Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[Monahammer]

Beyond that who's to say what the economy will look like in 5 years. In 2012 no one was predicting such an abrupt end to peak oil. For all we know there will be a major war between SA and Iran next year that will send the price of oil in to the stratosphere for 5 more years.
Alberta is also still leading the country in job creation and GDP growth. Companies are finally taking refinement in alberta seriously and investments are being made in processing in alberta. Yes getting cockblocked by our dumbass neighbors on pipelines (at the bidding of their American funders/overlords) is certainly hampering our economy, but you're not seeing the whole picture. I am truly sorry if you or a loved one was personally affected by the downturn, layoffs are brutal. That being said, new industries are starting to exist. Look at the new weed industry-employing over 5000 albertans already. Who would have guessed that 5 years ago?

Yes, the price differential on oil is bad. Yes, it would be amazing if our ineffectual federal government could do its job and ensure responsible resource development across the country. Yes, it would be amazing if companies like shell weren't selling off their Canadian operations and turfing folks. But alberta still has it comparatively good, and if you dont see that you're probably only getting your news from one source

[stone hands]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

be a shame if they put the fieldhouse on the backburner to push the arena forward.

If I understand correctly if the arena gets public money then the BMO Centre, Arts Commons, and fieldhouse do not.

Yeah, the part where they are deferring funds from other projects(like the fieldhouse) for this really rubs me the wrong way, but I've resigned myself to the fact that this is going to happen now one way or another. Might as well enjoy the $10.50 bud lite draft and $60 press level seating while we still can

[Ozy_Flame]

If I had to compare the two, I would think the BMO Centre would be more needed for a vision of hosting large scale international events. That said, the new arena would be used more frequently by locals, as well as the field house.

Five years ago I would say a new BMO Centre isn't necessary for growth. I am not so sure about that these days. Perhaps there is a way that costs can be shared between the two facilities.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I have heard from a decent source that ownership does not have the same kind of wealth they used to. That is obvious. But more specifically a guy like, say, Markin who was worth over $1B is now worth closer to like 90M.

So I’m pretty sure if Calgary wants to keep the Flames they’ll want to buck up and help pay for the arena. If so much public funds was suddenly available for a half cocked Olympics bid, I see no reason why money can’t be made available for this considering the exponential value to citizens over multiple decades of entertainment vs. 14 days.

Also, again if people think we are on the brink of some kind of boom in the next 5 years you’re delusional or just not reading the news.

I think you might have missed a zero...

[Weitz]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

I think you might have missed a zero...

$600 million as of March 2017. Probably less now.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Calgary will be poor so we should pay for an arena to keep the flames is a terrible argument.

The business decisions of the owners outside of their CSE operations should not be considered at all during these negotiations imo. So what the owners have less money than before? Somehow this means to some people that the city should comp them a free cash cow?

I think that’s a fair counter but it also is just a function of how much people view the threat of the Flames leaving.

Personally if I was a billionaire with ownership in the Flames and my wealth eroded to a fraction of what it was I would not be signing up to build a hockey rink and would post haste be trying to sell out but hey, who knows.

[stone hands]

yeah poor alan markin, how will he feed his family with a paltry 600 million dollars and continue to have a national hockey league team as a personal toy

[Envitro]

Assets are valued at say $600m. It doesn't mean he has that as disposable income. He'd have to liquidate. But yes, the overall sentiment is still accurate.

[calf]

My net worth has dropped as a result of the downturn as well. Everyone should fund my new business ventures too.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Monahammer

Calgary will be poor so we should pay for an arena to keep the flames is a terrible argument.

The business decisions of the owners outside of their CSE operations should not be considered at all during these negotiations imo. So what the owners have less money than before? Somehow this means to some people that the city should comp them a free cash cow?

Fair comment, but then the wealth of the owners arising from other ventures should also not be an argument against them either, right?

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

I think you might have missed a zero...

It’s all rumour mongery but apparently it is that bad. Who knows though I think my point was just that their wealth is nowhere near what it once was.

[Blarg]

What? Losing 91% of your net worth as a billionaire isn't economic downturn, that's from sweet hookers and even sweeter blow.

[Flamenspiel]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

be a shame if they put the fieldhouse on the backburner to push the arena forward.

If I understand correctly if the arena gets public money then the BMO Centre, Arts Commons, and fieldhouse do not.

Particularly when we turned down a free one a few months ago.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

If I had to compare the two, I would think the BMO Centre would be more needed for a vision of hosting large scale international events. That said, the new arena would be used more frequently by locals, as well as the field house.

Five years ago I would say a new BMO Centre isn't necessary for growth. I am not so sure about that these days. Perhaps there is a way that costs can be shared between the two facilities.

If the goal is to spur an entertainment district and generate , convention centres definitely are at the top of the totem pole in terms of their potential. Getting a steady schedule of decent conventions means a steady stream of people needing hotel rooms, people going out to eat and drink looking for something to do, vendors with expense accounts, etc and this tends to apply even for shows primarily attended by locals.



An arena really only has 60-80 premiere events a year between the Flames and concerts (and maybe 60-80 more for smaller events between the Hitmen, Roughnecks and smaller concerts?) and most of the attendees live in the city so no hotel rooms and the bulk of their food and drink money is spent in the arena. If the entertainment district is adjacent to the arena you'll probably have more people spending more right by the arena, but what does that do to the places pre-game traffic currently goes to? The potential for the district is limited if this is your primary driver for traffic. If the district gets taken over by the 'Margaritaville's' of the world then how many locals will really care to go?



Basically both are necessary for a city like Calgary. San Diego we are not so we aren't getting the crazy premiere convention traffic with consistency (without even including the 130,000 person behemoth of Comicon) so I don't think a convention expansion alone can do it. The arena provides a bit of a baseline, convention expansion provides the potential, the Stampede will be the gravy for the businesses there.

[Parallex]

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local...-for-new-arena

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

Fair comment, but then the wealth of the owners arising from other ventures should also not be an argument against them either, right?

Agreed. I'm the person who probably to the point of annoyance keeps saying that we need to see CSEC's books if we're to even begin discussing whether to subsidize it, let alone talking numbers already. But I 100% agree that their personal wealth shouldn't factor in, regardless of whether they're doing well elsewhere or not.

The numbers I want to see only include anything that involves both CSEC and the saddledome/potential future venue.

So the Flames, Hitmen, Roughnecks regardless of whether the revenue is arena related or not, since their existence is tied to having an adequate venue. Also, any other event going through the venue unless CSEC aren't involved in operating the arena at the time. The stamps aren't a factor (although they were when CalgaryNEXT was on the table).

But they don't want to do that, because it would show that one of the following two things is true:

1. The owners make money hand over fist in all of the above, and have made more than enough, with no signs of that stopping, and would still be profitable if they had to pay for their own arena and mortgage interest, or

2. CSEC is a money losing venture if they have to pay for their own venue. This would mean that the NHL is likely a money losing venture overall, as presumably the flames are more profitable than the hitmen/roughnecks, and not every owner has the luxury of secondary tenants like that. Of course the NHL would lose their minds if this was the case and an owner announced that to the world.

I can't really see a 3rd reason why they'd not just reveal the finances and let people have informed discussions and opinions on the matter.

[GreatWhiteEbola]

The Economic Impact Assessment of the Rivers District Revitalization can be found at the end of this article.

Study assesses economic impact of revitalization of Rivers District

[The Familia]

My feeling is they will do the BMO and event center at the same time in the short term (next two years). Then they will do the arts centre phase 1. After that, the field house and then arts center phase 2. I think everything can be built by 2026.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by The Familia

My feeling is they will do the BMO and event center at the same time in the short term (next two years). Then they will do the arts centre phase 1. After that, the field house and then arts center phase 2. I think everything can be built by 2026.

Would have been a good year showcase the city to the entire world.

[Tacoman]

So considering the price tag for the city and it’s taxpayers looks like it’s going to be about 7x more than what the city was being asked to put into the Olympics and it’s various capital projects, why aren’t we having a plebiscite on this decision? Who will pay for these overruns?