HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

New Arena deal agreed to by city and Katz group:mod warning #616

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-03-2013, 09:43 AM
  #626
gqmixmaster
Registered User
 
gqmixmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,340
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metzen View Post
Have you ever been to another arena? I suggest you go visit Nashville. Beautiful arena, walking distance to downtown... Just leaps and bounds a better experience and atmosphere.

In comparison, Edmonton doesn't even have an AHL quality arena.
If it was all funded by Katz, then whatever it's his call. But when taxpayer cash starts funding it, you got to wonder if Rexall couldn't be used for ten years more. Katz could then save for the next 10 years to pay for the rest just like the rest of the business world. Last time I checked if I want a new shop for my business, taxpayers don't pay for it.

I hate any taxpayer funded arena deal, if business can't afford it then it probably doesn't financially make any sense. Given there is no evidence of collateral benefit economically to cities as exampled by several other arenas built like this, a line in the sand needs to be drawn. What better place to draw it than in a strong hockey market.

gqmixmaster is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 10:06 AM
  #627
oiler-dude
Registered User
 
oiler-dude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins View Post
If you "don't Understand what's wrong with Rexall", Watch More Closely when they show imagines of the Other buildings around the league. CBC showed shots of the outside of Staples Center (obviously named in honour of David Staples) in LA, if you can't understand the difference between that and Rexall, then I can't help you.

You hit the Nail on the head, it's old and ugly, no way around it.
And that's even speaking only aesthetically. Rexall has had leaking problems in the past, the ice plant is past it's "best before" date making for crappy ice. To replace that, they'd have to close the arena all summer and they won't be doing that (too much concert revenue). Then there's the cramped concourses, crappy lighting, inadequate food selections. The list goes on.

Rexall in its current state is a "make due until the better one is done" situation.

oiler-dude is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 10:18 AM
  #628
Matador
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,379
vCash: 500
I don't think Katz will agree to another ticket tax to fund the remaining portion of the arena. It is effectively money out of his pocket because it limits his ability to raise ticket prices, which are already fourth highest in the league.

Matador is online now  
Old
05-03-2013, 10:23 AM
  #629
Replacement
Now 11.5% more Zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ones View Post
How much was Glendale city council willing to spend on the situation with the coyotes in that utterly futile mess, and they don't even like hockey down there!
Thats an odd comparison for a number of reasons.

1) Glendale being a suburban blight that just wants the world to know it exists. If it got them ink they'd fund a lacrosse team in town.

2) Who else would pay anything for a hockey arena in the Phoenix area, a non hockey market.


Instead what we have here is one of the hottest hockey, and entertainment markets on the planet. Not sure if people have noticed but several big acts are playing two shows in NY, two shows in LA, two shows in Edmonton of all places. No, of course no comparison whatsoever except that as an entertainment market we rock with the big pockets willing to spend money on anything.

Pay careful note that in this market, one of the best big ticket entertainment markets on the planet, Katz wants the sweetest arena deal found anywhere on the planet.

just because

Replacement is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 10:44 AM
  #630
Oilfan2
Oil the way..
 
Oilfan2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,956
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Thats an odd comparison for a number of reasons.

1) Glendale being a suburban blight that just wants the world to know it exists. If it got them ink they'd fund a lacrosse team in town.

2) Who else would pay anything for a hockey arena in the Phoenix area, a non hockey market.


Instead what we have here is one of the hottest hockey, and entertainment markets on the planet. Not sure if people have noticed but several big acts are playing two shows in NY, two shows in LA, two shows in Edmonton of all places. No, of course no comparison whatsoever except that as an entertainment market we rock with the big pockets willing to spend money on anything.

Pay careful note that in this market, one of the best big ticket entertainment markets on the planet, Katz wants the sweetest arena deal found anywhere on the planet.

just because
I'm sure you realize the only reason that is..one word..oil....The 5 top wage earning metros per capita in Canada are in Alberta, with 3 in Northern Alberta. The Wood Buffalo metro is the largest in Canada. Where do you think people will go to spend their entertainment dollar? I live there and I'm not driving all the way to Calgary or any other city in the country. Edmonton is a lot closer and Edmonton is one of the top earners as well. Because they can sell out high end ticket shows, they come to Edmonton (it's all dollars).

When there is a downturn in the economy because oil prices drop, Edmonton will be back where it was before in relation to dollars spent on entertainment. Katz needs to protect himself from the inevitable. If Edmonton wants an arena and want to keep the Oilers, they're just going to have to pony up and people like you and your socialist friends need to stop complaining about Katz at every step.

Oilfan2 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 11:01 AM
  #631
Beerfish
Registered User
 
Beerfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oilfan2 View Post
I'm sure you realize the only reason that is..one word..oil....The 5 top wage earning metros per capita in Canada are in Alberta, with 3 in Northern Alberta. The Wood Buffalo metro is the largest in Canada. Where do you think people will go to spend their entertainment dollar? I live there and I'm not driving all the way to Calgary or any other city in the country. Edmonton is a lot closer and Edmonton is one of the top earners as well. Because they can sell out high end ticket shows, they come to Edmonton (it's all dollars).

When there is a downturn in the economy because oil prices drop, Edmonton will be back where it was before in relation to dollars spent on entertainment. Katz needs to protect himself from the inevitable. If Edmonton wants an arena and want to keep the Oilers, they're just going to have to pony up and people like you and your socialist friends need to stop complaining about Katz at every step.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

This is what I love about the 'anti socialists crowd' They will bleat incessantly about free enterprise, keep the government out of the way and but if it comes to their pet project things are completely different. Are you aware that having a government fund a private entity is far more 'socialist' than it is capitalistic and free enterprise?

The scare mongering of 'if the city wants a team they better' is idiotic. The thing furthest away from socialism on this topic would be for the city to say, nope, you fund the arena.....what? You can't or won't? In that case your business is not viable and therefor should shut down.

Nice that you are happy to have Katz protect himself with out having the least worry in the world about the municipal government and by extension tax payers protect themselves. Because as of now the city is taking all the risk and the team is getting all the benefits.

Also regarding our scuzzy, awful, horrible rink that is 38 years old. 38 years old is not old at all as far as a the lifecycle of a major building is concerned. We all want a replacement but 38 is not old.

Beerfish is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 11:38 AM
  #632
Tarus
#Craigsnotonit
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,776
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
Also regarding our scuzzy, awful, horrible rink that is 38 years old. 38 years old is not old at all as far as a the lifecycle of a major building is concerned. We all want a replacement but 38 is not old.
It may not be old by building standards, but it's antiquated by NHL arena standards. Has been since the 90s when the US went on a mass arena building spree(majority of which were paid for the by the city/states). The business model changed, and small, ratty buildings aren't considered acceptable in the world of big sports entertainment.

Tarus is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 11:39 AM
  #633
oiLowe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgree
Country: Canada
Posts: 694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
As a matter of fact my job has a lot to do with construction costs and tracking them. Costs have gone up considerably over the last 10 years however there was a significant drop in 09/10. inflation was rather flat in 10/11 and it has gone up the last two years again.

If the price of oil nose dives and the oil patch suddenly goes stagnant some costs will go down 100% for sure. Just like many other things there are a lot of forces in play when it comes to inflation, cost of goods, cost of labor etc.
The fact of the matter is, construction costs never actually dropped. The only change was an overabundance of contractors due to the excessive prices during the boom in the early 2000s. As such, these contractors "tried" under-bidding jobs giving industry the illusion of lower construction costs. Many of these companies went into receivership and just recently have these projects started being renegotiated or re-priced. Many of these "lower construction costs" projects have actually become double or triple what they were preceived by the public when completed.

While I would agree market changes "could" drop construction costs. It simply hasn't happened in Alberta since the late 80s-early 90s and frankly, it's unrealistic to believe costs will ever drop in Alberta until we dry up...

oiLowe is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 11:44 AM
  #634
Replacement
Now 11.5% more Zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,807
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

This is what I love about the 'anti socialists crowd' They will bleat incessantly about free enterprise, keep the government out of the way and but if it comes to their pet project things are completely different. Are you aware that having a government fund a private entity is far more 'socialist' than it is capitalistic and free enterprise?

The scare mongering of 'if the city wants a team they better' is idiotic. The thing furthest away from socialism on this topic would be for the city to say, nope, you fund the arena.....what? You can't or won't? In that case your business is not viable and therefor should shut down.

Nice that you are happy to have Katz protect himself with out having the least worry in the world about the municipal government and by extension tax payers protect themselves. Because as of now the city is taking all the risk and the team is getting all the benefits.

Also regarding our scuzzy, awful, horrible rink that is 38 years old. 38 years old is not old at all as far as a the lifecycle of a major building is concerned. We all want a replacement but 38 is not old.
People seem to forget that when we sprung into the NHL with a very new building most rinks in the league were old, antiquated, and several had been around for more than 50yrs. Many, since the inception of the original 6 clubs.

The timing cycle of how old most NHL rinks were resulted in a needed turnover happening in a shorter than normal period of time where cities bucked up and got new arenas. But in many cases due to arenas that were basic hazards.

Also that all these rinks got built at a time of unprecedented and unfounded optimism when money was seen to be growing on trees. A lot of the US cities would second guess the same decisions today. A lot more are questioning false promises of untold benefit. Just as cities always have with arenas.

Ironically, historically, the most common associations to be found civically around arenas is that the areas are, or become slums. Not saying any causal relationship here but interesting nonetheless in countering an assumed vitality dynamic at work.

Indeed build it and they will slum is the most discernible trend over the last century.

Replacement is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 12:01 PM
  #635
oilers2k10
Yak Don't Back Down
 
oilers2k10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,472
vCash: 500
so who will follow the Seattle Oilers?

oilers2k10 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 12:28 PM
  #636
Marc08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers2k10 View Post
so who will follow the Seattle Oilers?
As long the Board of Governors veto the relocation, it is impossible to move them.

Marc08 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 12:30 PM
  #637
Section337
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 4,352
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers2k10 View Post
so who will follow the Seattle Oilers?
I'm sure this fine tuned management team will be able to build a fan base from scratch, why look at their ability to build a team, umm...a rink, umm...a dinner honouring Patrick LaForge, yeah that last works.

Section337 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 12:36 PM
  #638
gqmixmaster
Registered User
 
gqmixmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,340
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarus View Post
It may not be old by building standards, but it's antiquated by NHL arena standards. Has been since the 90s when the US went on a mass arena building spree(majority of which were paid for the by the city/states). The business model changed, and small, ratty buildings aren't considered acceptable in the world of big sports entertainment.
I don't disagree that its antiquated, but the problem I have is with the investment itself. If a private billionaire won't entirely fund his own arena, why would you want in? Sure you get to go to a shiny new arena, but you will be paying $100+ each time to see it and then you will be paying on top of that as a taxpayer regardless if you go at all.

The money that Katz is putting up is several times the amount needed to repair rexall and improve its ice plants etc. If I cant afford a bigger house, I will keep the one I got. When repairs come up, I make them. I don't know why a billionaire feels his life should be any different.

It really doesn't make sense from any political viewpoint either. The left wing crowd would rather the money be spent on health or the poor. The right wing crowd says government should stay out of business.

gqmixmaster is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 12:37 PM
  #639
Billybaroo*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers2k10 View Post
so who will follow the Seattle Oilers?
Yeah, cause thats such a great market, with Katz owning the rink with all the surrounding development.

Billybaroo* is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 12:42 PM
  #640
Marc08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billybaroo View Post
Yeah, cause thats such a great market, with Katz owning the rink with all the surrounding development.
As of now, Seattle doesn't have an arena that fits for today's NHL.

Remember, No-NBA-in-Seattle = No-arena

Marc08 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 01:00 PM
  #641
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,071
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers2k10 View Post
so who will follow the Seattle Oilers?
Seattle's arena plans have been scuttled (for the time being) because the Sacramento Kings aren't moving. Their arena plans were contingent on getting an NBA team.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 02:27 PM
  #642
Moneypuck
Registered User
 
Moneypuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,324
vCash: 500
What does a billionaire from Vancouver care about his business located in Edmonton?

As long as he rakes in his 20 million per year, he can still come and hang with all his yesteryear buddies a couple times a year. Obviously he doesn't give a rats arse about this club. He's sat idly by while his buddy drove this team face first into the mud. Why should Edmonton hand him a new building to house his band of overpaid underachieving millionaires? It's rather obvious he doesn't have a clue what he's doing when it comes to running/owning an NHL team. He sits by while this all goes down the drain for him. He'll get what he deserves.

Aren't Edmontonians already paying enough for argueably the worst hockey team ever?

Moneypuck is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 02:31 PM
  #643
Marc08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneypuck View Post
What does a billionaire from Vancouver care about his business located in Edmonton?

As long as he rakes in his 20 million per year, he can still come and hang with all his yesteryear buddies a couple times a year. Obviously he doesn't give a rats arse about this club. He's sat idly by while his buddy drove this team face first into the mud. Why would they need a new building to house his band of overpaid underachieving millionaires?

Aren't Edmontonians already paying enough for argueably the worst hockey team ever?
Only to your last will and testament.

Marc08 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 02:32 PM
  #644
Jimmi McJenkins
Sometimes Miracles
 
Jimmi McJenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 41,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneypuck View Post
What does a billionaire from Vancouver care about his business located in Edmonton?

As long as he rakes in his 20 million per year, he can still come and hang with all his yesteryear buddies a couple times a year. Obviously he doesn't give a rats arse about this club. He's sat idly by while his buddy drove this team face first into the mud. Why should Edmonton hand him a new building to house his band of overpaid underachieving millionaires? It's rather obvious he doesn't have a clue what he's doing when it comes to running/owning an NHL team. He sits by while this all goes down the drain for him. He'll get what he deserves.

Aren't Edmontonians already paying enough for argueably the worst hockey team ever?
Probably, makes sense to blow it up, or have it leave, or whatever the point is. Maybe we can force the city to take control of the team and then that will show him?

Jimmi McJenkins is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 02:47 PM
  #645
gqmixmaster
Registered User
 
gqmixmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,340
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmi Jenkins View Post
Probably, makes sense to blow it up, or have it leave, or whatever the point is. Maybe we can force the city to take control of the team and then that will show him?
I think the city should call his bluff and deny him the funding. Let him propose something he can actually afford. Then, the city should chip in with the funding of the supporting infrastructure - mass transit, roads etc.

He owns the Oilers and he has no ability to move the franchise. He knew that going in and he only assumed that the financing would be there for a new arena because that's what always happens. Do you think the NHL would just let him move? Why doesn't the NHL have a reserve fund for arena's? Why isn't that put into their costing when determining salary cap?

The only way to change the business model of the NHL and its various arenas is to take a stand and force a change. Believe me, they will figure it out, 3.3B is not something to walk away from. If the next CBA needs to pay the players less because the league is financing the arenas, then that's what needs to happen. This will never end unless a real hockey market stands up.

gqmixmaster is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 02:51 PM
  #646
Marc08
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gqmixmaster View Post
I think the city should call his bluff and deny him the funding. Let him propose something he can actually afford. Then, the city should chip in with the funding of the supporting infrastructure - mass transit, roads etc.

He owns the Oilers and he has no ability to move the franchise. He knew that going in and he only assumed that the financing would be there for a new arena because that's what always happens. Do you think the NHL would just let him move? Why doesn't the NHL have a reserve fund for arena's? Why isn't that put into their costing when determining salary cap?

The only way to change the business model of the NHL and its various arenas is to take a stand and force a change. Believe me, they will figure it out, 3.3B is not something to walk away from. If the next CBA needs to pay the players less because the league is financing the arenas, then that's what needs to happen. This will never end unless a real hockey market stands up.
It takes 20 or more members of the Board of Governors to agree this sort of thing.

Marc08 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 04:19 PM
  #647
gqmixmaster
Registered User
 
gqmixmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,340
vCash: 50
I am a huge Oilers fan but don't even live in Alberta. As a business owner I feel its a shame the wool that the NHL tries to pull over the cities that run these teams. Arena's do not pay for themselves. If there is no arena then build one, if there is, then maintain it until the costs of maintenance outweigh the difference in cost compared to building a new one.

There is no way the maintenance cost is even in the same league otherwise the Oilers would have left a long time ago. This could be the biggest taxpayer coup against the exploitation of tax dollars by major sports in history.

These arena deals are crippling and NEVER recoup their costs. The NHL has all to gain, the city of Edmonton has very little to gain. They would be better off sending their offerance of funds to a different project that the city could see own all revenue streams. Why is the city or province involved in the arena to begin with????? The only answer is - because that's the way it has been done all along. The blind leading the blind.

gqmixmaster is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 04:31 PM
  #648
Jimmi McJenkins
Sometimes Miracles
 
Jimmi McJenkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 41,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gqmixmaster View Post
I am a huge Oilers fan but don't even live in Alberta. As a business owner I feel its a shame the wool that the NHL tries to pull over the cities that run these teams. Arena's do not pay for themselves. If there is no arena then build one, if there is, then maintain it until the costs of maintenance outweigh the difference in cost compared to building a new one.

There is no way the maintenance cost is even in the same league otherwise the Oilers would have left a long time ago. This could be the biggest taxpayer coup against the exploitation of tax dollars by major sports in history.

These arena deals are crippling and NEVER recoup their costs. The NHL has all to gain, the city of Edmonton has very little to gain. They would be better off sending their offerance of funds to a different project that the city could see own all revenue streams. Why is the city or province involved in the arena to begin with????? The only answer is - because that's the way it has been done all along. The blind leading the blind.
Again, I more then sure you don't understand what a "dump" Rexall place truly is.

This is like suggesting that you're POS 1989 Minivan is still good, because you can just fix it. That might be true, but it doesn't some how NOT make it a POS.

Jimmi McJenkins is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 04:36 PM
  #649
Oilfan2
Oil the way..
 
Oilfan2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,956
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by gqmixmaster View Post
I am a huge Oilers fan but don't even live in Alberta. As a business owner I feel its a shame the wool that the NHL tries to pull over the cities that run these teams. Arena's do not pay for themselves. If there is no arena then build one, if there is, then maintain it until the costs of maintenance outweigh the difference in cost compared to building a new one.

There is no way the maintenance cost is even in the same league otherwise the Oilers would have left a long time ago. This could be the biggest taxpayer coup against the exploitation of tax dollars by major sports in history.

These arena deals are crippling and NEVER recoup their costs. The NHL has all to gain, the city of Edmonton has very little to gain. They would be better off sending their offerance of funds to a different project that the city could see own all revenue streams. Why is the city or province involved in the arena to begin with????? The only answer is - because that's the way it has been done all along. The blind leading the blind.
If you don't like the Oilers and hockey, just say so...instead of spouting paranoid theories..

Oilfan2 is offline  
Old
05-03-2013, 04:41 PM
  #650
SeriousBusiness
T.Hall da man
 
SeriousBusiness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,620
vCash: 500
Is there a possibility of a radical move like building the arena somewhere else in the city?

SeriousBusiness is offline  
Closed Thread

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 06:07 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.