Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

nah.

you have your opinion, i have mine.

i'll leave it at that

DiracSpike has his facts, and you have… uh… your opinion.

You should have quit while you were not as far behind.

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

How about:

3. City pays 33%, Flames pay 33%, users pay 33% (ticket tax), flames own and maintain building and pay property taxes on it.


The only way this would ever look unreasonable is in comparison to the debacle to our north.

I would love that, and think it's completely reasonable, but it's not going to happen under the current ownership.

I think the best we can hope for is 33/33/33, city owns it, flames maintain it at no charge, and the city gets a piece of parking or something.

[Blarg]

Originally Posted by DiracSpike

Edwards lived in Calgary from the late 80s until just recently so it's safe to say the vast vast vast majority of his fortune he paid taxes on. So relax and give the blood pressure a break.

Additionally the corporation he founded employs 10,000 people who all pay taxes.

I don't know, suggesting that a multi-billionaire should be exempt from taxes because he employs people who do pay taxes makes me feel...icky.

[topfiverecords]

Had Edwards (CSEC) planned properly for the eventual cost of a new arena for his hockey team to play in he should have moved to the UK sooner.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Blarg

I don't know, suggesting that a multi-billionaire should be exempt from taxes because he employs people who do pay taxes makes me feel...icky.

How about suggesting he should be exempt from income tax in a place where he does not live, because he pays income tax in the place where he does live?

[Blarg]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

How about suggesting he should be exempt from income tax in a place where he does not live, because he pays income tax in the place where he does live?

Where does his money that he earns come from?

[DiracSpike]

Originally Posted by Blarg

I don't know, suggesting that a multi-billionaire should be exempt from taxes because he employs people who do pay taxes makes me feel...icky.

I'm not suggesting he should be exempt from taxes. But people are allowed to move, as far as I'm aware. People do it all the time, so it's pretty ridiculous to link moving to tax cheating. Given that Edwards is not currently under investigation for tax evasion from when he was living here, I'd say it's pretty good odds that he paid taxes on his amassed fortune far and square. My point on the company is that if you're targeting someone for not contributing tax wise it's pretty non sensical to target the guy who has contributed so much to our public coffers both through his own money and the multi billion dollar companies he's founded that employ thousands of people. Unless, again, it's against the law to move and we place all the country's billionaires under house arrest.

[soulchoice]

I couldn’t care less where Murray Edwards lives. If I had the money that he has, I wouldn’t be living in Calgary either. He employs hundreds if not thousands of people. That’s good enough for me.

[Manhattanboy]

Ya this nonsense about where Edwards lives and pays tax is tiring and irrelevant.

[The Familia]

How about this. 33% city, 33% Flames, 33% ticket tax. Land value is not part of the split and is a separate one time expense the Flames pay to the city for the property. Flames own and operate the arena and collect all revenue except for parking. They also maintain and upgrade the building as needed. They do not pay rent or property tax. City removes property tax fee but collects parking revenue for all events. They also get paid for the land deal. All three groups have put up 1/3 which they do not get back. City loses property tax money but gains the sale of the land, parking (small but it’s something) and they will never have to sink a penny into the building. Flames get to collect all revenue and not pay property tax, but lose parking and will have to operate the building and pay for repairs and upgrades. Fans get nothing but the option to either buy expensive tickets or not. Seems like everyone gains and loses something.

[powderjunkie]

^ that's pretty reasonable, too. A lot would depend on the parking design - Stampede's lots will still be most of the supply I would imagine - beyond that I'm not sure the city is well designed to administer 'event parking' (ie. expensive on event nights, but cheaper/free other times to encourage visitation).

I still think any big chunk one time payments from the city should be in the form of an investment stake in CSEC. In the long-run eventual sale of the team/next time a new arena needs to be built, it improves the city's position.

[monkeyman]

For context.



I think the Flames also wanted all parking, the city to pay insurance and security, and they wanted free transportation for all event patrons to and from the game.
There's probably more, I'm just too lazy to go back and look.

[Nuje]

I really don't know why anyone is discussing anything unless we know exactly how lucrative operating the Saddledome is right now. They make X dollars a year from running the dome ($5.4m a year for just the Flames, according to Forbes as of November 2017). But the rest? Hitmen? Roughnecks? Concerts? Monster truck rallies? That Jehovas Witness event I find a pamphlet on my door for every year?

Once they show us all of the numbers, discussions can begin. If they actually make more than enough money to finance that themselves, and stand to increase their operating income significantly in a new venue, then they should get $0, and fund it themselves.

If, on the other hand, it would actually be a barely break-even proposition over 30 years to fund it all themselves, then we would all see that. I still personally don't believe that we should contribute public money in that scenario (because that simply means that the NHL's business model is crap, and it's not our job to bail them out). But were that the case, and public opinion sided with the Flames, and most people wanted the money spent, then I'd absolutely concede. I wouldn't be happy, but I wouldn't feel a need to talk about it much, if at all, because everything was done honestly and transparently.

The fact that CSEC doesn't just release all that information makes me think I know which one of those scenarios are the reality.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Blarg

Where does his money that he earns come from?

All over the world. He moved to the U.K. to be closer to his businesses there.

And his businesses pay corporate income tax in the jurisdictions where they do business.

You have no grounds for complaint.

[shogged]

I pay very little income tax. Am I a bad person?

[Nuje]

Originally Posted by shogged

I pay very little income tax. Am I a bad person?

It depends. Just like with the Flames wanting money for their new arena, we need more details regarding your finances to answer that question.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Nuje

It depends. Just like with the Flames wanting money for their new arena, we need more details regarding your finances to answer that question.

Some people in this thread don't need any details at all.

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Major Major

I would love that, and think it's completely reasonable, but it's not going to happen under the current ownership.

I think the best we can hope for is 33/33/33, city owns it, flames maintain it at no charge, and the city gets a piece of parking or something.

This is likely the best the Flames will agree to.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

This is likely the best the Flames will agree to.

They already had their chance and said 'no.'

[Macindoc]

Originally Posted by Locke

They already had their chance and said 'no.'

No, that is not correct, under the city's proposal, the Flames would own the arena and pay property taxes on it. The Flames want the city to own the arena, so as to avoid having to pay the property taxes.