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 Thread: Rogers Place? Yawn...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-21-2013, 12:45 AM
  #351
Philly85
Moody'
 
Philly85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave View Post
What is the 'media ring' feature that was ditched between an earlier design and the final design because it was too expensive?
Ya I was wondering about that too

Philly85 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:57 AM
  #352
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
nevermind


Last edited by Replacement: 05-22-2013 at 02:22 PM.
Replacement is online now  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:58 AM
  #353
Auguste Escoffier
Registered User
 
Auguste Escoffier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 5,679
vCash: 500
This is the media/spectator ring:


Auguste Escoffier is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:58 AM
  #354
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave View Post
What is the 'media ring' feature that was ditched between an earlier design and the final design because it was too expensive?
Hopefully it isn't the "Sky paddock" feature which imo was one of the more interesting concepts with public seating available.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:59 AM
  #355
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auguste Escoffier View Post
This is the media/spectator ring:

Yikes.

It is the sky paddock.

Unfortunate they would decide to leave this out. THAT view I would pay dearly for.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-21-2013, 12:59 AM
  #356
Tarus
Fire Mact
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave View Post
What is the 'media ring' feature that was ditched between an earlier design and the final design because it was too expensive?
Do believe it was the skywalk type thing you can see in one of the concept pictures in the sun article(image 3). That concept picture is no longer up on Edmonton's design page for the project that I can find.

I think you can also see it in the top right of this concept picture they still have up - http://www.edmonton.ca/city_governme...600x370_90.jpg

Tarus is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 01:18 AM
  #357
Oiltankjob Fail
Registered User
 
Oiltankjob Fail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 6,692
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Zezel View Post
Probably not going to happen, Epcor was the first in how many years?

Around 3 years ago now ATB was inquiring about building a new tower. Katz reportably brought in Santiago Calatrava to put a design forward to ATB, but eventually they moved into Telus Tower. I'm not sure what the vacancy is now, but doubt there is enough demand for a full office tower yet.
Does not even need to be office tower Missaugua is building some beautifull condo projects, Edmonton was allways restricted by height from muni airport those days are gone build them high imo.

Oiltankjob Fail is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 02:44 AM
  #358
Panda Bear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 620
vCash: 500
Edmonton's on a clay base (which when combined with our seasonal cycles results in a million potholes being created each spring), which makes it easy to dig out but does require more work in both waterproofing and stabilizing foundations due to how freaking wet it can get.

There's no chance that a landmark project would ever be built underground, though, unless it had some miraculous surface-level public space aspect to it like The Louvre--which only works as well as it does due to the population (both local and tourist) density in that area.


Last edited by Cowbell232: 05-22-2013 at 12:09 PM.
Panda Bear is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 10:08 PM
  #359
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
I waited along time to see if this would get any mention from any of the arena proponents who have long argued that we may as well spend money on a project in Edmonton, for Edmontonians, by Edmontonians, and that it is good to fund projects because it creates local employment. The argument I've also heard often here is that much of our tax money goes to Quebec instead of spending it in good ol Alberta.

Well here we go again:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...894/story.html

Absolutely sickening that a 70M contract, on a public funded build, is awarded to the corruption scarred industry of Quebec INSTEAD of local supplier bidders who of course employ people in the Alberta economy.

Now I wonder if this "lowest cost" contract comes in at said cost including freight when all is said and done.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-21-2013, 11:05 PM
  #360
Philly85
Moody'
 
Philly85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 12,317
vCash: 500
^^^ that is garbage

Philly85 is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 11:05 PM
  #361
Frank the Tank
The Oiler Tankers
 
Frank the Tank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
I waited along time to see if this would get any mention from any of the arena proponents who have long argued that we may as well spend money on a project in Edmonton, for Edmontonians, by Edmontonians, and that it is good to fund projects because it creates local employment. The argument I've also heard often here is that much of our tax money goes to Quebec instead of spending it in good ol Alberta.

Well here we go again:

http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...894/story.html

Absolutely sickening that a 70M contract, on a public funded build, is awarded to the corruption scarred industry of Quebec INSTEAD of local supplier bidders who of course employ people in the Alberta economy.

Now I wonder if this "lowest cost" contract comes in at said cost including freight when all is said and done.
It sounds like the Alberta companies were hoping that being local would trump their bid being 10-15% higher than the competition. Unfortunately for them it appears their gamble did not pay off. I wonder if it is even legally allowed for PCL to select a local bid that is higher? Nonetheless, this is an unfortunate example of the negatives of significant wage inflation Alberta has experienced this past decade - it becomes more difficult to compete in a global market. Although primarily unrelated to the arena project, the Quebec protectionism is wrong.

Frank the Tank is offline  
Old
05-21-2013, 11:17 PM
  #362
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank the Tank View Post
It sounds like the Alberta companies were hoping that being local would trump their bid being 10-15% higher than the competition. Unfortunately for them it appears their gamble did not pay off. I wonder if it is even legally allowed for PCL to select a local bid that is higher? Nonetheless, this is an unfortunate example of the negatives of significant wage inflation Alberta has experienced this past decade - it becomes more difficult to compete in a global market.
You may be unfamiliar but locally speaking the lowest bid is often the disastrous bid. We've seen this often enough in Edmonton and most recently with the 23Ave exchange, Quesnell widening project, and Dawson Bridge, all of which involved significant cost over runs and schedule delays. With the penalties for such delays not even coming close to recapturing the increases in project cost.

So the City of Edmonton would have some avenue to demonstrate in court that going lowest bidder is not the way to go. That seeking the involvement of a known and reputable firm, with known local quality results and product, would be the way to go. Heres the deal as well. Quebec, as cited, doesn't even consider applicants from Alberta. But we somehow HAVE to consider Quebec bids? How does that work.

Next, the construction/manufacturing industry in quebec is rife with corruption, scandals, payoffs, protectionism and so not necessarily on a level playing field with Alberta. Quebec being a province where you can't even say for certain that firms are paying similar for ore, taxes, tariffs etc.

Finally, the city ceded sole rights to oversee the bidding process (for some explicable reason) and so the city don't have last say in the first place on who gets the contracts. Great business this. For anybody but Albertans.

So I would ask, where are allthe people being laid off in speaking out on this. The exact firms that lost this contract have recently had to lay off people due to slowdown. So I doubt this is labor cost alone. I imagine some people would rather have a job today than not. But instead the steel jobs on our arena are going to Quebec.

unbelievable

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 04:10 AM
  #363
oilborn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 160
vCash: 177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
You may be unfamiliar but locally speaking the lowest bid is often the disastrous bid. We've seen this often enough in Edmonton and most recently with the 23Ave exchange, Quesnell widening project, and Dawson Bridge, all of which involved significant cost over runs and schedule delays. With the penalties for such delays not even coming close to recapturing the increases in project cost.

So the City of Edmonton would have some avenue to demonstrate in court that going lowest bidder is not the way to go. That seeking the involvement of a known and reputable firm, with known local quality results and product, would be the way to go. Heres the deal as well. Quebec, as cited, doesn't even consider applicants from Alberta. But we somehow HAVE to consider Quebec bids? How does that work.

Next, the construction/manufacturing industry in quebec is rife with corruption, scandals, payoffs, protectionism and so not necessarily on a level playing field with Alberta. Quebec being a province where you can't even say for certain that firms are paying similar for ore, taxes, tariffs etc.

Finally, the city ceded sole rights to oversee the bidding process (for some explicable reason) and so the city don't have last say in the first place on who gets the contracts. Great business this. For anybody but Albertans.

So I would ask, where are allthe people being laid off in speaking out on this. The exact firms that lost this contract have recently had to lay off people due to slowdown. So I doubt this is labor cost alone. I imagine some people would rather have a job today than not. But instead the steel jobs on our arena are going to Quebec.

unbelievable
I can understand the outrage BUT to me being gouged just to go local is not acceptable. In the article it is stated that the local bid was actually a joint bid.

"Structal-Heavy Steel Construction, a division of Boucherville, Que.-based Canam Group, appears to have trumped a joint bid by two of Edmonton’s largest steel fabricators, Waiward Steel and Supreme Group"

This to me looks to me like a powerplay from the 2 largest local steel fabricators to corner this market while making a tidy profit off the backs of taxpayers, why else make a joint bid and not compete with each other?

"Timler acknowledges that the joint bid by Waiward and Supreme Group — Canada’s largest privately owned steel construction and fabrication firm, with annual revenues of $400 million — was roughly $5 million to $7 million higher than the bid by Structal."
5-7 Million is quite a chunk of change.

Then they continue on to extole their community virtues...

""Supreme Group and Waiward are extremely strong supporters of the community,” says Timler, noting that his company has held Oilers season tickets for years, as has Waiward

So they are proud of the fact that they have season tickets but as far as charitable work within the city I have never heard of these 2 companies until today.

Now I do agree that the quebec construction industry is highly corrupt and quebec protectionism is a farce BUT you go on to mention a few local projects that have been disastrous. Those projects demonstrate the corruption in the alberta construction industry, low bids to get the project then cost overruns and delays costing taxpayers millions while lining the pockets of these construction companies responsible. So I see where you are coming from but in the end if we are going to be dealing with corruption I would rather save a few million dollars doing it.

oilborn is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:39 AM
  #364
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,686
vCash: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
You may be unfamiliar but locally speaking the lowest bid is often the disastrous bid. We've seen this often enough in Edmonton and most recently with the 23Ave exchange, Quesnell widening project, and Dawson Bridge, all of which involved significant cost over runs and schedule delays. With the penalties for such delays not even coming close to recapturing the increases in project cost.

So the City of Edmonton would have some avenue to demonstrate in court that going lowest bidder is not the way to go. That seeking the involvement of a known and reputable firm, with known local quality results and product, would be the way to go. Heres the deal as well. Quebec, as cited, doesn't even consider applicants from Alberta. But we somehow HAVE to consider Quebec bids? How does that work.

Next, the construction/manufacturing industry in quebec is rife with corruption, scandals, payoffs, protectionism and so not necessarily on a level playing field with Alberta. Quebec being a province where you can't even say for certain that firms are paying similar for ore, taxes, tariffs etc.

Finally, the city ceded sole rights to oversee the bidding process (for some explicable reason) and so the city don't have last say in the first place on who gets the contracts. Great business this. For anybody but Albertans.

So I would ask, where are allthe people being laid off in speaking out on this. The exact firms that lost this contract have recently had to lay off people due to slowdown. So I doubt this is labor cost alone. I imagine some people would rather have a job today than not. But instead the steel jobs on our arena are going to Quebec.

unbelievable
City/PCL screwed up by allowing said Company to qualify to bid. As soon as that happens you are kinda pooched. Although I'm not sure how this bid was done. I presume companies had to qualify and then I assume you had a portion of your bid based on your name, which usually allows for 10% and allows Cities/Companies/Provinces to take the next bid if they choose so. The problem is if you win by 15% and lose your 10% you are still 5% higher.

This was the whole problem with the Quesnell Bridge. Local companies fought saying the City shouldn't allow that company to qualify because they have done previous crap work and will really undercut the work. Someone on council or with the transportation department said they had no choice because there could be a lawsuit. City rolled the dice and got burnt.

And I'm actually shocked it took you this long to hear about Quebec getting the contract. I heard about it a couple weeks ago and it doesn't sound like many involved are that shocked that an outside company got the work.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 09:54 AM
  #365
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,686
vCash: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilborn View Post
I can understand the outrage BUT to me being gouged just to go local is not acceptable. In the article it is stated that the local bid was actually a joint bid.
.
I wouldn't say the locals are gouging it's more there are companies that have no work in their home province and are bidding jobs at very low margins if any, add lower labor costs and 10% isn't hard to come by.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 10:00 AM
  #366
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,686
vCash: 344
http://www.structalstructure.ws/www/...&frame=estrucs

http://www.structalstructure.ws/www/...&frame=estrucs

First link is some of their projects, second link is of one they did in Edmonton already. Looking at some of the projects they've been apart of I'm not exactly worried about them doing it, they are doing some of the biggest and best projects out there. Even on the Edmonton one it appears they fabricated it in Calgary.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:00 PM
  #367
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
City/PCL screwed up by allowing said Company to qualify to bid. As soon as that happens you are kinda pooched. Although I'm not sure how this bid was done. I presume companies had to qualify and then I assume you had a portion of your bid based on your name, which usually allows for 10% and allows Cities/Companies/Provinces to take the next bid if they choose so. The problem is if you win by 15% and lose your 10% you are still 5% higher.

This was the whole problem with the Quesnell Bridge. Local companies fought saying the City shouldn't allow that company to qualify because they have done previous crap work and will really undercut the work. Someone on council or with the transportation department said they had no choice because there could be a lawsuit. City rolled the dice and got burnt.

And I'm actually shocked it took you this long to hear about Quebec getting the contract. I heard about it a couple weeks ago and it doesn't sound like many involved are that shocked that an outside company got the work.
I'm honestly not sure about how the bid process would currently go. My family has been out of the industry for awhile and a more recent landmark successful lawsuit apparently impacted how such tenders get consideration. I do fear that is a slippery slope and that builders ought to be allowed some autonomy to receive bids from reputable firms they want to hire. I've heard the quotes too in this and other projects reflecting concern that if we don't allow a bid, or don't accept a low bid, it could result in a lawsuit.

It didn't take me this long to hear about this, I just didn't post it. One of the reasons I'm disgusted by the issue is how little print its recieved. Gary Lamphier, who I respect for outing these kinds of things, and thats about it.

Why isn't there an upcry? Apathy in what is considered a vibrant econonomy. But a relatively undiversified one. No way would there be apathy on this issue if the situation was reversed and it was Quebec arena and alberta firm getting the contract which would never happen.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:10 PM
  #368
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilborn View Post
I can understand the outrage BUT to me being gouged just to go local is not acceptable. In the article it is stated that the local bid was actually a joint bid.

"Structal-Heavy Steel Construction, a division of Boucherville, Que.-based Canam Group, appears to have trumped a joint bid by two of Edmonton’s largest steel fabricators, Waiward Steel and Supreme Group"

This to me looks to me like a powerplay from the 2 largest local steel fabricators to corner this market while making a tidy profit off the backs of taxpayers, why else make a joint bid and not compete with each other?

"Timler acknowledges that the joint bid by Waiward and Supreme Group — Canada’s largest privately owned steel construction and fabrication firm, with annual revenues of $400 million — was roughly $5 million to $7 million higher than the bid by Structal."
5-7 Million is quite a chunk of change.

Then they continue on to extole their community virtues...

""Supreme Group and Waiward are extremely strong supporters of the community,” says Timler, noting that his company has held Oilers season tickets for years, as has Waiward

So they are proud of the fact that they have season tickets but as far as charitable work within the city I have never heard of these 2 companies until today.

Now I do agree that the quebec construction industry is highly corrupt and quebec protectionism is a farce BUT you go on to mention a few local projects that have been disastrous. Those projects demonstrate the corruption in the alberta construction industry, low bids to get the project then cost overruns and delays costing taxpayers millions while lining the pockets of these construction companies responsible. So I see where you are coming from but in the end if we are going to be dealing with corruption I would rather save a few million dollars doing it.
I'm not convinced that the joint bid of Supreme and Waiward was a PP to corner the market here. Moreso this is a huge project and in order to deliver on scale and match the kind of production that Structal could role out that the two firms found it wise to merge on the project. For all we know this may have even been suggested to the Alberta bidders.
Structal is a huge firm that has done several similar projects before. Through their success I'm sure they are able to win these bids on economy of scale in addition to other concerns I've raised. But heres the thing. When Structal started out in Quebec and were not this huge firm I would think that they had more local support from a province that does believe in hiring from within and diversifying the Quebec economy.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:15 PM
  #369
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
http://www.structalstructure.ws/www/...&frame=estrucs

http://www.structalstructure.ws/www/...&frame=estrucs

First link is some of their projects, second link is of one they did in Edmonton already. Looking at some of the projects they've been apart of I'm not exactly worried about them doing it, they are doing some of the biggest and best projects out there. Even on the Edmonton one it appears they fabricated it in Calgary.
Nice links Joe. I'm not concerned about structal getting the contract. More about how this impacts Alberta firms, alberta workers, etc. I just think that in terms of a largely public funded project that one of the benefits that ought to be assumed, at the very least, is that the $ trickles (hate that term) into the Alberta economy.

I'm no economist but if you take the price differential, consider freight differential from local vs across continent supplier, then consider taxbase lost, local earning lost, I don't know that the math all adds up. On a public build is it really better to have this tendered to Quebec firm? I'm not convinced.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:25 PM
  #370
fysloc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 337
vCash: 500
Does the city actually do the supplier picking? Or does PCL do it as they are the construction managers?

Also, the public spending has always been about "FIND THE CHEAPEST BID" because thats mostly what politicians see. They dont have the big picture of the impact of selecting this bid over that bid, and all they have to go on to vote is cost.

Its one of the things I noticed working at an EPC company. Partially good that uneducated politicians stay away from these stuff, as a person with knowledge will pick the best value contract with the least hassle. At the same time, that person will mostly be looking out for themselves and their company first, as opposed to the concept of public money going back into the local economy.

It's basically a double edged sword no matter what you do in picking a bidder, unless the local firm happens to be perfectly reputable, cheapest bid, and service way above everybody else, which almost never happens here.

fysloc is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:26 PM
  #371
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,686
vCash: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Nice links Joe. I'm not concerned about structal getting the contract. More about how this impacts Alberta firms, alberta workers, etc. I just think that in terms of a largely public funded project that one of the benefits that ought to be assumed, at the very least, is that the $ trickles (hate that term) into the Alberta economy.

I'm no economist but if you take the price differential, consider freight differential from local vs across continent supplier, then consider taxbase lost, local earning lost, I don't know that the math all adds up. On a public build is it really better to have this tendered to Quebec firm? I'm not convinced.
Pretty sure they'd have to quote it with freight.

Comes down to people wanting this to be done for less money. Well this is one way to do it. Can't have it both ways.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:27 PM
  #372
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,098
vCash: 500
I thought this was supposed to be a lump sum contract by PCL? If so, then they are free to choose whomever they want to do the work. It is their money, not the city's.

This is a good problem to have. Our economy is so strong that local businesses have trouble winning some local jobs. We are too busy and we pay our people too much compared to Quebec steel providers.

Why are you guys complaining?

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:30 PM
  #373
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,686
vCash: 344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
I'm honestly not sure about how the bid process would currently go. My family has been out of the industry for awhile and a more recent landmark successful lawsuit apparently impacted how such tenders get consideration. I do fear that is a slippery slope and that builders ought to be allowed some autonomy to receive bids from reputable firms they want to hire. I've heard the quotes too in this and other projects reflecting concern that if we don't allow a bid, or don't accept a low bid, it could result in a lawsuit.

It didn't take me this long to hear about this, I just didn't post it. One of the reasons I'm disgusted by the issue is how little print its recieved. Gary Lamphier, who I respect for outing these kinds of things, and thats about it.

Why isn't there an upcry? Apathy in what is considered a vibrant econonomy. But a relatively undiversified one. No way would there be apathy on this issue if the situation was reversed and it was Quebec arena and alberta firm getting the contract which would never happen.
PCL has worked with this company before so it's not like this is a virgin company that they've never heard of before. And while this company is based out of Quebec they have a plant in Calgary.

http://www.structalstructure.ws/www/...edir/comm08_09

Fabrication of the structural steel components, mainly in Canam Group’s Calgary, AB, and Sunnyside, WA, plants, will begin in the fall of 2008. The erection process is scheduled to begin in February 2009 and should be completed during the third quarter of 2009.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:44 PM
  #374
oiLowe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Calgree
Country: Canada
Posts: 687
vCash: 500
Structural actually has a huge Albertan employee base. I know two of their project managers and both live full time here in Calgary.

If this is lump sum contract as mentioned earlier, PCL has complete control on whom they choose to do the work. They are NOT held strictly to the lowest bidder and in my experience with PCL they almost never select the contractor on bid price alone.

Furthermore, Structural has a great reputation in the industry and I see zero issues with them winning this contract.

oiLowe is offline  
Old
05-22-2013, 12:47 PM
  #375
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,814
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joestevens29 View Post
PCL has worked with this company before so it's not like this is a virgin company that they've never heard of before. And while this company is based out of Quebec they have a plant in Calgary.

http://www.structalstructure.ws/www/...edir/comm08_09

Fabrication of the structural steel components, mainly in Canam Group’s Calgary, AB, and Sunnyside, WA, plants, will begin in the fall of 2008. The erection process is scheduled to begin in February 2009 and should be completed during the third quarter of 2009.
ftr I was stating the bolded just in general terms and not specific to Structal. Thats why I said slippery slope and reflecting concern with where things could lead to in the future. How would the economy be if some firm wanted to build a massive condo tower and felt forced to pick lowest bids only? I'm just stating that in general terms.

As far as the regional Calgary plant at least thats good for Alberta, if not for Edmonton. So Edmonton public $ going out to feed Quebec and Calgary then. I feel so much better about that.


Last edited by Replacement: 05-22-2013 at 01:00 PM.
Replacement is online now  
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 09:58 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.