want and the Flames to build what they want. This might even lower the cost of the building the City builds but might increase the cost of the building the Flames build. The added benefit of this would be that they would have the ability to hold more events because they would not be competing for space.
If the City can’t make a concert hall & event centre work where they new building was planned in close proximity to the Stampede grounds and Bell National music centre then they are admitting they need the flames to make a new building work. This would mean that they need the flames and can’t build a new building without them and thus should not make the flames the scape goat/bad guy.
The flames want a new place for them, their CFL team and their WHL team to play out of. If they can’t make a combined building work then they are admitting they need the city and as stated in the previous paragraph they should not make it look like it is the city’s fault. The biggest problem with the original Calgary next was the cleanup which needed to take place and I think if the city was taken out of this responsibility it could make the project viable.
That is my take from a distance without being closer to/in the room. Bottom line is they either build a building together or two/three separate buildings (field house).
Do you really think there exists ANY owner, or potential owners that would undertake 100% at their own cost the building of a sports only arena in Calgary, where they would get no other event and therefore no other revenue?
Those investors don't exist. That's one thing that will NEVER happen.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to GordonBlue For This Useful Post:
People can complain about helping "billionaire owners" all they want, but at the end of the day, the reality is Calgary does not have a big enough population where a private owner can build a $600M facility and get positive return on capital. If the city didn't have an NHL team, they would probably fund a smaller $300M public arena.
Right now, with the uncertainty of the Covid environment wreaking havoc on forecasting potential revenues for the next few years, I can see why the Flames would get cold feet in funding this thing.
Gondek and city hall basically inadvertently gave CSEC an out by tacking on all their additional requests, and CSEC took it. Now it will probably cost the city more later one when they do a new 50/50 negotiation.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to The Yen Man For This Useful Post:
If the City can’t make a concert hall & event centre work where they new building was planned in close proximity to the Stampede grounds and Bell National music centre then they are admitting they need the flames to make a new building work.
On a completely unrelated note, I think Calgary sorely lacks a 500-1000 capacity music/concert venue on 17th Avenue. Would be a great location to round out the entertainment options in that area in addition to the established restaurant / street presence. Keeps the ability to walk from venue to venue, and provides an accessible space downtown close to many amenities. Something akin to the Commodore Ballroom in Vancouver.
The Following User Says Thank You to Muta For This Useful Post:
On a completely unrelated note, I think Calgary sorely lacks a 500-1000 capacity music/concert venue on 17th Avenue. Would be a great location to round out the entertainment options in that area in addition to the established restaurant / street presence. Keeps the ability to walk from venue to venue, and provides an accessible space downtown close to many amenities. Something akin to the Commodore Ballroom in Vancouver.
So, put your money up and build it? Obviously there is an untapped market there for you to rake in money hand over fist?
On a completely unrelated note, I think Calgary sorely lacks a 500-1000 capacity music/concert venue on 17th Avenue. Would be a great location to round out the entertainment options in that area in addition to the established restaurant / street presence. Keeps the ability to walk from venue to venue, and provides an accessible space downtown close to many amenities. Something akin to the Commodore Ballroom in Vancouver.
Isn't the Palace on 8th kinda the same thing?
The Following User Says Thank You to OldDutch For This Useful Post:
I don't think the Palace on 8th is a reasonable request for people on 17th ave to consider. Too far of a detour. There definitely should be a venue capable of concerts on 17th ave at that kind of capacity. And for the record I don't consider the Ship as a concert venue - it's a bar that crams in bands.
Edmonton just re-opened the Roxy Theatre on 124th street. Even something like that would go a long way.
Kinda, but a better laid-out venue on 17th would be more successful IMO. Quicker access to restaurants, shopping and other options, closer to/within walking distance from the Beltline and Mission (where lots of young people rent). Stephen Avenue has less of all that as it currently is, and is in a more sketchy area with a seedier vibe.
The Following User Says Thank You to Muta For This Useful Post:
