HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Edmonton rejects Oiler [Arena] bid for more taxpayer dollars

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-19-2012, 02:26 PM
  #51
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,413
vCash: 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Surely I don't have to literally explain to you the differences between Winnipeg's arena and the proposed arena district that Katz has designed, do I?

Winnipeg's arena was built for a paltry $135M. Edmonton's arena district is a proposed $450M+ that encases two rinks, world class design, restaurants, an indoor 'winter garden' (likely scrapped), several office towers, underground parking, condos and LRT access not to mention private investment in the form of bars/restaurants that are part of the project as developable land.

That is a project the city has to be involved in. There was a lot of research that went into developing a feasible project based on historical effects on arenas located in downtown areas. The conclusion was that an arena downtown itself does not revitalize the area and there are many failed arena-only cities worldwide where this is prevalent. They've concluded that a successful revitalization encompasses many aspects and thus the arena district was born. It should be seen as a municipal-wide initiative with the arena as a focal point of the whole revitalization project.

Katz' expectation of public funds is not unreasonable because this project is thinking Edmonton first and arena second. It's incredibly ambitious and one that will change the perception of Edmonton for decades to come if it's built.
TNSE in Winnipeg already own their arena and garner all of the ancillary attached revenue. They additionally own parking structures, a multiplex practice facility, ticketing agency, run a successful concert promotion business, own clubs and restaurants in the surrounding area with plans for more and are also currently building an office tower/hotel/other retail developments around the arena within a new Sports & Entertainment district.

http://www.centrepointwinnipeg.com/project.php
(Longboat = Chipman)

Unlike in Edmonton, Winnipeg currently seems able to get things accomplished beyond the conceptual stage though.



Last edited by Gump Hasek: 09-19-2012 at 02:34 PM.
Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 02:37 PM
  #52
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
TNSE in Winnipeg already own their arena and garner all of the ancillary attached revenue. They additionally own parking structures, a multiplex practice facility, ticketing agency, run a successful concert promotion business, own clubs and restaurants in the surrounding area with plans for more and are also currently building an office tower/hotel/other retail developments around the arena within a new Sports & Entertainment district.

http://www.centrepointwinnipeg.com/project.php
(Longboat = Chipman)

Unlike in Edmonton, Winnipeg currently seems able to get things accomplished beyond the conceptual stage though.

I believe that there have been one or two additional highrise residential towers added to the Longboat SHED mix in the last few days

Puckschmuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 02:42 PM
  #53
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,413
vCash: 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
I believe that there have been one or two additional highrise residential towers added to the Longboat SHED mix in the last few days
That is correct. I should have mentioned the residential component as well. At least one other tower is to go on the opposite corner of Donald/Portage, IIRC?

EDIT: Found it...
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/loc...169998586.html


Last edited by Gump Hasek: 09-19-2012 at 02:56 PM.
Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 02:43 PM
  #54
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
TNSE in Winnipeg already own their arena and garner all of the ancillary attached revenue. They additionally own parking structures, a multiplex practice facility, ticketing agency, run a successful concert promotion business, own clubs and restaurants in the surrounding area with plans for more and are also currently building an office tower/hotel/other retail developments around the arena within a new Sports & Entertainment district.

http://www.centrepointwinnipeg.com/project.php
(Longboat = Chipman)

Unlike in Edmonton, Winnipeg currently seems able to get things accomplished beyond the conceptual stage though.

This is what I don't understand... Doesn't it make sense for a Canadian billionaire to build his own arena and control all revenue streams? In terms of the fan what's the difference between a ticket tax and a ticket price increase?

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 02:53 PM
  #55
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egil View Post
First, Katz threat to move is non-credible. There is nowhere better to move, and half the league is in a worse financial position than Edmonton and want the few available locations for themselves. This is doubly so when you consider the abismal product that the Oilers have put on the ice since the lockout. The Oilers arn't even fake NHL .500 since the lockout, compiling a record of 248-261-65 in that timeframe.

Second, the Arena cost does not need to be anywhere near $450 mil, this is a bloated project greased with public money for private profit, and should be opposed. I can see it costing upwards of $300 mil for a credible, modern arena, but the rest of the money is pure bloat.

Third, Edmonton has more money than Winnipeg (this is a city which is nearly twice as large), and should be able to build a new arena with private money and turn a profit. IMHO, the only subsidy that the City of Edmonton should provide is demolition of the current arena to give the new Arena a monopoly, and for a light rail station at/near the Arena. The rest should be left to private funds.
This is not just an arena. I don't know how many times I have to make that clear. If it's just the arena we were talking about here it would have been covered by the $170M that Katz has invested in ($70M in land acquisition and the committed $100M for the arena). Where the problem lies is in the external necessities that are imperative to ensure the success of a revitalization including the office towers, condos, etc. These additions benefit Edmonton and its citizens directly and that's why the city has been asked to jump in with construction costs (Which will be paid for by the levy).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cap'n Flavour View Post
Taxpayers should cough up for a new arena, of course - as long as it's publicly owned and rented out to the Oilers for a competitive rate. But this is apparently blasphemy.

By the way, for anyone seriously arguing that Edmonton should give in to Katz, try to find a study that shows that publicly funded arenas are not only revenue positive but also have a better return than infrastructure spending. I'd love to see it.
The arena is just one part of the district. There is more to this than just an arena.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Free View Post
Edmonton will always have a hockey team.

Even if the Oilers move, which would be a tragedy, there would be probably 25 other owners dying to move their teams to Edmonton.

Edmonton is probably per-capita the richest city in North America and one of the craziest about hockey. It's just way too profitable for it to not exist.

As long as people want oil, Edmonton will have a team.
Nope. No team is going to willingly come into a situation where they have to live in Rexall place with Northlands sucking up all the profits. They'd want a new arena and will likely be built on the outskirts of the city like Glendale and Ottawa. That helps nobody and Katz learned from those cities that bad arena location is a bad investment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
I don't believe that City council have warmed up to a ticket tax idea, which hasn't been discussed in the media in awhile. And besides, this doesn't make up for him not wanting to pay his fair share of property taxesm which will fall on the shoulders of tax-paying Edmontonians for the rest of their lives.

Sorry, billionairs need to pay their taxes just like everyone else.
Oh well. I guess the facts that they will pay property tax went completely over your head.

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 03:08 PM
  #56
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by danishh View Post
winnipeg did it with private money.
Not quite...from the MTS website on the arena's origins...

"For every two private- sector dollars, there will be less than one dollar of public- sector investment."

About 30% of the building cost was picked up by taxpayers.

  Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 03:10 PM
  #57
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Where the problem lies is in the external necessities that are imperative to ensure the success of a revitalization including the office towers, condos, etc.
So it's really just a real estate deal that happens to include a hockey team.

Gotcha.

Glendale says "Hello!"

  Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 03:27 PM
  #58
Egil
Registered User
 
Egil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
This is not just an arena. I don't know how many times I have to make that clear. If it's just the arena we were talking about here it would have been covered by the $170M that Katz has invested in ($70M in land acquisition and the committed $100M for the arena). Where the problem lies is in the external necessities that are imperative to ensure the success of a revitalization including the office towers, condos, etc. These additions benefit Edmonton and its citizens directly and that's why the city has been asked to jump in with construction costs (Which will be paid for by the levy).
Office towers and Condos are constructed routinely without government subsidies. Why are these different?

And the threat to move is still completely non-credible, so the city should simply ignore Mr. Katz until he stops trying to blackmail the city into giving him money and comes up with a more reasonable proposal for city funds.

Egil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:03 PM
  #59
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
If you all would really like to understand the arena and the economics surrounding it, I would highly suggest listening to a recent interview with Daryl Katz and Bob Stauffer.

http://oilers.nhl.com/club/podcastpl...d=98&iid=40211

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:12 PM
  #60
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Let me guess - Katz makes comments in support of Katz's position.

Was I close? Did I Karnak it?

  Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:16 PM
  #61
Egil
Registered User
 
Egil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 8,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Let me guess - Katz makes comments in support of Katz's position.

Was I close? Did I Karnak it?
More like Katz and Staufer make comments in support of Katz's position

Egil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:22 PM
  #62
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Let me guess - Katz makes comments in support of Katz's position.

Was I close? Did I Karnak it?
Why don't you listen and find out?

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:27 PM
  #63
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Not quite...from the MTS website on the arena's origins...

"For every two private- sector dollars, there will be less than one dollar of public- sector investment."

About 30% of the building cost was picked up by taxpayers.
Picked up by City, but still owed by TNSE to the City. They have paid it back by now (I think).

Holden Caulfield is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:33 PM
  #64
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Oh well. I guess the facts that they will pay property tax went completely over your head.
LOL No it didn't. However, what seems to have gone over your head is a member of city council stating that he doesn't indeed want to pay property taxes. There was an article about it in the Edmonton Journal yesterday which, surprise surprise, is no longer available (it was supposed to be kept hush hush, like so much regarding this arena deal, but Tony made the mistake of tipping off reporters). Katz won't state this to the public because he knows exactly what kind of reaction he will rightfully get.

Puckschmuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:35 PM
  #65
Q Continuum
You are Wrong
 
Q Continuum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,035
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egil View Post
More like Katz and Staufer make comments in support of Katz's position
Ding ding.

He's gonna do all he can to weasel every dollar we have, then reap all the benefits.

Q Continuum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 04:37 PM
  #66
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
This is not just an arena. I don't know how many times I have to make that clear. If it's just the arena we were talking about here it would have been covered by the $170M that Katz has invested in ($70M in land acquisition and the committed $100M for the arena). Where the problem lies is in the external necessities that are imperative to ensure the success of a revitalization including the office towers, condos, etc. These additions benefit Edmonton and its citizens directly and that's why the city has been asked to jump in with construction costs (Which will be paid for by the levy).
That's totally incorrect. The $450 million is just for the rink not the arena district. The City has already bought the land back from Katz, that cost is on top of the $450 million. The $100 million Katz has committed will be paid over 30 years. He's putting nothing into the arena up front.
http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...framework.aspx

Halibut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:01 PM
  #67
danaluvsthekings
Registered User
 
danaluvsthekings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 4,139
vCash: 500
It sounds like Katz wants to build something similar to the LA Live complex down here. You've got Staples Center, two hotels, condos, the Nokia Theater, a bunch of restaurants.

Anschutz bought the Kings in October of 1995 with the goal of building a brand new arena and this big entertainment district. That was his plan from the beginning. Staples Center was finished in 1999. Construction on LA Live didn't begin until 2005.

So my question is, why does Katz have to get everything he want built right away? Why can't it be done in phases? Get the arena done first, start making increased profits for the Oilers due to more luxury boxes and better club/premiere seating options. If people see you can get that done, I'd imagine that would increase the odds of finding investors for the entertainment/residential complex that he wants built around the arena.

danaluvsthekings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:04 PM
  #68
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by danaluvsthekings View Post
It sounds like Katz wants to build something similar to the LA Live complex down here. You've got Staples Center, two hotels, condos, the Nokia Theater, a bunch of restaurants.
So that will put other, non-Katz enterprises out of business as entertainment dollars get shifted to Katz enterprises, and he gets to reap over-sized rewards for the new Katz establishments.

I get how this is good for Katz. Unclear how this is good for anybody else.

  Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:06 PM
  #69
KClovesGaming
Registered User
 
KClovesGaming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danaluvsthekings View Post
It sounds like Katz wants to build something similar to the LA Live complex down here. You've got Staples Center, two hotels, condos, the Nokia Theater, a bunch of restaurants.

Anschutz bought the Kings in October of 1995 with the goal of building a brand new arena and this big entertainment district. That was his plan from the beginning. Staples Center was finished in 1999. Construction on LA Live didn't begin until 2005.

So my question is, why does Katz have to get everything he want built right away? Why can't it be done in phases? Get the arena done first, start making increased profits for the Oilers due to more luxury boxes and better club/premiere seating options. If people see you can get that done, I'd imagine that would increase the odds of finding investors for the entertainment/residential complex that he wants built around the arena.
I guess because if everything is built, then that means a nicer downtown and more people will spend money? IDK.

KClovesGaming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:21 PM
  #70
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
LOL No it didn't. However, what seems to have gone over your head is a member of city council stating that he doesn't indeed want to pay property taxes. There was an article about it in the Edmonton Journal yesterday which, surprise surprise, is no longer available (it was supposed to be kept hush hush, like so much regarding this arena deal, but Tony made the mistake of tipping off reporters). Katz won't state this to the public because he knows exactly what kind of reaction he will rightfully get.
Probably because it was false.

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:31 PM
  #71
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egil View Post
Third, Edmonton has more money than Winnipeg (this is a city which is nearly twice as large)
I'm not sure how relevant it is to the topic because I'm not at all up to speed on this arena stuff, but either you think Edmonton is a lot bigger than it is, or Winnipeg a lot smaller.

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:38 PM
  #72
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
That's totally incorrect. The $450 million is just for the rink not the arena district. The City has already bought the land back from Katz, that cost is on top of the $450 million. The $100 million Katz has committed will be paid over 30 years. He's putting nothing into the arena up front.
http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...framework.aspx
Nope. The proposed $450M includes the arena district, as the $100M from Katz is earmarked in both the building itself and the arena district.

"The Arena Building
The maximum cost of new arena is $450 million and the building will be owned by the City of Edmonton.

The $450 million includes:

Design, construction, soft costs, eligible pre-development expenses
Any oversight expenses
Associated development costs.
350 parking stalls
Site servicing costs
Levies"

"Arena Entertainment District
The Katz Group will commit $100 million to development in the arena district, subject to commercial viability. In the Council-approved framework, $30 million of the $100 million must be invested prior to the start of construction of the arena."

As you can see, he has to invest $30M up front. There goes that accusation of him not paying anything up front! The arena and district should be seen as a whole.

I do not believe that Katz has committed $200M for the arena and the arena district, (Or the "greater arena") considering the district is comprised of mainly land development and real estate (Restaurants, bars, stores opening, etc).

And the arena building itself is comprised of many different aspects and is not "just" an arena. It also includes the winter garden and community rink.



Quote:
Originally Posted by danaluvsthekings View Post
It sounds like Katz wants to build something similar to the LA Live complex down here. You've got Staples Center, two hotels, condos, the Nokia Theater, a bunch of restaurants.

Anschutz bought the Kings in October of 1995 with the goal of building a brand new arena and this big entertainment district. That was his plan from the beginning. Staples Center was finished in 1999. Construction on LA Live didn't begin until 2005.

So my question is, why does Katz have to get everything he want built right away? Why can't it be done in phases? Get the arena done first, start making increased profits for the Oilers due to more luxury boxes and better club/premiere seating options. If people see you can get that done, I'd imagine that would increase the odds of finding investors for the entertainment/residential complex that he wants built around the arena.
The Oilers have until 2014 when the lease on Rexall expires. At that point, they will likely enter a year-by-year lease with Northlands. If significant progress (As in, breaking ground) hasn't occurred by then the Oilers will be faced with the reality that they are just not sustainable in the current NHL market at Rexall. If the deal falls through, Katz cannot guarantee the Oilers in Edmonton long term.

The proposed idea needs to be approved before staged construction can begin. Once the financials are in order, then the arena can be built. The surrounding district will be built as it is developed from private investments.

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:50 PM
  #73
Pablo Aimar
Registered User
 
Pablo Aimar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeyRiver View Post
No billionaire can resist a risk he can socialize.
Bingo. Don't you love billionaire welfare queens?
Hopefully the city will tell Katz to go and fly a kite. I doubt it though.

Pablo Aimar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:52 PM
  #74
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
I'm not sure how relevant it is to the topic because I'm not at all up to speed on this arena stuff, but either you think Edmonton is a lot bigger than it is, or Winnipeg a lot smaller.
Some people from Edmonton just like to make this a topic of conversation for some reason (to make them feel better about themselves or whatever).

Winnipeg metro, about 760k
Edmonton metro, about 1.2k

Winnipeg City proper, about 710k
Edmonton City proper, about 850k

The larger difference is in the metro area. But when you compare the city by city populations, not much of a difference there. But really, the metro population is less important because they don`t pay city taxes like those living in the cities do.

Puckschmuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-19-2012, 05:54 PM
  #75
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,937
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Probably because it was false.
Or that it`s true but the city and Katz don`t want it scrutinized by the media and public. Only time will tell, but my gut feeling is that he wants his cake for almost free, and wants to be able to eat it too.

Puckschmuck* 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 06:34 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.