12-21-2021, 06:58 PM
|
#101
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Field near Field, AB
|
Climate Change for 4.5 million?
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 06:58 PM
|
#102
|
|
It's not easy being green!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: In the tubes to Vancouver Island
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royle9
So when you purchase your vehicle the dealership and then sign the contract for your F150 for 75k and then you go to pick it up and they tell you sorry it’s now 125k because it costs them more to make it.. what would you do?
This is 100% city pandering to the political bull####.
|
This isn’t quite right, it’s more like when you buy a condo or house and the cost of materials rises, you can get a bill from the builder for excesses or you can walk away. The Flames are choosing the latter.
__________________
Who is in charge of this product and why haven't they been fired yet?
|
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 06:59 PM
|
#103
|
|
Powerplay Quarterback
|
It seems pretty conceivable to me that two things can be true at the same time here. It may be true that Gondek swooped in a the final hour and tried to fiddle with some numbers (lame, though probably common in contract negotiations), and it could also be true that this presents itself as a golden parachute for Edwards and co. to bail on what was probably going to be a significantly cost-inflated project over what was originally planned (also quite lame).
Who people will blame here will depend on a lot of things and whom they're more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to, I imagine.
__________________
Is your cat doing singing?
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Max Cow Disease For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 06:59 PM
|
#104
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torture
|
I think this is the important tweet (best to read the whole thread though):
https://twitter.com/user/status/1473467788576497664
Suggests it’s CSEC looking for $$$ here, not the other way around.
That’s her take though; I’m sure CSEC sees it differently.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to tvp2003 For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 06:59 PM
|
#105
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA/Scottsdale, AZ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarywinning
Climate Change for 4.5 million?
|
Yep. Attached as a condition of the development permit approval.
Pretty slimy if you ask me.
__________________
It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DoubleK For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 06:59 PM
|
#106
|
Participant  |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royle9
So when you purchase your vehicle the dealership and then sign the contract for your F150 for 75k and then you go to pick it up and they tell you sorry it’s now 125k because it costs them more to make it.. what would you do?
This is 100% city pandering to the political bull####.
|
Well, it’s more like you’re splitting the cost of a $80k truck with someone and you want to add the rock chip protection to the hood and split the cost and they tell you to #### off and that they don’t want to buy the truck anymore.
But sure, whichever version makes you more angry.
|
|
|
|
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to PepsiFree For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:01 PM
|
#107
|
|
Franchise Player
|
No more politics for me!
|
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:02 PM
|
#108
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
|
Sorry, did they officially walk away or threaten to walk away?
|
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:03 PM
|
#109
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK
Yep. Attached as a condition of the development permit approval.
Pretty slimy if you ask me.
|
Things like rooftop solar asked for inclusion by the City, a condition of occupancy (so they could seek a partner) during construction period were agreed to by the applicant. There is nothing underhanded here.
__________________
Trust the snake.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:04 PM
|
#110
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Cow Disease
It seems pretty conceivable to me that two things can be true at the same time here. It may be true that Gondek swooped in a the final hour and tried to fiddle with some numbers (lame, though probably common in contract negotiations), and it could also be true that this presents itself as a golden parachute for Edwards and co. to bail on what was probably going to be a significantly cost-inflated project over what was originally planned (also quite lame).
Who people will blame here will depend on a lot of things and whom they're more likely to give the benefit of the doubt to, I imagine.
|
This is likely the most logical case here. Easy out for the flames on a project that was going to be way over budget.
|
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:05 PM
|
#111
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Calgary, AB
|
What an embarrassment Gondek has been so far. Didn't think I would miss Nenshi.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Fire For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:05 PM
|
#112
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Bettman to double down and move the Flames to Arizona
Phoenix Phlames
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Geeoff For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:05 PM
|
#113
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA/Scottsdale, AZ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk
Things like rooftop solar asked for inclusion by the City, a condition of occupancy (so they could seek a partner) during construction period were agreed to by the applicant. There is nothing underhanded here.
|
Then that should have been in the specification for the building. Clearly it wasn't.
That's the literal definition of underhanded.
__________________
It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to DoubleK For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:06 PM
|
#114
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Conflicting reports on who was on hook for additional costs
|
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:07 PM
|
#115
|
|
Jordan!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Chandler, AZ
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geeoff
Bettman to double down and move the Flames to Arizona
Phoenix Phlames
|
Who’s moving to Houston first? Arizona or Calgary?
Who breaks ground first? Arizona or Calgary
Flames to Quebec City?
Yotes to Houston?
I’m done with the NHL. FML
|
|
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:07 PM
|
#116
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Barthelona
|
It's wild how many people are happy to side with a billionaire who allegedly has a history of bad faith negotiations.
This dude does not have any interest in bettering the fan experience; everything is about the real estate.
Considering trends in material cost and availability, it feels to me like this is CSEC taking an easy out.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snipetype
k im just not going to respond to your #### anymore because i have better things to do like #### my model girlfriend rather then try to convince people like you of commonly held hockey knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 41 Users Say Thank You to Mass_nerder For This Useful Post:
|
1991 Canadian,
aaronck,
boogerz,
Calgary Highlander,
Captain Chuckles,
Cecil Terwilliger,
ClubFlames,
Cole436,
combustiblefuel,
DownInFlames,
FlameOn,
Flames0910,
FlamesFanInOilCountry,
FlatLandFlamesFan,
FormerPresJamesTaylor,
Hockey_Ninja,
iLoveLamp,
Insufficient Funds,
jayocal,
jayswin,
Johnny Makarov,
Kasi,
MarchHare,
Montagna,
mrkajz44,
Muta,
Ozy_Flame,
Pellanor,
Plett25,
powderjunkie,
ReinhartonD,
Roger,
Sandman,
Stillman16,
theJuice,
topfiverecords,
Torture,
Underdog,
vennegoor of hesselink,
VilleN,
White Out 403
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:08 PM
|
#117
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK
Then that should have been in the specification for the building. Clearly it wasn't.
That's the literal definition of underhanded.
|
I don’t know what you mean by “included in the specification of the building”. The design is determined by the approval process.
__________________
Trust the snake.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Bunk For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:10 PM
|
#118
|
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Field near Field, AB
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RM14
Sorry, did they officially walk away or threaten to walk away?
|
The mayor is on the offensive. So i can bet they have. Goodbye Calgary Flames and a descent venue for musical events.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to calgarywinning For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:10 PM
|
#119
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
This is ####ed for Gondek/city to be trying to alter a deal that's been agreed upon. With the current information, I'm on the Flames side. If that small sum isn't really that big of a deal to Gondek, then the city should pay for it. Which sounds like it's suppose to.
I thought we were done with this ####. Just get it over with. Otherwise I wouldn't blame Flames ownership saying #### it, sell the team, and move.
|
|
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Joborule For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
12-21-2021, 07:12 PM
|
#120
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Barthelona
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoubleK
Then that should have been in the specification for the building. Clearly it wasn't.
That's the literal definition of underhanded.
|
What? Municipalities routinely give provisional DP approval that hinges on action items.
How do you know what is in the building spec? Have you read it?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by snipetype
k im just not going to respond to your #### anymore because i have better things to do like #### my model girlfriend rather then try to convince people like you of commonly held hockey knowledge.
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:26 PM.
|
|
