Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by ST20

I'd bet you my house more calgarians will use the new arena then the library and I'm a fan of the library.

It's not solely an economic argument unless you can somehow put value to all the other things a sports team does for a city. If you're looking for an economic argument the answer to a new building and the flames will always be no and it's not wrong depending on what you care about.

It's definitely not solely an economic argument. Even poor old KK gets that, when he trotted out his Colosseum story.

The pro arena side should could do more in talking about all the value a new arena would bring to the city.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by ST20

I'd bet you my house more calgarians will use the new arena then the library and I'm a fan of the library.

The library is expecting well over a million visitors a year (2M for the first year). That puts it right on level with an arena (Flames get ~750K, Hitmen ~350K, 500K from concerts would put us #1 in Canada).



Libraries are open a lot more than arenas are, I wouldn't be throwing the deed down on the table so hastily.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

This is where it gets tricky (and I don't pretend to have the answers). But I think it is important to keep the hockey team (a for-profit business) separate from the arena (which the for-profit business needs, but also has other uses and benefits for the community).

The 64,000 question of course, is how much benefit is there for the community? And also, how much subsidy is tolerable, in order to house the for-profit business?

Agreed. But hard to separate the two when the Flames say that without a new arena, they can't stay here. I mean if it weren't for that threat, implied or otherwise, I don't believe this would be a conversation would it?

As you say, it's complex. No doubt it would be easier to figure out how much subsidy is tolerable if the Flames were transparent with their finances. Possibly they are behind closed doors.

[Passe La Puck]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Well last Saturday I joined some friends in the Stampede Casino bar next to Cowboys after the Flames took down Nashville. The place was jammed and the crowd really did not thin out until nearly last call.

I didn't have to research a paper to see the economic benefit of a pro sports franchise that evening.

Well #### why would anyone waste time researching anything when we can get quality anecdotes for free!?

[stone hands]

For what it's worth I probably went out to eat before a game like 3 times in my 4 seasons as a sth(full dislosure: I had press level seats so I got food the last 2 years)

I'm already paying for tickets, gas, parking 41 nights a year, don't really want to add 30+ per game for meals when you can whip something up at home before heading down to the dome

[powderjunkie]

The arena economic arguments are useless at this stage and in this situation. If we currently had no arena and no team, then it would be worth the debate. If you want to tell me that moving the arena two blocks north of the Dome will allow mean that Moxie's and Boston Pizza can open next door and be packed on game nights, I won't argue very hard...though I will ask how much more money than present will really end up back in the local economy?

Although it's not currently as convenient, at least most of the restaurants in proximity to the Saddledome are locally owned. I think a new arena would see an increase in the total number of people dining out before/after games, but a higher proportion of that money will go to big chains. The overall impact to the local economy will be marginal.

I believe the Flames can continue to operate profitably in the Saddledome for another 20+ years. I also believe they could operate more profitably in a new arena. Kind of like any other business in the world...increasing profitability involves investment and risk. I am more than willing to call their bluff...I'll pack their bags and hold the door open for them if they want to leave. But I know there are a lot of things that would have to happen before that became a reality...and if they did, it would mean that the situation isn't viable without a massive handout, which IMO, means it simply isn't viable.

[getbak]

As was discussed at the Event Centre Assessment Committee meeting on Friday, Ernst & Young has been hired to create an Economic Impact Study. They will be looking at various cities around North America and the impact of their arena/entertainment districts.

On Friday, they presented their methodology for the report and not the report itself. They proposed using Edmonton, Columbus, and Nashville as the comparables. Members of Council made some suggestions for other cities to look at, but I'm not sure what final decision was made for that. They are supposed to file the report by mid-January so that Council can use it during their budget discussions at the end of January.

[Flamenspiel]

A lot has been said about the STH wanting this and that. The fact is that most of the long time ones are in good spots(in all price points), know their way around and are quite content with the status quo.

I get what the Flames are trying to do, and I understand that, but i don't really care. It happens when it happens.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

the arena economic arguments are useless at this stage and in this situation. If we currently had no arena and no team, then it would be worth the debate. If you want to tell me that moving the arena two blocks north of the dome will allow mean that moxie's and boston pizza can open next door and be packed on game nights, i won't argue very hard...though i will ask how much more money than present will really end up back in the local economy?

Although it's not currently as convenient, at least most of the restaurants in proximity to the saddledome are locally owned. I think a new arena would see an increase in the total number of people dining out before/after games, but a higher proportion of that money will go to big chains. The overall impact to the local economy will be marginal.

i believe the flames can continue to operate profitably in the saddledome for another 20+ years. i also believe they could operate more profitably in a new arena. Kind of like any other business in the world...increasing profitability involves investment and risk. I am more than willing to call their bluff...i'll pack their bags and hold the door open for them if they want to leave. But i know there are a lot of things that would have to happen before that became a reality...and if they did, it would mean that the situation isn't viable without a massive handout, which imo, means it simply isn't viable.

LOL. Everyone has an opinion and I'm fine with people opposing the arena but at least be a little realistic. The Naussau Coliseum is only 12 years older than the Dome and you expect the Saddledome to outlast that building by over a decade? Come on man get real.

[MacDaddy77]

[QUOTE=Strange Brew;6913238]My God man, it's not the least bit condescending to ask if someone appreciates the difference between a library and a for profit enterprise. Only different from a functionality and purpose perspective? If the City was building a 18,000 seat community arena for all Calgarians to use to enrich their lives then perhaps I would agree with you.

Except You didn’t ask that. You said “surely I can see the difference” and I did take it as condiscending.

To which I pointed out this is about more than just the arena. The arena will be an economic driver for east village that will draw thousands to the area many times a week. What else could you put that would generate the same foot traffic to the area to entice investment.

Losing a little on the arena deal COULD result in a massive return on additional east village development

Having the argument Solely about the arena without weighing the other impacts is nonsensical

[MacDaddy77]

Originally Posted by driveway

It’s pretty clear it doesn’t make any economic sense for the public to invest in a new building. The question is if it makes emotional sense, and how much. That’s the real number the Flames owners will be able to get from the public.

Really, are you so sure?

If the public (city) can invest $350,000,000 in order to kickstart Billions in private investment in the area I think it make significant economic sense

Again, this is about more than an arena for the city

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

lol

So...you disagree? Now I'm especially not sure public money should go to such a fragile operation apparently on the precipice of collapse...

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Well last Saturday I joined some friends in the Stampede Casino bar next to Cowboys after the Flames took down Nashville. The place was jammed and the crowd really did not thin out until nearly last call.

I didn't have to research a paper to see the economic benefit of a pro sports franchise that evening.

I don't know how those Casinos in Vegas managed to stay open so long without a pro hockey team.

[monkeyman]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

Really, are you so sure?

If the public (city) can invest $350,000,000 in order to kickstart Billions in private investment in the area I think it make significant economic sense

Again, this is about more than an arena for the city

I don't know if you realise this, but that area has already been kickstarted, and it had nothing to do with an arena.

[cam_wmh]

Originally Posted by MacDaddy77

Really, are you so sure?

If the public (city) can invest $350,000,000 in order to kickstart Billions in private investment in the area I think it make significant economic sense

Again, this is about more than an arena for the city

Kickstart billions in investment? From where?
What industry? Surely, not hospitality.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Kickstart billions in investment? From where?
What industry? Surely, not hospitality.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by monkeyman

I don't know how those Casinos in Vegas managed to stay open so long without a pro hockey team.

Its not like Vegas is known for their gambling and casinos?? The point being made was that he visited 1 establishment which was 4x? 10x? as busy because of the hockey team and nothing else. I am sure up to 1,000 other establishments saw money come in due to that single game.

Originally Posted by monkeyman

I don't know if you realise this, but that area has already been kickstarted, and it had nothing to do with an arena.

Everyone has their own definition of kickstarted....I would say this area is at a 1/10 right now for potential. Vacant condos galore, financing being threatened on projects, commercial tenants struggling, etc, all throughout EV while Vic Park has been under the impression it will become an entertainment district with margaritaville type establishments for the better part of 10 years. I get that we are in a downturn but "high demand" areas are still pushing through this downturn. The area needs a true kickstart, something to build around and as great as the library and music center are, they are not the type of kickstart to attract business of all types to the area.

[Travis Munroe]

Originally Posted by cam_wmh

Kickstart billions in investment? From where?
What industry? Surely, not hospitality.

billions of investment would add up real quick when looking at
- new residential development, jobs created, taxes paid
- hundreds of commercial spaces
- hotels

To live within walking distance of a brand new arena which sparks a surrounding entertainment district would mean millions each year in added residential taxes for the city.

I get that many don't want tax payers paying for this but I challenge you to find me another private investment which is the closest thing to a guarantee to put millions in the citys pocket each year that they would not have otherwise seen.

(of course we need the people to fill said establishments which comes with not being in a recession as proven in the past)

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Travis Munroe

billions of investment would add up real quick when looking at
- new residential development, jobs created, taxes paid
- hundreds of commercial spaces

... how are all those things not simply being displaced from other parts of the city? A new arena isn't going to trigger a population spike so that residential development and commercial space comes at the expense of development elsewhere in the city (as opposed to addition to). I don't see a compelling reason to give hundreds of millions of dollars in public handouts to a private enterprise so that someone can build condos in location X instead of location Y.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Parallex

... how are all those things not simply being displaced from other parts of the city? A new arena isn't going to trigger a population spike so that residential development and commercial space comes at the expense of development elsewhere in the city (as opposed to addition to). I don't see a compelling reason to give hundreds of millions of dollars in public handouts to a private enterprise so that someone can build condo's in location X instead of location Y.

Well, the city (especially the mayor) has placed an emphasis in trying to move population inward, and, more specifically, in that area. I do suspect a lot of businesses would set up there that wouldn't in any old area. Suburban areas aren't as attractive for restaurant/bars, etc.

Would the Parq area in Vegas have been cleaned up and developed without the arena? I doubt it - it was a card flip, low quality area for years and years. You didn't really want to walk along there. It's not where the new development along the strip was really going. Would the franchises in that area have simply gone elsewhere? Maybe, but there's not really the evidence either way.