Flames Arena, the Saga Continues

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,981
8,455
I'm ok with the outline of the proposed deal. Is it a good deal, as a Calgary based taxpayer absolutely not, as I think at least 50% ($600M) of the cost should have been on CSEC.
I am also not ok with the veiled threat of Danielle Smith basically saying Calgary needs a strong UPC vote to provide the mandate.

This is no deal right now this is now an election platform issue.

I don't disagree with you. Raw cost wise, it makes more sense that CSEC takes on at least half. However, I think the problem is that the city owns the land. The land is worth a ridiculous portion of the deal and it doesn't cost the city much to contribute it to the deal.

IIRC the original 600 million plan, the city was going to put up $50 mil + land and the CSEC was basically the one who would have to come up with the cash or borrow it + pay interest for the rest of everything. I think this is sorta still the case, but I don't know if the Province is funding or lending (major difference) that $330 million. This likely means that the CSEC is on the hook for like 66%-80% of the real cash implications (ignoring interest on any loans) to complete the project. This is probably the sticking point from CSEC's side. They'll let the city and the province spin the angle from a FMV contribution value perspective and hide the "where's the money coming from?" perspective.

But honestly, I don't know. That's just questions you uncover from an accounting standpoint once you start poking into the situation there.

LOL that's not what happened

CSEC bailed on the deal because they agreed to cover cost overruns (in exchange for getting to manage to project instead of the city) only to have the whole covid thing make material prices go sky high.

That being said, Grondek & the city got taken to woodshed in this deal. Nenshi was so much better.


It was the official straw that broke the camel's back. CSEC indeed agreed to cover cost overruns. Nary a peep when the material prices went through the roof. Only blew up the deal when Gondek started saying that there were solar panels and sidewalks and other things that needed to be part of the deal and if I'm not mistaken, brought up the idea of the city managing the project over CSEC. I suspect scope creep and micro management might be the real culprit, but that's not what's the official comment. Official comment is that CSEC thought Gondek and co were nickel and diming and not in good faith (openly said, not sure what was privately said) and blew up the deal. The city management of the project might be the real reason CSEC blew it up, but I believe in the media, they commented on the sidewalks and solar panels and stuff prior to blowing up the deal.

I suspect Gondek had to accept shitty terms under the mediation because she indeed was doing things that could have been considered objectively not to be in good faith.

The funny thing about "Nenshi is better" is that I seem to recall people saying no one could eff up worse than Nenshi. Not saying it against you negatively or anything, but damn. Sometimes we don't know what we have until it's gone and you have worse.
 

Mobiandi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
21,082
17,540
The can was kicked down the road for 10 years and CSEC still got the deal they always wanted. What a ridiculous sequence of events. Are we certain this deal will even hold up?
 

DomBarr

Registered User
Apr 7, 2014
2,757
901
The can was kicked down the road for 10 years and CSEC still got the deal they always wanted. What a ridiculous sequence of events. Are we certain this deal will even hold up?
No, the NDP or the UCP can kill it post election.
Remember Smith said she would like to see a strong Calgary mandate during the election as a show of support for this deal
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Ace Rimmer

Ace Rimmer

Stoke me a clipper.
The can was kicked down the road for 10 years and CSEC still got the deal they always wanted. What a ridiculous sequence of events. Are we certain this deal will even hold up?
Pfft. Of course not.

Someone will dust off the ol' CalgaryNExT plan, and promise that for the Stamps and the Flames and clean the pollution and more LRT and everything.

Rachel? You're up.

Here's a lot of not new, and yet somewhat clarifying, information.

 
Last edited:

Some Other Flame

Registered User
Dec 4, 2010
7,449
8,879

It was the official straw that broke the camel's back. CSEC indeed agreed to cover cost overruns. Nary a peep when the material prices went through the roof. Only blew up the deal when Gondek started saying that there were solar panels and sidewalks and other things that needed to be part of the deal and if I'm not mistaken, brought up the idea of the city managing the project over CSEC. I suspect scope creep and micro management might be the real culprit, but that's not what's the official comment. Official comment is that CSEC thought Gondek and co were nickel and diming and not in good faith (openly said, not sure what was privately said) and blew up the deal. The city management of the project might be the real reason CSEC blew it up, but I believe in the media, they commented on the sidewalks and solar panels and stuff prior to blowing up the deal.

I suspect Gondek had to accept shitty terms under the mediation because she indeed was doing things that could have been considered objectively not to be in good faith.

The funny thing about "Nenshi is better" is that I seem to recall people saying no one could eff up worse than Nenshi. Not saying it against you negatively or anything, but damn. Sometimes we don't know what we have until it's gone and you have worse.

You can believe the official version from the Flames but I don't know why you would since it's so obviously BS.
The city and the Flames agreed on an arena deal more than two years ago with the initial estimate of $550 million split between the two.

The cost estimate for the project has risen to $634 million.

CSEC president and chief executive officer John Bean has said his company's share of the new total would be $346.5 million compared to the city's $287.5 million, and said the Flames bear the risk of rising costs in the future.

I mean, does it make sense the deal was scrapped over less than 2% of it? Or is it much more rational to think that in the face of a rumored 100 to 200M projected overrun increase, that the CSEC got cold feet and looked for an easy scapegoat issue that they knew the rubes for fall for?

The funny thing about "Nenshi is better" is that I seem to recall people saying no one could eff up worse than Nenshi. Not saying it against you negatively or anything, but damn. Sometimes we don't know what we have until it's gone and you have worse.
Irrelevant. It's politics - it's always polarizing, meritless or not. Nenshi had a background in economics and honestly, a weird level of passion about municipal affairs. He at least understood the concept of public dollars for public benefit, and that was never in question.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ace Rimmer

super6646

Registered User
Apr 16, 2018
17,907
15,768
Calgary
Tbh I’d rather the flames move at this point than go through with this deal. They city would’ve been better off just funding the whole thing publicly, owning the arena the fully, and getting the naming rights on this arena as an extra source of revenue or whatever else, but I presume CSEC wouldn’t be for this. Anyways, they absolutely destroyed this city council. Gondek, you are a f***ing awful mayor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Towers and DomBarr

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,981
8,455
You can believe the official version from the Flames but I don't know why you would since it's so obviously BS.


I mean, does it make sense the deal was scrapped over less than 2% of it? Or is it much more rational to think that in the face of a rumored 100 to 200M projected overrun increase, that the CSEC got cold feet and looked for an easy scapegoat issue that they knew the rubes for fall for?


Irrelevant. It's politics - it's always polarizing, meritless or not. Nenshi had a background in economics and honestly, a weird level of passion about municipal affairs. He at least understood the concept of public dollars for public benefit, and that was never in question.

I think you misunderstand. I agree with you. I'm just saying that's the official statement. We don't know what the official reason is, but we can read between the lines. But officially, it was over solar panels and the sidewalk stuff and neither side bothered to change the official narrative on it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Some Other Flame

Nanuuk

Registered User
Nov 16, 2013
2,598
1,241
Calgary, Alberta
I'm ok with the outline of the proposed deal. Is it a good deal, as a Calgary based taxpayer absolutely not, as I think at least 50% ($600M) of the cost should have been on CSEC.
I am also not ok with the veiled threat of Danielle Smith basically saying Calgary needs a strong UPC vote to provide the mandate.

This is no deal right now this is now an election platform issue.
I don't think it is an election issue unless the feckless NDP choose to promote it as such.

The province's role in this is minor and they basically bridged a gap I'm guessing.

They had no role to play on the size of the project as again it was the City driving the bus on this one as they wanted a re-development project verses a replacement (more or less) in kind.

CSEC really couldn't influence the scope other than to bow out altogether.

So the fact that it is not a 50-50 split now is probably due to the scope of the project, i.e. roads, bridges, public spaces, LRT connection, etc.
 

JPeeper

Hail Satan!
Jan 4, 2015
11,667
8,847
Just thinking about the millions and millions of tax dollars that have been wasted for this arena over the past decade makes me insanely jealous that I can't get a taste of that cheddar.

Hopefully the new design isn't so bland and old like the last design. They used the same team that designed the Oilers arena and I hate that arena, the concourse is nice and it's got a lot of space, but the actual seating is horrendous. I don't know how anyone over 150lbs or over 5'8" can sit in those dumpster fire chairs, they make the space for Dome seats seem like you're in a LazyBoy chair.
 

Ace Rimmer

Stoke me a clipper.

The funding will support land acquisition, site utilities and transportation infrastructure for the Calgary arena and entertainment district project. The investment will also cover 50 per cent of the construction costs of a new 1,000-seat community arena that will serve youth and amateur hockey. Once complete, the Rivers District is expected to create 1,500 permanent jobs and welcome an estimated 8,000 new residents and three million annual visitors to the Culture and Entertainment District.
 

Lunatik

Registered User
Oct 12, 2012
56,255
8,385
the Flames press release.


this was the part I was most curious about.
The Province:
$330.0 million
  • $300 million to fund transportation improvements, land, infrastructure and site enabling costs, including off-site and on-site utility servicing costs, public realm and site clearing/demolition
  • $30 million to fund 50% of the community rink
 
  • Like
Reactions: deleted user

Mobiandi

Registered User
Jan 17, 2015
21,082
17,540
7th time’s the charm? Until they actually break ground, I’m still waiting for the other shoe to drop
 

Three On Zero

Deranged Oreo Dolphin Parking Instructor
Sponsor
Oct 9, 2012
29,117
26,012
Great new for Calgary and Calgary fans, but at the same time Alberta and Calgary took one on the chin in this deal.
 

deleted user

Registered User
Sponsor
Dec 16, 2019
3,691
3,602
I sure hope shovels are in the ground when they estimated so. 2024 at some point would be cool to see it get started. Definitely think they got screwed though lol.
 

Rubi

Photographer
Sponsor
Jan 9, 2009
15,675
10,233
The wheels are turning boys...

Final agreements for Calgary event centre released, construction pegged to start this year


The design phase has started and will be finalized by this summer and construction shall begin in the summer or fall. The arena is expected to be completed by 2026 and the community arena and infrastructure by 2027.
 
Last edited:

Fig

Absolute Horse Shirt
Dec 15, 2014
12,981
8,455


Before anyone freaks out, I assume this clause is primarily for the purposes of preventing insanity in the event of "selling/transferring" ownership of the team in the event that an owner passes away/fighting over assets via divorce etc.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad