Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Roughneck]

Mayoral candidate Bill "don't ask where my campaign money is coming from" Smith throws doubt on whether the city's proposal is actually the city's proposal, wants to see CalgaryNEXT back on the table:


Lucas Meyer ‏Verified account @meyer_lucas 50m50 minutes ago
More
Important: Smith implied that what @nenshi released as city's #Flames arena offer wasn't credible. We asked him to clarify. #yyc #yycvote



https://twitter.com/meyer_lucas/stat...50360660258817

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Barnes

If all this small market, number of transactions, woe is us stuff is to be believed, why does CSEC think it’s appropriate to build the second most expensive arena (adjusted for 2017 $) in the history of the league?

Presumably it would make it a destination, bringing in people from out of town to our world class facility.

Being world class, the number of potential transaction hosts goes from 1 million to over 7 BILLION!

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by troutman

Who are you talking to? I don't come across many people on their side on this, including people on a Flames message board.

I have friends and colleagues on the Flames side on this. They usually fall into a few of the following traits:

- "pro business": they tend to buy the idea that sports bring in economic benefit which is good for the city. They brush off the studies as some sort of "ivory tower" academic conspiracy, and bring up places like LA Live and other areas as evidence this is untrue.

Another facet of this cohort is that they are inevitably little weasels and are trying to get on the side of the business crowd. I know alot of people who fall over themselves to tell stories about the time they met Brett Wilson or Murray Edwards, etc. and all truly think one day they will be building things by each of their sides. They think they are the future leaders in the city and are not about to disagree with those leaders to risk their inevitable climb up the ladder.

- "Conservative": now, I don't mean small "c" conservatives, and, as both a conservative and, mostly, a Conservative, I am certainly not painting a large brush to one political party or ideology, but the majority of people I know who support the Flames fall into this branch of the political spectrum - perhaps because Alberta/Calgary has so many conservative supporters. I also don't just mean people who vote; i mean people who are actively tied to the Conservative parties (Fed and Prov). I know several higher-ups of both orgs that support the Flames in this fight - i think it's somewhat tied to the "pro-business" mentality of the conservative parties, and their inability to separate pro-business from "pro-business" (something that benefits business and inturn benefits the public vs. something that benefits business with limited/no public benefit)

These are the same people losing their stuff over the Corporate tax proposals by the Libs noting that the middle class is being squeezed out by new taxes etc.

- Anti-Nenshi-ites: This goes without saying, but a big cohort despise Nenshi. They attack him personally and say he is bad for the city. They don't understand why people vote for him, and guess that most do because he is funny on twitter. They chalk all this up to people being "uniformed" and, particularly among the older crowd, think that us millennials are ruining it for them.

- Flames fans: goes without saying. But i would say the majority of the Pro-CSEC colleagues regularly attend Flames games, either through their own season tickets or corporate tickets. In most cases they are wealthy (and can afford the season tickets - or sell them and attend a handful of games while paying for the rest) or have upper-middle class so purchasing the odd game here or there is a drop in the bucket.

Again, I know Flames fans, season ticket holders, and corporate users that oppose the idea, but this just seems to be a theme here.

- Emotionally attached: these people have a great attachment to the Flames; far beyond the entertainment value that the majority of flames fans have. They aren't bandwagoners (those friends don't care) and aren't even that group that post on forums or watch every game. It's something more. It's an emotional connection that reaches beyond.

- The Selfish: They oppose anything the city/province/feds do that doesn't benefit themselves in some sort of way. They want low taxes, but want to subsidize an arena. When questioned, they say "well i didn't want a library/public art/bike lanes/homeless shelters/schools" etc. What benefits the person is the way the person feels about the project.

We all do this in some way or another, and so it's not necessarily out of the ordinary, but this is one of the main issues that many people have. The new arena benefits them in some way (concerts, hockey, pride, business development) and therefore they want it to happen. If the city spent a bunch of money on stuff they don't use, it's time to return the favour.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by morgin

I don’t have anything of substance to add to this discussion, but I did want to point out that this has to be the least self aware post you’ve ever made here given how you continue to trip over yourself to be the first to defend KK at every step of the way.

I've called him out several times for being a jackass. Check the posting history. I've also pointed out many of the good things in the City proposal and pointed out how it could work. Too bad so many others could not bother to look past their tribal instincts and do the same the other way. No, that won't happen, because this isn't about find solutions to a problem, this has boiled down to one side being right, and the other side being wrong. But hey, that's me tripping allover myself to defend KK and troll the city side.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Cappy

These are the same people losing their stuff over the Corporate tax proposals by the Libs noting that the middle class is being squeezed out by new taxes etc.

As a practitioner of tax for over 40 years I can assure you that this statement is complete crap.

I'll be more than happy to discuss this in the Off-Topic forum if you want.

[taxbuster]

The problem with Flames ownership and KK is that they seem to be playing from a scheme concocted in the 1980s. In the interim period, Calgary has grown up, has a lot of VERY educated people in things financial; be it professionals in finance, young MBAs, accountants etc. None of these people is liable to be fooled the way they seemed to be in Edmonton. I have no problem with Nenshi and the folks at City Hall establishing a baseline for participation in an arena that provides actual, tangible, provable benefits to the city.

If Murray Edwards wants to have all the cards in his hands he can do so. He can build his own arena, charge his own fees for tickets, establish exactly what he wants as a profit level and then do what every other business in the world does: wait to see if people come. If they don't ....well, he bet/judged/planned wrong, didn't he? If they do, he'll be successful at it.

But to expect young people (mostly) in the 20-teens to flock to the idea of enthusiastically supporting a billionaire's pipe dream is....a pipe dream. They are likely more interested in trying to keep their jobs, have babies (and feed them) and build a life. An arena for the billionaire group is likely the farthest thing from their minds.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

As a practitioner of tax for over 40 years I can assure you that this statement is complete crap.

I'll be more than happy to discuss this in the Off-Topic forum if you want.

The question was "do you know people who support the flames stance and what makes them that way" (paraphrase)

This is my experience from friends and colleagues. I'm not painting all people with the same brush. No reason to discuss, unless we have the same friends

I'm also not implying all people who oppose the tax change support the arena. Again not broad strokes

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I have friends and colleagues on the Flames side on this. They usually fall into a few of the following traits:

- "pro business": they tend to buy the idea that sports bring in economic benefit which is good for the city. They brush off the studies as some sort of "ivory tower" academic conspiracy, and bring up places like LA Live and other areas as evidence this is untrue.

Another facet of this cohort is that they are inevitably little weasels and are trying to get on the side of the business crowd. I know alot of people who fall over themselves to tell stories about the time they met Brett Wilson or Murray Edwards, etc. and all truly think one day they will be building things by each of their sides. They think they are the future leaders in the city and are not about to disagree with those leaders to risk their inevitable climb up the ladder.

- "Conservative": now, I don't mean small "c" conservatives, and, as both a conservative and, mostly, a Conservative, I am certainly not painting a large brush to one political party or ideology, but the majority of people I know who support the Flames fall into this branch of the political spectrum - perhaps because Alberta/Calgary has so many conservative supporters. I also don't just mean people who vote; i mean people who are actively tied to the Conservative parties (Fed and Prov). I know several higher-ups of both orgs that support the Flames in this fight - i think it's somewhat tied to the "pro-business" mentality of the conservative parties, and their inability to separate pro-business from "pro-business" (something that benefits business and inturn benefits the public vs. something that benefits business with limited/no public benefit)

These are the same people losing their stuff over the Corporate tax proposals by the Libs noting that the middle class is being squeezed out by new taxes etc.

- Anti-Nenshi-ites: This goes without saying, but a big cohort despise Nenshi. They attack him personally and say he is bad for the city. They don't understand why people vote for him, and guess that most do because he is funny on twitter. They chalk all this up to people being "uniformed" and, particularly among the older crowd, think that us millennials are ruining it for them.

- Flames fans: goes without saying. But i would say the majority of the Pro-CSEC colleagues regularly attend Flames games, either through their own season tickets or corporate tickets. In most cases they are wealthy (and can afford the season tickets - or sell them and attend a handful of games while paying for the rest) or have upper-middle class so purchasing the odd game here or there is a drop in the bucket.

Again, I know Flames fans, season ticket holders, and corporate users that oppose the idea, but this just seems to be a theme here.

- Emotionally attached: these people have a great attachment to the Flames; far beyond the entertainment value that the majority of flames fans have. They aren't bandwagoners (those friends don't care) and aren't even that group that post on forums or watch every game. It's something more. It's an emotional connection that reaches beyond.

- The Selfish: They oppose anything the city/province/feds do that doesn't benefit themselves in some sort of way. They want low taxes, but want to subsidize an arena. When questioned, they say "well i didn't want a library/public art/bike lanes/homeless shelters/schools" etc. What benefits the person is the way the person feels about the project.

We all do this in some way or another, and so it's not necessarily out of the ordinary, but this is one of the main issues that many people have. The new arena benefits them in some way (concerts, hockey, pride, business development) and therefore they want it to happen. If the city spent a bunch of money on stuff they don't use, it's time to return the favour.

So in other words, idiots?

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Passe La Puck

So in other words, idiots?

Nice drive by.

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Mayoral candidate Bill "don't ask where my campaign money is coming from" Smith throws doubt on whether the city's proposal is actually the city's proposal, wants to see CalgaryNEXT back on the table:

Wow. I love he's apparently about transparency, yet can't even give straight answers about anything. Truly a change worth voting for.

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Nice drive by.

Wasn't slagging his post, but it's true. Okay 3 idiots, 2 selfish, and 1 lacking perspective?

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by Cappy

The question was "do you know people who support the flames stance and what makes them that way" (paraphrase)

This is my experience from friends and colleagues. I'm not painting all people with the same brush. No reason to discuss, unless we have the same friends

I'm also not implying all people who oppose the tax change support the arena. Again not broad strokes

Fair enough.

[Senator Clay Davis]

I think what's annoying about the Flames crying poverty argument, is that there has to be at least 8-10 owners in the league who would switch markets with Calgary, even playing in the Dome, if making money was the primary concern. In Calgary you can make more money as a championship level team relative to many markets, and more importantly you can make more money when you're at E=NG levels of bad.

Originally Posted by New Era

I suggested this several pages back. That would of course require the team to be sold and agreement from the BoG. Would they? Would be an interesting exercise for sure. In the Green Bay model there are about 5,000,000 shares, with the last public offering being 269,000 shares starting at $250. I figure it would take about $1B to buy out ownership and then build a new arena from cash. So with a $250 per share IPO price, that would mean about 4,000,000 shares.

So how many shares worthless pieces of paper can I put you down for?

If it's like the Packers "shares", I hope you got a nice frame for them. If anything maybe Murray should take the Flames public in an IPO like Manchester United...lol.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Mayoral candidate Bill "don't ask where my campaign money is coming from" Smith throws doubt on whether the city's proposal is actually the city's proposal, wants to see CalgaryNEXT back on the table:


Lucas Meyer ‏Verified account @meyer_lucas 50m50 minutes ago
More
Important: Smith implied that what @nenshi released as city's #Flames arena offer wasn't credible. We asked him to clarify. #yyc #yycvote



https://twitter.com/meyer_lucas/stat...50360660258817

This is unreal.. he needs to sit down with Bunk and understand why CalgaryNEXT is such a terrible idea.

[Parallex]

... what? Bill Smith makes no sense. What is he saying? That Nenshi lied to the public? that the municipal negotiators lied to Council?

Anyways I think I now see what's up with the Flames going loco... Bill Smith told them that he's going to push for their $1,300,000,000.00 monstrosity if he becomes mayor (possibly in exchange for support/money). So why not meddle in the municipal election see if you can get the whole enchilada.

[PeteMoss]

Willing to bet a large reason why the Flames revenue is 16th or whatever is due to a terrible decision to sign a 10 year TV deal just before the rights fees went through the roof.

When that ends in 2020, the Flames will gain a boatload more revenue. Senators got about 5 times more money on their local deal from their previous one when they signed in 2014. Rogers and Bell will fight for the rights and the Flames (and Oilers) will cash in.

[Fire]

How does the Flames TV ratings compare to the Senators?

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Willing to bet a large reason why the Flames revenue is 16th or whatever is due to a terrible decision to sign a 10 year TV deal just before the rights fees went through the roof.

When that ends in 2020, the Flames will gain a boatload more revenue. Senators got about 5 times more money on their local deal from their previous one when they signed in 2014. Rogers and Bell will fight for the rights and the Flames (and Oilers) will cash in.

Lol, wonder who was behind that deal.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Willing to bet a large reason why the Flames revenue is 16th or whatever is due to a terrible decision to sign a 10 year TV deal just before the rights fees went through the roof.

Biggest reason is probably the Canadian dollar falling 20% over the past 5 years.

[You Need a Thneed]

The chances of CalgaryNEXT happening even if Bill Smith is Mayor are still exactly ZERO.

With what we have heard about he status of the Existibg CRL, even a Vic park arena has a ZERO chance of happening even with Smith as mayor, under the Flames’ proposal.

That’s one thing I don’t get with the Flames. Their own timeline has them negotiatibg with the city since at least 2012. How can they at this point still not understand what funding mechanisms the city even has available that might work? They literally are suggesting funding models that CANNOT work. Frankly, it shows that they have never truly been at the table with the city.