10-18-2017, 12:40 PM
|
#3561
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir
Quebec was moved almost literally overnight the moment it stopped making money, the fact it was in the black the entire time leading up to that moment meant nothing. The rhetoric that Calgary's ownership has been using sounds very familiar and leads me to believe they're contemplating a similar type of exit plan.
|
I don't see the comparison, they had a very small arena in a small city(500K) that effectively had devalued an existing franchise's fan base. Quebec effectively took fans away from Montreal and then gave them back. The Habs owners were probably thrilled with Quebec's move.
That being said, i could certainly see the Flames being sold, but not for any similarity to the Quebec scenario.
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 12:43 PM
|
#3562
|
Franchise Player
|
count me as someone who feels that the NHL would be loathe to move a team from Canada as they would likely rather have the expansion fee over the relocation fee.
although I guess the counterpoint for all the work they have done to keep the yotes in PHX would be the moving of the the Thrashers to Wpg as that seemed to happen somewhat quickly
__________________
If I do not come back avenge my death
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 12:45 PM
|
#3563
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamenspiel
I don't see the comparison, they had a very small arena in a small city(500K) that effectively had devalued an existing franchise's fan base. Quebec effectively took fans away from Montreal and then gave them back. The Habs owners were probably thrilled with Quebec's move.
That being said, i could certainly see the Flames being sold, but not for any similarity to the Quebec scenario.
|
You can make the argument that two Alberta teams split the market and devalue each other too, especially since neither one has anything close to the market size of Montreal. At ground-level there's plenty of Nordiques fans out there that abhor the thought of supporting the Habs but why wouldn't monopolizing pro hockey in Alberta be any less desirable to the surviving owners than it was in Quebec?
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 12:53 PM
|
#3564
|
Farm Team Player
Join Date: Jul 2013
Exp:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames
I think Nenshi can and should take a step towards the Flames in their proposal, if only to show good faith and kickstart real talks, as he is the mayor and we do need that arena either for the Flames or an Olympic bid.
If the Flames continue to pout after that though then forget about it, that's on them and they can deal with the consequences. At least then we can say Nenshi and co gave it a real shot and it can't really be hung on the city.
|
Nenshi has already stated throughout the campaign that the city is still at the table waiting for CSEC to return to restart negotiations. He has also stated that the last position the city proposal is not written in stone and they are willing to negotiate.
What more do you want him or the city to do? The next move is up to to CSEC as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
|
The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to Hangman For This Useful Post:
|
Art Vandelay,
Calgary4LIfe,
GreatWhiteEbola,
iggy_oi,
mikeecho,
powderjunkie,
Stillman16,
stone hands,
Textcritic,
Torture,
vennegoor of hesselink
|
10-18-2017, 01:01 PM
|
#3565
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cape Breton Island
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangman
Nenshi has already stated throughout the campaign that the city is still at the table waiting for CSEC to return to restart negotiations. He has also stated that the last position the city proposal is not written in stone and they are willing to negotiate.
What more do you want him or the city to do? The next move is up to to CSEC as far as I'm concerned.
|
The Flames are the bad guys here, period. They're trying to hold the city hostage for a giant payday that the Oilers got with their sweetheart arena deal. It's not happening, so they're holding their breath and throwing a public tantrum.
Nenshi is stewarding tax payer dollars .. u know, the thing that people who voted for Bill Smith, what they wanted? Oh except when it's on their own pet project that impacts their life. This is why I hate politics and so many people now. Everyone wants their taxes next to nothing but god help any politician who can't give you a 500 million dollar arena without raising your taxes.
|
|
|
The Following 16 Users Say Thank You to White Out 403 For This Useful Post:
|
Art Vandelay,
cam_wmh,
East Coast Flame,
GreatWhiteEbola,
Hangman,
mikeecho,
Nandric,
OldDutch,
Peanut,
powderjunkie,
ricosuave,
Scornfire,
Stillman16,
stone hands,
Torture,
vennegoor of hesselink
|
10-18-2017, 01:06 PM
|
#3566
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hangman
Nenshi has already stated throughout the campaign that the city is still at the table waiting for CSEC to return to restart negotiations. He has also stated that the last position the city proposal is not written in stone and they are willing to negotiate.
What more do you want him or the city to do? The next move is up to to CSEC as far as I'm concerned.
|
I don't disagree with this but I think a couple of additional meaningful preliminary steps should be taken by the City such as the announcement of the formation of an arena negotiating team made up of a few councilors and members of administration (that does not need to include Nenshi at this point) and a willingness to commit to a specific time frame to work to get a deal done with regularly scheduled meetings (i.e. don't leave CSEC waiting for weeks to respond to proposals).
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:08 PM
|
#3567
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cape Breton Island
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manhattanboy
I don't disagree with this but I think a couple of additional meaningful preliminary steps should be taken by the City such as the announcement of the formation of an arena negotiating team made up of a few councilors and members of administration (that does not need to include Nenshi at this point) and a willingness to commit to a specific time frame to work to get a deal done with regularly scheduled meetings (i.e. don't leave CSEC waiting for weeks to respond to proposals).
|
There's already a negotiating team in place with Nenshi NOT on it.
Last edited by White Out 403; 10-18-2017 at 01:27 PM.
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:11 PM
|
#3568
|
Franchise Player
|
Nenshi is totally in the drivers seat here with all the good PR. All he has to do when the topic comes up is say something along the lines of "The Flames are important to our community and we value them being here. We are still committed to negotiating a deal that works for both sides if the Flames are willing to return to the table." Flames continue to look stupid and petty until they move from their "no more negotiating" stance.
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Hockeyguy15 For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:12 PM
|
#3569
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Owning a pro sports franchise is the ultimate toy. It's crazy to suggest that this toy should also generate 7-10% growth in ebitda. I understand it can't be a huge sink of money but please, the world's tiniest violin is playing a sad melody to the tune that public money is needed to maximise earnings for a plaything for the super rich.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Tinordi For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:21 PM
|
#3570
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resurrection
Jesus. There`s already a negotiating team in place with Nenshi NOT on it.
|
I was not aware there was a specific arena negotiating committee already in place that included councilors. I thought it was just the usual members of administration that would meet on any project. My mistake.
Last edited by Manhattanboy; 10-18-2017 at 01:24 PM.
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:27 PM
|
#3571
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cape Breton Island
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manhattanboy
I was not aware there was a specific arena negotiating committee already in place that included councilors. I thought it was just the usual members of administration that would meet on any project. My mistake.
|
Didn't mean to be a cranky pants with the Jesus part. Sorry.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to White Out 403 For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:36 PM
|
#3572
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorbeauNoir
You can make the argument that two Alberta teams split the market and devalue each other too, especially since neither one has anything close to the market size of Montreal. At ground-level there's plenty of Nordiques fans out there that abhor the thought of supporting the Habs but why wouldn't monopolizing pro hockey in Alberta be any less desirable to the surviving owners than it was in Quebec?
|
No, even if the Flames move I think most of us would never ever support the Oilers.
|
|
|
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Ashartus For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:49 PM
|
#3573
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashartus
No, even if the Flames move I think most of us would never ever support the Oilers.
|
Again I don't see how this is any different from the Habs/Nordiques situation.
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 01:56 PM
|
#3574
|
Scoring Winger
|
Well, the Oilers had an 8-year head start on the Flames for fan loyalty whereas the Canadiens had a 63-year head start on the Nordiques.
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 02:22 PM
|
#3575
|
Celebrated Square Root Day
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by djsFlames
I think Nenshi can and should take a step towards the Flames in their proposal, if only to show good faith and kickstart real talks, as he is the mayor and we do need that arena either for the Flames or an Olympic bid.
If the Flames continue to pout after that though then forget about it, that's on them and they can deal with the consequences. At least then we can say Nenshi and co gave it a real shot and it can't really be hung on the city.
|
Problem is the Flames are so dense that if Nenshi gave an inch of good faith they'd start beating their chest behind closed doors, screaming they've won and to now demand the city pays 100%.
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 02:44 PM
|
#3576
|
Franchise Player
|
Here's a legit question. Why don't they just add a 50 dollar ticket tax to every event that comes to the Saddledome to help pay for it? Then it's an actual USER PAY system.
__________________
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 02:46 PM
|
#3577
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Cape Breton Island
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by corporatejay
Here's a legit question. Why don't they just add a 50 dollar ticket tax to every event that comes to the Saddledome to help pay for it? Then it's an actual USER PAY system.
|
The city of calgary suggested a user fee.
1/3 City
1/3 Flames
1/3 users for all events concerts and games
fair right?
Nope. Calgary Flames want more.
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to White Out 403 For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-18-2017, 02:47 PM
|
#3578
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resurrection
The city of calgary suggested a user fee.
1/3 City
1/3 Flames
1/3 users for all events concerts and games
fair right?
Nope. Calgary Flames want more.
|
My proposal:
1/1 users for all events, concerts and games......
__________________
|
|
|
10-18-2017, 02:52 PM
|
#3579
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resurrection
The city of calgary suggested a user fee.
1/3 City
1/3 Flames
1/3 users for all events concerts and games
fair right?
Nope. Calgary Flames want more.
|
That's a charitable way of putting the cities offer and isn't really factual because it does not consider the current situation of the Flames and implies the city be giving the Flames new money.
A better way to describe the city offer is that the city will continue to subsidize the Flames by the same amount they currently and are willing to advance this subsody into subsidy a lump sum payment to assist with the capita costs of building an arena.
The city did not put any new money on the table.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to GGG For This Useful Post:
|
|
10-18-2017, 03:02 PM
|
#3580
|
Franchise Player
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
That's a charitable way of putting the cities offer and isn't really factual because it does not consider the current situation of the Flames and implies the city be giving the Flames new money.
A better way to describe the city offer is that the city will continue to subsidize the Flames by the same amount they currently and are willing to advance this subsody into subsidy a lump sum payment to assist with the capita costs of building an arena.
The city did not put any new money on the table.
|
Are they not putting up the cost of demolition and about 150 million of cash?
__________________
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:15 PM.
|
|