Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 09-15-2017, 09:11 AM   #401
Makarov
Franchise Player
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

^ that offer is more than fair. No loan repayment. Only property tax.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:12 AM   #402
FLAMESRULE
First Line Centre
 
FLAMESRULE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The centre of everything
Exp:
Default

That appears like a very fair and reasonable deal from the City.
FLAMESRULE is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:13 AM   #403
Backlunds_socks
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sureLoss View Post
Sounds like a bloody amazing deal to me, even if the Flames have to return the City's (our) money through a lease.
Backlunds_socks is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:13 AM   #404
crazy_eoj
Powerplay Quarterback
 
crazy_eoj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Exp:
Default

If the 185 MM contribution from the City is not a loan, I don't see how that deal isn't taken.
crazy_eoj is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:13 AM   #405
calumniate
Franchise Player
 
calumniate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: A small painted room
Exp:
Default

'We are no longer pursuing an arena in Calgary'

-Ken King
calumniate is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:14 AM   #406
BigT112
Crash and Bang Winger
 
BigT112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Alberta
Exp:
Default

That's a very fair deal by the City.
__________________
Emotionally exhausted and morally bankrupt
BigT112 is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:15 AM   #407
FlamesFanTrev
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cal_guy View Post
Another question I like to ask is does this project need to be in the $500-600 million range after all most of the NHL arenas built during the late 90s early 00s have been in the $250-450 million range when adjusted for inflation and currency rate. I know those arena didn't surpass every existing NHL arena in every way, but they address the issues with the Saddledome (not old, you can hang stuff from the roof, bigger concession area, more luxury boxes).
The NHL standard for Arenas has come way up. No point in building a 90s building, they are the next ones to get replaced once the dome goes.
FlamesFanTrev is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:16 AM   #408
Backlunds_socks
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eoj View Post
If the 185 MM contribution from the City is not a loan, I don't see how that deal isn't taken.
Even if it is a loan, the loan was always interest free. Its still a great deal.
Backlunds_socks is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:16 AM   #409
Cole436
First Line Centre
 
Cole436's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Exp:
Default

That deal is more than fair. The Flames position only gets more embarrassing as the week goes on.
__________________
Cole436 is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cole436 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-15-2017, 09:17 AM   #410
DiracSpike
First Line Centre
 
DiracSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BELTLINE
Exp:
Default

It's a very high level overview but on the surface, yeah that looks like a fair deal. I think a lot of us can get behind the 1/3 1/3 1/3 deal.

I wish KK would come out now to say what exactly their problem was with the deal, but I'm not holding my breath.
DiracSpike is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:17 AM   #411
Matty81
#1 Goaltender
 
Matty81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eoj View Post
If the 185 MM contribution from the City is not a loan, I don't see how that deal isn't taken.
Edit - sorry misunderstood... need coffee
Matty81 is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:18 AM   #412
GGG
Franchise Player
 
GGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Exp:
Default

Nm
GGG is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:19 AM   #413
Incogneto
#1 Goaltender
 
Incogneto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Calgary - Transplanted Manitoban
Exp:
Default

If i am understanding this correctly, the Owners were going to put in $200M of an $890M CalgaryNEXT project, which is 22% of that cost. If that is the case, and going by what Ken King said in his presser about the same RATIO, they are looking to put in $121M to this deal.

I also have heard that the Flames ownership considers the 33% Ticket tax part of what they are putting forward. Therefore they feel like they are paying 66%. ....Which is a total crock of.....ya, you get it.
Incogneto is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:19 AM   #414
NiklasSundblad
Crash and Bang Winger
 
NiklasSundblad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Backlunds_socks View Post
Sounds like a bloody amazing deal to me, even if the Flames have to return the City's (our) money through a lease.
We're living in a new era, leases are loans, and this contribution is actually $0.
NiklasSundblad is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:20 AM   #415
sureLoss
Some kinda newsbreaker!
 
sureLoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Learning Phaneufs skating style
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiracSpike View Post
It's a very high level overview but on the surface, yeah that looks like a fair deal. I think a lot of us can get behind the 1/3 1/3 1/3 deal.

I wish KK would come out now to say what exactly their problem was with the deal, but I'm not holding my breath.
He has said it. From CSEC's perspective they feel they are paying 100% of the cost of the arena with the city's proposal. Whether that is justified or not, is up for debate.
sureLoss is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:20 AM   #416
Makarov
Franchise Player
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eoj View Post
If the City is contributing only a loan to the Flames, and then they OWN the building, then how much are they paying for that ownership/right to charge rent? Being gifted an almost billion dollar structure....that's not ordinary.

As mentioned in many other posts it certainly isn't un-ordinary for the city to relax property tax requirements for new construction projects either. How much does the National Music Center pay for property tax....anyone?

Pretending either of these things are 'ordinary' in this situation doesn't make any sense.
The National Music Centre is likely exempt from property tax as a non-profit organization pursuant to the Municipal Government Act. If the Flames want to explore incorporating as a non-profit in order to qualify for property tax exemption, I would encourage them to consult a lawyer.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:21 AM   #417
NiklasSundblad
Crash and Bang Winger
 
NiklasSundblad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Aalborg, Denmark
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO View Post
I also have heard that the Flames ownership considers the 33% Ticket tax part of what they are putting forward. Therefore they feel like they are paying 66%. ....Which is a total crock of.....ya, you get it.
You can thank the losers up north for that brilliant idea.
NiklasSundblad is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:24 AM   #418
Makarov
Franchise Player
 
Makarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Moscow
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by InCoGnEtO View Post
If i am understanding this correctly, the Owners were going to put in $200M of an $890M CalgaryNEXT project, which is 22% of that cost. If that is the case, and going by what Ken King said in his presser about the same RATIO, they are looking to put in $121M to this deal.

I also have heard that the Flames ownership considers the 33% Ticket tax part of what they are putting forward. Therefore they feel like they are paying 66%. ....Which is a total crock of.....ya, you get it.
I actually think that it is fair for the Flames to consider the ticket tax as more or less being out of their pocket. I just think that, even so, it is entirely fair that the Flames should pay at least two thirds of the cost of their development.
__________________
"Life of Russian hockey veterans is very hard," said Soviet hockey star Sergei Makarov. "Most of them don't have enough to eat these days. These old players are Russian legends."
Makarov is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Makarov For This Useful Post:
Old 09-15-2017, 09:25 AM   #419
nfotiu
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Virginia
Exp:
Default

Is the ticket tax money that is paid up front by the city and then the tax is paid back to the city?
nfotiu is offline  
Old 09-15-2017, 09:25 AM   #420
FlamesFanTrev
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sureLoss View Post
I guess the only question I would have is what are the details that aren't represented in the City's Info Graphic? It's all fine and good, but is there any fine print? And this city contribution portion, what exactly is Meant by "non-property tax"?

If there are no more conditions or fine print, CSEC should take this deal. Anything more then this by the city will start to offend the sensibilities of the majority of tax payers.
FlamesFanTrev is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FlamesFanTrev For This Useful Post:
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:00 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021