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
12-12-2012, 11:04 PM
  #726
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
What percentage of Edmonton residents attend Oiler games?

Why don't they just jack up the ticket prices on, you know, the hockey fans who go to the game?

Why should someone who doesn't like hockey pay tax dollars to a billionaire so Joe Six Pack oiler can get a price break?
There are people in Edmonton who don't watch hockey?

DyerMaker66 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 12:17 AM
  #727
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
What percentage of Edmonton residents attend Oiler games?
All

Quote:
Why don't they just jack up the ticket prices on, you know, the hockey fans who go to the game?
They will.

Quote:
Why should someone who doesn't like hockey pay tax dollars to a billionaire so Joe Six Pack oiler can get a price break?
Strawman

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 07:33 AM
  #728
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
What percentage of Edmonton residents attend Oiler games?

Why don't they just jack up the ticket prices on, you know, the hockey fans who go to the game?

Why should someone who doesn't like hockey pay tax dollars to a billionaire so Joe Six Pack oiler can get a price break?
To answer your first question I would say that a conservative estmate would be
100000+ distinct individuals would attend Oiler games in a given year. But this is not the extent of those that use the arena. My guess is that if you look at events like a Justin Bieber concert, the Canadian Finals Rodeo or the Brier the over lap between the crowds at those events and he Oiler STH would be pretty minimal.

I really find it difficult to understand why people do not see a multi-use arena as part of the public infrastructure. And as investment in infrastructure this is actually relatively cheap for a city the size of Edmonton. Smaller cities and towns invest far more per capita all the time in rec facilities that are no more widely used, and in those cases the cities carry all of the operating cost.

Moose Jaw just built the Mosaic Center in part to keep the Warriors in town. The project cost $61M for a 4500 seat facility. The City is on the hook for $36.5M with the rest coming from Provincial and Federal governments as well as from a community fund raising effort. The City is subsidizing the facility to the tune of over $1M per year.

Moose Jaw has a population of about 34000 or roughly 1/30 of the size of Edmonton. This makes this project the per capita equivalent of a $2B dollar investment for a City the size of Edmonton with an equivalent annual subsidy of $30M per year.

These kind of projects can be found all over the country. My own community of about 100000 people is on the hook for $135M for a rec center that is mainly used for minor soccer.

All of these types of projects involve private enterprises making money off the public investment. Generally it is just on a much much smaller scale than would be the case
when an NHL team is on the line. It is this difference of scale that tends to dominate the debate for a project like the Edmonton arena.

Personally, I think the Oilers are important to the City of Edmonton, and not just to those who go to the games. I also think that the facility itself makes sense for a City the size of Edmonton, as isolated as Edmonton is, adn with as much disposable income as there is in town. I have no doubt that if the Oilers left town tomorrow the City would withing the decade be looking at a comparable investment but without the benefits that come from having an NHL team.

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 01:23 PM
  #729
Metzen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Sure it is. The city doesn't lose over 700 million by leaving it the way it is.
That's not a benefit. "Saving" money doesn't actually provide any physical benefit to citizen's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
This arena is hardly part of some master plan to contract the city to cover a smaller area. That argument is little more than a red herring.
You haven't been paying attention to Edmonton then. It is apart of a master plan to revitalize downtown and increase urban living.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
Katz doesn't actually want to pay anything. He's going to keep asking for more and more until he doesn't actually have to pay anything, or something really small.
Perhaps. That's why people have these negotiations.

Metzen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 10:10 PM
  #730
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metzen View Post
That's not a benefit. "Saving" money doesn't actually provide any physical benefit to citizen's.
No, saving it doesn't, but I have this crazy belief that re-investing 700 million into the city is more of a benefit than donating it to a billionaire.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-14-2012, 11:04 PM
  #731
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
No, saving it doesn't, but I have this crazy belief that re-investing 700 million into the city is more of a benefit than donating it to a billionaire.
Funny, because that's the whole idea behind the arena.

smackdaddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2012, 01:27 AM
  #732
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,847
vCash: 314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metzen View Post
That's not a benefit. "Saving" money doesn't actually provide any physical benefit to citizen's.
Ever heard of tax reductions?

knorthern knight is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2012, 08:09 AM
  #733
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,328
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Funny, because that's the whole idea behind the arena.
The city is not going to get anything from that 700 million. It is being used exclusively to drive profits into the pocket of katz. The city and the public are not getting anything re-invested.

Here is a better way of looking at it.

A businessman needs a new car as he travels a lot and needs to keep up his appearance for clients. He goes to the government and says buy me a new car. The government buys him a new car. Business man has a new car, and can make more money as a result, but nobody else benefits. No jobs are created, nobody else sees a quality of life improvement, nothing. That is the same thing Katz is trying to do. he wants the government to buy him a nice shiny new toy so he can make more money.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2012, 10:48 AM
  #734
Swarez
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 666
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
Ever heard of tax reductions?
Tax deductions don't come when city's add on debt. They come when they are responsible for less items and have less burden.

People talk about Jobs and economic expansion etc. One of the biggest drivers of economic activity is Airports, and they stopped receiving Government money over 20 years ago and somehow they survive. Are they expensive, sure but they learned to operate and build with private money. They actually enable trade and new growth. Are they expensive to fly in/out of sure but they don't burden tax payers.

Look at Calgary, a new terminal, a new 300 Million runway, all private money paid for by the airport Authority. Toronto is the same, with the T1 at pearson, (which now employs 40,000 people) and at the Island airport with there new terminal and there walking bridge under ground, all private money.

If a company like RBC asked the city of Toronto to build its new 40 story head office they would get laughed out of the room, yet its going to employee more middle class families (4000) than any hockey team, plus be a major center of international banking bringing in new business to the city/country. Yet people think its OK for sports teams to ask, mainly because they have fandom towards the team.

Swarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2012, 12:27 PM
  #735
Metzen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swarez99 View Post
Look at Calgary, a new terminal, a new 300 Million runway, all private money paid for by the airport Authority.
I think you are confused. The government is the one spending $300M to build a tunnel for the airport to allow the runway. The runway cost is nearly nothing.

Above and beyond that there are estimates the city will spend up to $600M when all is said and done on that project.


Last edited by Metzen: 12-15-2012 at 12:39 PM.
Metzen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2012, 01:46 PM
  #736
Swarez
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 666
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metzen View Post
I think you are confused. The government is the one spending $300M to build a tunnel for the airport to allow the runway. The runway cost is nearly nothing.

Above and beyond that there are estimates the city will spend up to $600M when all is said and done on that project.

That bridge is infrastructure outside the airport, and not under that authority control.
No city spends money on any capital in airports themselves as airports are now private not for profit corps.

I work with consulting group that has done many research projects for PCL (which does the construction). I haven't worked on Calgary specifically but in terms of capital its the same across the country. Have done work for Billy Bishop and GTAA. Anything under airport control comes out of improvement fees, which Calgary will soon have the most expensive in Canada for any major airport.

Swarez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-15-2012, 03:55 PM
  #737
Metzen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swarez99 View Post
That bridge is infrastructure outside the airport, and not under that authority control.
No city spends money on any capital in airports themselves as airports are now private not for profit corps.

I work with consulting group that has done many research projects for PCL (which does the construction). I haven't worked on Calgary specifically but in terms of capital its the same across the country. Have done work for Billy Bishop and GTAA. Anything under airport control comes out of improvement fees, which Calgary will soon have the most expensive in Canada for any major airport.
Understood.

If I understand your point, you are arguing that arena's could be run like the YYC? An airport is a little different than an arena. I guess you could say that Edmonton has a similar situation with Northland's (a not for profit) running Rexall, but based on the different outcomes (massive improvements to YYC, very little to degrading conditions at Rexall) I'm not sure that the airport model is working in Edmonton. Different businesses and different business model's it appears.

Metzen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-16-2012, 07:07 PM
  #738
DoyleG
Mr. Reality
 
DoyleG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: YEG--->YYJ
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metzen View Post
Understood.

If I understand your point, you are arguing that arena's could be run like the YYC? An airport is a little different than an arena. I guess you could say that Edmonton has a similar situation with Northland's (a not for profit) running Rexall, but based on the different outcomes (massive improvements to YYC, very little to degrading conditions at Rexall) I'm not sure that the airport model is working in Edmonton. Different businesses and different business model's it appears.
Unless he thinks nothing wrong about paying an an additional $20 on top of his game ticket.

Then again, his talking points don't really work in Edmonton because he has no understanding of the city.

DoyleG 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 09:50 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.