News   Apr 03, 2020
 1K     0 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 2.2K     3 
News   Apr 02, 2020
 873     0 

Calgary Stadiums and Arenas

Golfing guy

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 29, 2017
Messages
220
Reaction score
273
We won’t need a new arena, but with out a second (and a third smaller one for curling) events like figure skating will be held in other cities
 

MichaelS

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 5, 2016
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
3,763
First paragraph of the article I linked to says the IOC stated the Saddledome would be fine for hockey AND figure skating.

I think it is things like this that is giving many new council members a lot of apprehension about bidding. Tough to get a straight story on what is needed/costs.
 

darwink

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2016
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
2,461
Sure, it is perfectly capable for either. But could all events be hosted? No. Since at least 1998 two arenas have been used.

Could it be done? Sure. Does one want to host figure skating finals or major hockey games in the Corral? Preferably not.
 

MichaelS

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 5, 2016
Messages
1,123
Reaction score
3,763
Sure, it is perfectly capable for either. But could all events be hosted? No. Since at least 1998 two arenas have been used.

Could it be done? Sure. Does one want to host figure skating finals or major hockey games in the Corral? Preferably not.
If money were no object, sure. BUT, that is a reality that needs to be considered. Would one want to host figure skating finals in the Corral if it saved $1 TRILLION!!!! You bet. Now I know it won't cost that much obviously, but it is to highlight that there is a price point that is just too high. What that is will be up to Council, or maybe Calgarians if we get a plebiscite with that info.
 

gsunnyg

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 26, 2017
Messages
579
Reaction score
1,117
The fabled new arena isn't included in that budget? hm.
Seems odd, the VP plans included a new arena yet here they're planning on spending $10M on upgrading the 'dome. Seems like a silly thing to do if they're planning on demolishing it.
The way I interpreted the situation was that they were planning to get a new arena going eventually, but in a way that was best for the city as a whole rather than just the Flames head office.
Are these plans contradictory or did something big change?

With the way the Flames have been losing in the dome this year I'm starting to think maybe a new arena might help us out. That's just the superstitious hockey fan side of me though. My wallet has a different idea.
I agree we need a new arena really bad, as much as people say we don't we really do. Its sucks seeing so many artists skip our city when it comes to concerts. Thats potential revenue being lost for everyone involved. The problem is we have two very stubborn people negotiating, the flames are trying to play victim and Nenshi isn't buying any of it. As far as the $10 mil goes we have remember that the Victoria park vision has a spot left empty for the new arena, it doesn't necessarily mean we will have one, its just a place holder. I think if there is no deal in the next few years, the City may very well use funds for the Olympics to renovate it. These are speculations of course but I really think we'll definitely know the fate of our saddle dome in the next 4-5 years or hopefully even sooner. That'll give us enough time to even get a new arena built for the olympics if a deal does come through.
 

UrbanWarrior

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 28, 2016
Messages
3,496
Reaction score
8,391
Location
Mission
The 2026 Olympic host city will be announced in 2019, so we will know by then I would imagine.
 

darwink

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2016
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
2,461
Yeah, unfortunately the Flames took the city's 'opening gambit' finance plan as a final offer. And yeah, the city's offer for direct expenses was pretty insubstantial, basically just a loan guarantee for a 1/3rd of the capital cost which was only worth the spread between the city's available interest rate, and the Flames available rate.

There is a way to change the deal to make it work, without giving away the store but both sides will have to accept that they won't get everything. The Flames won't get Edmonton's arena deal 2.0. The city won't get to recover their direct contribution from the arena itself. Having city infrastructure built for only 30 cent dollars is usually considered quite a good deal for the city!

Maybe to alleviate the city's squeamishness about leasing to the Flames, it could be leased to the Saddledome Foundation 2.0 for $1 a year, populated with an eminent board of directors with the mandate to ensure that the lease to the Flames does not generate outsized returns through an arrangement that includes opening the books to that board. If the lease holder is generating beyond expected returns, perhaps a portion could be placed into a sinking fund for either future renovations (hopefully we will have not made mistakes this time around that prevent useful renovations) or replacement.

That ensures that a public body that people can request documents from doesn't have the Flames and in turn, the NHL's books.
 

Meikkhaell

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
286
Reaction score
227
I agree we need a new arena really bad, as much as people say we don't we really do. Its sucks seeing so many artists skip our city when it comes to concerts. Thats potential revenue being lost for everyone involved. The problem is we have two very stubborn people negotiating, the flames are trying to play victim and Nenshi isn't buying any of it. As far as the $10 mil goes we have remember that the Victoria park vision has a spot left empty for the new arena, it doesn't necessarily mean we will have one, its just a place holder. I think if there is no deal in the next few years, the City may very well use funds for the Olympics to renovate it. These are speculations of course but I really think we'll definitely know the fate of our saddle dome in the next 4-5 years or hopefully even sooner. That'll give us enough time to even get a new arena built for the olympics if a deal does come through.
Yeah, I'd tend to agree. I feel like the Flames are acting rather whiny - I'm supportive of Nenshi's stance on this. Evidently the city isn't hell-bent on surviving with the Saddledome, they're open to a new arena if it makes sense - but the Flames organization, as you said, just keeps playing victim and taking a defeatist stance on the issue.
The arguments that the Saddledome is fine and we don't need a new arena are reasonable, especially with the effects of this downturn still lingering. Just in the back of my mind the prospect of losing the Flames to another city - if they'd ever have the balls to leave - haunts me.
Of course, I'm not one to suggest we spoon-feed billionaires billions whenever they whine, but if we DO get a new arena I wouldn't protest it.
 

jdixon

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 19, 2017
Messages
139
Reaction score
144
Yeah, I'd tend to agree. I feel like the Flames are acting rather whiny - I'm supportive of Nenshi's stance on this. Evidently the city isn't hell-bent on surviving with the Saddledome, they're open to a new arena if it makes sense - but the Flames organization, as you said, just keeps playing victim and taking a defeatist stance on the issue.
The arguments that the Saddledome is fine and we don't need a new arena are reasonable, especially with the effects of this downturn still lingering. Just in the back of my mind the prospect of losing the Flames to another city - if they'd ever have the balls to leave - haunts me.
Of course, I'm not one to suggest we spoon-feed billionaires billions whenever they whine, but if we DO get a new arena I wouldn't protest it.
I agree on the need for a new arena, but I fail to understand how North American cities have all seemed to fall into the trap of using public money to subsidize arenas that a large percentage of the populace doesn't even use.
 

Mountain Man

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 9, 2017
Messages
2,117
Reaction score
2,477
For the comment about a new arena providing new revenue, that's not really that true. A new arena and the concerts it would bring would just be a new place for people to spend money they would have otherwise spent elsewhere in the city, so it doesn't actually create any new revenue for the city. The only real new revenue would be from people coming from out of town and spending money. There would be some of that with the additional concerns, but I be it would be a lot smaller than people think. The only new revenue that is actually generated will be for CSEC, and most of that will come from the 2x increase in box seats.
 

darwink

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 7, 2016
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
2,461
The higher arena utilization would make the infrastructure fee on the tickets a bit lower which is nice. But yeah, the main benefit to the public of a new arena is the mere fact that an arena will exist at all, and can accommodate all potential users. Whether that is worth $200 million Dollarydoos is a matter of individual opinion.

Also, can we try to sort the arena talk back into the arena thread - I think I remember one existing?
 

Joborule

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
34
Reaction score
63
Location
Calgary

Joborule

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
34
Reaction score
63
Location
Calgary
Posted this in the CalgaryNEXT/Plan B thread, but since McMahon is getting talk in here as well, thought I would post this:

Interesting from the olympic bid report on what redevelopment at McMahon Stadium would look like if it was to be carried out - which could be done in eight months. (Option 3 - vision concept in latter pages of report)

http://www.calgary.ca/_layouts/cocis/DirectDownload.aspx?target=http://www.calgary.ca/CSPS/Recreation/Documents/2026%20Olympic%20Bid/appendices/appendix-4J-detailed-venue-analysis-mcmahon.pdf&noredirect=1&sf=1
 

Top