Arena negotiation discussion. UPD: Flames release their proposal

[Bigfeet24]

Well it depends on whether or not you feel the city would benefit from a multi-purpose arena where the profits go directly to the owners or is shared amongst any potential investors.

I picked up on a previous comment that music artists etc don’t stop past Calgary as often as other cities. The Hydro was built in Glasgow as the city wanted to ensure they continued to attract a wide variety of events and needed a suitable venue.. the conferences and the like which visit the city have a massive impact on the local economy all because the venue is suitable.

So to answer your question, undoubtedly in my mind, it should be a mixture of public and private.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bigfeet24]

Originally Posted by Bawbag

The hydro is a great arena

Glasgow has out alot of money into that area to improve it.

Awesome arena. Mainly council owned too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Muta

It's actually a great idea, if you have the option to do so. But if you enjoy sitting outside in cold temperatures for hours, have at 'er. You do you.

Indoor football would actually do more harm to the Stamps than staying outdoors would. Why? People love being outdoors during pleasant weathers. It's why patios are such a huge draw. Majority of home games are during warm weather periods, and they would have a better chance at draws for those games simply because it's outdoors. Many that go to games go to enjoy the weather along with watching football; not just watching football alone.

Stamps need to draw the casual fans. Those aren't gonna come still if it's indoors, and they actually may end up dropping attendance since the more invested fans wouldn't want to attend since it's not outdoor anymore. I would say Stamps have more to lose by moving indoor.

It does suck for the important late season games and people do stay away because of how cold it gets, but the perks of the outdoor summer games outweigh the indoor summer games. Interior stadiums suck the energy out of the atmosphere, and you don't get to take advantage of the sunlight. Barely anyone goes to the Lions games at BC Place, and although it has a retractable roof, it feels like a convention hall still. I'm willing to bet that if the stadium was outdoors, they would have a bigger draw.

I believe indoor stadiums work ONLY if the stadium has enough natural lighting entering it, as well a breeze can come through, thus it's an indoor stadium that feels outdoor as it can. Then you get the best of both worlds: enjoy the summer weather, and stay warm in the colder months. But CSEC and the city is not going to put the costs down to build a brand new stadium like that. It's just not worth it for the CFL. It may end up costing more than the new arena does.

[Freeway]

Update: have responses from seven of 10 mayoral candidates; will be publishing them later this week.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Reneeee

I'm sorry. But I'd sure hope 90% of a Flames hockey forum would rather keep the greedy hockey team they enjoy watching play hockey than the greedy tech company that provides zero entertainment value.

... I'll take the 50,000 jobs paying an average 100K per year thanks. It's not even close actually.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Parallex

... I'll take the 50,000 jobs paying an average 100K per year thanks. It's not even close actually.

That's not very believable. 100k average?

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Indoor football would actually do more harm to the Stamps than staying outdoors would. Why? People love being outdoors during pleasant weathers. It's why patios are such a huge draw. Majority of home games are during warm weather periods, and they would have a better chance at draws for those games simply because it's outdoors. Many that go to games go to enjoy the weather along with watching football; not just watching football alone.

Stamps need to draw the casual fans. Those aren't gonna come still if it's indoors, and they actually may end up dropping attendance since the more invested fans wouldn't want to attend since it's not outdoor anymore. I would say Stamps have more to lose by moving indoor.

It does suck for the important late season games and people do stay away because of how cold it gets, but the perks of the outdoor summer games outweigh the indoor summer games. Interior stadiums suck the energy out of the atmosphere, and you don't get to take advantage of the sunlight. Barely anyone goes to the Lions games at BC Place, and although it has a retractable roof, it feels like a convention hall still. I'm willing to bet that if the stadium was outdoors, they would have a bigger draw.

I believe indoor stadiums work ONLY if the stadium has enough natural lighting entering it, as well a breeze can come through, thus it's an indoor stadium that feels outdoor as it can. Then you get the best of both worlds: enjoy the summer weather, and stay warm in the colder months. But CSEC and the city is not going to put the costs down to build a brand new stadium like that. It's just not worth it for the CFL. It may end up costing more than the new arena does.

Your post is completely anecdotal, but I respect it and you absolutely have the right to believe it. However, first and foremost, the Stamps are the best team in the CFL and they're not selling out the stadium; they can't even draw the casual fans anymore. Bo Levi Mitchell was on 960 last week saying as much - why would you go to a game at a dilapidated McMahon, when you can watch TV at home and enjoy from the warm pleasantries of your living room?

Calgary doesn't have the luxury of warm, consistent weather. An indoor stadium easily solves this problem. THere's LOTS of casual Stamps fan out there that won't go because it's a bit too cold - you BET their decisions are often weather-dependent, I'm not sure how you could claim otherwise. The hardcore fans will go, but most fans aren't hardcore and the weather plays into their decision. Ask the Stamps what they would do to attract more fans from start to finish - guarantee it's having not just a new stadium (which is a must), but an indoor stadium. I don't know if you've been to BC Place, but it is an absolute treat to watch the Whitecaps play there. Absolutely the weather does matter. Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis and US Bank Stadium in Minnesota are also indoor success stories. In fact, in Minnesota, the government wouldn't provide funding assistance unless the stadium was indoors.

This would be a nice stadium to go to when the temperature is below freezing outside, don't you think?



Regina's stadium was originally planned as an indoor stadium until the costs became too high for them. The point is they wanted an indoor stadium first before an outdoor one. Calgary's stadium proposal was the exact same, so that's two ownership groups that had that goal in mind. Calgary can draw on 5x the population that Regina does and has looked at the possibility of getting an MLS team here as well - this I know for fact. However, to attract casual fans and to get butts in seats, the field would have to be indoor. Imagine having two main tenants in your stadium and no fluctuating ticket revenue due to weather? Yeah, that's pretty much an ideal scenario. The casuals would come. CalgaryNEXT saw this, whether you want to believe that or not.

I believe almost the complete opposite when it comes to indoor stadiums than you. They attract fans (casual and hardcore) - for the pleasant, consistent environment. It's also all in how you design the stadium that matters. I would wager to say, and this is anecdotal just like yours, that people would have a roofed stadium over an open one if given the choice... particularly for northern climates.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Why would anyone go to live sports to pay $100 minimum for a decent experience when you can get a decent experience in your living room for anywhere between 80 and 95% of the cost? That's the long term question most sports have to answer, and it's why live attendance at most sports is in decline. The Stamps played most of their season during one of the hottest summers ever, with the clear best team in the league by far, and couldn't sell out. It's not like McMahon is a complete hole, but in general unless the Riders are playing and are good, selling out McMahon has been a problem for a while now.

Is some of that McMahon being crummy? Probably to a degree, but why should we expect better attendance for an indoor product? One that, since it's a new stadium, is virtually guaranteed to cost more? I don't think the trade off will increase attendance, and is more likely to decrease it. People want to see the outdoor sport play outdoors, especially in the summer, which is short enough here to begin with. Tough to give up a warm sunny day to go inside. The easy solution is clearly moving up the schedule, and then the season would be over in a few weeks from now rather than 7 or so weeks, and cold weather is a virtual non-factor.

[Muta]

On a related note, here's an interesting article from Populous / National Geographic on how stadiums of the future will look:

https://populous.com/news/2017/06/22...dium-tomorrow/

[Roughneck]

Forsyth Barr Stadium would be the indoor stadium benchmark for what the Stamps would be looking for. to try and get the best of indoor and outdoor.

https://populous.com/news/2011/08/01...ainment-arena/

Ability to have natural turf would definitely be a plus.

[Brendone]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

It's not like McMahon is a complete hole.

Yes, it absolutely is a hole. Sitting through cold games is one thing, but doing it in that dump is another.

[Strange Brew]

Sorry Muta but you just can't convince me that football fans prefer to watch the game indoors. I certainly do not. What Stamps game this year would have been a better experience indoors?

While Indy and Minnesota seemingly have nice stadiums, who wouldn't rather see a game at Lambeau or Mile High.

As for Vancouver, it's an absolute shame that they are stuck indoors watching their outdoor sports. Did you notice what Seattle did to the Kingdome?

[Ryan Coke]

I can guarantee that I would be attending more Stamps games if it had an indoor facility. There is no way my wife and kids would enjoy it enough to go when the weather is less then pleasant.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Roughneck

Forsyth Barr Stadium would be the indoor stadium benchmark for what the Stamps would be looking for. to try and get the best of indoor and outdoor.

https://populous.com/news/2011/08/01...ainment-arena/

Ability to have natural turf would definitely be a plus.

I'm not sure that roof would hold up well in Calgary's climate, which would probably explode the cost. That stadium cost the equivalent of 176 million CDN.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Muta

Your post is completely anecdotal, but I respect it and you absolutely have the right to believe it. However, first and foremost, the Stamps are the best team in the CFL and they're not selling out the stadium; they can't even draw the casual fans anymore. Bo Levi Mitchell was on 960 last week saying as much - why would you go to a game at a dilapidated McMahon, when you can watch TV at home and enjoy from the warm pleasantries of your living room?

...

I believe almost the complete opposite when it comes to indoor stadiums than you. They attract fans (casual and hardcore) - for the pleasant, consistent environment. It's also all in how you design the stadium that matters. I would wager to say, and this is anecdotal just like yours, that people would have a roofed stadium over an open one if given the choice... particularly for northern climates.

I do see where you're coming from, as originally I had the same opinion. The benefits of a indoor stadium means you would have a consistent draw of spectators, which should pay dividends in the playoff period of the season.

What has made me change my opinion though is the problem you mentioned in the first paragraph that is plaguing the CFL as a whole, watch the game in person, or watch it on TV? If someone is going to pay to view the game live, they're going for the in-game experience. I feel a big component for that is the weather.

You're right that it plays a big role in whether one goes or not. If the weather is crappy, it'll effect attendance. But if the weather is great, it'll boost attendance. I figure for the casual fans, and myself personally, when I attend Stamps games, it's a group experience. I'll go with a number of friends on a nice day to tailgate and enjoy the weather outside while taking in the football game atmosphere.

If the stadium was indoors, I'm not sure I'll have as high of a desire to go to the games since being inside takes away a part of the experience I like. I'm not a big enough fan of the brand of CFL football to go despite that. And that's the question for the casuals that CSEC needs to draw. How many more would come since it's indoor? And how many would they lose because it's indoor? One friend of mine who has season tickets said he probably wouldn't go to games anymore if it moved indoors. This is a dilemma with the ordeal. Although games in October and November may be a bit more tempting than it is currently. It's possible it could balance out, since as you said, you get the perks of consistent draw since weather isn't really a factor anymore.

The NFL does have a number of indoor stadiums, but there is a massive difference in quality of prestige and play between the NFL and CFL, so the CFL has to sell more than the game itself to draw people in. The NFL can get away with indoor stadiums, and it not mattering to fans as much because it's the best quality of football players you'll come across. The product is good enough in the consumers eyes to miss out on the outdoor experience.

And over half of the season is during the cold weather months of the year. There's only one month of the regular season where the weather is likely to be hot at all cities. So the NFL schedule is a cold weather schedule. It's more of a necessity for NFL teams than it is with the CFL. The CFL is opposite of that; and because of that, I feel the teams of the league need to embrace the summer elements since I believe spectators would rather be outside, than inside during the summer months. Indoor venues haven't worked well for teams in Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal. Granted, just the venue simply being indoors wasn't the only issue for the last two.

Like I said though, if Stamps could get a venue like US Bank Stadium, and you can make it feel like your outside whereas you're actually in an indoor stadium, that's great. However it's completely cost-prohibitive. I remember when Hamilton made their new stadium, I was surprised with how bare-bones it looked; especially compared to Regina's and Winnipeg's new stadiums. But with the landscape of the CFL now, it makes complete sense to build a cost-efficient venue that meets your demands.

[Beatle17]

Originally Posted by Parallex

... I'll take the 50,000 jobs paying an average 100K per year thanks. It's not even close actually.

Have you researched the issues that arise from this many people coming to town making that kind of money, I have and it isn't exactly pretty.

Because of the competition for rental properties, and condo/apartment purchases they change the market for local people who are unable to afford the price increases. Along with the price increases comes property tax increases because of the increase in values. It all sounds good but can really be a huge negative for certain parts of the local populace.

Traffic alone has changed to the negative in Seattle by a factor of 200% according to reports (and family related conversations) because of Amazon's office that was constructed there. These numbers will be comparable to Silicon Valley where regular citizens can no longer afford to live, ask them how the standard of living is doing.

And if you think that the City of Calgary is getting everything from Amazon without giving up BILLIONS of dollars over the years in incentives you will be mistaken.

[Mathgod]

Another factor to think about regarding the CFL/Stamps - the coaches need ideal conditions during training camp to do a proper evaluation of the players. Often it rains throughout training camp making things very difficult; an indoor stadium would alleviate this issue.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Beatle17

Have you researched the issues that arise from this many people coming to town making that kind of money, I have and it isn't exactly pretty.

Because of the competition for rental properties, and condo/apartment purchases they change the market for local people who are unable to afford the price increases. Along with the price increases comes property tax increases because of the increase in values. It all sounds good but can really be a huge negative for certain parts of the local populace.

Traffic alone has changed to the negative in Seattle by a factor of 200% according to reports (and family related conversations) because of Amazon's office that was constructed there. These numbers will be comparable to Silicon Valley where regular citizens can no longer afford to live, ask them how the standard of living is doing.

This is the "Moneysense city rankings" argument.

Yes, in a place where the economy is good, things get more expensive. It's still better to have a strong economy than a weak one. And, if the place where you live gentrifies, and your property value goes up, that's a financial windfall - you just have to sell to recieve it.

That's the irony about anti-development NIMBYs. Their resistance to chance actually pits them against their own self-interest.

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Another factor to think about regarding the CFL/Stamps - the coaches need ideal conditions during training camp to do a proper evaluation of the players. Often it rains throughout training camp making things very difficult; an indoor stadium would alleviate this issue.

This is true, but they don't need to have a stadium to do this. If they stay at McMahon, they could still build an indoor training facility. Therefore they don't have to worry about elements during training camp, as well during the colder points of the season.

[chedder]

Agree with the indoor stadium fans for the Stamps. I'm a season ticket holder and would love an indoor stadium. There's only a few games where the weather is so perfect that I'd rather be outside. Sometimes it's too windy. At risk of being flamed, sometimes too hot ( I face west and the sun can be blinding and burning). I'd trade the odd beautiful day for no parka in October and playoffs. Maybe I'm getting soft in my mid 40's.