I can't speak to any of the ownership questions, but busy convention centres are hugely beneficial to a city. I am part of a professional society that holds an annual meeting that is attended by 10,000 people from all over the world. That is four or five days' worth of accommodation, food and beverage revenue multiplied by 10,000 as well as a small added boost to local tourism, and that is for but ONE weekend. The revenue that a local sports team might generate is paltry compared to this.
That 30% was money given to build the arena, as in it's gone and the various levels of government that contributed it will never see it again. That's different than the city of Calgary's offer which was a loan. The MTS centre also was purchased by True North below what it cost to build and they are the recipient of rebates worth tens of millions each year.
So the only real comparables are Ottawa and Winnipeg, the developer in Ottawa went belly up and Winnipeg has a deal that is a heck of a lot sweeter than what the CoC offered up.
How was the city’s offer in any way a loan? There was no money that was asked to be paid back.
Having the Flames pay for 70% of the arena, negotiating with the province for property tax breaks (meaning they'd own the arena putting that declining value liability in their court rather than the city's), and letting the city charge an entertainment tax on every ticket sold and then rebate a bunch of it then sign me up. Put that deal in front of the city and they'd sign without much hassle too i'd imagine.
It means the Flames lose the ticket tax as a form of funding, and contribute a whole lot more cash than they were ever willing to contribute, because it is a tax rebate from a city revenue source, and not a loan guarantee. But yeah, done deal.
I'm of the belief that 66% of the funding was to come from the Flames, 33% straight cash and 33% ticket tax. So I don't think it's fair to say 70% was a whole lot more than what CSEC was willing to contribute. I agree with you though that who owns the building is likely to be a contentious issue, along with what is, in my opinion the most contentious issue:
The Flames are looking for a contribution they won't have to pay back, like what the various Mantioba governments put into the MTS centre. The City has been pretty dead set in their contribution remaining as a loan, so I have to disagree with the notion that the CoC would sign a WPG-like deal.
I assume that Flames owners would have donated to him because (a) he wasn't Nenshi, (b) he was more on their side on the issue, and (c) he's a conservative and so are they. I don't see what that would prove at all. Of course they supported him.
But to jump from there to a statement that CSEG stuck up a large ad on the jumbotron for free is a pretty big leap. If so, you would have to see a CSEG donation for the value of that ad.
If you see CSEG on his list vat all I'd be surprised. That's not how the game is played.
I imagine you think I supported Smith. I didn't - I preferred Nenshi, although his act is wearing thin IMO.
Finally, calling an agreement that features most of the risk and expenses flowing to one party (the public) and all of the revenues and financial benefits flowing to the other party (CSEC) a “partnership” is a bold redefinition of the word.
Edit: paywall removed!
Last edited by Tyler; 12-12-2017 at 03:33 PM.
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Tyler For This Useful Post:
I'm of the belief that 66% of the funding was to come from the Flames, 33% straight cash and 33% ticket tax. So I don't think it's fair to say 70% was a whole lot more than what CSEC was willing to contribute. I agree with you though that who owns the building is likely to be a contentious issue, along with what is, in my opinion the most contentious issue:
The Flames are looking for a contribution they won't have to pay back, like what the various Mantioba governments put into the MTS centre. The City has been pretty dead set in their contribution remaining as a loan, so I have to disagree with the notion that the CoC would sign a WPG-like deal.
This is open to interpretation. The Flames don't want to own the building. The City has talked about a 1/3 contribution but repaid. Now I don't think repayment in flow-through property tax means its a loan. If the repayment is in some other fashion, it's a loan.
My understanding is that the Flames would like a 1/3 contribution but without any repayment at all, tax or otherwise.
I assume that Flames owners would have donated to him because (a) he wasn't Nenshi, (b) he was more on their side on the issue, and (c) he's a conservative and so are they. I don't see what that would prove at all. Of course they supported him.
But to jump from there to a statement that CSEG stuck up a large ad on the jumbotron for free is a pretty big leap. If so, you would have to see a CSEG donation for the value of that ad.
If you see CSEG on his list vat all I'd be surprised. That's not how the game is played.
This is open to interpretation. The Flames don't want to own the building. The City has talked about a 1/3 contribution but repaid. Now I don't think repayment in flow-through property tax means its a loan. If the repayment is in some other fashion, it's a loan.
My understanding is that the Flames would like a 1/3 contribution but without any repayment at all, tax or otherwise.
The biggest issue with the loan/gift aspect, is that 150 million the city gives to the flames comes with a large interest bill as well.
150 million turns into 200-300+ quickly. even with municipal bond rates.
Not to mention the discussion about loaning the money for the ticket tax.
The threat to leave is not credible. It has never been credible. Everyone knows it's not credible. That the city and Nenshi knows that they wont leave speaks to how generous the city offer has been. They city literally does not need to pay anything let alone 180 million. In my mind, the offers from the city should only get worse from here on out.
Just to remind everyone, the current arena deal is very generous to the Flames. If they can't make it work with this deal then I don't know what to say.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Tinordi For This Useful Post:
The threat to leave is not credible. It has never been credible. Everyone knows it's not credible. That the city and Nenshi knows that they wont leave speaks to how generous the city offer has been. They city literally does not need to pay anything let alone 180 million. In my mind, the offers from the city should only get worse from here on out.
Just to remind everyone, the current arena deal is very generous to the Flames. If they can't make it work with this deal then I don't know what to say.
I have to say, no matter where anyone sits on this issue, this is the first time I can recall that anyone has had the cajones to call either offer "very generous" (or even just generous)...
Last edited by Lord Carnage; 12-12-2017 at 02:17 PM.
I have to say, no matter where anyone sits on this issue, this is the first time I can recall that anyone has had the cajones to call the City's offer "VERY GENEROUS "(or even just generous)...
Do you have any comparable examples of better offers our city council has given to other local businesses?
Do you have any comparable examples of better offers our city council has given to other local businesses?
I have a hard time going back and forth with you... the point we talk about keeps moving.
Professional sports is not linear to other businesses. I'm sorry you don't like that, but it's still a reality. I'm sure some concessions/offers were made to try and lure Amazon here, but again, it isn't a parallel to professional sports, so not relevant. So no, I can't come up with an example to something that doesn't exist.
Whether they have made anything comparable to a non-comparable industry just isn't relevant. Looking at this issue as it needs to be - unique - the city has made an offer it believes is 'fair', but not even their spokesmen are saying "very generous"
I have to say, no matter where anyone sits on this issue, this is the first time I can recall that anyone has had the cajones to call either offer "very generous" (or even just generous)...
The city's offer currently remains the second most generous offer any city in Canada has offered to their NHL teams owners.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Roughneck For This Useful Post:
How was the city’s offer in any way a loan? There was no money that was asked to be paid back.
In the way that it was money that was eventually going to be recouped through some other avenue.
To which I'm sure you'll say, doesn't the city deserve to get that money back? I don't necessarily disagree, I'm just saying that these deals only work in a market like Calgary when there's government funding that's not recouped directly back to their coffers. It's what has to happen for an arena to be built in a city this size, as proved by all of the other Canadian parellels.
My understanding is that the Flames would like a 1/3 contribution but without any repayment at all, tax or otherwise.
The Flames' offer was the 50/50 offer where most of their 50% was the ticket tax, because that's theirs, while the city considered it a user pay portion.
That aside, the Flames want the city to own it (thus be responsible for it at the end of the lifecycle and all the property taxes) and have their construction contribution act as their lease payment for 100% of revenues.
