Arena Negotiation Discussion v2

[RM14]

it’s important that it not be built like a “big spaceship” that’s been dropped into the middle of the community

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-...ns-with-flames

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Table 5

They are going to be the ones in your living room.

That's the double edged sword with new arenas. They are built to maximize revenue, which will inevitably price out a lot of people. Chances are people will go to fewer games, but have it be more of an "experience" when they do.

Right. Like the 'Experience' such as it is, isnt expensive enough already.

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Locke

Oh, when theres a new arena there arent going to be any 'cheap seats' anymore...

The cheap seats will be still available in the CP ticket exchange forum. Best deals in the city.

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by Locke

Right. Like the 'Experience' such as it is, isnt expensive enough already.

I don't disagree with you, and it's partly why I went to a total of 1 live games last year. If your primary goal of going to a game is watching the action on the ice, don't expect the value proposition to get better with a new arena.

It's kind of how things are going these days though in sports. Cater to fewer, better-off people (but spread the cost to everyone).

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

NiklasSundblad is talking about Rogers Place.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I should read before posting while half asleep.

[Slava]

This may already be somewhere in this thread (and my apologies if it is!), but they were discussing the arena at city council again today, and Michael Brown (CMLC) said he's seen more renderings done for the Flames by Rosetti, but they weren't presenting those today.

I know that Rosetti was discussed here, so maybe that's not new information, but thought I'd mention it anyway.

[rage2]

Originally Posted by socalwingfan

I imagine if the Flames/City went with Rossetti, they could get a pretty good deal. Got to think there would be a pretty big discount to be one of the early adapters of their product

Doubt it. CalgaryNEXT had the inverted bowl design as well and the arena pricetag that came out didn't look any cheaper.

Also interesting to note, the reason why CalgaryNEXT renderings were so bad when it was presented was because at the time the inverted bowl concept hasn't been unveiled by Rossetti so it was rendered with almost no detail. It wasn't mentioned at all in the presser, nor featured in any detail in the renderings. The only detail was a vague reference on the Rossetti page.

http://www.rossetti.com/work/project...nment-district

Makes a little more sense in hindsight.

[sureLoss]

News Update

Scott Dippel @CBCScott
#yyccc votes to re-engage in a partnership conversation with CSEC on an entertainment district (incl an arena). Only Farrell opposes. Keating absent.

[White Out 403]

I hope the city sticks to their guns with
1/3 team
1/3 city
1/3 users

how the #### is that not fair? god damn it. just do it.

[tkflames]

Originally Posted by sureLoss

News Update

Scott Dippel @CBCScott
#yyccc votes to re-engage in a partnership conversation with CSEC on an entertainment district (incl an arena). Only Farrell opposes. Keating absent.

Glad I voted against her. There is nothing wrong with hearing out a developmental concept for the city, regardless of where on the spending spectrum you fall.

[Joborule]

Farrell is opposed to money towards sport venue development in general.

[manwiches]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Farrell is opposed to money towards sport venue development in general.

If it was for useless spending on art, she's all for it.

[Fire]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

I hope the city sticks to their guns with
1/3 team
1/3 city
1/3 users

how the #### is that not fair? god damn it. just do it.

I'm sure the Flames would be fine with that assuming the property taxes would remain the same as they currently are at the Saddledome.

Having the Feds pay 1/3rd of the cost with it being part of the Olympics would be a big help as well.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by Fire

I'm sure the Flames would be fine with that assuming the property taxes would remain the same as they currently are at the Saddledome.

Having the Feds pay 1/3rd of the cost with it being part of the Olympics would be a big help as well.

Why would they also get a break on property taxes? Why do we have to keep giving these billionaire #######s tax breaks for their new toys? There's nothing wrong the Dome. If they want to have a fancy new stadium like it's a video game, go ahead, pay with the vast wealth you extract from us, the fans. Don't charge me and my family hundreds of dollars to go to one game, then, raise my taxes so you can have a 5th house instead of "just 4"

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Farrell is opposed to money towards sport venue development in general.

I voted to save her bacon last election because the alternatives were much worse. I have completely tired of her however. She’s morphed into the polar opposite Sean Chu. Smart, well spoken, but a staunch lefty opposed to any talk other that what Portland or some other progressive city had done.

A city needs balance. Without it she never would of got the bridge or investment in art. Calgary needs both.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

I hope the city sticks to their guns with
1/3 team
1/3 city
1/3 users

how the #### is that not fair? god damn it. just do it.

Even this was too much of a handout. It's probably going to be worse.

But corporate welfare is fine when it's for your hockey team I guess.

[colbym72]

Edit: Wrong thread

[Fire]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

Why would they also get a break on property taxes? Why do we have to keep giving these billionaire #######s tax breaks for their new toys? There's nothing wrong the Dome. If they want to have a fancy new stadium like it's a video game, go ahead, pay with the vast wealth you extract from us, the fans. Don't charge me and my family hundreds of dollars to go to one game, then, raise my taxes so you can have a 5th house instead of "just 4"

[ST20]

Originally Posted by Table 5

They are going to be the ones in your living room.

That's the double edged sword with new arenas. They are built to maximize revenue, which will inevitably price out a lot of people. Chances are people will go to fewer games, but have it be more of an "experience" when they do.

The current dome is too big and it's a massive waste for people to buy press levels (above rows 1-3). It's way better to watch at home than have the sloping ceiling cover half your view all the time.

I hope that they build a smaller arena that sells out every time - it's louder and a better TV product. It'll suck that the price will increases but I think if the crowd is better it will translate into a better TV product and hopefully they can make up revenue in better ratings to offset less seats. It's better to go to one or two games a year with a better experience than 10 press level games in my opinion.

Also, with the inverted bowl design maybe they do less seating but sell more standing room when they really want to pack the place.

[Nuje]

I keep repeating myself, but I vow to keep repeating myself until everyone gets the point on this. Until CSEC publicly show their total profit for everything related to the Saddledome (Flames, Hitmen, Roughnecks, concerts, other events), without trying to hide anything, no negotiation involving a single public dollar to them, loaned or donated, should begin.

Let's not forget that Katz bought the most expensive mansion in LA not long after receiving his new arena in Edmonton. I'm sure everyone ever would be devastated that he wouldn't be able to afford that, because he was paying a mortgage on his new arena, sort of like the rest of us do when we buy one condo. What a dark timeline that would be!