Calgary announces agreement for new $1.2 billion arena for the Flames

[Chet Manley]

I'm surprised the city would allow this announcement so close to a provincial election. Suppose $330m erases any concerns.

 

[Figgy44]

Did they announce how the revenue will be divided? I’m assuming the team wont be keeping all the profits.

If I'm not mistaken, it's a flat rate cut on all venues at the event centre. I think it's between 2-5% from all entertainment (not just Flames) and they get 100% the revenues from the naming rights + increased revenues from increased property taxes.

The owners get all of the rest of the revenues, so that's 98%, but the city was specific in making sure the owners were on the hook for almost all of operating costs as well.

I don't know how much of this is from the original arena deal details and how much of this is the new arena deal details though.

 

[Mike Jones]

I remember when I was younger id have the same reaction. But politics is so sickening its not worth wasting effort on. Business is politics. The owners are paying a fair bit too and wont own the land

The owners are only paying a small fraction of the project's costs and will be reaping the most benefit. As one economist (Moshe Lander - Concordia University) has already said (CTV News), there will be no economic benefit to either the city or the province. I'm not even sure there will be a political benefit either. This is just a disaster with only the Flames riding away with something. They will probably wind up with everything.

I'm surprised the city would allow this announcement so close to a provincial election. Suppose $330m erases any concerns.

The Utah story probably helped motivate the province and city. As it was probably designed to do.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

A conservative province pumped that a billionaire doesn’t have to pony up for a new arena

Weird

Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor,

The conservative way.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Privatize the gains, socialize the costs.

 

[Petey O]

Privatize the gains, socialize the costs.

A lot of people think of Canada as this Nordic country tier socialist society where people are taken care of, but in reality, it's not massively different from the United States in many ways. Rampant consumerism and crony capitalism rule the show.

 

[BraveCanadian]

A lot of people think of Canada as this Nordic country tier socialist society where people are taken care of, but in reality, it's not massively different from the United States in many ways. Rampant consumerism and crony capitalism rule the show.

We're a lot closer to the US than the Nordic countries in most respects, and for some reason people are doing their best to get us the rest of the way. People are the worst kind of people.

 

[Mike Jones]

Apparently there's a secret agreement (Noted later in the story attached here) made between the three parties and it's not supposed to be released until after the election.

That secret agreement should be released to the opposition and the media ASAP. It certainly can't wait until after the election.

Danielle Smith says she's 'confident' Calgary's arena deal will go ahead

A day after taking part in an announcement that Calgary's arena deal would go ahead with contributions from the city, the province and the Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corporation (CSEC), Premier Danielle Smith says she's excited the agreement was struck.

calgary.ctvnews.ca

 

[snag]

Scotia Place - Calgary's event centre

www.calgary.ca

 

[WaitingForThatCab]

I'm happy that my friends in Calgary are going to have a nice new rink. Not sure if they're happy they are going to foot the bill for it.

 

[Mitts]

You being a Flames supporter doesn't shield you from the fact that you're still being screwed in this deal.
The ones signing it are banking on people like you being blind to the robbery they are committing.
Carrying water for billionaires doesn't make you a better fan. It just makes you a sucker.

Are you delusional or just ignorant ? This deal affects me 0% IRL, comprende genius ? Now go put your soapbox away.

 

[KeithIsActuallyBad]

Elections are very "What have you done for me lately", so the timing of this is no mere coincidence.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

Are you delusional or just ignorant ? This deal affects me 0% IRL, comprende genius ? Now go put your soapbox away.

Location says Calgary. So, you just don't pay taxes?

 

[Mike Jones]

Location says Calgary. So, you just don't pay taxes?

A lot of people who support this arena deal aren't taxpayers. Look at the crowd who were at the press conference. There were a lot of people there who benefited from the deal and many others who weren't affected because they don't pay taxes. There were very few there who would be seriously affected.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

A lot of people who support this arena deal aren't taxpayers. Look at the crowd who were at the press conference. There were a lot of people there who benefited from the deal and many others who weren't affected because they don't pay taxes. There were very few there who would be seriously affected.

Exhibit A:

 

[Figgy44]

Exhibit A:
View attachment 697661

I don't like him as much as the next guy, but there are enough reasons to dislike him without making stuff up.

Anyone who thinks he doesn't pay taxes in Canada is wildly misinformed. He pays a ton of taxes in Canada, even as a non-resident for tax purposes. I'm not going into the details of this for those who can't even understand the basics of the Canadian tax system and just parrots stuff like this. It's exhausting.

He also has to pay attention to stuff like UHT and FAPI. So it's not like his change in residency for tax purposes is perfect to reducing taxes either.

Location says Calgary. So, you just don't pay taxes?

Someone who rents (ie: no property tax) and has income low enough for non-refundable tax credits to have no taxes owing on their tax filing is unaffected by this. It's not that they don't pay taxes, it's that the taxes they owe are paid by the government.

There are many people in Canada who do not have to pay taxes out of their own pocket who are not skirting their obligations for tax filings. Edwards is not one of those people. He did certain things to pay less taxes, but he is not paying zero in taxes.

 

[Cas]

A lot of people who support this arena deal aren't taxpayers. Look at the crowd who were at the press conference. There were a lot of people there who benefited from the deal and many others who weren't affected because they don't pay taxes. There were very few there who would be seriously affected.

People who live somewhere are affected by how that somewhere spends its money, even if said people don't pay taxes into that money pool.

 

[millax]

As an Albertan who doesn't live in Calgary I am not keen on some of my tax dollars going to fund the arena in Calgary - especially leading up to an election. The new arena in Edmonton was paid for by the city and the Oilers. We received no provincial funding - and only $8million in funding from the Federal Government for the community rink attached to the facility.

I want Calgary to get a new rink. It would be great for the city, the team and the NHL. However - I shouldn't have to pay for it because some political party wants to win an election.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

I don't like him as much as the next guy, but there are enough reasons to dislike him without making stuff up.

Anyone who thinks he doesn't pay taxes in Canada is wildly misinformed. He pays a ton of taxes in Canada, even as a non-resident for tax purposes. I'm not going into the details of this for those who can't even understand the basics of the Canadian tax system and just parrots stuff like this. It's exhausting.

He also has to pay attention to stuff like UHT and FAPI. So it's not like his change in residency for tax purposes is perfect to reducing taxes either.


Someone who rents (ie: no property tax) and has income low enough for non-refundable tax credits to have no taxes owing on their tax filing is unaffected by this. It's not that they don't pay taxes, it's that the taxes they owe are paid by the government.

There are many people in Canada who do not have to pay taxes out of their own pocket who are not skirting their obligations for tax filings. Edwards is not one of those people. He did certain things to pay less taxes, but he is not paying zero in taxes.

Re: your first point, "no taxes" is hyperbole - a common literary device. He is certainly deft when it comes to tax avoidance, as are most billionaires. And when he receives a near billion dollar gift from taxpayers, it is more than okay to mention this. Caping for such people is an interesting choice.

Re: your second point, that's fascinating stuff, but I did not say that the poster does not pay taxes. I asked if they did not pay taxes. It is a perfectly germane question in response to that poster saying that this funding has "0%" effect on them.

 

[North Cole]

He says as as his principal residence is probably still state tax free Florida, lmao

 

[Figgy44]

Re: your first point, "no taxes" is hyperbole - a common literary device. He is certainly deft when it comes to tax avoidance, as are most billionaires. And when he receives a near billion dollar gift from taxpayers, it is more than okay to mention this. Caping for such people is an interesting choice.

Re: your second point, that's fascinating stuff, but I did not say that the poster does not pay taxes. I asked if they did not pay taxes. It is a perfectly germane question in response to that poster saying that this funding has "0%" effect on them.

Wearing a cap for such people is your conclusion? Maybe you consider it hyperbole, or maybe you didn't know and are claiming hyperbole, how would I know. You're not the first one to make these comments. So I just decided to comment on it to clarify on that point. The comment was in a vacuum, without connecting it to the funding model.

I as a tax prepper, just wanted to clarify it so that those who don't know it's hyperbole don't keep parroting incorrect information. I get enough people getting upset about other tax situations because of wild misunderstanding of certain tax situation.

For the second quote, I just clarified a possibility that could make sense. I don't know that poster's personal situation.

 

[joestevens29]

I don't like him as much as the next guy, but there are enough reasons to dislike him without making stuff up.

Anyone who thinks he doesn't pay taxes in Canada is wildly misinformed. He pays a ton of taxes in Canada, even as a non-resident for tax purposes. I'm not going into the details of this for those who can't even understand the basics of the Canadian tax system and just parrots stuff like this. It's exhausting.

He also has to pay attention to stuff like UHT and FAPI. So it's not like his change in residency for tax purposes is perfect to reducing taxes either.


Someone who rents (ie: no property tax) and has income low enough for non-refundable tax credits to have no taxes owing on their tax filing is unaffected by this. It's not that they don't pay taxes, it's that the taxes they owe are paid by the government.

There are many people in Canada who do not have to pay taxes out of their own pocket who are not skirting their obligations for tax filings. Edwards is not one of those people. He did certain things to pay less taxes, but he is not paying zero in taxes.

So why would someone who is so poor actually be in support of the building? Not like they are ever going to be able to afford to go to an event

And wouldn't they also want tax money to go to programs that would better benefit them?

 

[Figgy44]

So why would someone who is so poor actually be in support of the building? Not like they are ever going to be able to afford to go to an event

And wouldn't they also want tax money to go to programs that would better benefit them?

That's... not totally true.

If the same logic as the Olympic bid referendum is the same as those who support the event centre... the reason is that they'll enjoy it the most and the amount they'll pay in extra taxes is considered negligible to them because it's heavily "subsidized" by others.

If they want to go to a concert or sporting event, they'll save money or go in debt to do it. So them not being able to afford to go to an event isn't totally true. It's perhaps financially irresponsible, but that's how some of these people literally perceive it.

And we're typically talking about younger 20-30 year olds who have little obligations, maybe work from home etc. I don't think they can think of other programs that would benefit them. Programs that help them save enough money to go out and party is probably the most beneficial in their eyes. I understand your logic. I have a similar logic. But people who are for the event centre and think the taxes are negligible are not operating with the same logic as us. I think you may have noted that not all Calgarians/Flames fans posting in this thread are full of pure elation about this deal.


On a slightly different direction, I am not in disagreement with any of the rest of you that the politics is frustrating. I honestly dislike all of the platforms and parties out there right now. However, I do have to concede that the party I honestly dislike the most is the one that would likely give me the most in advantages. It kinda sucks.

 

[joestevens29]

That's... not totally true.

If the same logic as the Olympic bid referendum is the same as those who support the event centre... the reason is that they'll enjoy it the most and the amount they'll pay in extra taxes is considered negligible to them because it's heavily "subsidized" by others.

If they want to go to a concert or sporting event, they'll save money or go in debt to do it. So them not being able to afford to go to an event isn't totally true. It's perhaps financially irresponsible, but that's how some of these people literally perceive it.

And we're typically talking about younger 20-30 year olds who have little obligations, maybe work from home etc. I don't think they can think of other programs that would benefit them. Programs that help them save enough money to go out and party is probably the most beneficial in their eyes. I understand your logic. I have a similar logic. But people who are for the event centre and think the taxes are negligible are not operating with the same logic as us. I think you may have noted that not all Calgarians/Flames fans posting in this thread are full of pure elation about this deal.


On a slightly different direction, I am not in disagreement with any of the rest of you that the politics is frustrating. I honestly dislike all of the platforms and parties out there right now. However, I do have to concede that the party I honestly dislike the most is the one that would likely give me the most in advantages. It kinda sucks.

I don't get it are the 20-30 year olds in Calgary all lazy? The majority should be actually working and would be considered a taxpayer

 

[K1984]

I don't understand the hardline stance against public funds being used. It's like any other infrastructure, it can make sense.

Calgary is getting the new rink, another 1000 seat rink for the community & flames practices, plaza, community centers, parking, road improvements & a yearly 1.5M cheque from the Flames for community sports. Compare it to what the we spent on BC place's roof & renovation a decade ago - easily over 600m in today's dollars - they're getting way more.

It also guarantees the Flames stay in Calgary for a long time.

Be livid if you want I guess but if governments were entirely transparent about their spending people would livid 100% of the time, atleast your actually getting something that will be really good for the community out of it.

This is my view as well. The positive cultural impact of an NHL team and ability to host major public events to a city in Canada outweighs fretting about whos getting what, if there is ROI, etc. There are plenty of projects that suck up significant public capital that have far less of an impact on a city than a modern arena. It's frankly critical infrastructure for major cities for reasons beyond sports.

Is it fair that sports owners get to win off of public money? No, but that's the reality of sports economics that won't change. You can bet that a lot of people in Calgary would change their tune on support for public financing if the Flames left and a new arena was required to get a team back. I think too many operate under the assumption that "the Saddledome is good enough" when it very clearly isn't and think the risk of relocation is far less than it actually is.

Having said all this - it's bullshit that the province is funding this. These projects should be handled by the municipality exclusively.