Calgary city council approves arena deal (UPD: new deal upcoming?)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,518
2,915
Calgary
Good thing is its possible to have both!

We have invested in all of that in Edmonton and got an arena. Who'd have thunk?
The Edmonton deal is different and geared towards helping the city recover its original investment. There's no way Calgary taxpayers would recover even half of what we would have thrown away on the arena. We wouldn't have received any revenue and we would not have received any tax revenue.

The Flames were going to get everything and us taxpayers were going to get scraps. And our idiot council thought that was a good deal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rob

Headshot77

Bad Photoshopper
Feb 15, 2015
3,950
1,942
I wonder what will happen when all of these major cities wise up and say "we won't/can't afford to give you $250m for a stadium". How many sports franchises across all the major sports would suddenly become insolvent? Probably like half of NHL franchises wouldn't be able to front that cost. You'd see teams, if they owned their existing arenas, try to keep them running as long as possible like with Madison Square Garden. I've always hated how disposable sports venues have been viewed.
 

K1984

Registered User
Feb 7, 2008
13,810
13,255
The Edmonton deal is different and geared towards helping the city recover its original investment. There's no way Calgary taxpayers would recover even half of what we would have thrown away on the arena. We wouldn't have received any revenue and we would not have received any tax revenue.

The Flames were going to get everything and us taxpayers were going to get scraps. And our idiot council thought that was a good deal.

Still possible to have a rink and police and firefighters though.
 

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,518
2,915
Calgary
Still possible to have a rink and police and firefighters though.
If the deal was right probably. Again, the Flames have to pay for everything to make this work. Either that or agree to a decent revenue sharing agreement (Which does not exist in the current deal) and a commitment from the team to pay their fair share of taxes on the building, ticket sales (One of the huge differences between the Calgary and Edmonton deals), concession sales, etc.
 

DoyleG

Reality sucks, Princesses!
Dec 29, 2008
7,324
889
YEG-->YYJ-->YWG-->YYB
You're right, but I can tell you that the team leaving would be much more dire for that city than a shoulder shrug and a shift to some theoretical soccer team that doesn't exist yet.

Guarantee a year out of Calgary not having NHL hockey that everyone in the town would sign up for handing over $300M of taxpayer money to get them back again. Considering no individual taxpayer would even see the impact of that relatively small amount of money personally anyways, its kind of a moot point. It's a lot easier to get to the right answer when "subsidizing private business" ideology is taken out of the equation, and the question becomes "is it worth it for the city of Calgary to front $300M to keep this institution in the city?" answer is a no brainer yes at that point IMO.

Calvary isn't going to move out of Spruce Meadows for a long time. His much vaunted pro soccer team wolud need an owner that can afford it.

That would be the Flames.

If he and the rest of the traumatized clique told the Flames to leave, that would make the city even worse off (not counting they would have to find a new owner for the Stamps).

And still, they would have to replace both the Saddledome and McMahon, with not guaranteed tenant that would fill it.
 

K1984

Registered User
Feb 7, 2008
13,810
13,255
Calvary isn't going to move out of Spruce Meadows for a long time. His much vaunted pro soccer team wolud need an owner that can afford it.

That would be the Flames.

If he and the rest of the traumatized clique told the Flames to leave, that would make the city even worse off (not counting they would have to find a new owner for the Stamps).

And still, they would have to replace both the Saddledome and McMahon, with not guaranteed tenant that would fill it.

The moment the Flames move a mayoral candidate will run on building a new rink to attract an NHL team and they'll win. It will be like Winnipeg and Quebec City. Funny how easy it is to get an arena deal done when the public knows what they have lost and want to get back again badly. Easy to bluff with "I don't care if they leave!" before you realize that the winters are long and shitty without having your NHL team to follow anymore.

Calgary is a funny city because it is world class in many areas, but their sports and major event facilities are embarrassingly bad and people seem to be just be fine with it. They are almost there as it is, but a few years down the road they won't be host of really any major events because their facilities just aren't suitable. The consequences extend beyond sports and a major city that can't even host a basic concert event is kind of embarrassing and shitty for the people that live there.
 

TheLegend

Megathread Gadfly
Aug 30, 2009
36,923
29,191
Buzzing BoH
I feel like Quebec fans probably don't care if they get the Yotes, Senators, or Flames. They just want a team at any cost.

If that were the case they would have been screaming for Quebecor and PKP to put up what was needed when they applied for expansion with Vegas.

Since then it’s been any cost to some other market.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TorontoSports

Mike Jones

Registered User
Apr 12, 2007
12,518
2,915
Calgary
Calgary is a funny city because it is world class in many areas, but their sports and major event facilities are embarrassingly bad and people seem to be just be fine with it. They are almost there as it is, but a few years down the road they won't be host of really any major events because their facilities just aren't suitable. The consequences extend beyond sports and a major city that can't even host a basic concert event is kind of embarrassing and shitty for the people that live there.
The Flames could easily fix this but they won't. They expect us to pay for their toys and we have much more important things to spend our money on. Flames owners can easily pay for new facilities themselves and if they need help they can go out and find private partners to help them. I have no sympathy for these billionaires.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Behind Enemy Lines

DoyleG

Reality sucks, Princesses!
Dec 29, 2008
7,324
889
YEG-->YYJ-->YWG-->YYB
I wonder what will happen when all of these major cities wise up and say "we won't/can't afford to give you $250m for a stadium". How many sports franchises across all the major sports would suddenly become insolvent? Probably like half of NHL franchises wouldn't be able to front that cost. You'd see teams, if they owned their existing arenas, try to keep them running as long as possible like with Madison Square Garden. I've always hated how disposable sports venues have been viewed.

This is more of a case of a mayor wanting to "gold plate" the arena in a way that shows she's dealing with a "climate emergency". If she had been honest from the start, it wouldn't have been an issue. In fact, its like the city could've done this without impacting the arena deal.

Instead, she commits an act that brings out the lowest base denominator in the whole debate.
 

CorbeauNoir

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
928
154
I'm pretty sure the tax payer will be fine.. you wouldn't even notice the difference.
Calgary has been in a taxation death spiral for years, it's been bad enough for small business owners to stage an open tax revolt on city council over double-digit percentage increases. The difference at ground level has in fact not only been 'noticeable' but cripplingly so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch

Behind Enemy Lines

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
15,166
16,029
Vancouver
The Flames owners are in their optimal market to maximize revenue and profit. They are in monopolistic market conditions for sports entertainment discretionary dollars within a hockey as king hockey mad Canadian market. They own a vertical sales market option with the junior Hitmen team (with essentially free labour) to target families and 'entry level' hockey customers. Throw in the Stampeders and lacrosse teams and this ownership group has got all sports entertainment revenue options covered.

The Canadian NHL market teams have been a vital major breadwinner for the NHL's bottom line with gate revenue (and high average ticket prices) and record setting broadcast rights deal. Calgary is a critical market both within Canada and as part of the NHL league's financial growth and success. The Flames owners operate within a closed market cartel and, as such, they cannot freely pick up and move without strict permissions of fellow owners. With the NHL now setting $650 million as the Expansion Fee standard, there's zero chance NHL owners will give up this pot of gold to simply allow the Flames owners to move to a targeted market like Houston or a small niche market like Quebec City. And that newest team paid its own way with the Kraken Haus renos/rebuild price tag of $1.2 billion.

Stability with only one franchise moving back to lucrative Canadian monopoly conditions in Winnipeg has been the way through Bettman's high growth era which has built the NHL into a $5+ Billion dollar business. With recent news that private equity groups are exploring ownership stakes in NHL teams that has to speak to the profitability into the cartel's success under Bettman.

The Flames don't need to stay in Calgary but if their primary objective is profit motivation (duh), they are firmly locked into ideal conditions in hockey mad Canada and what's been for much of its time an economic engine city. But forking over a potential $650 million expansion fee to move to a highly competitive and saturated sports market like Houston where they fall behind a variety of professional and college sports entertainment options ... is an option... I guess.
 

Ernie

Registered User
Aug 3, 2004
12,845
2,318
I wonder what will happen when all of these major cities wise up and say "we won't/can't afford to give you $250m for a stadium". How many sports franchises across all the major sports would suddenly become insolvent? Probably like half of NHL franchises wouldn't be able to front that cost. You'd see teams, if they owned their existing arenas, try to keep them running as long as possible like with Madison Square Garden. I've always hated how disposable sports venues have been viewed.

All that would happen is player salaries would adjust downwards. Instead of spending $80m on payroll each year, they'd spend $50m.

Pro sports has plenty of money to pay its own bills.
 

garbageteam

Registered User
Jan 7, 2010
1,425
692
If that were the case they would have been screaming for Quebecor and PKP to put up what was needed when they applied for expansion with Vegas.

Since then it’s been any cost to some other market.

They did, did they not? Or did I miss something? They could have put up a theoretical 2 billion dollars and the league seemed hell bent on rejecting them to wait for a Seattle application.
 

Ciao

Registered User
Jul 15, 2010
10,004
5,812
Toronto
I wonder what will happen when all of these major cities wise up and say "we won't/can't afford to give you $250m for a stadium". How many sports franchises across all the major sports would suddenly become insolvent? Probably like half of NHL franchises wouldn't be able to front that cost. You'd see teams, if they owned their existing arenas, try to keep them running as long as possible like with Madison Square Garden. I've always hated how disposable sports venues have been viewed.
Wow.

I was right with you until you mentioned Madison Square Garden. I get your point, but probably the worst example you could agave picked.

MSG has been a bone of contention between its owners and the City of New York for decades -- in fact, for almost as long as it's been built.

MSG has been tax-exempt since 1980 on condition that the Rangers and Knicks play all their home games there -- following a threat by their owners to move the teams to the Meadowlands.

MSG sits on top of Pennsylvania Station and had been long thought to be an impediment to the redevelopment of commuter rail transit in NYC. The battles between the City and MSG seemed never-ending until the Governor of New Yoek and intervened -- I think pretty much on the side of MSG. Gee. I wonder how that happened?

I find it hard to think of MSG as a good corperate citizen.

I do agree with your point, though -- that municipalities should wise-up and not subsidize pro sports.

And I would add that pro sports teams should pay their taxes.
 

TheLegend

Megathread Gadfly
Aug 30, 2009
36,923
29,191
Buzzing BoH
They did, did they not? Or did I miss something? They could have put up a theoretical 2 billion dollars and the league seemed hell bent on rejecting them to wait for a Seattle application.

You missed the part where Quebecor was seeking a co-investor and nobody stepped up.

OVG didn’t come into the picture until we’ll afterwards. And they did spend nearly $2 billion.

If they had come in earlier the NHL would have simply rejected the QC bid outright (instead of deferring) and been done with it.
 
Last edited:

Digital Kid

Registered User
Jun 5, 2015
289
219
Calgary
Calgarians have been electing more and more left-leaning mayors and councillors for the past three mayors. I would be shocked and surprised if this things gets resolved. The Flames might need to investigate more PPV TV options and hope for the best for Saddledome attendance.

When I think about the fact the a new football stadium, hockey arena COMBO could have been in place by now, and seeing that we now will have neither, makes me embarrassed as a sports fan.

But hey, we have a big library across the street from City Hall!
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,694
2,132
Calgarians have been electing more and more left-leaning mayors and councillors for the past three mayors. I would be shocked and surprised if this things gets resolved. The Flames might need to investigate more PPV TV options and hope for the best for Saddledome attendance.

When I think about the fact the a new football stadium, hockey arena COMBO could have been in place by now, and seeing that we now will have neither, makes me embarrassed as a sports fan.

But hey, we have a big library across the street from City Hall!
Libraries have free admission. Also help you learn how to read with the youth programs. Don't get this.
 

voyageur

Hockey fanatic
Jul 10, 2011
9,467
8,157
At this point it's pretty obvious that Edwards is going to sell the team to owners who will move them to Quebec.

Except the Flames can play in the Saddledome and make money, more money than the Coyotes will ever make in their suburban arena. Lesson being if you build an arena make the sure the fans will come there.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,694
2,132
Except the Flames can play in the Saddledome and make money, more money than the Coyotes will ever make in their suburban arena. Lesson being if you build an arena make the sure the fans will come there.
I don't think the saddledome is making that much money to be fair. This project would make way more money.
 

CorbeauNoir

Registered User
Apr 13, 2010
928
154
Libraries have free admission. Also help you learn how to read with the youth programs. Don't get this.
If anything the branch's main problem is that it tried too hard to broaden its appeal by expanding into other functions beyond a traditional library. There should not be a f***ing children's jungle gym directly adjacent to study spaces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Melrose Munch
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad