HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Notices

New Arena Thread: Rogers Place? Yawn...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-14-2013, 03:26 PM
  #26
Moneypuck
Registered User
 
Moneypuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Then it will cost even more to build.
Then the person who'll benefit the most from it can contribute more.

Maybe taxpayers could pay for it all if they used mud bricks instead of actual concrete, no?

If they wait 3 yrs, perhaps they get a better facility. Sure it may cost more but what's the difference between 500 (to build it now) and 600 million (to start 3 yrs from now) per taxpayer?

Free Taxpayer Money is the issue here. If the facility itself was essential to the profitability/sustainability of the Oilers, Katz would have started this long ago. Daryls greed is the only thing holding this up.

Moneypuck is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 03:38 PM
  #27
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,839
vCash: 3099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneypuck View Post
Then the person who'll benefit the most from it can contribute more.

Maybe taxpayers could pay for it all if they used mud bricks instead of actual concrete, no?

If they wait 3 yrs, perhaps they get a better facility. Sure it may cost more but what's the difference between 500 (to build it now) and 600 million (to start 3 yrs from now) per taxpayer?

Free Taxpayer Money is the issue here. If the facility itself was essential to the profitability/sustainability of the Oilers, Katz would have started this long ago. Daryls greed is the only thing holding this up.
If they wait 3 years, perhaps the team moves and no new building is built. How's that workin for ya?

Taxpayer dollars are spent on many things, including for profit business ventures. Lots of tax dollars went into WEM. Lots go into the oil patch as well. Those things provide some benefits to taxpayers, as would a new arena. Bringing world class entertainment to Edmonton benefits taxpayers. A new building helps facilitate that into the future.

Not sure how many games you are attending at Rexall these days, but besides the futility of the Oilers, attending the games is an arduous experience at best. No room on the concourse, long lineups for bathrooms and concessions, horrible food and very little to no amenities in the vicinity makes going to the games more of a chore than something to enjoy.

The city needs a new building. Forget about the Oilers and Katz. Does that have value to the taxpayer? I believe it does. The city and the Katz group have agreed to fund 90% of the project. They were counting on a minimal contribution from the provincial govt, but were not even able to get that, despite the many provincial tax payers who benefit from the hockey team and would benefit from a new building.

That is who is holding up the deal here. And they should be held to account for it. Yet there is scarcely a word mentioned about that here at all.

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 03:51 PM
  #28
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 23,990
vCash: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
If they wait 3 years, perhaps the team moves and no new building is built. How's that workin for ya?

Taxpayer dollars are spent on many things, including for profit business ventures. Lots of tax dollars went into WEM. Lots go into the oil patch as well. Those things provide some benefits to taxpayers, as would a new arena. Bringing world class entertainment to Edmonton benefits taxpayers. A new building helps facilitate that into the future.

Not sure how many games you are attending at Rexall these days, but besides the futility of the Oilers, attending the games is an arduous experience at best. No room on the concourse, long lineups for bathrooms and concessions, horrible food and very little to no amenities in the vicinity makes going to the games more of a chore than something to enjoy.

The city needs a new building. Forget about the Oilers and Katz. Does that have value to the taxpayer? I believe it does. The city and the Katz group have agreed to fund 90% of the project. They were counting on a minimal contribution from the provincial govt, but were not even able to get that, despite the many provincial tax payers who benefit from the hockey team and would benefit from a new building.

That is who is holding up the deal here. And they should be held to account for it. Yet there is scarcely a word mentioned about that here at all.
And you say I don't like you.

I always like to add how our money goes to the rest of the country and is helping fund entertainment venues as well.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:04 PM
  #29
raab
Where's the Heart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,567
vCash: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
And you say I don't like you.

I always like to add how our money goes to the rest of the country and is helping fund entertainment venues as well.
Edmontonians and Northern Albertans need to get after the provincial government to get this deal closed. They need to step up to the plate here.

raab is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:10 PM
  #30
The Big Unit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Those Forbes numbers are not accurate. And Seattle hasn't even built there new arena yet. All discussion about Seattle is dependent on them building their new arena.
They're projections because NHL teams don't release the actual numbers......so theoretically speaking, they could be higher or lower, but this is a good estimate based on average ticket price, the amount the Oilers get from NHL merchandise, TV contracts (both local and national), and other hockey related revenue.

To say that Seattle's numbers are dependent on them building a new arena is no different than projections of what the downtown arena will do to the Oilers' profitability; except one major difference. 34 years of NHL history in Edmonton vs 0 years in Seattle. Despite the fact that Seattle is triple Edmonton's size, don't think for one second that 10 years in Seattle is going to miraculously make Seattle a better hockey market than Edmonton. If that were the case, Buffalo and Columbus would be better than Edmonton; they're not.

Columbus' metro area has close to 1.9M people and is close to Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, and the Canadian border (3.5 hrs to Windsor). There are 11.5M people in Ohio vs 7M people in Washington state and I haven't even talked about the huge population of the surrounding states that are within a few hours drive.

Buffalo's metro area has close to 1.2M people so it's the same size as Edmonton. It's pretty much on the Canadian border and it's well known many Canadians frequently catch Sabres games (to the point that they'll still sing O Canada even when 2 American teams play). When you throw in Rochester and all the counties that make up Western New York, plus Southern Ontario you're talking over 4M people within a 2 hour drive and they're pretty solid hockey fans.

Both Columbus and Buffalo have fairly new arenas, both located downtown if I'm not mistaken. Yet for some reason, Edmonton is still considered a better hockey market.

The Big Unit is online now  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:22 PM
  #31
The Big Unit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
If they wait 3 years, perhaps the team moves and no new building is built. How's that workin for ya?

Taxpayer dollars are spent on many things, including for profit business ventures. Lots of tax dollars went into WEM. Lots go into the oil patch as well. Those things provide some benefits to taxpayers, as would a new arena. Bringing world class entertainment to Edmonton benefits taxpayers. A new building helps facilitate that into the future.

Not sure how many games you are attending at Rexall these days, but besides the futility of the Oilers, attending the games is an arduous experience at best. No room on the concourse, long lineups for bathrooms and concessions, horrible food and very little to no amenities in the vicinity makes going to the games more of a chore than something to enjoy.

The city needs a new building. Forget about the Oilers and Katz. Does that have value to the taxpayer? I believe it does. The city and the Katz group have agreed to fund 90% of the project. They were counting on a minimal contribution from the provincial govt, but were not even able to get that, despite the many provincial tax payers who benefit from the hockey team and would benefit from a new building.

That is who is holding up the deal here. And they should be held to account for it. Yet there is scarcely a word mentioned about that here at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
And you say I don't like you.

I always like to add how our money goes to the rest of the country and is helping fund entertainment venues as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Edmontonians and Northern Albertans need to get after the provincial government to get this deal closed. They need to step up to the plate here.
I'm not saying you guys are wrong here but the reason the Provincial Government won't directly kick in money to fund the arena is because the optics of it are bad. Alberta has been running a deficit for a few years and they keep cutting education and healthcare budgets. It doesn't look too good to fund a hockey arena for a billionaire and millionaire athletes when they're shutting down schools. It doesn't matter what the actual truth of the situation is, nor does it matter that taxpayer dollars get spent (sometimes wasted) on a bunch of other entertainment venues and private subsidies that don't generate the same kind of income the arena will (for the province and the city) because the media just blows it out of proportion.

The Big Unit is online now  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:25 PM
  #32
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 23,990
vCash: 406
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Unit View Post
I'm not saying you guys are wrong here but the reason the Provincial Government won't directly kick in money to fund the arena is because the optics of it are bad. Alberta has been running a deficit for a few years and they keep cutting education and healthcare budgets. It doesn't look too good to fund a hockey arena for a billionaire and millionaire athletes when they're shutting down schools. It doesn't matter what the actual truth of the situation is, nor does it matter that taxpayer dollars get spent (sometimes wasted) on a bunch of other entertainment venues and private subsidies that don't generate the same kind of income the arena will (for the province and the city) because the media just blows it out of proportion.
I know exactly why they won't, still doesn't mean it doesn't upset me to here they are funding other entertainment projects that I'll never use in my life.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:29 PM
  #33
raab
Where's the Heart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,567
vCash: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Unit View Post
They're projections because NHL teams don't release the actual numbers......so theoretically speaking, they could be higher or lower, but this is a good estimate based on average ticket price, the amount the Oilers get from NHL merchandise, TV contracts (both local and national), and other hockey related revenue.

To say that Seattle's numbers are dependent on them building a new arena is no different than projections of what the downtown arena will do to the Oilers' profitability; except one major difference. 34 years of NHL history in Edmonton vs 0 years in Seattle. Despite the fact that Seattle is triple Edmonton's size, don't think for one second that 10 years in Seattle is going to miraculously make Seattle a better hockey market than Edmonton. If that were the case, Buffalo and Columbus would be better than Edmonton; they're not.

Columbus' metro area has close to 1.9M people and is close to Cleveland, Cincinnati, Detroit, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, and the Canadian border (3.5 hrs to Windsor). There are 11.5M people in Ohio vs 7M people in Washington state and I haven't even talked about the huge population of the surrounding states that are within a few hours drive.

Buffalo's metro area has close to 1.2M people so it's the same size as Edmonton. It's pretty much on the Canadian border and it's well known many Canadians frequently catch Sabres games (to the point that they'll still sing O Canada even when 2 American teams play). When you throw in Rochester and all the counties that make up Western New York, plus Southern Ontario you're talking over 4M people within a 2 hour drive and they're pretty solid hockey fans.

Both Columbus and Buffalo have fairly new arenas, both located downtown if I'm not mistaken. Yet for some reason, Edmonton is still considered a better hockey market.
Columbus has never won so you can't really blame fans for not helping them out. They start winning and it's a whole new ball game down there IMO. Also all discussion on moving to Seattle is based on the premise that Edmonton doesn't get the new arena built.

raab is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:31 PM
  #34
Billybaroo*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Edmontonians and Northern Albertans need to get after the provincial government to get this deal closed. They need to step up to the plate here.
Actually, Edmontonians & albertans need to get after Katz to get the deal closed. He needs to step up.

Billybaroo* is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:35 PM
  #35
raab
Where's the Heart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,567
vCash: 580
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billybaroo View Post
Actually, Edmontonians & albertans need to get after Katz to get the deal closed. He needs to step up.
How much is the province contributing to the deal. O right...

raab is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:43 PM
  #36
Beerfish
Registered User
 
Beerfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10,264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Edmontonians and Northern Albertans need to get after the provincial government to get this deal closed. They need to step up to the plate here.
Good luck with that.

Regarding this press conference tomorrow. which city Infra fund will the mayor be raiding to make up the final 35 million or so? Place your bets here! Or they will just expand or re-work the CRL and massage it's projections.

Beerfish is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:44 PM
  #37
Moneypuck
Registered User
 
Moneypuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
If they wait 3 years, perhaps the team moves and no new building is built. How's that workin for ya?

Taxpayer dollars are spent on many things, including for profit business ventures. Lots of tax dollars went into WEM. Lots go into the oil patch as well. Those things provide some benefits to taxpayers, as would a new arena. Bringing world class entertainment to Edmonton benefits taxpayers. A new building helps facilitate that into the future.

Not sure how many games you are attending at Rexall these days, but besides the futility of the Oilers, attending the games is an arduous experience at best. No room on the concourse, long lineups for bathrooms and concessions, horrible food and very little to no amenities in the vicinity makes going to the games more of a chore than something to enjoy.

The city needs a new building. Forget about the Oilers and Katz. Does that have value to the taxpayer? I believe it does. The city and the Katz group have agreed to fund 90% of the project. They were counting on a minimal contribution from the provincial govt, but were not even able to get that, despite the many provincial tax payers who benefit from the hockey team and would benefit from a new building.

That is who is holding up the deal here. And they should be held to account for it. Yet there is scarcely a word mentioned about that here at all.
I must be part of that 95% fan base that never goes to see the Oilers live in recent memory I guess. The 95% that really don't care where the game is played at all. Why should we support failure served to us on an unprecedented level? I'm happy and prepared to only purchase playoff tickets. Remember 2006 playoff run, the building really took away from the product on the ice and the atmosphere in the building those two months. Put a decent team on the ice so the focus isn't just the building.

We need a new building, yes, but what's the rush? The forum in Montreal lasted 80 yrs. Maple Leafs Gardens lasted 75 yrs. The Coliseum is only 39yrs old. Why focus on the green grass on the other side of the fence. Billy has one, so we need one too?

It'll happen in time, whether Katz is the owner and the Oilers are the team is irrelevant. Why would the league leave this market vacant for more than a heartbeat?

Moneypuck is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:52 PM
  #38
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,839
vCash: 3099
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Big Unit View Post
I'm not saying you guys are wrong here but the reason the Provincial Government won't directly kick in money to fund the arena is because the optics of it are bad. Alberta has been running a deficit for a few years and they keep cutting education and healthcare budgets. It doesn't look too good to fund a hockey arena for a billionaire and millionaire athletes when they're shutting down schools. It doesn't matter what the actual truth of the situation is, nor does it matter that taxpayer dollars get spent (sometimes wasted) on a bunch of other entertainment venues and private subsidies that don't generate the same kind of income the arena will (for the province and the city) because the media just blows it out of proportion.
Yet they can still find can still fund junkets across the ocean and suites at the olympics, not to mention hiring friends and family for govt contracts. Alison Chretien is dropping the ball on this project.

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:55 PM
  #39
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
What's the rush? Rexall Place is on the verge of becoming the oldest building in the National Hockey League if you don't count Madison Square Garden and the latter sees routine 500+ million dollar renovations to keep it modern and up to standards.

The NHL sees our building as sub-NHL quality. Whether that's fair or unfair is irrelevant. The league holds all the power here.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 04:56 PM
  #40
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,839
vCash: 3099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneypuck View Post
I must be part of that 95% fan base that never goes to see the Oilers live in recent memory I guess. The 95% that really don't care where the game is played at all. Why should we support failure served to us on an unprecedented level? I'm happy and prepared to only purchase playoff tickets. Remember 2006 playoff run, the building really took away from the product on the ice and the atmosphere in the building those two months. Put a decent team on the ice so the focus isn't just the building.

We need a new building, yes, but what's the rush? The forum in Montreal lasted 80 yrs. Maple Leafs Gardens lasted 75 yrs. The Coliseum is only 39yrs old. Why focus on the green grass on the other side of the fence. Billy has one, so we need one too?

It'll happen in time, whether Katz is the owner and the Oilers are the team is irrelevant. Why would the league leave this market vacant for more than a heartbeat?
Because we refuse to build a new building. See Winnipeg and Quebec City. No new building = no team. Whether you are watching from your couch or section 101, it wont matter, there wont be a team in this market until a new building is built, so why put it off until it will cost everyone, including taxpayers, more money?

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 05:10 PM
  #41
Moneypuck
Registered User
 
Moneypuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Because we refuse to build a new building. See Winnipeg and Quebec City. No new building = no team. Whether you are watching from your couch or section 101, it wont matter, there wont be a team in this market until a new building is built, so why put it off until it will cost everyone, including taxpayers, more money?
They're only 100 million apart if we factor in the undeniable cost overruns. 12-24 months tops before this is a go. The Oilers will still harvest minimum 20+ million per year in the current building. No need to rush.

Imagine the funds that could be raised from bake sales and bottle drives Katz could oversee in the meantime.

Moneypuck is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 05:12 PM
  #42
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,839
vCash: 3099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneypuck View Post
They're only 100 million apart if we factor in the undeniable cost overruns. 12-24 months tops before this is a go. The Oilers will still harvest minimum 20+ million per year in the current building. No need to rush.
Bettman doesnt fly to Edmonton to take in the sights. There is a drop dead date coming. Of that there is no doubt. How hard did Bettman fight to keep Winnipeg and Quebec in the league after they refused/were unable to build a new building?

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 05:17 PM
  #43
Moneypuck
Registered User
 
Moneypuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,324
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Bettman doesnt fly to Edmonton to take in the sights. There is a drop dead date coming. Of that there is no doubt. How hard did Bettman fight to keep Winnipeg and Quebec in the league after they refused/were unable to build a new building?
It's a good thing city council has the spine to speak up as to how Gary Bettman is running the City Of Edmontons budget then. Why doesn't the NHL kick in 50 million towards one of their soon to be new prized brothels?

Moneypuck is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 05:18 PM
  #44
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 6,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Edmontonians and Northern Albertans need to get after the provincial government to get this deal closed. They need to step up to the plate here.
Let me get this straight. The provincial government has had no hand in the negotiations, but now they're to blame?

The City and Katz has been the only two parties in the negotiations and agreement, but now you expect the province to throw in $100 million just because the City and katz thought that what the province SHOULD do?

At no point in time was the province a part of the negotiations and has said repeatedly No money. Of the three groups mentioned, they have been the most consistent throughout the entire process.

Master Lok is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 05:28 PM
  #45
I am the Liquor
Registered User
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,839
vCash: 3099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
Let me get this straight. The provincial government has had no hand in the negotiations, but now they're to blame?

The City and Katz has been the only two parties in the negotiations and agreement, but now you expect the province to throw in $100 million just because the City and katz thought that what the province SHOULD do?

At no point in time was the province a part of the negotiations and has said repeatedly No money. Of the three groups mentioned, they have been the most consistent throughout the entire process.
First off, the money needed to get shovels in the ground is not 100mill. Secondly do taxpayers outside the city of Edmonton benefit from a new building and/or the Oilers or not? Do they contribute to the project? Should they? I dont think its unrealistic for them to do so.

Did the provincial govt contribute funds to the old building? Commonwealth stadium? Did the Sask provincial govt contribute to the new football stadium?

The answer would be yes to all of the above. So why then and why not now?

I am the Liquor is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 06:17 PM
  #46
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moneypuck View Post
Then the person who'll benefit the most from it can contribute more.

Maybe taxpayers could pay for it all if they used mud bricks instead of actual concrete, no?

If they wait 3 yrs, perhaps they get a better facility. Sure it may cost more but what's the difference between 500 (to build it now) and 600 million (to start 3 yrs from now) per taxpayer?

Free Taxpayer Money is the issue here. If the facility itself was essential to the profitability/sustainability of the Oilers, Katz would have started this long ago. Daryls greed is the only thing holding this up.
Him getting a good deal is also essential in the idea of the new rink being profitable and sustainable. As has been stated around these threads before, every other team that has recently paid for their own arena, has gone bankrupt. Katz owns almost purely Canadian companies and his value depends on the dollar, so just based on past market history, he's got to keep his eyes open and ready for if and when things hit a slide.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 06:19 PM
  #47
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
First off, the money needed to get shovels in the ground is not 100mill. Secondly do taxpayers outside the city of Edmonton benefit from a new building and/or the Oilers or not? Do they contribute to the project? Should they? I dont think its unrealistic for them to do so.

Did the provincial govt contribute funds to the old building? Commonwealth stadium? Did the Sask provincial govt contribute to the new football stadium?

The answer would be yes to all of the above. So why then and why not now?
I agree. I would have no problem if my municipality decided to kick in a couple of million. Hell, if Darryl promised Fort Mac the AHL team they have stated they want when our arena gets built up here soon, I wouldn't be surprised if Fort Mac was willing to chip in 5-8 million.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 06:46 PM
  #48
TrevorK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 93
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am the Liquor View Post
Did the provincial govt contribute funds to the old building? Commonwealth stadium? Did the Sask provincial govt contribute to the new football stadium?

The answer would be yes to all of the above. So why then and why not now?
You can't really compare the province/city funding Commonwealth stadium to the new hockey arena. Commonwealth stadium was built to host the commonwealth games and is owned/operated by the city of edmonton.
Whereas the arena will be built for the sole purpose of professional sports and the revenue stream will be held by a private individual.
Big differences.

TrevorK is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 06:50 PM
  #49
Gret99zky
Worst Thread Ever
 
Gret99zky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Gamma Quadrant
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 6964
I say ticket tax the hell out of the new building. Just like they do with Airports. If you walk through the entrance you pay.

This will ensure all the beautiful people in Sherwood Park, St. Albert, Leduc, Spruce Grove, Red Deer, and other surrounding areas contribute to the arena as well.

Gret99zky is offline  
Old
05-14-2013, 06:57 PM
  #50
VanIslander
Hockey in the blood.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Edmonton taxpayers will pay $219 million toward the 18,559-seat facility, which has a futuristic design of metal and glass.

The Oilers' share will be $143 million. Another $125 million will come from a ticket tax that wouldn't exceed seven per cent of the total cost of a ducat.
Edmonton taxpayers 219 m + 125 m ticket tax = 344 m
Edmonton Oilers ownership = 143 m

The billionaire pays less than a third of the total cost but gets to manage the assets and get the profits?

The logic of public-private partnerships is corporate welfare run amock.

Water services and waste management services has already dumped millions of taxpayers dollars into private corporate hands. The trend continues.

Hockey would survive in Edmonton without sponsoring a billionaire. It's a profitable market for hockey!!! This deal suggests otherwise? or a money/power grab/abuse!

VanIslander 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 01:19 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.