Impact of arena negotiation tactics and election interference on STHs?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Will you not use the Saddledome in the meantime? Is the prestige of a new arena to watch the same hockey in worth paying higher taxes and ticket prices? Not to mention that same money the city took from you could be spent on something else that you could get even more use out of than the arena.

There are literally dozens of libraries in Calgary...and numerous other bridges as well.

Ridiculous point.

[Benched]

lol this old chestnut argument about the library/bridge.

I thought we were past this.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by Smartcar

If you’re seriously asking, you’re either not a STH or you don’t believe in honouring contracts.

What?

LOL

No idea what you mean by this.

I was merely asking him why he is done with season tickets now (all of a sudden) and what changes after this season...he explained it.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Cambardi

To play the devils advocate here...the Calgary stampede runs for ten days every July. It is a non profit as we’ll but receives tax subsidy without a doubt. Not ever Calgarian likes or attend the greatest outdoor show on earth but their tax money indeed funds it to some extent.

if the Flames turned into a community owned team, like the Packers, you'd find much more support for the arena.

As a privately owned enterprise, support is tepid because all profits go into the pockets of individuals....all of whom are wealthy beyond the imagination of 99% of the taxpayers being asked to help fund the arena.

[Smartcar]

Originally Posted by transplant99

No idea what you mean by this.

I was merely asking him why he is done with season tickets now (all of a sudden) and what changes after this season...he explained it.

I meant if you were a STH you would know that you commit around mid-March to renew for the following season. Which is why you can’t cancel your seasons tickets in October because you’re upset about the Flames interfering in the election. Unless you don’t care about honouring contracts.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by transplant99

Uhhh...no.

This was about complaining where ones tax dollars go....remember? Its right up there ^^^^ for you to see.



Im merely pointing out that i did not have a right to refuse money going to a plethora of projects i will never use....soo therefore i might as well ask my tax dollars go to something i will.


Pretty simple.

Don't worry... i am on record saying I'd be ok with paying 25-33% for the arena as well.

So, by definition I also support corporate welfare....but only up to a point.

I mean public money going towards a privately owned enterprise is by definition corporate welfare, or a corporate handout...

how would you define it?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

if the Flames turned into a community owned team, like the Packers, you'd find much more support for the arena.

As a privately owned enterprise, support is tepid because all profits go into the pockets of individuals....all of whom are wealthy beyond the imagination of 99% of the taxpayers being asked to help fund the arena.

Which makes zero difference to someone who wants their tax dollars going to something they will use as opposed to something they wont....and isnt that what we are talking about here?

Im hardly advocating that the city pay for everything carte blanche, only that IF we are deciding where we want our property taxes going in regards to projects within the city, I am a lot more interested in them going to something I will use versus the 95% of things built that I won't.

I really dont see whats so unreasonable about that stance.

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

Don't worry... i am on record saying I'd be ok with paying 25-33% for the arena as well.

So, by definition I also support corporate welfare....but only up to a point.

I mean public money going towards a privately owned enterprise is by definition corporate welfare, or a corporate handout...

how would you define it?

Investing into your city to make it a better place?

The arena isnt viable without a tenant so therefore I like to think of it as more of a partnership between the team and the citizenry. Until this debacle that's how it has always felt to me. Maybe the city has outgrown that, and it's no longer viable for it to continue? I dont know.

I realize many don't see it that way, and that's fine.

I just don't jump all over someone who does support the city putting money towards it vs those that don't, and those are the lines that have been drawn for some reason.

[Corral]

The demands on city funds these days are massive while at the same time the city's primary source of revenue - commercial property tax - is probably either stagnant or declining, so I find it a bit much to think there is really any money available from the city for something like a new arena.

To the extent there is extra dollars hidden in the walls at city hall, I would like them to be spent boosting essential services and maintenance on existing infrastructure. Its a blemish to Calgary that one needs to consider which lane to drive in on a major roadway here if they want to avoid nasty bumps or potholes. No doubt CPS or CFS could use way more money than they currently get.

You want an arena - surtax the crap out of STHs.

That's the message the Flames don't want to hear, but its the only message they are going to get.

[RM14]

It's not black and white...

Without the NHL team. The city will still find a way with public contribution to have an event center in Vic Park.

It will happen with or without the NHL team. With public "dollars".

[Scornfire]

Originally Posted by RM14

It's not black and white...

Without the NHL team. The city will still find a way with public contribution to have an event center in Vic Park.

It will happen with or without the NHL team. With public "dollars".

In which case the city would receive 100% of the revenues

[RM14]

Originally Posted by Scornfire

In which case the city would receive 100% of the revenues

City of Calgary will be so good at optimization of their new building. We will all be so much better off as taxpayers then right?

[getbak]

Originally Posted by RM14

City of Calgary will be so good at optimization of their new building. We will all be so much better off as taxpayers then right?

Maybe.

It's my understanding that the Sprint Center (which was built specifically to try to attract an NBA and/or NHL team) has done so well for Kansas City without a major tenant that they're no longer trying to woo a team there.


Look at the deal the Flames wanted: City pays $230 million up-front with no mechanism to recoup any of those costs. Annual costs to pay for free transit to any events in the building and additional police working the games. No rent or property taxes paid to the city and the city covers the provincial property tax on the building. City receives no revenue from any events held in the building. CSEC gets first rights to develop the surrounding land and receives a portion of the revenue from the Casino and event parking that currently go to the Stampede.

The city could tell CSEC to stuff it and build an concert/events centre without concern for trying to get all the NHL bells & whistles ... No NHL practice rink (probably drops the price by $100 million right there) no "world's largest" scoreboard (that's tens of millions); no NHL-calibre dressing room and training facility (more millions saved). They also wouldn't need a dozen different exclusive club and suite options (although, those might be lucrative enough to pay for themselves).

A concert-first venue could probably be had in the $300 million range. That's only slightly more than what CSEC wants the city to pay now, but the city would receive all revenue generated by the building. The city would almost-certainly come out ahead during the life of the building over what CSEC is asking for.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by getbak

Maybe.

It's my understanding that the Sprint Center (which was built specifically to try to attract an NBA and/or NHL team) has done so well for Kansas City without a major tenant that they're no longer trying to woo a team there.


Look at the deal the Flames wanted: City pays $230 million up-front with no mechanism to recoup any of those costs. Annual costs to pay for free transit to any events in the building and additional police working the games. No rent or property taxes paid to the city and the city covers the provincial property tax on the building. City receives no revenue from any events held in the building. CSEC gets first rights to develop the surrounding land and receives a portion of the revenue from the Casino and event parking that currently go to the Stampede.

The city could tell CSEC to stuff it and build an concert/events centre without concern for trying to get all the NHL bells & whistles ... No NHL practice rink (probably drops the price by $100 million right there) no "world's largest" scoreboard (that's tens of millions); no NHL-calibre dressing room and training facility (more millions saved). They also wouldn't need a dozen different exclusive club and suite options (although, those might be lucrative enough to pay for themselves).

A concert-first venue could probably be had in the $300 million range. That's only slightly more than what CSEC wants the city to pay now, but the city would receive all revenue generated by the building. The city would almost-certainly come out ahead during the life of the building over what CSEC is asking for.

I don't think a concert only venue would be economically viable. The revenue generated just wouldn't be enough.

[Bingo]

I'm just so glad we found another place to talk about the arena project, relieved.

Hold on while I back my car over this dead horse repeatedly.

[nik-]

It's kind of a big deal.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by calgarywinning

I concur with Bingo's article. It's mathematically impossible for an new arena to be built and operated at a huge loss by owners only. I want the Flames to stay in Calgary. There is a civic aspect to this.

I'm hoping Naheed Nenshi will revisit and take the initiative to get talks rolling and work to get a deal that will work for both sides as soon as possible. It would be an economic boon and help get things moving in the right direction and show good faith.

The not Nenshi vote was still a massive amount and while it's not linked to the arena debate, it means that Nenshi isn't all inclusive, didn't have a huge victory and ought to get to doing the work for the Nenshi and Bill Smith vote, not just the Nenshi vote.

The thing is, the owners are the ones who have not been working in good faith throughout the entire process. These tweets, leaked offer documents and everything else just prove what all citizens assumed was going on. I used to enjoy season tickets and still attend many games annually but can tell you that my appetite to do so has severely diminished due to these petty antics by CSEC.

I don't know what else the city can do at this point unless the forlorn child comes back to the table from his timeout willing to concede he has made a massive miscalculation as to the intelligence level of Calgarians in general. This city was never going to be dooped into some behemoth of a tax burden like the Edmonton's of the world.

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by nik-

It's kind of a big deal.

I'm not so sure the size of the deal insists that you have to around and around in circles saying the same thing over and over every day.

[TheAlpineOracle]

Originally Posted by Bingo

I'm not so sure the size of the deal insists that you have to around and around in circles saying the same thing over and over every day.

Yup and the same 5-6 posters saying the same thing and talking down to those who don’t agree. Magically the same posters who post in no other threads on the Fire and Ice board appear when surprise, surprise, politics play a component. It’s really becoming tiresome. I’m starting to think the mods should put a daily post maximum per day (say 5-6) so they have to pick and choose where they put down their soap box instead of in every thread not directly about hockey.

[rohara66]

Why does this garbage thread still have a garbage thread title?

"Election Interference" is a pretty bold accusation.

Last I checked businesses were allowed to support any candidate publicly and/or privately and financially.