Quantcast
Calgary Flames New Arena Update - Page 51 - Beyond.ca - Car Forums
Page 51 of 56 FirstFirst ... 41 50 51 52 ... LastLast
Results 1,001 to 1,020 of 1115

Thread: Calgary Flames New Arena Update

  1. #1001
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Lariat 2.7 & StreetTriple R
    Posts
    456
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by suntan View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I can pretty well guarantee you absolutely fucking no one decides on where to lived based on the presence of an NHL team, or any other pro sports team.
    What about the team itself, paying for physio, medical, catering, direct jobs, alcohol, taxes, airport fees. Then add sponsorships and foundations (charities etc). Then add in the big nights when the teams go out and spend big money in local venues. Then their massive homes with a bunch of purchases, where do you think they get all that from and who gets to pay sales and property taxes on that?

    I can tell you that the team itself is a pretty major injection of cash into the city. Not saying it makes up for the 500 mil but it certainly makes a difference and is often overlooked
    Last edited by OTown; 01-05-2022 at 04:12 PM.

  2. #1002
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Nothing worth mentioning.
    Posts
    1,140
    Rep Power
    24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 2Legit2Quit View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I voted for Hallelujah

    A fucking inanimate carbon rod would be better than what we have.

  3. #1003
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    2018 Allroad, 2020 Velar
    Posts
    1,435
    Rep Power
    21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Genuine question. Would it be better if Calgary builds an arena/entertainment centre and long term lease out the space to CSEC and concert promoters similar to the current arrangement? That way it's not directly funding a private business, but CSEC will get a better deal out of it.
    For me, I would support this if the economics made sense. If Calgary could not recoup the cost of the investment in a reasonable amount of time(no idea what sort of term is acceptable in commercial real estate), then I would be supportive. Not sure why the CSEC would get a better deal out of it though. Was there some other proposal I'm missing? I would imagine the lease costs would need to go up and have a firm commitment of 20 years or whatever to ensure that CoC isn't taking a bath on it. I'd expect the devil is in the details for this arrangement which is why it's not going forward. I doubt all the braindead people at the CoC will be able to book the venue consistently with large paying acts thus never paying off the investment and they don't want to take on that risk.

    EDIT: Removed my shitty idea.
    Last edited by npham; 01-05-2022 at 04:20 PM.

  4. #1004
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    403
    My Ride
    Bunch of Honda's
    Posts
    6,351
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    EDIT: Removed my shitty idea.
    LOL I was just about to say could you image the time/cost/headache for the City of Calgary to manage and run the place. Hahahha. 10% property tax hike here we come.

  5. #1005
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    North North Dakota
    My Ride
    Mallfinder
    Posts
    332
    Rep Power
    22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OTown View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Yep. Were no better than the Torontonias, Montrealais or Vancouverites that vote for Trudeau year after year expecting something different. Its laughable, actually.
    Those places vote for Turdeau because they aren’t expecting anything different…

  6. #1006
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    YYC
    My Ride
    1 x E Class Benz
    Posts
    22,843
    Rep Power
    101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by npham View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    For me, I would support this if the economics made sense. If Calgary could not recoup the cost of the investment in a reasonable amount of time(no idea what sort of term is acceptable in commercial real estate), then I would be supportive. Not sure why the CSEC would get a better deal out of it though. Was there some other proposal I'm missing? I would imagine the lease costs would need to go up and have a firm commitment of 20 years or whatever to ensure that CoC isn't taking a bath on it. I'd expect the devil is in the details for this arrangement which is why it's not going forward. I doubt all the braindead people at the CoC will be able to book the venue consistently with large paying acts thus never paying off the investment and they don't want to take on that risk.

    EDIT: Removed my shitty idea.
    There are some publicly available data (in a different market) to show what market value looks like for renting an arena for an NHL team. The mess that's the Arizona Coyotes has all their dirty laundry aired out so these figures are public information. They pay about $3m USD per year in rent at Gila River Arena ($500k/year plus $55k/game operating expenses), plus misc expenses such as parking sales. Let's generously round that up to $5m CAD. The new arena costs $650m at the latest estimates before it was terminated. At market rates, it would take 130 years to pay it off, assuming there is nobody else to pay that much for the other times the arena is available. That's much longer than the shelf life of any arena. Now, if we had 3 pro sports team that's willing to pay that, it's a more reasonable 43 years. Calgary is a LONG ways from that happening.

    Why is this a better deal for the flames? Because the latest agreement had the CSEC pay $346.5m for 35 year lease, or $9.9m/year.

    This is why no private company would invest in an arena 100% in Calgary. It's a money losing proposition as the economics doesn't make sense in Calgary with the inability to secure high rent value at 90%+ utilization. The city is in a tough position with the Saddledome falling apart (if the $200m roof repair report is legit). The city isn't in the business of making money from their investments. It's in the business of allocating tax dollars to make life better for Calgarians, and hopefully getting the most bang for the buck. Circling back to the City paying 100%, there is a bright side. Leasing it out for 35 years to CSEC at $5m will net them $175m, while the building will be open for public use like the library majority of the time, which will make Calgarians feel better about their tax dollars. Underlying numbers though are rough, at a cost of $475m for the city. The numbers doesn't make sense considering the cost criticism of our library lol.

    I think CSEC knows the city is in a tough spot and has more leverage than they do. This will end up with them getting a better deal at some point, and Gondek looking like a bigger idiot costing the city way more money.
    Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
    I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name

  7. #1007
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Unicycle
    Posts
    10,856
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    Flames will get thier deal, I have no doubt.
    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I almost shat myself after eating way too much at lunch with @killramos so ya, we can start the diaper thread now.

  8. #1008
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Homeless
    My Ride
    Blue Dabadee
    Posts
    7,926
    Rep Power
    69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are some publicly available data (in a different market) to show what market value looks like for renting an arena for an NHL team. The mess that's the Arizona Coyotes has all their dirty laundry aired out so these figures are public information. They pay about $3m USD per year in rent at Gila River Arena ($500k/year plus $55k/game operating expenses), plus misc expenses such as parking sales. Let's generously round that up to $5m CAD. The new arena costs $650m at the latest estimates before it was terminated. At market rates, it would take 130 years to pay it off, assuming there is nobody else to pay that much for the other times the arena is available. That's much longer than the shelf life of any arena. Now, if we had 3 pro sports team that's willing to pay that, it's a more reasonable 43 years. Calgary is a LONG ways from that happening.

    Why is this a better deal for the flames? Because the latest agreement had the CSEC pay $346.5m for 35 year lease, or $9.9m/year.

    This is why no private company would invest in an arena 100% in Calgary. It's a money losing proposition as the economics doesn't make sense in Calgary with the inability to secure high rent value at 90%+ utilization. The city is in a tough position with the Saddledome falling apart (if the $200m roof repair report is legit). The city isn't in the business of making money from their investments. It's in the business of allocating tax dollars to make life better for Calgarians, and hopefully getting the most bang for the buck. Circling back to the City paying 100%, there is a bright side. Leasing it out for 35 years to CSEC at $5m will net them $175m, while the building will be open for public use like the library majority of the time, which will make Calgarians feel better about their tax dollars. Underlying numbers though are rough, at a cost of $475m for the city. The numbers doesn't make sense considering the cost criticism of our library lol.

    I think CSEC knows the city is in a tough spot and has more leverage than they do. This will end up with them getting a better deal at some point, and Gondek looking like a bigger idiot costing the city way more money.

    Gondek:

    We will build our own arena, with blackjack and hookers!
    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ndek-1.6305280
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by Yolobimmer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    guessing who I might be, psychologizing me with your non existent degree.

  9. #1009
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    3,796
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are some publicly available data (in a different market) to show what market value looks like for renting an arena for an NHL team. The mess that's the Arizona Coyotes has all their dirty laundry aired out so these figures are public information. They pay about $3m USD per year in rent at Gila River Arena ($500k/year plus $55k/game operating expenses), plus misc expenses such as parking sales. Let's generously round that up to $5m CAD. The new arena costs $650m at the latest estimates before it was terminated. At market rates, it would take 130 years to pay it off, assuming there is nobody else to pay that much for the other times the arena is available. That's much longer than the shelf life of any arena. Now, if we had 3 pro sports team that's willing to pay that, it's a more reasonable 43 years. Calgary is a LONG ways from that happening.

    Why is this a better deal for the flames? Because the latest agreement had the CSEC pay $346.5m for 35 year lease, or $9.9m/year.

    This is why no private company would invest in an arena 100% in Calgary. It's a money losing proposition as the economics doesn't make sense in Calgary with the inability to secure high rent value at 90%+ utilization. The city is in a tough position with the Saddledome falling apart (if the $200m roof repair report is legit). The city isn't in the business of making money from their investments. It's in the business of allocating tax dollars to make life better for Calgarians, and hopefully getting the most bang for the buck. Circling back to the City paying 100%, there is a bright side. Leasing it out for 35 years to CSEC at $5m will net them $175m, while the building will be open for public use like the library majority of the time, which will make Calgarians feel better about their tax dollars. Underlying numbers though are rough, at a cost of $475m for the city. The numbers doesn't make sense considering the cost criticism of our library lol.

    I think CSEC knows the city is in a tough spot and has more leverage than they do. This will end up with them getting a better deal at some point, and Gondek looking like a bigger idiot costing the city way more money.
    Pay the players less

  10. #1010
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Location
    YYC
    My Ride
    1 x E Class Benz
    Posts
    22,843
    Rep Power
    101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by killramos View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I guess city lost all their leverage lol.
    Originally posted by SEANBANERJEE
    I have gone above and beyond what I should rightfully have to do to protect my good name

  11. #1011
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    809
    Rep Power
    18

    Default

    "There are still many interested parties that want to see this move forward."

  12. #1012
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Unicycle
    Posts
    10,856
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    Jesus, if the flames won't pay half, we'll make them pay . . . less? Wicked negotiating!
    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I almost shat myself after eating way too much at lunch with @killramos so ya, we can start the diaper thread now.

  13. #1013
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Homeless
    My Ride
    Blue Dabadee
    Posts
    7,926
    Rep Power
    69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dimi View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    translation
    Quote Originally Posted by Jyoti Gondek
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Funding Secured
    Last edited by killramos; 01-05-2022 at 06:40 PM.
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by Yolobimmer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    guessing who I might be, psychologizing me with your non existent degree.

  14. #1014
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Unicycle
    Posts
    10,856
    Rep Power
    100

    Default

    "funding secured" lol.
    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I almost shat myself after eating way too much at lunch with @killramos so ya, we can start the diaper thread now.

  15. #1015
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    calgary, alberta, canada
    My Ride
    Faux X 4 Mall Crawler
    Posts
    5,596
    Rep Power
    31

    Default

    Really hoping the province comes through with some recall legislation, and maybe shredding the city charter to take any authority away from these poorly trained chimps
    sig deleted by moderator, because they are useless

  16. #1016
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Homeless
    My Ride
    Blue Dabadee
    Posts
    7,926
    Rep Power
    69

    Default

    It would be Uber hilarious if we tried to recall Gondek before chu

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by vengie View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I think Gondek is sewering her political career very quickly.

    Lets look at her resume in her few short months as Mayor.
    1) Declares Climate emergency
    2) Created significant division between the city and CPS
    3) Created significant division with city council
    4) Went rogue and sewered a $600million infrastructure project which was the lynch pin holding together an entire East Side revitilization

    She's exactly the Mayor Calgarians deserve.
    Speaking of which. Dont forget the I refuse to swear in stunt with Chu
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by Yolobimmer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    guessing who I might be, psychologizing me with your non existent degree.

  17. #1017
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    Turbo stuff
    Posts
    3,186
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    Gon down in Flames?

  18. #1018
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    41
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rage2 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    . Circling back to the City paying 100%, there is a bright side. Leasing it out for 35 years to CSEC at $5m will net them $175m, while the building will be open for public use like the library majority of the time, which will make Calgarians feel better about their tax dollars. Underlying numbers though are rough, at a cost of $475m for the city. The numbers doesn't make sense considering the cost criticism of our library lol.
    The deal as set up had:

    City paying ~$310M
    CSEC paying ~$310M

    CSEC taking on cost overruns (originally it was an even split, unless overruns were caused by only one side wanting something different. But this was part of the deal that saw the city give up CMLC as project manager)

    CSEC would get a 35 year lease of the arena management contract and a “ticket tax” (or whatever they’re calling it) would contribute to ~$150M to the city, plus $2.5M from naming rights.

    A long term lease was always a part of the deal. Your deal has the city paying hundreds of millions more for nothing extra in return.

    A deal structured around the city taking on the construction risk, and increasing CSECs payments through the lease life (I.e $15M/year, so CSECs contribution would work out roughly the same, they just don’t need to take on the large initial capital financing) would be closer to the structure of Edmonton’s deal (Katz pays a lot less of a portion of the Rogers Place cost) but that means the city has to find a lot more money to take on that construction risk.
    Last edited by kertejud2; 01-05-2022 at 08:16 PM.

  19. #1019
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Homeless
    My Ride
    Blue Dabadee
    Posts
    7,926
    Rep Power
    69

    Default

    Sounds like a financial slam dunk
    Originally posted by Thales of Miletus

    If you think I have been trying to present myself as intellectually superior, then you truly are a dimwit.
    Originally posted by Toma
    fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by Yolobimmer View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

    guessing who I might be, psychologizing me with your non existent degree.

  20. #1020
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Calgary
    My Ride
    ute
    Posts
    3,796
    Rep Power
    39

    Default

    how about the city does city things, and the entertainment companies do entertainment things.

    ffs this isn't that complicated.

Page 51 of 56 FirstFirst ... 41 50 51 52 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 301
    Latest Threads: 10-09-2015, 11:52 AM
  2. City of Calgary purchases land from GSL Chev, West Village/new Arena coming?

    By dino_martini in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 27
    Latest Threads: 02-13-2015, 06:14 PM
  3. Possible new Flames arena

    By duaner in forum Sports, Health & Fitness
    Replies: 37
    Latest Threads: 01-31-2014, 06:35 PM
  4. Edmonton's new arena.... yay or nay

    By yellowsnow in forum Society / Law / Current Events / Politics
    Replies: 46
    Latest Threads: 02-05-2013, 07:07 PM
  5. Directions to Murry Copot Arena?

    By Marsh in forum General
    Replies: 5
    Latest Threads: 07-03-2004, 09:53 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •