[News Roundup] CSEC/City arena deal UPDATED: Third Party Facilitator

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Mull

Says you.

I would be disappointed and that’s it

They are a private for profit organization that trades on civic services pride for wealth gain.

Yea says me . And most the city and people who visit

What do you think the city of Calgary is known for ? Stampede , Oil, and then … probably the Flames (mountains and banff don’t count , because … we’ll .. not Calgary but Alberta )

What does them being a private for profit organization have to do with anything .

I work internationally and while it might be surprising when people visit all they want to do is a hockey game and mountains (which isn’t Calgary ) and I bring Flames merchandise when I travel

Sports teams are huge to a cities identity whether you like it or not .

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Yea says me . And most the city and people who visit

What do you think the city of Calgary is known for ? Stampede , Oil, and then … probably the Flames (mountains and banff don’t count , because … we’ll .. not Calgary but Alberta )

What does them being a private for profit organization have to do with anything .

I work internationally and while it might be surprising when people visit all they want to do is a hockey game and mountains (which isn’t Calgary ) and I bring Flames merchandise when I travel

Sports teams are huge to a cities identity whether you like it or not .

When I was a young professional spreading my wings and looking for work opportunities across Canada, I absolutely gave preference to cities that had interesting and prestigious events to attend. NHL hockey was one of those, so were concerts, among other things.

I can only speak for myself obviously, but I imagine having professional sports is one thing that draws in new talented residents and helps keep talented people in a city. Obviously some people won't care about it, but some do and I would bet it is a pretty high number in Canada considering how entrenched hockey is in the culture. The City of Calgary even has the Flames on their website as a reason to consider coming to Calgary, so the City sees value in it for promoting itself on the international stage.

[Mull]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Yea says me . And most the city and people who visit

What do you think the city of Calgary is known for ? Stampede , Oil, and then … probably the Flames (mountains and banff don’t count , because … we’ll .. not Calgary but Alberta )

What does them being a private for profit organization have to do with anything .

I work internationally and while it might be surprising when people visit all they want to do is a hockey game and mountains (which isn’t Calgary ) and I bring Flames merchandise when I travel

Sports teams are huge to a cities identity whether you like it or not .

I don’t get your point.

Are you saying that you actually know people who came here to visit because of the flames and not the mountains?

Or you’re just saying that Calgary is known for the flames but not committing to say it’s the reason people come here- if so/ so what?

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Bs&Cs

People move on after something out of their control happens?.

Exactly my point.

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by Mull

I don’t get your point.

Are you saying that you actually know people who came here to visit because of the flames and not the mountains?

Or you’re just saying that Calgary is known for the flames but not committing to say it’s the reason people come here- if so/ so what?

I know it was 30 minutes ago and you may forget what you are posting in reply to people and me but to recap :

I claimed

" If the Flames were to ever leave those who “let” it happen on both sides would go down as some of this cities greatest failures in history"

You replied

Says you.

I would be disappointed and that’s it

They are a private for profit organization that trades on civic services pride for wealth gain.

So my point, which is quiet obvious (Actually my opinion) is that, even though you would just be disappointed , while for some reason throwing in the "Private for profit" statement, is that the Flames are a MAJOR part of this cities identify, and easily arguable a top 3 identifier, and people most certainly would care, and the legacy of those

- Both on council and on the Flames ownership -

Would be as the people who failed the city and let a large metropolitan city loose their only major sports franchise, which other then Quebec City (and they are neither population nor income close to Calgary) are the only city I can actually think that lost their only Sports franchise . And can you think of a lot of things Quebec City is know for now ?

- If anyone can give an example of another city loosing their only Sports franchise since 2000 I've forgotten would gladly welcome it -

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I know it was 30 minutes ago and you may forget what you are posting in reply to people and me but to recap :

I claimed

You replied


So my point, which is quiet obvious (Actually my opinion) is that, even though you would just be disappointed , while for some reason throwing in the "Private for profit" statement, is that the Flames are a MAJOR part of this cities identify, and easily arguable a top 3 identifier, and people most certainly would care, and the legacy of those

- Both on council and on the Flames ownership -

Would be as the people who failed the city and let a large metropolitan city loose their only major sports franchise, which other then Quebec City (and they are neither population nor income close to Calgary) are the only city I can actually think that lost their only Sports franchise . And can you think of a lot of things Quebec City is know for now ?

- If anyone can give an example I've forgotten would gladly welcome it -

Theyre probably more worried about the alternate legacy:. As the people who handed Murray Edwards hundreds of millions of dollars taxed from middle class people.

[Bs&Cs]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

Exactly my point.

Forgetting about the team for the summer and the team leaving aren't the same thing. I know being obtuse
Is your shtick and all but come on.

And only the kind of sad people that whine about taxes being used build anything on call in shows on 770 will care in 25 years whether the city kicked in a bunch of money to build an arena. The scar left by the team relocating would resonate with far more people for far longer and that's not even really up for debate.

[Bunk]

You guys are talking like the City is sitting on its hands not working on a deal. I think there’s motivated people on both sides. I think it’s when and what, not if.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bunk

You guys are talking like the City is sitting on its hands not working on a deal. I think there’s motivated people on both sides. I think it’s when and what, not if.

I don't want to give you a hard time because I appreciate all your updates and info on the topic. But frankly, we've been hearing exactly this for more than a decade already. And we are further away now than we've ever been.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Bunk

You guys are talking like the City is sitting on its hands not working on a deal. I think there’s motivated people on both sides. I think it’s when and what, not if.

I guess the main difference now is that there isn’t an overtly pro-publicly funded arena-councillor at the forefront trying to undermine the city’s negotiating position this time.

[Mull]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I know it was 30 minutes ago and you may forget what you are posting in reply to people and me but to recap :

I claimed

You replied


So my point, which is quiet obvious (Actually my opinion) is that, even though you would just be disappointed , while for some reason throwing in the "Private for profit" statement, is that the Flames are a MAJOR part of this cities identify, and easily arguable a top 3 identifier, and people most certainly would care, and the legacy of those

- Both on council and on the Flames ownership -

Would be as the people who failed the city and let a large metropolitan city loose their only major sports franchise, which other then Quebec City (and they are neither population nor income close to Calgary) are the only city I can actually think that lost their only Sports franchise . And can you think of a lot of things Quebec City is know for now ?

- If anyone can give an example of another city loosing their only Sports franchise since 2000 I've forgotten would gladly welcome it -

A). Why so sassy? Because you though I missed something obvious to you? Perhaps take a break as I am not trying to get under your skin and yet somehow accidentally succeeding in that.

B). My statement about the for profit aspect that trades on civic pride was an attempt to separate the tribalism from it. My view is the flames have an over inflated importance.

C). I don’t agree they are a major part of this cities identity to be honest. Part of it? Sure I can’t deny that but more importantly-

D)what does that give us? I don’t know anyone who travel here to see the flames. And while some have for sure it must be a rounding error compared to the stampede and the mountains. Why do I care if this part of our identity is removed for the time being (as it’s extremely unlikely that the nhl wouldn’t want a Calgary team one day if the stars align)?

E) I have travelled to Quebec City, and known many people who have. Not one cared they didn’t get to see an nhl game. Zero importance. So they lost that part of their identity- so what?


Honestly to me- if we are afraid of losing our identity with losing the flames it makes us sound pathetic

[timun]

*losing

One looses arrows, and loses hockey teams.

[Mull]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

I guess the main difference now is that there isn’t an overtly pro-publicly funded arena-councillor at the forefront trying to undermine the city’s negotiating position this time.

Who are you referring to? Davison?

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by Mull

Who are you referring to? Davison?

Yes.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I don't want to give you a hard time because I appreciate all your updates and info on the topic. But frankly, we've been hearing exactly this for more than a decade already. And we are further away now than we've ever been.

I get the skepticism and “I will believe it when I see it”, I really do, but this isn’t even close to being true. CalgaryNEXT was clearly that moment. ;-)

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

This thread is a fascinating look into the window of people who've been gaslit by the AB conservatives and corporations their whole lives. It's like watching stockholm syndrome unfold in real time

I'm sure I've written this before on CP and maybe this thread but I feel like repeating myself: under no circumstances will the NHL allow any owner to move the Flames away from Calgary. They're in a profitable and dedicated market. Full stop. If you really believe this team is on the brink of moving over not getting a fancy new arena you are engaged in pure mental fantasy.

I think it’s not that complicated. Sometimes people just want to convince themselves a publicly funded arena is a great idea because they just really want a new arena.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Yes.

I’d say Sharp and McLean’s enthusiasm for a deal is very high. Both are on the committee.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

I know it was 30 minutes ago and you may forget what you are posting in reply to people and me but to recap :

I claimed

You replied


So my point, which is quiet obvious (Actually my opinion) is that, even though you would just be disappointed , while for some reason throwing in the "Private for profit" statement, is that the Flames are a MAJOR part of this cities identify, and easily arguable a top 3 identifier, and people most certainly would care, and the legacy of those

- Both on council and on the Flames ownership -

Would be as the people who failed the city and let a large metropolitan city loose their only major sports franchise, which other then Quebec City (and they are neither population nor income close to Calgary) are the only city I can actually think that lost their only Sports franchise . And can you think of a lot of things Quebec City is know for now ?

- If anyone can give an example of another city loosing their only Sports franchise since 2000 I've forgotten would gladly welcome it -

The Oilers became relegation worthy some time in the 2000s...


Pretty sure there's been a grand total of five big 4 relocations in the 2000s: Grizzlies, Expos, Hornets, Sonics, Thrashers (though I could easily be missing some?). The fact that none were the only team in that city is not particularly surprising...lemme take a sporcle at naming the 1-team cities:

Vancouver (since 2001)
Edmonton
Calgary
Winnipeg (since 2011)
Ottawa
Montreal (since 2005)
Portland
Sacramento
San Jose
OKC (2008)
Memphis
Columbus
Orlando
Jacksonville
SLC
San Diego (since a few years ago)
San Antonio
Raleigh
Green Bay (though since it's only 8 football games a year you might argue it's not that far from Milwaukee)

Maybe a few more depending on how pedantic you want to be about metro areas? That's 19 of the 122 franchises that existed pre-VGK, though there were really only ~13 cities that had just 1 for most of the 2000s


122/5 = 24.4, so if you were picking 5 teams out of a hat it wouldn't be at all noteworthy that none of them came from the list above. At least 7 teams would have to move before you'd have any expectation for one to come from the above.

VAN 2-->1; MEM 0-->1
MTL 2-->1; WAS 3-->4
SEA 4-->3; OKC 0-->1
ATL 4-->3; WPG 0-->1

Charlotte briefly went 2 to 1 and then got NBA back. New Orleans went 1 to 2...Pelicans may be on the hot seat though.

[Jason14h]

Forgot the NFL relocations but doesn’t overly matter

I appreciate the effort of that post - but the point stands that large metro cities don’t let their only sports team leave

You can argue it was mathematically unlikely - which your above post does support -
There is also a very real fact that every major large city has a sports franchise and the impact on the city shouldn’t be overlooked

[Jason14h]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

I think it’s not that complicated. Sometimes people just want to convince themselves a publicly funded arena is a great idea because they just really want a new arena.

Great idea and economic reality aren’t the same thing

I don’t think it’s a “great idea” to give large corporations tax breaks to move to your city . I also understand other cities are willing too so if you don’t you won’t get them .

You can stand of some altruistic principles all you want , but you’ll end up with no sports teams and no corporate headquarters on your city