New Edmonton Arena Construction will begin in March 2014

[Street Pharmacist]

Not saying I approve of tax payers funding an arena, but but.....


If ROI was only in money our cities would look like Soviet Russia

[Mr.Coffee]

I just don't get what the big deal is, I've been to other rinks and yes they are obviously nicer but I don't sit around thinking about it, I am there to watch the game. The Saddledome isn't THAT bad that it is a distraction or a turn off to going (obviously, the place is filled).

The Saddledome is what, 30 years old? In the next 100 years are we going to build 3 huge hockey arenas and keep knocking down the old ones?

[saskflames69]

If they replaced the Saddledome's roof so the upper level views weren't so obstructed and expanded the concourses a bit, they wouldn't need a new arena.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by saskflames69

If they replaced the Saddledome's roof so the upper level views weren't so obstructed and expanded the concourses a bit, they wouldn't need a new arena.

Yes, if they turned the Saddledome into a completely different arena, they wouldn't need to replace it with a new arena.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Explain.

The specific argument that increasing property values is not a benefit to the city is unsound. Either the tax rate goes down or revenues go up. That's all I was saying.

[BlackRedGold25]

Originally Posted by SebC

The specific argument that increasing property values is not a benefit to the city is unsound. Either the tax rate goes down or revenues go up. That's all I was saying.

But property values going up in the area around a new arena might cause property values elsewhere in the city to go up less than they would if a new arena is not built. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

[-TC-]

Originally Posted by BlackRedGold25

But property values going up in the area around a new arena might cause property values elsewhere in the city to go up less than they would if a new arena is not built. These things don't happen in a vacuum.

...? I'm trying to understand what you are saying but I don't get it.

Property values are driven by demand for the land surrounding a development.

If you build a high value/high demand property then surrounding values will go up.

Building an arena downtown won't have a negative effect on the rest of the city...except fo rmaybe Northlands and that's because it's already subsidized I believe.

[-TC-]

Originally Posted by belsarius

I understand the bigger picture and I am not completely anti-arena. I was/am fully behind the 100M investment the city has already agreed to. It will help, however there has to be an end. The fact that Katz is already coming back with his hand out and the unsaid threat to move the team is too much.

The city had figured out what the benifit would be worth, how much they could afford to invest to assist in that, but it's not enough, and will never be enough. Ground isn't even broke yet and there are already overages.. what happens when this thing is half complete and another 20M is needed? Why should the city be held ransom to now house their office in his office tower?

It would be a nicety to have, it might rejuvinate downtown, then again it might just be empty office rooms and a nice pedway for the homeless to take shelter during the winter when there isn't an Oiler game on.

Living on the southside I hate having to travel all the way to the NE and fear getting stabbed everytime I walk around there. But the city can't let themselves be held hostage in this. They've pledged an amount and they have to stick to their guns on it. If that means its a little less asthetics and a little more form, it will still be better than the current arena.

But again, the actual increase in revenue will be very minor until this thing is paid off. Rexall is already home to sporting events, concerts etc and yes there may be a few more but overall the increase will be minor overall adn that increase will go to paying this arena off.

I'm happy the city helped get the project going, but I am not happy if they simply open the city's coffers every time Katz needs more money.

I agree that there should be cost containment but I also think that $500MCDN is not a bad number all things considered.

[BlackRedGold25]

Originally Posted by -TC-

...? I'm trying to understand what you are saying but I don't get it.

Property values are driven by demand for the land surrounding a development.

If you build a high value/high demand property then surrounding values will go up.

Building an arena downtown won't have a negative effect on the rest of the city...except fo rmaybe Northlands and that's because it's already subsidized I believe.

It's pretty simple. There's only so much demand for property in Edmonton. Building a rink doesn't create more demand for property (unless people/companies outside of Edmonton start wanting Edmonton property for the first time). So the higher demand for the property around the new rink will reduce the demand for property elsewhere in Edmonton. That property elsewhere in Edmonton will see property values decline or rise less than they would if the arena wasn't built.

[Walter Reed]

The chances of the Oilers relocating to another city are as remote as the Flames leaving Calgary.

[corporatejay]

“I’m focused on making this deal work — God knows, I’ve spent enough money,” Katz said. “My wife thinks I’m nuts, OK?
“If this deal doesn’t work, what can I say, obviously all bets are off and we’ll have to figure out what comes next. And I don’t know what that will be.”

What a hero.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...650/story.html

[Fire]

Katz should sell the team if he doesn't put up at least 50% of the money for a new arena. I'm sure there would be other interested parties that want to keep the team in Edmonton.

[Joborule]

'Nobody can question my good faith or my commitment'

They sure can when you're asking the city to basically pay for most of it.

I get why he's doing it, but he doesn't have to make his BS's so blatant.

[BigFlameDog]

Originally Posted by saskflames69

If they replaced the Saddledome's roof so the upper level views weren't so obstructed and expanded the concourses a bit, they wouldn't need a new arena.

I am confused, the building was built that way specifically so there would be no obstructed views.....what is obstructing you? Beer goggles?

...but as another said, you are describing a building replacement there. There is no expanding the concourse or replacing the roof....I am going to say impossible or ridiculously expensive.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

What a hero.

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/sport...650/story.html

Frankly, I am AMAZED at how patient and foregiving Oiler fans have been towards Katz so far.

He buys the team and promises a new building, all pie in the sky stuff. He then immediately triggers a burn-it-to-the-ground rebuild so that the salary structure plummets and he can sock away huge profits for a few years in order to pay off his investment and gather the cash for (his portion of) a new arena.

He keeps the team in the basement for years, not spending any more money than necessary, because fans are swallowing his "hope" story like lemmings and continuing to support the team financially - not only with their ticket support (which I understand as a STH myself), but also with a huge bump in merchandise sales, etc. It is interesting that the Oilers are currently one of the most profitable teams in the league!

Then he (shockingly) tells the city that they are going to have to put up more money or he might have to move the team.

But of course, all along he has built up grass roots support because the fans are all on-board the "we've put up with a crap team for years and now we're finally going to be rewarded for it" train. So he has their support to pressure the city to give him whatever he needs.

My hat is off to him - well played Mr Katz!

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

The city will own the arena and the land around the arena.

Yes, but Katz gets all of the arena's revenue hockey and non-hockey does he not?

[WilderPegasus]

Originally Posted by Locke

Yes, but Katz gets all of the arena's revenue hockey and non-hockey does he not?

And why would Katz build an office tower on land that he doesn't own?

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

So again, nobody seems to be able to answer my question.

Why are new rinks needed, at all? Because Gary said so? Who cares?

It's really not that difficult of a concept. New rink = increased revenues.

[flamesaresmokin]

Originally Posted by valo403

It's really not that difficult of a concept. New rink = increased revenues.

And this is somehow a problem that concerns Alberta tax payers?

I'd rather the province shoveled 100M dollars into a giant pile and torched it then hand it over to the Oilers/Flames on the preposterous notion that its going to benefit each city. We as taxpayers get to see our money used to line NHL owners pockets and also pay even more exorbitant prices to watch hockey under the premise of a having the privilege of going to a "state of the art" facility.

How about the benefit that money would have if it were invested or spent on health care/education.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Originally Posted by flamesaresmokin

And this is somehow a problem that concerns Alberta tax payers?

I'd rather the province shoveled 100M dollars into a giant pile and torched it then hand it over to the Oilers/Flames on the preposterous notion that its going to benefit each city. We as taxpayers get to see our money used to line NHL owners pockets and also pay even more exorbitant prices to watch hockey under the premise of a having the privilege of going to a "state of the art" facility.

How about the benefit that money would have if it were invested or spent on health care/education.

I've said this lots before so I'm sure I'm sounding very repetitve. But the city and province will benefit from a new arena facility, both directly and indirectly in revenue generation for both of them. Both direct and indirect job creation (the indirect much harder to quantify, such as business that thrive because of the existance of the Flames and other events at the facility) will benefit the province and city, as well as the cultural benefits of such a facility creates (again through the increased appeal Calgary will have by having an NHL franchise and a facility to support concerts etc...) which in turns makes the city a more appealing place for companies to set up shop and create jobs and revenues for the province.

Now, what I have no idea about is how much that benefit is worth, and I couldn't figure it out with out being close to the numbers. But, whether that worth 5% of the cost or 70% of the cost of the new rink, whatever it is, the City and Province should actually pay their share IMO, as they also reap the benefits of such a facility.