Flames future in Calgary

[skolozsy2]

17 minutes ago, Stelar said:

Lol, you mean the city that lost its basketball team.  

 

And i I never said they were one of the most profitable, I said profitable.  Profitable enough to help prop up the Hurricanes, Panthers, Coyotes and soon the LVGK.  

I understand your point, but seriously, what professional league doesn't have the most profitable teams helping support the less profitable teams.  Even the NFL has profit/revenue sharing to help the smaller markets.  MLS does it, the NBA, MLB, its the same in every sport now.  So why shouldn't the NHL share?

[Stelar]

2 minutes ago, skolozsy2 said:

I understand your point, but seriously, what professional league doesn't have the most profitable teams helping support the less profitable teams.  Even the NFL has profit/revenue sharing to help the smaller markets.  MLS does it, the NBA, MLB, its the same in every sport now.  So why shouldn't the NHL share?

I'm not saying they shouldn't. I'm saying, why would you move a team that gives to a location where the team will take?

[skolozsy2]

11 minutes ago, Stelar said:

I'm not saying they shouldn't. I'm saying, why would you move a team that gives to a location where the team will take?

Sorry, i misinterpreted what you were implying.  My bad.

 

To answer your question though as to why a team would re-locate to less profitable area.....in this case, because one city might pay for a new arena, and the other city wont.  For some reason, billionaire owners always have a ton of money right up until it comes time to sign a check to actually pay for something. 

[Canuck Surfer]

22 hours ago, goalie13 said:

Quotes from Eric Francis' Twitter feed...

 

Nenshi was in council when Ken King dropped bombshell & wont respond until tomorrow. Interesting to see how he handles political hot potato

Bettman on what Calgarians can do now: "You need to make your voice heard if you think the city is moving in the wrong direction."

 

1

Bettman, and King for that matter, can get stuffed!

 

Canadian teams have spent a ton of money the past 15 years propping up BS American markets that are not self-supporting. In the name of gaining television distribution, I believe?

 

The NHL, the league itself, is profitable. They should be reinvesting profits in required infrastructure, like arena's themselves. Or get smarter with how it pays salaries & expenditures. There is no reason the public purse has to give hand outs. 

 

The only reason a civic govt. such as Calgary should be investing in an arena? Is if the rental and other revenues generate a net return for taxpayers. Plus the expenditure also stimulates more tax revenue, supports more growth than investing in other projects such as highways, hospitals, bridges, schools, and true public facilities. 

[butters]

2 hours ago, Stelar said:

Lol, you mean the city that lost its basketball team.  

 

And i I never said they were one of the most profitable, I said profitable.  Profitable enough to help prop up the Hurricanes, Panthers, Coyotes and soon the LVGK.  

Because they weren't dumb enough to use public money to subsidise a profitable business. The NBA didn't leave Seattle due to lack of support.

[AlwaysACanuckFan]

 

[McBackup]

Teams should obviously foot the majority of the bill for new arenas, but considering the massive economic, social and cultural benefits having an arena and major league sports brings to a city, people shouldn't get offended at the idea of the city chipping in a bit. Its win-win for both parties. 

[McBackup]

7 hours ago, butters said:

Because they weren't dumb enough to use public money to subsidise a profitable business. The NBA didn't leave Seattle due to lack of support.

Very fair but Seattle is still not exactly a hockey market. People seem to think just because its a Northern US city it automatically has a built in fanbase, but most of Seattle couldn't really care less about hockey. They want basketball and an NHL team would be a neat sideshow. 

 

You know what Safeco field looks like when the Blue Jays are in town? Picture the same thing but when the Canucks are down there playing the Metropolitans or Totems or whatever they get named.

[Art Vandelay]

If only my city would offer 2/3rd's the cost for a brand new building for my business. 

 

Can't believe the flames declined that deal. Greedy greedy greedy. 

[JM_]

3 minutes ago, Art Vandelay said:

If only my city would offer 2/3rd's the cost for a brand new building for my business. 

 

Can't believe the flames declined that deal. Greedy greedy greedy. 

yup. Nenshi stick handled this thing well. Didn't flinch with the Burke/King/Bettman bs and put it all out in the open. 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

1 hour ago, Art Vandelay said:

If only my city would offer 2/3rd's the cost for a brand new building for my business. 

 

Can't believe the flames declined that deal. Greedy greedy greedy. 

Since when did the flames offer 2/3rd.  The offered a $185 million loan (which is only 1/3 of the total cost) + interest to be paid back in full by the team..

 

 

[Alflives]

6 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Since when did the flames offer 2/3rd.  The offered a $185 million loan (which is only 1/3 of the total cost) + interest to be paid back in full by the team..

 

 

NHL needs the revenue generated by all the Canadian markets to keep several of the US teams afloat.  With an escrow of at least 14%, and a stagnant cap the league will not move a team out of Calgary, unless it's to Quebec City.  Even then, that's a sideways move financially.  

[Art Vandelay]

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Since when did the flames offer 2/3rd.  The offered a $185 million loan (which is only 1/3 of the total cost) + interest to be paid back in full by the team..

 

 

From what I've seen, the portion of the cost divides up into 1/3 by the City, 1/3 by the flames organization, 1/3 by surcharge to ticket prices.

 

The city and their residents will be paying for 2/3rd's of the project.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

40 minutes ago, Art Vandelay said:

From what I've seen, the portion of the cost divides up into 1/3 by the City, 1/3 by the flames organization, 1/3 by surcharge to ticket prices.

 

The city and their residents will be paying for 2/3rd's of the project.

Sorry but that's just not true.  A surcharge is not the city, a surcharge is team revenue.  I have flames season tickets, I will be forced pay extra because I enjoy watching live hockey, but I don't represent the city, i am individual, if i don't feel the price is justified, then I am free to not pay for a ticket.   The team has the right to charge what ever that market allows them to charge, a surcharge is just them giving public evidence to show where the money is being redistributed.  As for as the other 1/3 the city flames expect to recoupe their "donation" through a flames taxes and or an equity share.  That's why King quickly went public right after the city made the proposal to explain what the city was really offering.

 

 

[ForsbergTheGreat]

51 minutes ago, Alflives said:

NHL needs the revenue generated by all the Canadian markets to keep several of the US teams afloat.  With an escrow of at least 14%, and a stagnant cap the league will not move a team out of Calgary, unless it's to Quebec City.  Even then, that's a sideways move financially.  

Canadian markets don't represent near as much NHL revenue as they once did. Calgary's 18th overall in team revenue.

[Art Vandelay]

3 minutes ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Sorry but that's just not true.  A surcharge is not the city, a surcharge is team revenue.  I have flames season tickets, I will be forced pay extra because I enjoy watching live hockey, but I don't represent the city, i am individual, if i don't feel the price is justified, then I am free to not pay for a ticket.   The team has the right to charge what ever that market allows them to charge, a surcharge is just them giving public evidence to show where the money is being redistributed.  As for as the other 1/3 the city flames expect to recoupe their "donation" through a flames taxes and or an equity share.  That's why King quickly went public right after the city made the proposal to explain what the city was really offering.

 

 

I guess it's not all 100% known. Both parties saying different things.

[Alflives]

3 hours ago, ForsbergTheGreat said:

Canadian markets don't represent near as much NHL revenue as they once did. Calgary's 18th overall in team revenue.

I don't trust the NHL bean counters one bit.  They will "cook the books" to best suit their current objective.  Now their goal is to threaten the .Calgary fans into paying for the team's new arena.  Next it will be all the teams are losing money in order to get more from the players in 2021.  I HATE the Flames, and want their fans to suffer, but not like this.  It seems really unfair, what the league is doing to the Calgary fans.  Bad Betman.

[BCNate]

There is absolutely no way that the Flames leave Calgary, regardless of where the arena process stands right now.  Something will get worked out and the taxpayers will take the brunt of it.  Once the new arena is built and people see how awesome it is, any anger will dissipate.  This is what has happened in nearly all arena and ballpark issues (outside of the NFL, who require a minimum $1.5 billion) over the past 30 years.

[MikeBossy]

Hey don't kid yourselves - Canucks ownership will pull the same crap at some point. These owners didn't become Billionaires with their own money after all.

[IBatch]

On 12/09/2017 at 9:44 PM, goalie13 said:

Quotes from Eric Francis' Twitter feed...

 

Nenshi was in council when Ken King dropped bombshell & wont respond until tomorrow. Interesting to see how he handles political hot potato

Bettman on what Calgarians can do now: "You need to make your voice heard if you think the city is moving in the wrong direction."

Bettman: "At some point there will be consequences that will have to be dealt with."

Bettman: "I'm not surprised at this result. I think it was inevitable."

King: "we're not shopping, we're not looking around." Bettman is here to help guide Flames forward

King on the city's stance re a new rink: "their message is it's not going to work"

King re future of Flames in Calgary: "I don't know what this means."

King spoke to Mayor and determined the city has no genuine interest in helping build a building. Talks over.

King: "we will operate as long as we can."

King: "It's time we stopped pretending."

WTF?  The fans of the flames better wake up now and make themselves heard.   It sounds like ownership would sell out rather than cough up for a new building.  It's absolutely ludicrous IMO after what the Iltich family just made in Detroit, the place is so cool and way beyond any other building in the league that I am considering booking tickets just to check it out.

THAT is what they should be working towards, not looking for a handout from the taxpayers or the league.  Terrible leadership, terrible focus.