Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Da_Chief

Smith winning and giving Flames a sweetheart deal they're looking for would leave a sour taste in a lot of Calgarians mouth.

Eventually people will forget what happened but there'll be some who will not care about the Flames anymore. I've been a hardcore Flames fan for last 21 years when I moved to Calgary but them bullying taxpayers into stuffing their own pockets? don't think I'll be able to cheer for this team like I have to this day.

Maybe for a while, but as soon as the arena opened, the general population wouldn't care anymore once they could look at and play with the city's shiny new toy.

[Blarg]

Originally Posted by getbak

I know it's been pointed out many times how flawed the Flames' argument is that the city's proposal would require them to pay 120% of the cost of the building. I decided to crunch the numbers in a way that most of us should be familiar with, buying a house.


Let's say you're buying a $500,000 house and have a $100,000 down payment. You need to borrow the remaining $400,000 and get a mortgage.

Your bank offers you a mortgage with a 3.5% interest rate with the full loan to be paid off in 35 years. At the end of the loan, you will have paid a total of $694,328.27 with interest.

Now, during that time, you will have also been paying property taxes because that's what we all do. The property taxes on a half-million dollar house should be about $3,200 a year.

Let's assume a 2% annual increase in the tax rate. By the end of 35 years, your property taxes will cost $6,274.16 a year. Over the 35 years, you will have paid a total of $159,982.33 in taxes.


If we add it all up, after 35 years, you will have paid a total of $854,310.60 for your $500,000 house, or 170.86% of the original price.

EDIT: Whoops, forgot to include the original $100,000 down payment too... So, the actual total is $954,310.60 or 190.86%.


When you look at it that way, even if you buy into the idea that the Flames would be paying 120% of the cost, it's still a hell of a deal.

On top of that, the Flames would also be generating revenue, something you would not be able to do in your home.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

Maybe for a while, but as soon as the arena opened, the general population wouldn't care anymore once they could look at and play with the city's shiny new toy.

sadly, people seem to suffer from short term memory loss...

Remember the player strike/owner lockout? a lot of people were upset about that, but once the strike was over, people flocked back to the arena and to their TV screens.

most couldn't be bothered to even boycott a single game.

So, are their entitlement issues with the sports franchises, owners and players in general?

Sure, because we, the sports fans, enable them to think what they do is actually important...

its not.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

sadly, people seem to suffer from short term memory loss...

Remember the player strike/owner lockout? a lot of people were upset about that, but once the strike was over, people flocked back to the arena and to their TV screens.

Speaking of short-term memory loss: it was a lockout, not a strike. The owners cancelled the season.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

Speaking of short-term memory loss: it was a lockout, not a strike. The owners cancelled the season.

I actually covered my bases by listing both parties

[Boreal]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

I actually covered my bases by listing both parties

No you didn't. You just verified how little you know. Anyone who knows anything never confuses the two.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by nobles_point

No you didn't. You just verified how little you know. Anyone who knows anything never confuses the two.

lol ok chief

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Just listening to this tool on the radio now trying his damnedest to backpedal on his article: "I'm not picking sides, but unless Calgarians want to lose their NHL team—"

Good rule of thumb is to ignore everything g that comes before "but"

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by Blarg

On top of that, the Flames would also be generating revenue, something you would not be able to do in your home.

You also wouldn't be able to get paid to name your home after a corporation.

[Blarg]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

You also wouldn't be able to get paid to name your home after a corporation.

That is true. Just out of curiosity, do naming rights revenue go into HRR?

[Backlunds_socks]

You also couldn’t right off th business loan interest against the ebitda

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Good news everyone! The City of Edmonton has offered to pay for our arena, with just a few conditions.

After more than two years of failed negotiations between the city of Calgary and the Calgary Sport and Entertainment Corporation (CSEC) over funding of a new arena for the Calgary Flames, the city of Edmonton has stepped in and offered to foot the bill, provided they get to name it 'Eat #### Calgary' Place.

The new facility Edmonton has proposed will feature prominent photos of the Gretzky Oilers during their Cup runs, unbelievably uncomfortable seating for fans, and the “Price is Right” loser horn in lieu of a Flames’ goal siren.

And the best part, by far:

Flames President/CEO Ken King is said to love the name, as he ####ing hates Calgary too.

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2017/09...calgary-place/

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Good rule of thumb is to ignore everything g that comes before "but"

NSFW!

[rage2]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Anyone have history on how that happened? Last time i checked, the Flames are a for profit enterprise that is wholly privately owned...

While they certainly are involved in many charitable works around the City, they are not a non-profit business...

Not sure how that tax exemption came to pass in the first place?

The Flames don’t own the Saddledome, they’re merely a tenant on a cheap lease deal. That’s why they don’t pay property taxes, not because of an exemption. Business tax however, I don’t think they’re exempt from paying that, but I have no evidence either if they do or do not pay. Surprised neither side brought that up. A comparison to this would be the Bow. Encana doesn’t pay property tax. They pay a lease of $80m a year or something. The property tax is paid by the owner of the Bow. Because the Saddledome is city owned, they’re exempt from a property tax. This is why the Flames want nothing to do with arena ownership.

They got into this position by taking over maintenance and management of the Saddledome in exchange for $1 rent, contribution to local sports, and $20m (works out to around $2m/year). There is some risk involved with this deal, such as the big flood, where the Flames were responsible for repairing the dome. This deal expired in 2014, was renewed, but no details were made publicly on the details.

[InglewoodFan]

Originally Posted by AC

I saw Francis made a legal threat after receiving criticism for his BS article:

@c_debruyn
Replying to @SUNSports @EricFrancis
Eric Francis is literally paid by the flames to write and say this garbage. Nice journalistic integrity. What a hack

@EricFrancis
Replying to @c_debruyn @SUNSports
Be careful you don't get sued slandering folks like that.

Also wouldn't it be libel, not slander?

Odd that a local business owner would be so quick to alienate potential customers.

[Ozy_Flame]

Can't we just crowdsource 1/3 of this thing? I'd pay 500 if it got me like like 10 tickets for 4-5 games, merchandise, a plaque on the wall between Seaman and Edwards as a community builder, and one year of free beatings on Harvey the Hound.

[Nacre]

As a Seattle resident and former Sonics fan who lost him team and does not want to steal another city's team, I thought I would post a couple of thoughts.

1. Flames fans will be totally OK if the Flames leave.
When the Sonics left Seattle I switched my basketball purchases for ice hockey. I now have a season ticket package for the WHL Everett Silvertips with money left over. Other people in Seattle started going to Major League Soccer games, and Seattle now averages higher attendance than many of the big European teams.

I doubt the Flames will leave Calgary. But if they do you will find other things to do with your pocket money. A surplus of disposable income to spend on entertainment is never going to be a problem in a major city like Calgary.

2. Calgary will be totally OK if the Flames leave.
When the Sonics left Seattle, Key Arena went from making a loss to a profit because the team had to pay off the remaining debt on the arena. The arena now has no anchor tenant and hosts smaller events like our music festival (Bumbershoot), the WNBA, college basketball, exhibitions like Roger Federer vs John Isner, and concerts. But it does so at a profit, whereas it was forced to eat a loss when the Sonics were here and would have lost even more money with a publicly funded arena.

Again I doubt the Flames will leave your city. But if they do then Calgary should be able to operate the Saddledome at a profit. That's because NBA and NHL teams (including the Flames) usually have better deals that the smaller acts like concerts that they displace. Calgary ought to be able to get more tax revenue from non-NHL events at the Saddledome.

EDIT: I forgot to add a third issue . . .

3. The Flames are only likely to move if they get bought out.
Seattle loved the Sonics and years after they left the team was still selling more merchandise than a handful of active teams in the NBA. Oklahoma has done a good job of supporting the relocated Thunder, but the team has still lost a lot of money from the move.

The Sonics/Thunder moved because they were purchased by an Oklahoma ownership group that wanted a team in their hometown more than they cared about making money.

I think the same thing is true for the Flames. Calgarians provide the Flames with more support than they would get in any American city. The team is only likely to relocate to Seattle if they are first purchased by a Seattle-based ownership group that cares more about owning a team in Seattle than in having a stable and profitable NHL franchise.

[Lanny_McDonald]

This account doesn't smell on the up and up. if the city were okay with it, they wouldn't be working so hard to get a team back. Just saying.

[Nacre]

Originally Posted by New Era

This account doesn't smell on the up and up. if the city were okay with it, they wouldn't be working so hard to get a team back. Just saying.

Most people in Seattle want the NBA back, and perhaps a new NHL team. But we are not willing to do it by spending private money on an arena. Seattle was gouged for $500+ million in public money (almost $900 million USD in 2017 dollars) for a baseball stadium that few of us use. After that and the NFL stadium, the citizens were not willing to spend any more tax revenues on stadium welfare.

The reconstructed arena in Seattle will be funded by private investors.

[GioforPM]

I do t know if you can compare Seattle's love for NBA basketball to Calgarians love for NHL hockey. And Seattle obviously has other major league sports to turn to.

As for how the Flames would relocate, of course they'd be sold to a new owner. I do t think anyone doubts that, nor does it change the debate at all.