Ken King; Flames Ownership no longer pursuing new arena in Calgary

[viper0220]

Here is what I think is happening.

The Flames and NHL are just waiting for the city to bet for the Olympics, they want to see if they can get a better arena deal with Olympics coming to Calgary(this is assuming that the city does bet for the Olympics and wins it.)

If they cannot get the arena deal they want, they will move the Flame to Houston. This is the deal they probably with the NBA’s Rockets owner.

 

[Oilers Propagandist]

Here is what I think is happening.

The Flames and NHL are just waiting for the city to bet for the Olympics, they want to see if they can get a better arena deal with Olympics coming to Calgary(this is assuming that the city does bet for the Olympics and wins it.)

If they cannot get the arena deal they want, they will move the Flame to Houston. This is the deal they probably with the NBA’s Rockets owner.

They are apparently looking at a joint bid with Edmonton and whistler.

Edmonton should tell those scavengers to go away lol

 

[Pizza the Hutt]

Here is what I think is happening.

The Flames and NHL are just waiting for the city to bet for the Olympics, they want to see if they can get a better arena deal with Olympics coming to Calgary(this is assuming that the city does bet for the Olympics and wins it.)

If they cannot get the arena deal they want, they will move the Flame to Houston. This is the deal they probably with the NBA’s Rockets owner.

Wouldn't Rogers, the NHL's single largest benefactor, be kind of pissed if the NHL took a way a large chunk of their revenue? And wouldn't that in turn, hurt the NHL's revenue?

 

[muddywaters]

In a few cases (ie. IGF and Mosaic) a portion of the funding is to be paid back.

What is the point of posting that link anyways? Is it to justify massive public expenditures by the city of Calgary for a new arena? The city of Calgary is willing to pay for a third of the new arena - $187 million, have a third paid through a ticket tax (of which they will provide the loan up front with no interest of $187 million) which is similar to what is happening in Regina with Mosaic Stadium and a third paid for by the Flames ownership group - $187 million. Seems like the city is being pretty generous!

It's the property tax that is the issue , the Flames will in essence be paying for 123% of the entire cost over the next 30 years , the Bombers and Jets get a refund of their property tax every year , I do not know for sure but I'm willing to bet Regina does the same .... Edmonton has a revitalization deal with the city that pays the property tax for them .... the Flames have no such deal with the city ... here is a link explaining Winnipeg's tax refund with its sport teams ... Winnipeg pro sports franchises in line for $15.2M score in 2017 .....

 

[MNNumbers]

It's the property tax that is the issue , the Flames will in essence be paying for 123% of the entire cost over the next 30 years , the Bombers and Jets get a refund of their property tax every year , I do not know for sure but I'm willing to bet Regina does the same .... Edmonton has a revitalization deal with the city that pays the property tax for them .... the Flames have no such deal with the city ... here is a link explaining Winnipeg's tax refund with its sport teams ... Winnipeg pro sports franchises in line for $15.2M score in 2017 .....

If the property tax were the only issue, then the Flames would have counter offered something like:
City pays third
Ticket surcharge pays third
Team pays third
(City owns arena).

But they did not. The counteroffered a situation where the city has all the risk.

 

[muddywaters]

If the property tax were the only issue, then the Flames would have counter offered something like:
City pays third
Ticket surcharge pays third
Team pays third
(City owns arena).

But they did not. The counteroffered a situation where the city has all the risk.

I do not know who offered what first or how these talks ended up stalling ...

 

[viper0220]

They are apparently looking at a joint bid with Edmonton and whistler.

Edmonton should tell those scavengers to go away lol

For the sake of the Flames, I really hope Edmonton tells, Calgary and the Olympics, no thanks.

 

[viper0220]

Wouldn't Rogers, the NHL's single largest benefactor, be kind of pissed if the NHL took a way a large chunk of their revenue? And wouldn't that in turn, hurt the NHL's revenue?

I don’t think Rogers can tell the NHL, where to put the team. It may hurt Rogers revenue but it won’t be enough to “piss” Rogers off. And the NHL does not lose any revenue.

 

[muddywaters]

For the sake of the Flames, I really hope Edmonton tells, Calgary and the Olympics, no thanks.

That is not going to happen , Calgary city councilor Dru Ferrell said to get provincial money for the Olympics we have to include Edmonton , it is Edmonton pushing for inclusion not Calgary ... that is another reason I hope our council drops the bid ...

 

[viper0220]

That is not going to happen , Calgary city councilor Dru Ferrell said to get provincial money for the Olympics we have to include Edmonton , it is Edmonton pushing for inclusion not Calgary ... that is another reason I hope our council drops the bid ...

I thought it was Calgary pushing and not Edmonton, either really hope this does not happen.

 

[muddywaters]

I thought it was Calgary pushing and not Edmonton, either really hope this does not happen.

Nope ....

 

[Mike Jones]

I thought it was Calgary pushing and not Edmonton, either really hope this does not happen.

Calgary initiated the bid but it sounds like it's taking on a life of its own now that the decision making has hit new levels.

 

[Mightygoose]

I was under the impression the reason why Edmonton is getting included is to secure provincal funding.

Edmonton was interested in the 2026 Commonwealth games. No way the province will support both so the plan is let Edmonton host events too.

The fact that delegates from both the city and the province are going to South Korea for the games next year suggests to be they're both on board.

 

[muddywaters]

I was under the impression the reason why Edmonton is getting included is to secure provincal funding.

Edmonton was interested in the 2026 Commonwealth games. No way the province will support both so the plan is let Edmonton host events too.

The fact that delegates from both the city and the province are going to South Korea for the games next year suggests to be they're both on board.

Our only hope is that when Calgary city council votes to actually do a formal bid it gets turned down , from my understanding it still has to go through that process ...

 

[muddywaters]

If the property tax were the only issue, then the Flames would have counter offered something like:
City pays third
Ticket surcharge pays third
Team pays third
(City owns arena).

But they did not. The counteroffered a situation where the city has all the risk.

To further comment on this I think the Flames would take this offer ... it is close to the Edmonton deal but Nenshi has said the Flames are not getting the Edmonton deal .....

 

[Oilers Propagandist]

For the sake of the Flames, I really hope Edmonton tells, Calgary and the Olympics, no thanks.

It really makes no sense lmao.

 

[Mike Jones]

I do not know who offered what first or how these talks ended up stalling ...

From what I have read (In articles posted in this thread) greed seems to be playing a factor in this failed negotiation. The Flames have been making insane demands of the city and I don't blame city leaders from holding the line and saying no when necessary. It's really too bad Calgary media haven't been properly informing fans as to what the team has been demanding and how it will affect the city taxpayers, local services like transit and the Stampede Board, etc.

 

[Mike Jones]

It really makes no sense lmao.

If I were Edmonton I'd short circuit the new arena debate by offering to host the Olympic hockey tournament at Rogers. Why build a new arena when there's a perfectly good venue up the road? That would be a great way for Calgary Olympic officials to cut costs.

 

[Mike Jones]

More BS from Eric Francis:
Link: Francis: 150 million more reasons for Flames owners to sell

It's funny how it's always an elected official who has to be the "bigger person" when it's team owners who want everything for nothing and expect the city to roll over and cough up hundreds of millions of free money to make these same owners richer.

 

[Mightygoose]

If I were Edmonton I'd short circuit the new arena debate by offering to host the Olympic hockey tournament at Rogers. Why build a new arena when there's a perfectly good venue up the road? That would be a great way for Calgary Olympic officials to cut costs.

Actually it wouldn't save the Calgary organizers anything.

The 4.6 billion from the Exploration committee doesn't include the cost of the arena. So not only would there be no savings, revenues for that event would go to Edmonton instead, plus there's additional transportation and security costs by spreading out the events.

 

[Mightygoose]

More BS from Eric Francis:
Link: Francis: 150 million more reasons for Flames owners to sell

It's funny how it's always an elected official who has to be the "bigger person" when it's team owners who want everything for nothing and expect the city to roll over and cough up hundreds of millions of free money to make these same owners richer.

Yeah, a typical Francis scare tactic piece.

I think this is a (delayed) rebuttal to Nenshi's comments on the OVG deal in Seattle with private funds....notice he puts Houston (and a lesser degree Quebec) as the bogeyman....how those arenas were funded are not a coincidence....more senseless propaganda....

 

[edog37]

Yeah, a typical Francis scare tactic piece.

I think this is a (delayed) rebuttal to Nenshi's comments on the OVG deal in Seattle with private funds....notice he puts Houston (and a lesser degree Quebec) as the bogeyman....how those arenas were funded are not a coincidence....more senseless propaganda....

of course it is a scare tactic. How do you think these arenas get built in the first place?

 

[MNNumbers]

Again, to put the competing proposals in text here:

Each side admits the total cost, including land, etc, is about 555M.

Calgary offers:
55M direct for land use and demo of Saddledome
130M for construction
150M+ for transit and road and utility upgrades (est. total is 185M)
Flames pay 185 directly, and the Flames own the place so they pay property taxes on the place.
User fees pay the other 185M
OR>>>IN ESSENCE: City pays 1/3, Team pays 1/3, users pay 1/3, and the team owns it and pays taxes
{35 year term}

Flames say, "NO!!! The ticket fees come out of OUR pockets because it's potential ticket revenue we cannot get. The city's contribution is being paid by US in the property tax. We would be paying the whole thing....."
Flames offer:
1- The new arena will be city property, so NO property tax.
2- The land and demo is all on the city, so we are not including it in our offer
3- Thus, we are working with a cost of 500M
275M from the Flames
225 from a CRL (but the city says CRL $$ would come short and the city would be on the hook).
OR, IN ESSENCE: City pays 1/2, team pays 1/2, and since its city owned, there is no property tax on it.

What's being argued over?
Well, first, the 50M in infrastructure. But, that's a small thing, really semantics.
The difference in the offers really amounts to:
Flames own offer is 90M MORE up front than the city is offering.
However, the 185M in user fees is a BIG deal to the Flames
and, the property taxes amount to, in the Flames' mind, 243M

So, the gap is really huge. HUGE.

 

[Mike Jones]

Again, to put the competing proposals in text here:

Each side admits the total cost, including land, etc, is about 555M.

Calgary offers:
55M direct for land use and demo of Saddledome
130M for construction
150M+ for transit and road and utility upgrades (est. total is 185M)
Flames pay 185 directly, and the Flames own the place so they pay property taxes on the place.
User fees pay the other 185M
OR>>>IN ESSENCE: City pays 1/3, Team pays 1/3, users pay 1/3, and the team owns it and pays taxes
{35 year term}

Flames say, "NO!!! The ticket fees come out of OUR pockets because it's potential ticket revenue we cannot get. The city's contribution is being paid by US in the property tax. We would be paying the whole thing....."
Flames offer:
1- The new arena will be city property, so NO property tax.
2- The land and demo is all on the city, so we are not including it in our offer
3- Thus, we are working with a cost of 500M
275M from the Flames
225 from a CRL (but the city says CRL $$ would come short and the city would be on the hook).
OR, IN ESSENCE: City pays 1/2, team pays 1/2, and since its city owned, there is no property tax on it.

What's being argued over?
Well, first, the 50M in infrastructure. But, that's a small thing, really semantics.
The difference in the offers really amounts to:
Flames own offer is 90M MORE up front than the city is offering.
However, the 185M in user fees is a BIG deal to the Flames
and, the property taxes amount to, in the Flames' mind, 243M

So, the gap is really huge. HUGE.

Thank you for this! It's really really helpful. On top of all this there's a Seattle group setting a huge example by offering to pay roughly $750Million Canadian (I think that's the rough equivalent of $600 million US) to renovate an arena to NHL standards. If that group can pay that in Seattle the Flames' owners can easily find $550mil to help make them richer.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Was that Eric Francis writing that or Ken King?
what a shill