View Single Post
01-24-2013, 12:05 PM
Registered User
KirkW's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Berlin, DE
Country: Canada
Posts: 170
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Yeah, can anybody say contrived.

Anybody looking at those options and noting that option B, and C, the dogfood versions, are somehow costing more should perhaps pause for thought and wonder how the whole magical pricetag for arena was arrived at in the first place.

Those price guesstimates are the biggest load of crap I've seen yet in this unending saga which is saying something.
From the Oilers website:
City administration also presented Council with 2 alternative designs: one with a pedestrian link over 104 Avenue instead of the Wintergarden, and the second with no pedestrian link or Wintergarden. Neither of these options included a private sector partner or confirmed tenant.
I initially had the same reaction as you, but a little reading into the matter brings some light. It appears that the latter two were suggestions brought forward by the city. The cost to the city would be greater for the last two options it appears, because they would be funding the arena themselves (ie. Katz as tenant, but not major contributor to the project).
As I understand it, option one would still cost more over-all, but the burden to the city would be less because of "private sector partners" (Katz and WAM).
At least that's my take.

KirkW is offline