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

Latest on New YEG Arena?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-04-2011, 04:17 PM
  #1101
hockeyaddict101
Registered User
 
hockeyaddict101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 19,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyril View Post
Link? Someone saying it is an alternative doesn't mean it's on the table. I guess the Enoch site is on the table as well?

FACT: The city has already agreed on a framework for a downtown arena. That is the only issue.

Also, the Northlands renovation is not on the table because it will never ever get approved. There are maybe two councilors that would vote for this.

Maybe this is where I should say, educate yourself?
The fact is that Northlands arena has been grandfathered in for years it doesn't meet NHL Specs and hasn't for a long time. It is why the HOK report was commissioned in the first place.

The fact that Northlands was touting it last weekend as an alternate should be a clue that it is very much on the table. The fact that City Council was pressuring Northlands to release the report should also be a clue. The fact that Northlands needs extensive renovations should be widely known as well but it isnt.

I am quite educated on the issue, it is a shame that you think you are!

hockeyaddict101 is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 04:29 PM
  #1102
BrinkOfGreatness*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,961
vCash: 500
I'm surprised at how fast I received a response to an email I sent. It wasn't a short response either.

BrinkOfGreatness* is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 04:33 PM
  #1103
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Take the Shot View Post
I don't know, man. It's starting to get pretty crazy between Katz and council. This whole thing could self-destruct and not even reach the provincial funding stage.
This is more than just bad PR for Katz. It shows what the Katz group seemingly only solution ... pressuring the City to put the money in instead.

Problem #1: $100 million shortfall from the province.
Problem #2: Non compete clause with Northlands.

Katz solution: email Oiler fans to put pressure on City politicians so that the City has to come up with either the solution or the money.

That's it? That's their negotiation and solution? I agree with Mandel - that's simply a ridiculous suggestion and doesn't help anything in the slightest and instead wastes resources and time.

But it's something that I said earlier in this thread - which hockeyaddict said was NOT a suggestion but apparently is.... do you expect the City to put an extra $100 million (totalling $200 million then) into the arena? If not the City, then would individual donors?

Master Lok is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 04:35 PM
  #1104
Beerfish
Registered User
 
Beerfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
I find great irony in your preaching of the long term worries associated with this deal on behalf of the city when it appears quite evident that you refuse to recognize what Katz has riding on this venture long term as well...well beyond the Oilers that is.
Sure he has risk and he is trying to minimize it. I look at it this way.

He gets a rink built, he has to put some of the money in.
He is agreeing to be a tenant of the rink for 35 years, about the lifecycle of that kind of building. (Though a very very very young lifecycle in relation to your average building.)

At the end of 35 years, he can lobby to get a new building built, or lobby for major renos paid for by the rink owner or he walks. It's all good for him. The city in 35 years has a 35 year old building on their hand and will have to bend over backwards to keep their tenant in it.

Beerfish is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 04:38 PM
  #1105
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
If not the City, then would individual donors?
Why would individual donors step up?

Katz isn't about to cut them in on the profits.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 04:41 PM
  #1106
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
Sure he has risk and he is trying to minimize it. I look at it this way.

He gets a rink built, he has to put some of the money in.
He is agreeing to be a tenant of the rink for 35 years, about the lifecycle of that kind of building. (Though a very very very young lifecycle in relation to your average building.)

At the end of 35 years, he can lobby to get a new building built, or lobby for major renos paid for by the rink owner or he walks. It's all good for him. The city in 35 years has a 35 year old building on their hand and will have to bend over backwards to keep their tenant in it.
In 35 years he will have a 1/2 billion dollar real estate venture separate but dependent on the arena being exactly where it is.

Why would he flush all that away?

He or his successor and real estate company will be more tied to that location than anyone else.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:01 PM
  #1107
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,057
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by copperandblue View Post
Why would individual donors step up?

Katz isn't about to cut them in on the profits.
I never said anything about profits. I'm suggesting that since pro-arena supporters is up in arms about public money going to stuff like museums and art galleries - the art gallery raised a significant amount through private donors like Katz himself, why not the same thing for the hockey arena?

Master Lok is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:09 PM
  #1108
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 27,136
vCash: 2642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beerfish View Post
Sure he has risk and he is trying to minimize it. I look at it this way.

He gets a rink built, he has to put some of the money in.
He is agreeing to be a tenant of the rink for 35 years, about the lifecycle of that kind of building. (Though a very very very young lifecycle in relation to your average building.)

At the end of 35 years, he can lobby to get a new building built, or lobby for major renos paid for by the rink owner or he walks. It's all good for him. The city in 35 years has a 35 year old building on their hand and will have to bend over backwards to keep their tenant in it.
He'll probably be dead in 35 years, we should probably be nice to his kid. Give him free passes to the waterpark.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:32 PM
  #1109
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 Beerfish View Post
Sure he has risk and he is trying to minimize it. I look at it this way.

He gets a rink built, he has to put some of the money in.
He is agreeing to be a tenant of the rink for 35 years, about the lifecycle of that kind of building. (Though a very very very young lifecycle in relation to your average building.)

At the end of 35 years, he can lobby to get a new building built, or lobby for major renos paid for by the rink owner or he walks. It's all good for him. The city in 35 years has a 35 year old building on their hand and will have to bend over backwards to keep their tenant in it.
Doesn't sound much different than what's going on now.

City owns a 37 year old arena (which it did not pay for), and would have to bend over (to the tune of $250M) to keep their main tenant there.

A lot of people don't realize that pro sports require a certain give and take. That's the simple reality of it. If Katz doesn't get an agreement that 29 other NHL teams get, there won't be pro sports in this city. (IMO, though they haven't said they'd move) A pro sports building does not equal to a skyscraper, or mall, or whatever else. It's just a different situation altogether.

It's a matter of being a big city, or small prairie town.

oiler-dude is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:34 PM
  #1110
Hockey Nightmare
Registered User
 
Hockey Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,492
vCash: 500
Well well well.

Quote:
Northlands wants $250M for arena non-compete clause

CBC News

Posted: Oct 4, 2011 4:09 PM MT

CBC News has learned Edmonton Northlands wants $250 million from city taxpayers before agreeing to a non-compete clause with The Katz Group on the new downtown arena.

Northlands operates a lucrative concert business at Rexall Place, which will be replaced by the downtown arena as the home of the Katz-owned Edmonton Oilers

The Katz Group is demanding the clause as a condition for reaching a deal with the city on the construction and operation of the facility which will be located on the Baccarat Casino lands at 101st Street and 104th Avenue.

Mayor Stephen Mandel said that so far, Northlands hasn't agreed to negotiate.

"Northlands has not been willing to sit down - I wouldn't say sit down - to come up with something that is reasonable," Mandel said. "They gave a letter to the city manager that had a number in it. But I'm not going to publicize what that number was."

But CBC News has been told by two reliable sources that Northlands President Richard Anderson recently sent an angry letter to City Manager Simon Farbrother demanding $250 million to bow out of the concert business.

Farbrother would not comment on the contents of the email from Anderson. But when asked if $250 million was an unfeasible number, Farbrother replied that was "a reasonable observation."

Steve Hogle, a spokesman for The Katz Group, would not comment on Northlands' demand. Last week, Katz Group vice-president John Karvellas said the deal is at risk if an agreement is not reached with the city by Oct. 31st.

Mandel said he is frustrated by the situation.

"We thought that Northlands would be reasonable in this, that they would come to the table and they haven't," he said. "And it's frustrating that what's lost in this whole idea is what's good for Edmonton."
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmont...n-compete.html

Hockey Nightmare is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:37 PM
  #1111
McDorian2
Positional Bias.
 
McDorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,979
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
I never said anything about profits. I'm suggesting that since pro-arena supporters is up in arms about public money going to stuff like museums and art galleries - the art gallery raised a significant amount through private donors like Katz himself, why not the same thing for the hockey arena?
Speaking solely for myself, I am not up in arms about public money going to these other ventures. What I'm up in arms about is why these types of things do not get questioned, even though I do support it, yet Katz gets raked over the hot embers of purgatory? Why the difference in attitude regarding both of these situations?

Bad PR? Media? Mentality? Frustration? Small mindednesss? Nervousness? Lack of answers? Lack of thought? Lack of education? All of the above? None of the above?

McDorian2 is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:41 PM
  #1112
Soundwave
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 28,997
vCash: 500
I'm kinda confused is Northlands a public company or a private enterprise?

Soundwave is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:49 PM
  #1113
McDorian2
Positional Bias.
 
McDorian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,979
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Take the Shot View Post
Well, I'm very happy about this little tidbit of information. It basically gives a whole lotta substance to my previous and recent rants regarding this group. They aren't interested in the best interests of the city and the Edmonton community...at all. They are interested in fleecing as much as they can from taxpayers like you and me, which I, and a number of posters, have alluded to many times before.

Thanks for getting my blood pressure up as well. Maybe I should go to Rexall Drugs for some medication or something.

McDorian2 is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 05:54 PM
  #1114
Hockey Nightmare
Registered User
 
Hockey Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave View Post
I'm kinda confused is Northlands a public company or a private enterprise?
They're a non-profit, lol.

Hockey Nightmare is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:10 PM
  #1115
McBooya42
Have a McDavid day!
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,871
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Take the Shot View Post
They're a non-profit, lol.
Hmmm non-profit that wants $250 million from the taxpayers to bow out of the arena/concert business that was given to them for free in 1998 from the city.

I've said it before, and i'll say it again. They may be non-profit, but they sure like to pay themselves well...

This in essence tells everyone how Northlands puts the city ahead of it's own self interests.

McBooya42 is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:13 PM
  #1116
Hockey Nightmare
Registered User
 
Hockey Nightmare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,492
vCash: 500
Unless Northlands bends, the Oilers are gone. No, I'm serious. No arena is going to get built - downtown or in Enoch - while they're demanding $250M for a non-compete clause. Now we really know what the issue is and why all this drama has come up in the past couple weeks.

Hockey Nightmare is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:17 PM
  #1117
BrinkOfGreatness*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,961
vCash: 500
LOL

250 Million!!?

How much do concerts bring in per year anyways?

Edit: I can see asking for a big amount if you were the sole starter of this venture or bought the rights as well, but it was given to them for free.....

BrinkOfGreatness* is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:22 PM
  #1118
hillbillypriest
Registered User
 
hillbillypriest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: there there
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,129
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Take the Shot View Post
Unless Northlands bends, the Oilers are gone. No, I'm serious. No arena is going to get built - downtown or in Enoch - while they're demanding $250M for a non-compete clause. Now we really know what the issue is and why all this drama has come up in the past couple weeks.
There's actually a very simple resolution here. IMO, Katz et al have completely failed to justify why they require AEG as their new facility operator and won't entertain Northlands. In reality, Rexall place does very well attracting tennants for non-Oiler nights, despite having a supposedly third rate facility to work with.

This is a no brainer fix IMO. If we're at impasse because Katz and co. have been refusing slamming the door on Northlands as a new facility partner, the breakdown and Northlands reaction is on them, not Northlands.

hillbillypriest is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:24 PM
  #1119
BrinkOfGreatness*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,961
vCash: 500
Katz and his team should sit with Northlands and work something out if possible. I get why Northlands is pi**ed as well even though I'm Pro-Arena.

They basically have a guy (Katz) coming in and telling the city that Northlands better buzz off lol.

BrinkOfGreatness* is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:26 PM
  #1120
s7ark
Moderator
McDavid!!!!!!!!!!!
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,856
vCash: 500
Seriously, **** Northlands.

s7ark is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:30 PM
  #1121
McBooya42
Have a McDavid day!
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,871
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillbillypriest View Post
There's actually a very simple resolution here. IMO, Katz et al have completely failed to justify why they require AEG as their new facility operator and won't entertain Northlands. In reality, Rexall place does very well attracting tennants for non-Oiler nights, despite having a supposedly third rate facility to work with.

This is a no brainer fix IMO. If we're at impasse because Katz and co. have been refusing slamming the door on Northlands as a new facility partner, the breakdown and Northlands reaction is on them, not Northlands.
I respectfully disagree. If Katz doesn't want Northlands involved due to their past incompetence and lackluster product, then that is his right. It just means that he won't get his non compete clause, and will have to simply provide a better venue. This shouldn't be that hard considering. As another side effect of this whole scenario, it is very clear that the city should now cut any and all ties with Northlands - pernamently. No more funding period...They want to play hardball like this and act like ingrates, then it's a two way street. **** you Northlands and your old boys club.

Northlands is doing nothing but trying to force their way in and making profits, without putting in a single dime towards the project...**** them.

McBooya42 is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:30 PM
  #1122
BrinkOfGreatness*
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,961
vCash: 500
I've said F Northlands in my head too, but in a small way I try to look at it from their side.

O.K. They were given free rights to the concerts. I can see why they are getting mad that some "Billionaire" is coming in and telling them to take a hike.

On the other hand, aren't they supposed to do what's right for the city? Would giving those rights up to Katz and letting him bring in a world class company like AEG better the non-hockey events at Rexall, etc?

There must be some solution. 250 Million from the city seems like a huge amount.

BrinkOfGreatness* is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:32 PM
  #1123
Tarus
#Craigsnotonit
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,778
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hillbillypriest View Post
There's actually a very simple resolution here. IMO, Katz et al have completely failed to justify why they require AEG as their new facility operator and won't entertain Northlands. In reality, Rexall place does very well attracting tennants for non-Oiler nights, despite having a supposedly third rate facility to work with.

This is a no brainer fix IMO. If we're at impasse because Katz and co. have been refusing slamming the door on Northlands as a new facility partner, the breakdown and Northlands reaction is on them, not Northlands.
It's probably pretty simple

Katz needs 100% revenue to be on par with the rest of the NHL, and Northlands wants to keep or be compensated for the concert business despite being supposedly a non-profit entity working for the benefit of the city.

Stauffer has hinted at this for some time now, referencing that the Stampede board down in Calgary stepped aside, but Northlands is unwilling to. Hence you have your breakdown in common interests and Katz's desire to cut Northlands out of the picture.

Tarus is offline  
Old
10-04-2011, 06:32 PM
  #1124
s7ark
Moderator
McDavid!!!!!!!!!!!
 
s7ark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,856
vCash: 500
Continue this chat here

s7ark 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 10:28 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.