HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

One step close to a new arena in Quebec

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-16-2010, 03:20 PM
  #26
Not The One
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montréal, Qc.
Posts: 1,325
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turboflex View Post
Karl Pelideau and Quebecor can build their own damn arena.

This would be a huge mistake by Harper and Charest. If the people of Quebec City want to waste all this money they can do it themselves, don't get the Montreal or the Canadian taxpayer involved.
Yeah! I'd much rather we spend a billion for a meeting on Toronto or a dozen billions so our soldier boys can get some new toys to play with.

Not The One is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2010, 03:32 PM
  #27
FlyingKostitsyn
Registered User
 
FlyingKostitsyn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by number 11 View Post
trying to re-create the habs nordiques rivalry is a poor excuse to use 300 million in public funds to build an arena for a privately owned team. the rivalry wouldn't even be close to what it was, given the political landscape of the 70s/80s in quebec.

where are the billionaires who lined up to buy the habs when Gillette was selling?

and what are the chances the winter olympics would actually be held in canada again for the second time in 12 years?
1. The purpose of building an arena is not to recreate the nordiques habs rivalry

2. The arena would serve for more than just being the home ice for a Quebec team, it would serve all year round for shows and spectacles. Its an infrastructure that would replace the obsolete colisée.

3. I hope you realize 300 million is peanuts for the federal govt. Considering the federal's contribution would likely be under 200 million you would, as a canadian tax payer, pay your part by putting gas in your car once or twice or going to the restaurant a few times.

FlyingKostitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2010, 03:39 PM
  #28
Turboflex*
 
Turboflex*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
Yeah! I'd much rather we spend a billion for a meeting on Toronto or a dozen billions so our soldier boys can get some new toys to play with.
So because they've wasted some money on some stupid stuff, they should waste more money on more stupid stuff.

Turboflex* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2010, 04:12 PM
  #29
beowulf
Poster of the Year!
 
beowulf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,721
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to beowulf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not The One View Post
Yeah! I'd much rather we spend a billion for a meeting on Toronto or a dozen billions so our soldier boys can get some new toys to play with.
How the hell does one compare to the other?

beowulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2010, 08:16 PM
  #30
Vineon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: Martinique
Posts: 86
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by number 11 View Post
trying to re-create the habs nordiques rivalry is a poor excuse to use 300 million in public funds to build an arena for a privately owned team. the rivalry wouldn't even be close to what it was, given the political landscape of the 70s/80s in quebec.

where are the billionaires who lined up to buy the habs when Gillette was selling?

and what are the chances the winter olympics would actually be held in canada again for the second time in 12 years?
Have you missed the Montreal-Québec hockey reality show? If it showed anything through ratings, its that the rivalry still exists.

Tensions between Québec and Montreal remain high,if not higher. It would take you a minute on Quebec City's radio stations to notice it. Montreal and its "gang de gauchistes du plateau" is brought up every day and hearing them, it sums up everything that is bad about the province.

The Québec Nordiques are still a far cry from the Montréal Canadiens in terms of history and market size, that is not a very fair comparison. You would obviously expect less buyers. That said... if PKP is interested.... he's certainly not your average Joe Blo.

As for the winter Olympics, I believe the chances to be none, at least for 2022. This will however likely be used as an excuse to fund the arena.

Vineon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-16-2010, 09:13 PM
  #31
HCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Wild West
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingKostitsyn View Post
1. The purpose of building an arena is not to recreate the nordiques habs rivalry

2. The arena would serve for more than just being the home ice for a Quebec team, it would serve all year round for shows and spectacles. Its an infrastructure that would replace the obsolete colisée.

3. I hope you realize 300 million is peanuts for the federal govt. Considering the federal's contribution would likely be under 200 million you would, as a canadian tax payer, pay your part by putting gas in your car once or twice or going to the restaurant a few times.
An arena is not infrastructure. Infrastructure is roads, bridges, subways, pipelines, sewer systems, water supplies. An arena is an amenity.

If Quebec City gets federal funding where do you draw the line. Every community should be treated equally and if you did that, the $200 million would quickly spiral into billions.

On other hand, if a facility is that much of an economic benefit, then the community should be willing to fund all of it themselves. After all, who wouldn't want to invest in a profitable project.

HCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 01:06 PM
  #32
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 23Hab View Post
Screw that crap! Quebec City can find it's own companies to chip in, Nobody helped the Expo's & I would never do a deal with the Bloc.
Nobody helped the Expos? Generation of Quebecers have paid for the Big O.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 01:35 PM
  #33
neofury*
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal, PQ
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,277
vCash: 500
*cough*becoming very political*cough*

neofury* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 02:32 PM
  #34
Markovskaya
Registered User
 
Markovskaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
It's not fair saying Montreal and Canadiens shouldn't be involved in any big project taking place in Québec City.

The taxe payers in Quebec city paid for:

The god damn Olympic stadium;
The expo 67'
The montreal and vancouver olympics
The quartier des spectacles
The OSM
The G8 summit in Toronto
Etc, etc, etc...

It's called living in the same COUNTRY.

You guys wanna live in state-cities ?

Now I'm not saying it should be 100% public money. I'm saying with the taxes we pay in this country, it's a contract people have with the government that big projects like this will get support from public funds.

Simple as that folks.

Markovskaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 02:34 PM
  #35
kyne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
Nobody helped the Expos? Generation of Quebecers have paid for the Big O.
The Expos played out of Jarry Park when the Big O was built. The stadium was not built with a pro team in mind as would be the case for any new arena in Quebec City. It was part of the Olympic installations and, as such, was funded municipally, provincially and federally. If anything, RIO had to convince the Expos to play there since they were quite happy at Jarry Park.

Is Quebec City staging the Olympic Games in the near future? No.

kyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 02:37 PM
  #36
Markovskaya
Registered User
 
Markovskaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyne View Post
The Expos played out of Jarry Park when the Big O was built. The stadium was not built with a pro team in mind as would be the case for any new arena in Quebec City. It was part of the Olympic installations and, as such, was funded municipally, provincially and federally. If anything, RIO had to convince the Expos to play there since they were quite happy at Jarry Park.

Is Quebec City staging the Olympic Games in the near future? No.
In 2010 a city needs an arena of that type BEFORE a city become an olympic candidat. Look at vancouver. Unless you're china and have unlimited workforce and wealth, the CIO will not take any chances.

Markovskaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 03:08 PM
  #37
kyne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markovskaya View Post
It's not fair saying Montreal and Canadiens shouldn't be involved in any big project taking place in Québec City.

The taxe payers in Quebec city paid for:

The god damn Olympic stadium;
The expo 67'
The montreal and vancouver olympics
The quartier des spectacles
The OSM
The G8 summit in Toronto
Etc, etc, etc...

It's called living in the same COUNTRY.

You guys wanna live in state-cities ?

Now I'm not saying it should be 100% public money. I'm saying with the taxes we pay in this country, it's a contract people have with the government that big projects like this will get support from public funds.

Simple as that folks.
Not that simple. The government has limited funds and has to determine who is most deserving. Why is Quebec City entitled to this as opposed to, let's say, Edmonton or Calgary? You could say both Alberta cities have a compelling case.

Alberta has been a "have" province for some time and contributes to the pool of money distributed by the Federal government to the so-called "have not " provinces which include Quebec. You could say Alberta taxpayers have paying for you for years since they top up the Quebec provincial budget every year and have been doing so for decades. A part of your income tax refund (presuming you got one) was paid for by Alberta taxpayers. Using your argument, shouldn't they deserve public funding for new stadium for the Flames or Oilers - teams that already exist?

kyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 03:15 PM
  #38
kyne
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markovskaya View Post
In 2010 a city needs an arena of that type BEFORE a city become an olympic candidat. Look at vancouver. Unless you're china and have unlimited workforce and wealth, the CIO will not take any chances.
The Garage in Vancouver was paid for privately. Ditto the Saddledome in Calgary. Meanwhile, Quebec City is not going to get the Olympic Games anytime soon.

Besides, you don`t spend hundreds of millions of dollars of public money up front in the hope of getting Olympic Games. Not in tough economic times and not when the national public debt is over 50% of GDP.

kyne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 03:31 PM
  #39
Markovskaya
Registered User
 
Markovskaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyne View Post
Not that simple. The government has limited funds and has to determine who is most deserving. Why is Quebec City entitled to this as opposed to, let's say, Edmonton or Calgary? You could say both Alberta cities have a compelling case.

Alberta has been a "have" province for some time and contributes to the pool of money distributed by the Federal government to the so-called "have not " provinces which include Quebec. You could say Alberta taxpayers have paying for you for years since they top up the Quebec provincial budget every year and have been doing so for decades. A part of your income tax refund (presuming you got one) was paid for by Alberta taxpayers. Using your argument, shouldn't they deserve public funding for new stadium for the Flames or Oilers - teams that already exist?
Let me start by saying that Quebec city is a very strong city for Canada economically. And so are Edmonton and Calgary. Quebec GDT grew 21% since 2000. They have 5% unemployment rate and the real estate projects are booming.

Why are they "more deserving" then Calgary and Edmonton in term of hockey Arena ? Simply because contrarily to those 2 cities, we're dealing with an old arena, built in the late 40'. We need it a lot more than they do and that's a fact! Their arenas are getting old but they can still be used many more years.

The Saddledome was built in 1983.

The Rexal place in 1972.

Colisé Pepsi was opened in 1949 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Also, I would like to remind something to you. It's true that the economical growth of Alberta is impressive. They do pay a lot more taxes then the Q and have been for about 20 years now. But let's not forget that the people of Quebec and Ontario paid for more than 100 years for their roads and infrastructure. If you do back to what Calgary was in the 70', it really, REALLY wasn't the place where the government got his money from. So as a country, let's not forget our history and try to give credit where credit is due.

Also, it's not only an arena for hockey. It's a multifunctional complex that will be used to host concert, expositions, sport events, hockey and possibly Olympics. So it's not only about giving an arena to a city that has the best chance to get a hockey team or already has one.

Markovskaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 03:35 PM
  #40
Markovskaya
Registered User
 
Markovskaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hub City Hab View Post
Corrected
It includes people in Québec city.

Markovskaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-17-2010, 04:01 PM
  #41
Alaix
I believe.
 
Alaix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Belgium
Posts: 1,016
vCash: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyne View Post
Not that simple. The government has limited funds and has to determine who is most deserving. Why is Quebec City entitled to this as opposed to, let's say, Edmonton or Calgary? You could say both Alberta cities have a compelling case.

Alberta has been a "have" province for some time and contributes to the pool of money distributed by the Federal government to the so-called "have not " provinces which include Quebec. You could say Alberta taxpayers have paying for you for years since they top up the Quebec provincial budget every year and have been doing so for decades. A part of your income tax refund (presuming you got one) was paid for by Alberta taxpayers. Using your argument, shouldn't they deserve public funding for new stadium for the Flames or Oilers - teams that already exist?
If you had read the acutal article or first post, you would have noticed that they were also talking about a new arena in Edmonton

Alaix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 07:17 AM
  #42
wedge
Registered User
 
wedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: victoriaville
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,274
vCash: 500
I don't have a problem with the federal giving some money. But giving some money so that the Bloc Quebecois votes for them looks a lot like all the controversy we're having in the news these days.

wedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 07:45 AM
  #43
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by number 11 View Post
trying to re-create the habs nordiques rivalry is a poor excuse to use 300 million in public funds to build an arena for a privately owned team. the rivalry wouldn't even be close to what it was, given the political landscape of the 70s/80s in quebec.

where are the billionaires who lined up to buy the habs when Gillette was selling?

and what are the chances the winter olympics would actually be held in canada again for the second time in 12 years?
This.

It's a waste of taxepapers money and Bettman never really like a team there.

CN_paladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 08:55 AM
  #44
CarrePrisme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markovskaya View Post
It's not fair saying Montreal and Canadiens shouldn't be involved in any big project taking place in Québec City.

The taxe payers in Quebec city paid for:

The god damn Olympic stadium;
The expo 67'
The montreal and vancouver olympics
The quartier des spectacles
The OSM
The G8 summit in Toronto
Etc, etc, etc...

It's called living in the same COUNTRY.

You guys wanna live in state-cities ?

Now I'm not saying it should be 100% public money. I'm saying with the taxes we pay in this country, it's a contract people have with the government that big projects like this will get support from public funds.

Simple as that folks.
The large majority of Quebec City's economy is already paid by taxpayers across the province of Quebec. Don't believe that myth that Quebec City has a growing private sector, as I explained at the end of this thread: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=797646&page=6

I think the fact that Quebec City's is already such a huge drain on tax payers money is what bothers people when they ask for an additional half a billion dollar for a brand new arena.

CarrePrisme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 09:24 AM
  #45
CarrePrisme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markovskaya View Post
Let me start by saying that Quebec city is a very strong city for Canada economically. And so are Edmonton and Calgary. Quebec GDT grew 21% since 2000. They have 5% unemployment rate and the real estate projects are booming.
21% GDP growth spanning over the last decade is not that spectacular. It averages to about two pecercent a year, which is moderate considering the economic growth of 2002 to 2008. The 5% unemployment rate reveals a shortage of workers, not a booming economy. Few immigrants are interested in coming to Quebec City. The businesses and ministries are having huge recruitment problems already. I've been around and trust me, a lot of people are already pulling their hair and the bulk of the baby boomer generation hasn't retired yet. According to La Presse Affaires, Quebec city absorbs all of the graduate from eastern Quebec's colleges and Uni's and it's not nearly enough. The city still has a demographic deficit vs Mtl. That gap is narrowing down, but still, the problem remains. There is a nuance between not having enough workers and having a booming economy.

As for real estate projects...you need to realize that with close to non-existent interest rates, real estate projects are popping up all over the place, not just in Quebec city.

Quote:
Also, I would like to remind something to you. It's true that the economical growth of Alberta is impressive. They do pay a lot more taxes then the Q and have been for about 20 years now. But let's not forget that the people of Quebec and Ontario paid for more than 100 years for their roads and infrastructure. If you do back to what Calgary was in the 70', it really, REALLY wasn't the place where the government got his money from. So as a country, let's not forget our history and try to give credit where credit is due.
Your argument is flawed. I don't think I need to explain you why this is a strawman.

Quote:
Also, it's not only an arena for hockey. It's a multifunctional complex that will be used to host concert, expositions, sport events, hockey and possibly Olympics. So it's not only about giving an arena to a city that has the best chance to get a hockey team or already has one.
People say this because they know there's no insurance a franchise will come here. But let's be honest, it's primarly for hockey. Concerts aren't going to magically fill up the calendar because there's a new complex in town. This is another myth. Olympics only 12 years from now are a fantasy.

CarrePrisme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 09:33 AM
  #46
Markovskaya
Registered User
 
Markovskaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarrePrisme View Post
The large majority of Quebec City's economy is already paid by taxpayers across the province of Quebec. Don't believe that myth that Quebec City has a growing private sector, as I explained at the end of this thread: http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=797646&page=6

I think the fact that Quebec City's is already such a huge drain on tax payers money is what bothers people when they ask for an additional half a billion dollar for a brand new arena.
What exactly do you mean by Quebec City's economy is already paid by taxpayers across the province ? You mean because there are 30,000 people working for the provincial government ? It's even 1/5 of the workforce. And what about Ottawa as a matter of fact ? Don't forget Quebec is a capital, every capital will have a lot of people working for the government. It's what a capital is for !

Anyways you really did not explain anything. You're just saying people in Quebec city are not that rich and that the growing private sector is NOT a myth. What do you base that stuff on exactly ? I lived in Sillery for a long time and trust me, many people got good money in Québec city.

Take a look at J'ai Ma Place private investors and partners: http://www.jaimaplace.com/en/page/partners. The corpor

That is Quebec privet sector saying "Hey, we're here to support that project".

It's not "Pipe dream" are you ****ing kiding me ? This is serious business with serious people. Quebec city is not a god damn village in Lac Saint-Jean and if that's what your looking for then you might just move your familly there.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with 100% public funding and I seriously believe that we'll get private money in the project soon. But please, get out with your "Quebec's economy is based on taxpayers money ********".

Markovskaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 09:36 AM
  #47
Drive425
Registered User
 
Drive425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: St Louis Du Haha
Country: Malta
Posts: 1,934
vCash: 500
Canadian Gov't need to keep its nose out of the private sector. This is not the Olympics or G8 summit, this is a City getting a Hockey Rink. What the City needs to do is gather Private money from corporations and apply for a tax exemption from the City. If they are not able to get support from local business and community this is just another white elephant and not worth wasting time on.

Has gov't money been used to build any other NHL hockey rink in Canada?

Drive425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 09:49 AM
  #48
Vukotal Recall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 124
vCash: 500
i think it's crucial that taxpayer money go to fund an arena in quebec city. the hundreds of millions in government subsidies will leverage a huge amount of local and tourist spending, and return many more millions in economic activity, taxes and jobs.

i believe this even though dozens of economic studies and real-world exerience have shown this to be a complete fantasy built on lies. i'm for it, though, anyway, because, hey, i like turtles.

Vukotal Recall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 09:56 AM
  #49
Markovskaya
Registered User
 
Markovskaya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarrePrisme View Post
21% GDP growth spanning over the last decade is not that spectacular. It averages to about two pecercent a year, which is moderate considering the economic growth of 2002 to 2008. The 5% unemployment rate reveals a shortage of workers, not a booming economy. Few immigrants are interested in coming to Quebec City. The businesses and ministries are having huge recruitment problems already. I've been around and trust me, a lot of people are already pulling their hair and the bulk of the baby boomer generation hasn't retired yet. According to La Presse Affaires, Quebec city absorbs all of the graduate from eastern Quebec's colleges and Uni's and it's not nearly enough. The city still has a demographic deficit vs Mtl. That gap is narrowing down, but still, the problem remains. There is a nuance between not having enough workers and having a booming economy.

As for real estate projects...you need to realize that with close to non-existent interest rates, real estate projects are popping up all over the place, not just in Quebec city.



Your argument is flawed. I don't think I need to explain you why this is a strawman.



People say this because they know there's no insurance a franchise will come here. But let's be honest, it's primarly for hockey. Concerts aren't going to magically fill up the calendar because there's a new complex in town. This is another myth. Olympics only 12 years from now are a fantasy.

First, I never said 21% was impressive. It's 2,3% a year and it's a fair growth considering it includes 2008 and 2009. I simply shows the city got richer. With inflation around 1%, the buying leverage of the population grew as well. It's a good indicator for the professionnal sport industry. Also, I never said the economy was booming. A boom would be the 90' in Calgary or the 80' in Japan. The situation is far from perfect and you are right saying we're short on work forces. But still, 5% unemployment rate still means that people living there are at work and get paid each week. Another good indicator for the profession sport industry.

Also if you want to compare Montreal vs Quebec city in economical terms, which by the way, as nothing to do with this argument since Montreal as nothing to do with the possibly or not of having a new arena and a hockey franchise in Quebec city, the GDP growth of Montreal since 2000 is 19,1%. Montréal population grew less than 10% since 2001. Quebec city grew about 7%. While it's less, it's still growing. I don't even know why we compare anyways; it really has nothing to do with anything about this topic.

Now, you're saying my argument is flawed. I consider my point a concept I feel we should respect more then an argument. But you can see it the way you want.

As for the multi functional complex concept, it is not a myth. It is based on facts. Winnipeg built his arena following the same concept and, though then don’t have a hockey team yet, they host an incredible number of concert and shows each year and the only reason is the Arena. I know a lot of people in the entertainment business in Québec city and they are all saying they lose many opportunities each year because nobody wants to perform in the old Colisé anymore. Again, not a myth

Markovskaya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2010, 09:59 AM
  #50
CarrePrisme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Markovskaya View Post
What exactly do you mean by Quebec City's economy is already paid by taxpayers across the province ? You mean because there are 30,000 people working for the provincial government ? It's even 1/5 of the workforce. And what about Ottawa as a matter of fact ? Don't forget Quebec is a capital, every capital will have a lot of people working for the government. It's what a capital is for !

Anyways you really did not explain anything. You're just saying people in Quebec city are not that rich and that the growing private sector is NOT a myth. What do you base that stuff on exactly ? I lived in Sillery for a long time and trust me, many people got good money in Québec city.

Take a look at J'ai Ma Place private investors and partners: http://www.jaimaplace.com/en/page/partners. The corpor

That is Quebec privet sector saying "Hey, we're here to support that project".

It's not "Pipe dream" are you ****ing kiding me ? This is serious business with serious people. Quebec city is not a god damn village in Lac Saint-Jean and if that's what your looking for then you might just move your familly there.

Again, I'm not saying I agree with 100% public funding and I seriously believe that we'll get private money in the project soon. But please, get out with your "Quebec's economy is based on taxpayers money ********".

Obviously, you only read my last comment and didn't read the one I made on the so-called private sector of Qc City. I'll link it for you: http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=140

Are you considering indirect jobs related to the public sector?

Why are you even bringing up Ottawa? Ottawa's arena is privately owned so it's out of the discussion.

Do you realize that linking a bunch of partners doesn't mean anything? That I could very well get a similar list of sponsors to support me for a charitable cause? That what matters is the amount of money commited by the partners, and not just slapping their logos on an internet page? Is is this what you call serious? And you can't be serious either when you bring up Sillery. That's like bringing up Brossard as an argument.

Also, try to relax a bit. It's not an attack on your beloved city. I've worked all over this city and I have a pretty good grasp of its job market (of it's medium/large public/private organizations anyway). I'm offering a reasonable POV, unlike what you hear on the radio. What's your background?

CarrePrisme is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:08 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.