The Official Calgary Flames "New Arena" thread

[The_People1]

21 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Actually the Oilers and Flames are the only CDN teams that don't own their arena interestingly enough. From a league perspective I think its less than half but i'm not 100% sure. 

They don't tend to own them because of the cost required to build is too high. They wind up as the manager of the building which is really a win-win for them. They don't need to put up the capital required to build it, aren't usually responsible for upgrades but they get the lions share of the revenue it generates. 

 

But does it not make sense that if a team wants to own their arena/stadium, that they pay for ALL of it?  And if they need initial funding from government, that the government contribution should be considered a loan of sorts and there's a way for the team to buy back those shares over time from the government?

 

Why would the government build an arena/stadium and own it all, only to let the team use it to host concerts, events, shows, etc and make money off it?

[cross16]

Just now, The_People1 said:

 

But does it not make sense that if a team wants to own their arena/stadium, that they pay for ALL of it?  And if they need initial funding from government, that the government contribution should be considered a loan of sorts and there's a way for the team to buy back those shares over time from the government?

 

Why would the government build an arena/stadium and own it all, only to let the team use it to host concerts, events, shows, etc and make money off it?

 

Because teams threaten to leave and go somewhere that will and so far there has always been a willing partner that will pay for it.

 

I'm being a little facetious and cynical of course but that seems to be the way it's worked. You make good points. 

 

 

[The_People1]

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Because teams threaten to leave and go somewhere that will and so far there has always been a willing partner that will pay for it.

 

I'm being a little facetious and cynical of course but that seems to be the way it's worked. You make good points. 

 

 

 

What would happen if we go to the government and demand they build a house for us on their money so that we can live there sometimes and/or rent it out whenever we are out of town?  And threaten to move to another city/province if they don't?

[Cowtownguy]

6 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

 

What would happen if we go to the government and demand they build a house for us on their money so that we can live there sometimes and/or rent it out whenever we are out of town?  And threaten to move to another city/province if they don't?

They would not care because they would lose few votes. If the Flames leave, there is some political capital lost.

 

2 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

Because teams threaten to leave and go somewhere that will and so far there has always been a willing partner that will pay for it.

 

I'm being a little facetious and cynical of course but that seems to be the way it's worked. You make good points. 

 

 

You both make good points. 

[cross16]

The standard pro sports vs the local municipatity threats/negotiations are picking up in full force. King first mentioned threats to move and now this

 

had to LOL at this

 

Always hope you can avoid this, but it always seems to come to this unfortunately. 

[phoenix66]

21 minutes ago, cross16 said:

The standard pro sports vs the local municipatity threats/negotiations are picking up in full force. King first mentioned threats to move and now this

 

had to LOL at this

 

Always hope you can avoid this, but it always seems to come to this unfortunately. 

It has to unfortunately .. it gets the attention of not just the city , but the province and sometimes Ottawa as well.

I'll give them credit , they're not using it as a ransom note like Edmonton did , just more of a "could happen" sort of way 

 

polls have shown that the majority of Calgarians want it built (but disagree on how to pay for it)..Nenshi I doubt wants his legacy to be the Mayor that punted the Flames out of town .. its posturing , nothing more...  i may be wrong but i dont think any team has ever made good on the threat to leave town if they dont get a new arena..

 

Maybe just for optics , King should have been at the Seattle announcement today and made sure a photographer saw him LOL

[Pyromancer]

 

Quote

 

Brian Burke on arenas, tax breaks and moving the team to Quebec - cbc.ca (Jun 07, 4:45 PM MT)

 

[Excerpt} The president of the Calgary Flames says the team could move without a new arena and that Canadian players should get tax breaks in order to make northern NHL teams more competitive.

Speaking to a crowd at the Canada Club of Calgary, things got heated when an audience member and longtime season ticket holder questioned Brian Burke on a new arena for the Flames and suggested there was nowhere for the team to go.

"You don't think we could find a place to go? With a straight face you're saying that.  Let's see. Quebec. Oh yeah they have a brand new building that meets NHL standards," he said to Chris McCrae.

"Quebec. OK you just said we had nowhere to go?"

When pressed by McCrae on why public dollars should be used to finance an arena for the team Burke said "I think most intelligent people get this, sorry … my learned friend."

 

Looking forward to cheering for the Quebec City Flames.

As for professional athletes on Canadian teams getting a tax break because of the variably mythical higher tax rates and the $CDN when they are paid in $USA - What a ridiculous concept!

Obviously there is a lack of "learned thinking" in the Flames management.

 

 

 

[The_People1]

Not sure what the fuss is all about.  Nenshi has said he wants a new arena.  He only said no to CalgaryNext.  I believe Nenshi is very willing to work on the latest Victoria Park plan.

[CheersMan]

4 hours ago, Pyromancer said:

 

 

Looking forward to cheering for the Quebec City Flames.

As for professional athletes on Canadian teams getting a tax break because of the variably mythical higher tax rates and the $CDN when they are paid in $USA - What a ridiculous concept!

Obviously there is a lack of "learned thinking" in the Flames management.

 

 

 

There is more to it than everyone paid in US$'s, Burke is not a dummy and he has a point.  Read the Stamkos reasoning for staying in TB.

 

https://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2016/06/28/reasons-why-steven-stamkos-stays-in-tampa-instead-of-leaving-in-nhl-free-agency.html

 

 

[The_People1]

1 hour ago, CheersMan said:

There is more to it than everyone paid in US$'s, Burke is not a dummy and he has a point.  Read the Stamkos reasoning for staying in TB.

 

https://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2016/06/28/reasons-why-steven-stamkos-stays-in-tampa-instead-of-leaving-in-nhl-free-agency.html

 

 

 

With the Canadian dollar so low against the US dollar, it's a bonus for players to get paid in USD and then spend it in Calgary/Canada.  I would think Canadian teams have negotiating leverage right now against US teams.

[Cowtownguy]

5 hours ago, The_People1 said:

Not sure what the fuss is all about.  Nenshi has said he wants a new arena.  He only said no to CalgaryNext.  I believe Nenshi is very willing to work on the latest Victoria Park plan.

I think the fuss is that there are no major trades happening at the moment. If the city is going to pay for a new arena, it sure would be nice for a good reason to be given. I am aware of what I believe are the reasons (or not). I want city councillors to explain their logic to Calgarians. Also, if they are going to spend a lot of tax dollars on the new arena, I would like to see other options being considered. Why not have three serious options on the table, costed out? And since the whole creosote issue came up, maybe offer a plan to clean it up. Clean it up and then sue Domtar or whoever to recoup the cash later. 

[Cowtownguy]

BTW, according to CBC, only Calgary and Edmonton have publicly owned facilities. The other 5/7 are privately owned arenas. Edmonton needed revitalization downtown. Not sure we can make the same justification in Calgary. Different model.

[The_People1]

I personally don't worry too much about the Flames moving.  

 

Calgary would immediately move up to the NHL's #1 location for expansion.  We are a Western city and that bodes well for division groupings.  We have a mature/advanced hockey audience and are an established hockey market of about 2.5-million (Southern Alberta and portions of Saskatchewan.)

 

It's like a girlfriend who threatens to leave if her demands are not met to the T.  Then leave.  We can find another.

[cross16]

58 minutes ago, The_People1 said:

I personally don't worry too much about the Flames moving.  

 

Calgary would immediately move up to the NHL's #1 location for expansion.  We are a Western city and that bodes well for division groupings.  We have a mature/advanced hockey audience and are an established hockey market of about 2.5-million (Southern Alberta and portions of Saskatchewan.)

 

It's like a girlfriend who threatens to leave if her demands are not met to the T.  Then leave.  We can find another.

 

Fully agree, it rings pretty hollow iMO, Ok so you go to Seattle or Quebec and you get a beautiful building but how much more revenue are we actually talking about considering you are leaving a market like Calgary with some of highest salaries around and a ton of corporate sponsors willing to shell out?

 

Standard procedure to threaten to move but I can't see it at all. 

[phoenix66]

On 6/7/2017 at 11:14 PM, Cowtownguy said:

I think the fuss is that there are no major trades happening at the moment. If the city is going to pay for a new arena, it sure would be nice for a good reason to be given. I am aware of what I believe are the reasons (or not). I want city councillors to explain their logic to Calgarians. Also, if they are going to spend a lot of tax dollars on the new arena, I would like to see other options being considered. Why not have three serious options on the table, costed out? And since the whole creosote issue came up, maybe offer a plan to clean it up. Clean it up and then sue Domtar or whoever to recoup the cash later. 

 

And a lot of this is where I have issues.

Yes.. the Calgary Next deal put on the table was heavily slanted in the Flames Org favor..  but it's called a negotiation . Flames were banking on 3 things that the city keeps glossing over:

1) The Clean up needs to happen whether flames build there or not.. if the city wants to build a village, guess what .. they will need to clean it up 

2)The cost request was only slightly more than the City has already said they would need to spend on a fieldhouse themselves, and they are including that in the project

3) This emcompasses all projects at once

 

Now again , I think the Flames expected a negotiation. All I have heard out of city hall is , Not good enough... redo it bring it back.... show us a plan B...we dont want it there..  NEXT is dead.. etc.

What about ,  the usual.. give us this, we'll give you that ?  Split the cost of the cleanup and then sue the company together?

I'm sure the Arena if built in Vic Park will be beautiful.. but now what about the Football stadium?  What about the Fieldhouse?.. you still have an area that needs to be cleaned up. When all is said and done the lowest cost will turn out to be the NEXT option .

 

Right or wrong , Burke got Nenshi to fly off the handle yesterday ..and when he does his true colors show up.. he flat out told Calgarians that we don't get what Edmonton got.. Calgarians love hearing that ..  but his biggest argument was that the Edmonton Deal included Revitalization of a bad area... well, isn't cleaning up a polluted area of town , and turning into a Vibrant area Revitalization?

Whats his real reason ?

 

personally .. I think hes in the back pocket of the Vic park developers..  the Stadium leaves,  Property values in that area will drop. The Stampede Board will suffer due to the loss of parking and some revenue from events. He wants it to stay in Vic Park..period

 

He claims no city benefit?

- What about the people who will be employed building it .. then ultimately working there and the surrounding businesses that will come ?

- what about the major events?-- concerts.. all star games,,.more Grey Cups. they estimated the Garth Brooks concerts injected quite a few million $ into the city economy that week alone

- The saddledome will revert back to the Stampede Board .. they can hold their own events, stampede concerts.. get more revenue of their own

 

Bottom line. Nenshi has an agenda-- under no circumstances should the NEXT project be agreed to as written.. Ken King himself I am sure will tell you nobody expected that, but the issue is Nenshi has the audacity to come out and say Flames aren't negotiating.. but yet I have seen no sign of negotiation from the city . I have seen a proposal , and no counter proposals.. other than to scoot them back to Vic park, and now say they are close. What they end up with will be nowhere near the impact of the Next project.

 

[Cowtownguy]

17 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

Bottom line. Nenshi has an agenda-- under no circumstances should the NEXT project be agreed to as written.. Ken King himself I am sure will tell you nobody expected that, but the issue is Nenshi has the audacity to come out and say Flames aren't negotiating.. but yet I have seen no sign of negotiation from the city . I have seen a proposal , and no counter proposals.. other than to scoot them back to Vic park, and now say they are close. What they end up with will be nowhere near the impact of the Next project.

 

I think that your assessment of Nenshi and your characterization of negotiations are unfair. I don't know that Jason Kenney is slashing and I don't know whether Richard Gere has a thing for rodents. I cannot speak intelligently about these matters as they occur behind closed doors. Likewise, you cannot speak intelligently about negotiations between the city and the Flames as they occur behind closed doors for the most part. We just see the bs staged tip of the iceberg of negotiations. 

 

I am not impressed at the way the Flames have handled this issue. I recall Ken King being asked years ago if his change in position was reflective of the fact that he was going to push for a new arena. He emphatically said "no". We now know that this was not true. The Flames asked Gary Bettman to come here and stir the pot. I find any input from him about how my pay cheque should be spent very insulting.

 

Burke's comments the other day were also insulting. I particularly disliked the comment he repeated that the Flames will not give warning about leaving, they will just leave. No threats. You know what? That is a threat. When people put ultimatums to me, my knee-jerk reaction is to encourage them to carry out their threat or, in this case, the passive-aggresive non-threat. The sarcastic statements about Calgary being dumb really made me furious and more resistant to public dollars going into this project. Edmonton got suckered into paying for their arena and it came in more costly than expected. The city picked up that tab too. But then again, the owner is known to have put forth an illegal political contribution of $300k to the PC party. The PCs rejected that illegal contribution, but later accepted multiple, smaller contributions on behalf of  Katz's employees. Coincidentally, those multiple donations came to $300k. So, don't tell me that I am dumb when the only city to build an arena for their team totally got fleeced by an owner of that stature.

 

I would really like to know how the price tag for NEXT was stated to be $1.3 billion and then the city estimated it closer to $1.8 billion. I realize that it is a meagre half billion. I just want to know. At no point have cost overruns been mentioned. 

 

The reality is that 5/7 Canadian teams used private financing to build their arenas. Edmonton misused federal government infrastructure grants given to municipalities to build their arena. That was money earmarked for bridges, roads, police stations, etc. Harper allowed municipalities to spend their share as they saw fit. I wonder how he felt about that clause after they put it towards an arena. They have a new arena, but the area that it is in is sufficiently scary that you need to carry a weapon to feel safe. I remain open to the possibility of resources going into an arena, but don't tell me that public dollars spent on policing or roads are analogous to money given to an NHL team. You need transportation. You do not need hockey.

 

In my opinion, the Flames need to:

 

1. Convince the public why any public resources should be spent on this arena. They need to do so in a fair, calm, and rational fashion, not in this insulting passive-aggressive, threatening, non-threatening fashion. Keep Bettman out of this entirely.

2. Explain why the Flames require public financing when other teams do not. And I do not care what happens in the United States. Apples and oranges. Detroit goes bankrupt with long-term city employees losing their pensions at the end of their working years, but they still have the cash for the arena. Hopefully, these broke seniors can find jobs selling popcorn on game days. Great comparison Burke.

3. Explain who will pay for any cost overruns. 

4. Hire a public relations firm yesterday because this arena issue has been one of the worst attempts to build a consensus ever. I have been a Flames fan since it was announced that they would move here from Atlanta, and every time the Flames raise the issue, I find myself more resistant to public resources going into the arena. Trump is better at consensus-building in Europe than the Flames are at generating interest in the new arena.

 

 

 

[cross16]

1 hour ago, phoenix66 said:

 

expected that, but the issue is Nenshi has the audacity to come out and say Flames aren't negotiating.. but yet I have seen no sign of negotiation from the city . I have seen a proposal , and no counter proposals.. other than to scoot them back to Vic park, and now say they are close. What they end up with will be nowhere near the impact of the Next project.

 

 

I think you are being extremely unfair to the city.

Do you know who commissioned and paid for a report to look into the feasibility of CalgaryNext? the city. Flames didn't do a dime worth a research on what the actual cost would be to CalgaryNext, they only told us what it would cost to build the arena and then mislead the public on the actual "benefit". It was the City that did the research into the scope and cost of the project and the data really showed how much the Flames mislead the numbers. 

Before the suggested Vic park they also looked into the feasibility, they spoke to the Stampede about a land swap, they looking into zoning to see that a CRL is already approved for Vic park so financing won't be a hurdle and mapped it as part of their future transit plans. Again, Flames did zip.

 

Just because the City prefers to conduct the negotiations outside the public space doesn't mean they arn't doing any work. I would actually argue that the City has put in far more work here than the Flames have. All the Flames did is come up with a half baked proposal riddiled with flaws and then the City has come in and actually done the research and data on it. 

 

And we shouldn't want this to wind up like Edmonton. That was a very public and at times nasty negotiation that resulted in Edmonton being absolutely bent over a barrel. I certainly don't want the City to wind up doing what Edmonton did. 

 

[Cowtownguy]

52 minutes ago, cross16 said:

 

I think you are being extremely unfair to the city.

Do you know who commissioned and paid for a report to look into the feasibility of CalgaryNext? the city. Flames didn't do a dime worth a research on what the actual cost would be to CalgaryNext, they only told us what it would cost to build the arena and then mislead the public on the actual "benefit". It was the City that did the research into the scope and cost of the project and the data really showed how much the Flames mislead the numbers. 

Before the suggested Vic park they also looked into the feasibility, they spoke to the Stampede about a land swap, they looking into zoning to see that a CRL is already approved for Vic park so financing won't be a hurdle and mapped it as part of their future transit plans. Again, Flames did zip.

 

Just because the City prefers to conduct the negotiations outside the public space doesn't mean they arn't doing any work. I would actually argue that the City has put in far more work here than the Flames have. All the Flames did is come up with a half baked proposal riddiled with flaws and then the City has come in and actually done the research and data on it. 

 

And we shouldn't want this to wind up like Edmonton. That was a very public and at times nasty negotiation that resulted in Edmonton being absolutely bent over a barrel. I certainly don't want the City to wind up doing what Edmonton did. 

 

You make some very good points here. The Flames have not even bothered to hire a company to help them sell this deal when it is obvious that they have nobody in the organization capable of doing so. This semi-hard closing of the deal is plain incompetent. 

[cross16]

14 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

You make some very good points here. The Flames have not even bothered to hire a company to help them sell this deal when it is obvious that they have nobody in the organization capable of doing so. This semi-hard closing of the deal is plain incompetent. 

 

It's not great but unfortunately its standard operating procedure when pro sports teams negotiate with municipalities. Flames arn't any different and are operating out of the same playbook as everyone else. 

[420since1974]

Personally, I do not have many problems with public money being used for a new Event Centre.

I don't use a lot of City services or venues, but I don't mind my tax dollars going to fund them (some of the public "art" like the $470k "blue ring" are exceptions).

The Saddledome is one of the very few City venues that I attend regularly, and IMO it is seriously outdated.

I am tired of seeing musical acts and other entertainment productions pass by Calgary and play in Edmonton because our building cannot handle their staging requirements .

This has been happening for many, many years, as the Saddledome was poorly designed for this purpose in the first place.

 

I say just build the damn thing now, worry about a new CFL stadium and field house later.

I prefer the Vic Park location over the Calgary Next/bus barns area; because it appears to have fewer hurdles with the City (contamination, etc.) and I live in the south end so Vic Park is closer.

 

I can see this issue becoming a potential political minefield for City Council going into this October's municipal election.

Nenshi appears to be shooting for the "fiscally responsible" role.

My alderman will certainly be hearing my view on this issue.

[phoenix66]

on kind of a semi related issue-- been wondering why nobody has ever designed a stadium that can do Hockey and football?

Logistically , I'm sure it can be done..  the dome right now is already adaptable to International ice.. simply by pushing back the front seats..

 

by that same concept you could widen and lengthen it for a football field.. close off the additional upper section for hockey games.. and in case of a playoff run , a ton more seats to sell

Realistically the seasons barely overlap.. so you wouldn't be constantly changing it after November 

 

I'm sure you'd have to figure out logistics like ensuring its a proper playing surface, but that's why engineers and developers get paid big bucks

 

now that would be revolutionary ..

[The_People1]

8 minutes ago, phoenix66 said:

on kind of a semi related issue-- been wondering why nobody has ever designed a stadium that can do Hockey and football?

Logistically , I'm sure it can be done..  the dome right now is already adaptable to International ice.. simply by pushing back the front seats..

 

by that same concept you could widen and lengthen it for a football field.. close off the additional upper section for hockey games.. and in case of a playoff run , a ton more seats to sell

Realistically the seasons barely overlap.. so you wouldn't be constantly changing it after November 

 

I'm sure you'd have to figure out logistics like ensuring its a proper playing surface, but that's why engineers and developers get paid big bucks

 

now that would be revolutionary ..

 

You can have the grass retractable in/out from the second level (retractable grass covers entire lower bowl so second level in a hockey setup would become the lower bowl for football).  Otherwise, size of the field is a big problem.  Hard to design as a one-size-fits-all seating plan that offers great viewing angles for both venues.

[CheersMan]

2 hours ago, phoenix66 said:

on kind of a semi related issue-- been wondering why nobody has ever designed a stadium that can do Hockey and football?

Logistically , I'm sure it can be done..  the dome right now is already adaptable to International ice.. simply by pushing back the front seats..

 

by that same concept you could widen and lengthen it for a football field.. close off the additional upper section for hockey games.. and in case of a playoff run , a ton more seats to sell

Realistically the seasons barely overlap.. so you wouldn't be constantly changing it after November 

 

I'm sure you'd have to figure out logistics like ensuring its a proper playing surface, but that's why engineers and developers get paid big bucks

 

now that would be revolutionary ..

 

Have you heard of CalgaryNext?........just kidding.

 

Areas are best when they are fish bowl like, steep stairs, looking down on the game, close and personal.

 

Stadiums, different story.

 

You've seen the two together, doesn't work.

 

 

 

[Cowtownguy]

10 hours ago, cross16 said:

 

It's not great but unfortunately its standard operating procedure when pro sports teams negotiate with municipalities. Flames arn't any different and are operating out of the same playbook as everyone else. 

I realize you said pro sports teams, but 5/7 Canadian NHL teams did not demand public dollars. They used private financing. 

[cross16]

10 minutes ago, Cowtownguy said:

I realize you said pro sports teams, but 5/7 Canadian NHL teams did not demand public dollars. They used private financing. 

 

Yes but 2 of them also sent bankrupt or were forced to sell mostly because of the cost associated with financing those arenas. 

But your right there are better way to do it without a pubic pissing match. Even though it's the norm I still think it's a shame