[News] Calgary, Alberta, & CSEC agree in principle to $1.223bn Event Centre + infrastructure

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

So it always is an ROI thing, even if the return isn't actual dollars.

Keeping the Flames here and revitalizing urban areas are good things that we want, but they can't come at literally any cost...

ROI refers to a financial return in this context.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Great. Since you know, tell me how “it” works

Show me the details on the stadium built with the ROI disclosure you seem to think is necessary

You can Google ROI, or use common sense to figure out that reputable businesses and investors do not calculate ROI by just assuming a bunch of numbers and then taking a guess.

But I’m not the one who brought up ROI, you did. I don’t need to see an ROI disclosure, never asked for one, and I’m hoping you worded that incorrectly because I think we should both know that it’s impossible to present an ROI disclosure on a built stadium when they haven’t even signed an official agreement, let alone broken ground.

My comment was about economic benefit. People, like yourself, keep espousing “obvious” economic benefits. So I’m asking you to show some economic benefit that justifies the cost or justifies this project over other, more important projects that could be developed. Evidence from any arena project will do, there are lots out there.

I don’t believe there is. You do. So I’m just asking you to show me. I don’t care about made up numbers and guesses because that’s an objectively terrible way to justify almost $1b. Just actual evidence of projects like this living up to big claims being made about it.

Not everything has to have an economic benefit. Not everything has to bring a financial return on the investment. Nobody believes that. It’s truly OK a major project doesn’t. But don’t just make one up and use that as the justification. Be OK with saying that the benefits are “intangibles” or whatever, or that you just want it because it’s cool. You don’t have to pretend to be an economist to justify enjoying a new billion dollar arena.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I missed this. Source please?

https://twitter.com/trevortombe/stat...993691140?s=12

Calgary paying $538m for a new arena. Some politicians say there’s no taxpayer cost. That’s misleading. Public money not free + has other uses.

At 5%, the flow value of the subsidy is like a permanent 2.4% increase in res PTax ($88/yr for median res). That’s how I think about it

So you if you support a permanent 2.4% property tax hike in perpetuity so that the Flames get an arena then that is great. Some folks will be against the permanent tax hike though.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

If this was the case do you think that the council vote would be 15-0? Wouldn't some of our more savvy councillors vote against a bad deal that is being pressured on them by the province? I don't believe for a second that Smith bamboozled or was able to coerce the entire council in Calgary.

I hate this deal, but putting myself in a councillor's shoes [albeit with the limited info we have], I'd probably be a very reluctant yes vote. Unfortunately, unlike previous arena votes, this one was in camera, so we don't know how many councillors were plugging their nose when they voted yes. There isn't much political upside to a no vote if you can't even explain your reasoning since your colleagues essentially agreed to a gag order.

I think the city played its hand poorly going back to the initial vote in 2019. Without a time machine, there isn't much chance of undoing that. I don't think the city could realistically do any better here, unless the provincial money fairy was coming in with the goal of making a deal in the best possible public interest


FWIW 2019 no voters are all gone (Evan Woolley, Druh Farrell, Jeromy Farkas and George Chahal). The 2021 revision involved a bunch of motions with different voting patterns that I'm too lazy to check.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You can Google ROI, or use common sense to figure out that reputable businesses and investors do not calculate ROI by just assuming a bunch of numbers and then taking a guess.

But I’m not the one who brought up ROI, you did. I don’t need to see an ROI disclosure, never asked for one, and I’m hoping you worded that incorrectly because I think we should both know that it’s impossible to present an ROI disclosure on a built stadium when they haven’t even signed an official agreement, let alone broken ground.

My comment was about economic benefit. People, like yourself, keep espousing “obvious” economic benefits. So I’m asking you to show some economic benefit that justifies the cost or justifies this project over other, more important projects that could be developed. Evidence from any arena project will do, there are lots out there.

I don’t believe there is. You do. So I’m just asking you to show me. I don’t care about made up numbers and guesses because that’s an objectively terrible way to justify almost $1b. Just actual evidence of projects like this living up to big claims being made about it.

Not everything has to have an economic benefit. Not everything has to bring a financial return on the investment. Nobody believes that. It’s truly OK a major project doesn’t. But don’t just make one up and use that as the justification. Be OK with saying that the benefits are “intangibles” or whatever, or that you just want it because it’s cool. You don’t have to pretend to be an economist to justify enjoying a new billion dollar arena.

Oh my. You’ve lost me.

Thanks for the google tip. I know what ROI is, and I don’t see what you are going for otherwise

You are asking for quantified demonstration of the economic benefit … but not ROI?

I was the one asking you for evidence from past like stadium projects, and you’re asking me for them now?

And you don’t think companies evaluate capital projects by making assumptions and calculating a projected ROI based on those?

Nobody I have seen is representing themselves as an economist. Or claiming that there are quantifiable benefits that Maybe it’s a straw man thing (?)

It is kind of silly. It is clear without accounting for every dollar, this project will take a lot of dollars and reinject them in to the Alberta economy. GST will be collected Albertans will make a lot of money, and also pay tax on it.

I never said it accounted for all dollars, but that is an immediate and demonstrable partial return on the investment

And if you think made up guesses is a terrible way to justify 1B? Lol.
What do you think 5% IRR is?

I don’t know, man. You’ve lost me

Certainly there will be intangible benefits

It will improve a pretty dumpy area of the city

The NHL might not call in disallowed goals off Coleman’s skate any more

You must have missed the part of my post that says Taylor Swift might come

[nieuwy-89]

I’m kind of disgusted that a forum of Calgary Flames fans can’t get behind this. This deal will keep the Flames in Calgary for the long term, make us competitive with other Canadian franchises, and breathe new life into a tired downtown core. For the first time in a year, my kids are excited about the future of the Flames.

This thread is a total downer at a very low point in the “hockey” part of the franchise. A new arena anchoring an entertainment district in the heart of your city is something to be excited about. The proof is in the pudding - look at any major new sports development in North America. This will be amazing for the Flames and for Calgary.

[Samonadreau]

People should be all for this deal. It looks like a much better project than the first itteration, only problem is cost of goods and inflation probably makes this project $200M+ more than it was 5 years ago.

[Bonded]

Originally Posted by nieuwy-89

I’m kind of disgusted that a forum of Calgary Flames fans can’t get behind this. This deal will keep the Flames in Calgary for the long term, make us competitive with other Canadian franchises, and breathe new life into a tired downtown core. For the first time in a year, my kids are excited about the future of the Flames.

This thread is a total downer at a very low point in the “hockey” part of the franchise. A new arena anchoring an entertainment district in the heart of your city is something to be excited about. The proof is in the pudding - look at any major new sports development in North America. This will be amazing for the Flames and for Calgary.

There’s a balance. Am I glad there is a new arena, sure. However, I can hate the total screw job the city and province is taking to enrich a group of billionaires.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by nieuwy-89

I’m kind of disgusted that a forum of Calgary Flames fans can’t get behind this. This deal will keep the Flames in Calgary for the long term, make us competitive with other Canadian franchises, and breathe new life into a tired downtown core. For the first time in a year, my kids are excited about the future of the Flames.

This thread is a total downer at a very low point in the “hockey” part of the franchise. A new arena anchoring an entertainment district in the heart of your city is something to be excited about. The proof is in the pudding - look at any major new sports development in North America. This will be amazing for the Flames and for Calgary.

Is there any level of cost to taxpayers where you would have been against the deal?

$2 billion?

$4 billion?

$10 billion?

The upside to getting a new arena is obvious to Flames fans. But you can't blame people for being frustrated when they look at what it's going to cost us...

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Goriders

If you’re a socialist or a union head like her husband yes.

I’d rather be a socialist than a corporate socialist. At least socialists support actual people and not grifting billionaires.

[Wormius]

It is exciting to get a new arena.

The way it came about and the undue requirement for everybody, but the Flames ownership to pay for it, while they and probably Ticketmaster, reap all the financial benefits is what’s putting a damper on the mood.

[Enoch Root]

Great news!

A project doesn't have to be 'better than any other way to allocate the funds, or else it is a bad decision'. If that were the bar, basically nothing would ever get built.

It will revitalize the area, which is a primary goal of the project, and a worthy one.

Would I rather CSEC pay for the whole thing themselves? Sure, of course. But that's not the reality. It isn't going to stop hospitals from getting built - cities do actually spend money on other things.

[zamler]

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Oh my. You’ve lost me.

Thanks for the google tip. I know what ROI is, and I don’t see what you are going for otherwise

You are asking for quantified demonstration of the economic benefit … but not ROI?

I don’t think you were ever found, tbh. You started out by responding to my post highlighting all the vague generalizations people have used to justify the arena by repeating the same vague generalizations.

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

I was the one asking you for evidence from past like stadium projects, and you’re asking me for them now?

Why would you ask me for evidence from past stadium projects when you’re one of the people who made the claim? I’m supposed to provide evidence if something you believe to be true and I don’t believe there’s any evidence of? Does that make sense to you?

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

It is kind of silly. It is clear without accounting for every dollar, this project will take a lot of dollars and reinject them in to the Alberta economy. GST will be collected Albertans will make a lot of money, and also pay tax on it.

This is true of lots of projects. A lot of them don’t cost almost $1b of public money. A lot that do have much more crucial benefits beyond the economic side. So why is it unreasonable to ask that the people touting economic benefit actually show one that justifies the cost? If you’re going to bring it up as something that justifies it, it… should… no? Or there’s no point in bringing it up.

Again, it’s fine if the answer is “we need entertainment.” But if you’re going to pretend the justification for this is the economic benefits, you have to actually show it. That seems straightforward.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by zamler

What the actual Christ?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bonded

There’s a balance. Am I glad there is a new arena, sure. However, I can hate the total screw job the city and province is taking to enrich a group of billionaires.

Exactly. It’s pretty easy to be happy with all the cool stuff that comes with the arena and recognize the intangible benefits without fudging the numbers and pretending this is some economic windfall or good deal.

The deal sucks. It’ll cost more public money than it’ll ever return, while the CSEC can easily recoup their investment far easier. It’s corporate welfare. We can recognize that and still enjoy the thing when it’s built. Nobody has to pretend this is anything more than it is.

[DeluxeMoustache]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I don’t think you were ever found, tbh. You started out by responding to my post highlighting all the vague generalizations people have used to justify the arena by repeating the same vague generalizations.



Why would you ask me for evidence from past stadium projects when you’re one of the people who made the claim? I’m supposed to provide evidence if something you believe to be true and I don’t believe there’s any evidence of? Does that make sense to you?



This is true of lots of projects. A lot of them don’t cost almost $1b of public money. A lot that do have much more crucial benefits beyond the economic side. So why is it unreasonable to ask that the people touting economic benefit actually show one that justifies the cost? If you’re going to bring it up as something that justifies it, it… should… no? Or there’s no point in bringing it up.

Again, it’s fine if the answer is “we need entertainment.” But if you’re going to pretend the justification for this is the economic benefits, you have to actually show it. That seems straightforward.

Yeah I don’t think anyone is doing that

Straw man it is

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Yeah I don’t think anyone is doing that

Straw man it is

Anyone is doing what? What straw man?

You barely know what conversation you’re in, you’re asking people for evidence of things they believe there is no evidence of and trying to dispute the idea that people are relying on vague generalizations by repeating vague generalizations.

This isn’t some argument anyone is trying to win. It’s just a conversation. If it’s that serious that you think people are setting up straw men by asking you to explain something maybe you should take a walk outside.

[zamler]

^^ I'm thinking drugs are involved.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by nieuwy-89

I’m kind of disgusted that a forum of Calgary Flames fans can’t get behind this. This deal will keep the Flames in Calgary for the long term, make us competitive with other Canadian franchises, and breathe new life into a tired downtown core. For the first time in a year, my kids are excited about the future of the Flames.

This thread is a total downer at a very low point in the “hockey” part of the franchise. A new arena anchoring an entertainment district in the heart of your city is something to be excited about. The proof is in the pudding - look at any major new sports development in North America. This will be amazing for the Flames and for Calgary.

Honestly I’m not super into grifting billionaires or giving them a ton of money either, but I’m not even sure it’s all that relevant. This isn’t like some private bakery getting a handout, let’s get real. A pro sports team obviously does way more for the culture and fabric of a community than many other types of businesses because it literally represents the place you’re from. It’s not like Rob’s auto body has the same emotional appeal to the masses.

I’m also a little surprised that people value negligible tax impacts more than keeping the Flames in Calgary. Because that’s really the impact to you. If you do a deal you need to not so much view it as to if the opposite side is “winning or losing” (because in this situation, they were always going to “win”), but moreso view it holistically as are you winning. And I think if the Flames are staying in Calgary for decades, you’re winning. Does it mean there are real opportunity costs for taxes that could be otherwise “better” spent? Yes. Do we know what those are or could have been? No. So what’s the point of all this angst? I dunno. Calgarians are more and more starting to be, well, kinda just ####ty fans, really.