Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > Fire on Ice: The Calgary Flames Forum
Ivrnet

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-12-2017, 09:17 AM   #21
New Era
Franchise Player
 
New Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
"Tentative" and "Deal" are words that don't work well together.
I would think that the final infrastructure components being agreed to by the municipality and county. There is a component in there for transportation improvements which are in the neighborhood of $40-100M, and that is being picked up by the local governments. Nothing is a deal until they have approval from those two bodies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
OVG was chosen back in June for this reno with this plan, so what's actually new today?
Seems they are close to having a completed deal. It's one thing to select the interest that will do the possible renovation, but its another to announce the deal is done and shovels will break dirt in as little as four months. That is substantial.
New Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 09:35 AM   #22
Buff
Franchise Player
 
Buff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: I don't belong here
Exp:
Default

If you build it, they will come...
Buff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 09:52 AM   #23
Locke
ness Monster
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk View Post
Privately financed - it begs the question, why can't the Flames do the same? Or at minimum, privately finance the majority of the project?
I think this has been the crux of the matter since the very beginning: They probably can, they just dont want to.

Its not a matter of 'cant' its a matter of 'want.'

Other Canadian cities and sports markets have set precedents of Public money for sports arenas, the CSEC is a private enterprise and are likely trying to get as much of that for themselves as they can. Represent the shareholders, etc.

But they couldnt have timed it worse.

Edmonton's deal being the shining pinnacle of bad deals left a bad taste in everyone's mouths and now nobody wants to commit public cash to an arena. Which is understandable.

But between 'The Edmonton Deal,' the crash of Oil Prices (which affects Calgarians significantly), unstable Political climate, and various other factors, having their hands out for Public cash could not have been done at a worse time.

If they'd done this 4-5 years ago when cash was flowing through the streets, a favourable Government was in place, Oil prices were high, the CSEC would have had more expendable cash to commit to the project and the City probably would have cut a cheque for the rest without blinking.
__________________
- "Somebody may beat me, but they're going to have to bleed to do it."
- Steve Prefontaine
Locke is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 10:03 AM   #24
Hot_Flatus
Scoring Winger
 
Hot_Flatus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Uranus
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk View Post
Privately financed - it begs the question, why can't the Flames do the same? Or at minimum, privately finance the majority of the project?
Not a case of "Can't", it's a case of not having the class to do something like this when they can take the taxpayers for a ride like Katz and Co did in Edmonton.

At the very least, I hope this makes the Flames ownership group lose a little sleep at use of their tactics in the matter.
__________________
I hate to tell you this, but Iíve just launched an air biscuit
Hot_Flatus is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Hot_Flatus For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 10:06 AM   #25
GirlySports
Franchise Player
 
GirlySports's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

It's just the Canadian way isn't it? Winnipeg just got TWO publicly funded facilities. Regina too!

Videotron Center in Quebec City is half and half right?
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire

GirlySports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 10:30 AM   #26
Jay Random
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Exp:
Default

Seattle is three times the size of Calgary (and growing rapidly), and the new arena will likely have two major-league tenants, not one. These facts should suggest to you some reasons why it's easier to justify $600 million in private money for an arena there.

Building an NHL-quality arena with your own money in a city of a million and change is a good way to throw your money away, and significantly more entertaining than flushing it down the toilet. People keep mentioning privately financed arenas in places like New York, Toronto, and now Seattle. Well, boys and girls, we're not in that league, and an arena here won't draw that kind of cashflow. The closest parallel for us is Ottawa, where they built an arena with private money, and it promptly went broke.
__________________
WARNING: The preceding message may not have been processed in a sarcasm-free facility.
Jay Random is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following 15 Users Say Thank You to Jay Random For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 10:41 AM   #27
CaptainCrunch
Norm!
 
CaptainCrunch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Exp:
Default

Ladies and Gentlemen please rise for your SEATTLE FLAMES!!!!!
__________________
Good Night America . . . Wherever you are
CaptainCrunch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 10:46 AM   #28
RM14
Powerplay Quarterback
 
RM14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports View Post
It's just the Canadian way isn't it? Winnipeg just got TWO publicly funded facilities. Regina too!

Videotron Center in Quebec City is half and half right?
Very much the American way as well. Not sure the rest of the world.
RM14 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to RM14 For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 10:50 AM   #29
rage2
Farm Team Player
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch View Post
Ladies and Gentlemen please rise for your SEATTLE FLAMES!!!!!
https://twitter.com/nhlflamessea?lang=en
rage2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 11:06 AM   #30
Locke
ness Monster
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random View Post
Seattle is three times the size of Calgary (and growing rapidly), and the new arena will likely have two major-league tenants, not one. These facts should suggest to you some reasons why it's easier to justify $600 million in private money for an arena there.

Building an NHL-quality arena with your own money in a city of a million and change is a good way to throw your money away, and significantly more entertaining than flushing it down the toilet. People keep mentioning privately financed arenas in places like New York, Toronto, and now Seattle. Well, boys and girls, we're not in that league, and an arena here won't draw that kind of cashflow. The closest parallel for us is Ottawa, where they built an arena with private money, and it promptly went broke.
Also this.
__________________
- "Somebody may beat me, but they're going to have to bleed to do it."
- Steve Prefontaine
Locke is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 11:25 AM   #31
Oil Stain
Franchise Player
 
Oil Stain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random View Post
Seattle is three times the size of Calgary (and growing rapidly), and the new arena will likely have two major-league tenants, not one. These facts should suggest to you some reasons why it's easier to justify $600 million in private money for an arena there.

Building an NHL-quality arena with your own money in a city of a million and change is a good way to throw your money away, and significantly more entertaining than flushing it down the toilet. People keep mentioning privately financed arenas in places like New York, Toronto, and now Seattle. Well, boys and girls, we're not in that league, and an arena here won't draw that kind of cashflow. The closest parallel for us is Ottawa, where they built an arena with private money, and it promptly went broke.
I'm not sure this is true.

http://www.northlands.com/rexall-pla...d-by-pollstar/

Rexall was the 5th busiest venue in North America in a 2014 poll.
Now around 30 of these dates would have been junior games which probably don't come close to making the same money as other events, but I think that an arena in Calgary would be very profitable.

The Alberta cities aren't really equatable to Ottawa that can't sell out the building when their team was just in the conference finals.

I'm also not sure that you can group Calgary's ownership which is worth billions to the situation in Ottawa, where Rod Brydon didn't appear to have net worth of anywhere close to a billion. I can find one article that puts his personal net worth at under $10 million in 1990 after the collapse of another one of his businesses.

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/rep...l.com&page=all

I would think that the Calgary ownership group could easily afford to finance their own rink without financial peril.

When the the other privately funded Canadian arena owners were having difficulty in the 1990s you had skyrocketing player salaries. That's not the case anymore. The cost inputs are much more stable now.

Edmonton's politicians should have held out for a better deal, but Mayor Mandel was looking for a legacy project and did his best to push the council into accepting Katz's sweetheart deal.

Calgary's politicians can do better and still have a new arena built.
__________________
I got laughed at when prior to the 2013 draft I stated the player the Flames picked at 6th is going to be better then any of the 3 previous guys the Oilers picked 1st overall.

I Stand by that remark.-MrMastodonFarm

Last edited by Oil Stain; 09-12-2017 at 11:36 AM.
Oil Stain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 11:47 AM   #32
Cappy
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random View Post
Seattle is three times the size of Calgary (and growing rapidly), and the new arena will likely have two major-league tenants, not one. These facts should suggest to you some reasons why it's easier to justify $600 million in private money for an arena there.

Building an NHL-quality arena with your own money in a city of a million and change is a good way to throw your money away, and significantly more entertaining than flushing it down the toilet. People keep mentioning privately financed arenas in places like New York, Toronto, and now Seattle. Well, boys and girls, we're not in that league, and an arena here won't draw that kind of cashflow. The closest parallel for us is Ottawa, where they built an arena with private money, and it promptly went broke.
So the we should throw our money away paying for a stadium? How does that make sense?
Cappy is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Cappy For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 12:03 PM   #33
EldrickOnIce
Franchise Player
 
EldrickOnIce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Chicago
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era View Post
I would think that the final infrastructure components being agreed to by the municipality and county. There is a component in there for transportation improvements which are in the neighborhood of $40-100M, and that is being picked up by the local governments. Nothing is a deal until they have approval from those two bodies.
Exactly the right approach. Private money for private building, public money for the public infrastructure in support of it.
EldrickOnIce is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:09 PM   #34
Flames Fan, Ph.D.
First Line Centre
 
Flames Fan, Ph.D.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Underground
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random View Post
Seattle is three times the size of Calgary (and growing rapidly), and the new arena will likely have two major-league tenants, not one. These facts should suggest to you some reasons why it's easier to justify $600 million in private money for an arena there.

Building an NHL-quality arena with your own money in a city of a million and change is a good way to throw your money away, and significantly more entertaining than flushing it down the toilet. People keep mentioning privately financed arenas in places like New York, Toronto, and now Seattle. Well, boys and girls, we're not in that league, and an arena here won't draw that kind of cashflow. The closest parallel for us is Ottawa, where they built an arena with private money, and it promptly went broke.
Agree with all this.

I don't think people realize how much money there is in Seattle nowadays.
Flames Fan, Ph.D. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:19 PM   #35
Vulcan
Franchise Player
 
Vulcan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
Exp:
Default

The Canucks owner also went broke building his own arena.
__________________

Vulcan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 12:20 PM   #36
Johnny Makarov
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke View Post
Then Canucks fans can cheer for Seattle's NFL and NHL teams!
There are way too many Seahawk fans here in Calgary. Do they not know they are the Vancouver Canucks of the NFL?
Johnny Makarov is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Johnny Makarov For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 12:56 PM   #37
Oil Stain
Franchise Player
 
Oil Stain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vulcan View Post
The Canucks owner also went broke building his own arena.
Here's an interesting article about it:

To summarize, Arthur Griffiths started building the rink without even having all of the financing in place. A projected $100 million dollar project ended up costing $160 million which is a pretty huge overrun. He then brought in an NBA team at the cost of $125 million with the McCaws as a minority partner. He soon ran into cashflow issues and the Mccaws forced him out.

I don't think this is so much a story about an arena being impossible to finance privately so much as it being a story about Arthur not being a very good business man compared to his father who built the business empire.

http://www.lcshockey.com/issues/57/feature10.asp

Here's a shorter article giving some other reasons why the Canuck went bankrupt:
http://www.taxpayer.com/blog/why-can...krupt--part-2-

It's by the the Canadian Taxpayers federation so it is obviously biased, but I think they make some fair points.
__________________
I got laughed at when prior to the 2013 draft I stated the player the Flames picked at 6th is going to be better then any of the 3 previous guys the Oilers picked 1st overall.

I Stand by that remark.-MrMastodonFarm
Oil Stain is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Oil Stain For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 01:08 PM   #38
Bunk
Franchise Player
 
Bunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Exp:
Default

I'm almost 100% sure there'll be some public money on the table - but not in the same ballpark as the Flames want.
__________________
Trust the snake.
Bunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2017, 01:11 PM   #39
Flacker
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Flacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov View Post
There are way too many Seahawk fans here in Calgary. Do they not know they are the Vancouver Canucks of the NFL?

Incorrect, the Seahawks have a championship, there has never been a riot in Seattle following a football game, their coach has never waved a white towel in an embarrassing fashion, and they aren't constantly whining about officiating.
Flacker is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Flacker For This Useful Post:
Old 09-12-2017, 01:27 PM   #40
Resolute 14
One of many who is too boring; thinks that there should be rules regarding grammar in custom user titles, and also makes moderators wonder if there is a charachter limit here. I mean come on- you would think that would be a limitation in the software
 
Resolute 14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunk View Post
I'm almost 100% sure there'll be some public money on the table - but not in the same ballpark as the Flames want.
At this point, we don't actually know what the Flames want. CalgaryNext is dead, so there's no point going back to it. Haven't heard yet what they would be looking for for an NHL arena only proposal.
__________________

Resolute 14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

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 12:56 PM.

Calgary Flames
2016-17




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016