Calgary Flames Monday Roundtable: New Arena Edition

This week, there were lots of conversations surrounding a new arena for the Calgary Flames and Brian Burke and Ken King basically butting heads. Let’s have a discussion about this.

Hello and welcome all to another edition of Calgary Flames Monday Roundtable! The segment we here at Flame for Thought bring you every Monday. Basically, I ask the other writers here about different topics every week and we have a virtual roundtable discussion about it. Last week, we talked about the expansion draft. Today, let’s talk about a new arena.

As many Flames fans know, there have been lots of controversy with getting a new arena. Right now after the end of an era with the Joe Louis arena in Detroit, the Saddledome is now the oldest arena in the NHL. Of course, everyone wants a new arena, nobody more than the Flames owners. However, they can’t come to an agreement with Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi.

Basically to keep things short, the owners want most of the money towards a new arena used from public money. Whereas Nenshi won’t let that happen right now and now is sparking outrage with the Flames owners.

Related Story: No new arena means no more Calgary Flames?

Last week, Flames President of Hockey Operations, Brian Burke, and Calgary Sports and Entertainment Corporation President and CEO, Ken King, basically but heads when it came to a new arena. Brian Burke had a business luncheon at the Canadian Club of Calgary on Wednesday last week. He was quite.. blunt.. if you will, during the luncheon.

Via Calgary Herald:

“We’re not going to make the threat to leave. We’ll just leave. We still have a building that was built in 1983, the oldest in the league by more than 10 years. “They figured it out in Edmonton, where they know that a new building can rejuvenate the downtown. But I guess we’re just smarter than that here.”

Oh, but it didn’t stop there. Of course not.

Via Calgary Herald:

“You don’t think we could find a place to go? With a straight face you’re saying that. Let’s see. Quebec. Oh yeah, they have a brand-new building that meets NHL standards,” Burke replied to Flames fan Chris McCrae. Burke then ended the exchange by adding, “I think most intelligent people get this.”

After that, Ken King had a response to Burke’s comments made.

Via Calgaryflames.com:

“Brian Burke runs Hockey Operations for the Calgary Flames and he and many Calgarians have strong views about this topic. However, he is not our spokesperson regarding a new events centre for our city. We remain committed to our dialogue with the City and very optimistic we will get to a positive conclusion. We admire everyone’s enthusiasm on this subject.”

I think it’s funny how we’ve done somewhat of a 180 with Ken King. He was the one who initially said, “we wouldn’t threaten to leave, we would just leave,” and how he’s saying how the team has a commitment with the city? Anyways, let’s move on to the questions I asked the other writers here at Flame for Thought.

Question 1: There’s a lot of controversy with Ken King and Brian Burke right now threatening to relocate if Calgary doesn’t build a new arena. In your opinion, do you think the owners are in the right for wanting it to be mostly public money or are you siding with Mayor Naheed Nenshi?

Jonathan Boulanger

As a Calgarian, I side with Nenshi. However, I think it’s possible (unlikely, but possible) for the Flames to relocate. I think they’re bluffing, but they might not be if things continue this way.

Alex Hoegler

I for one believe the Scotiabank Saddledome is fine as is for the Flames right now. The fact King and Burke are threatening to move the team is outrageous. It’s not happening and it’s just a ploy to take the money of civilians. Mayor Nenshi all the way. No way should fans have to pay more money for an arena. At least, now right now.

Calgary Flames

Dan Raicevich

Yeah, the Flames ownership group is in the right regarding this subject. The majority of the arenas in the National Hockey League are public funded buildings, not privately funded. The new Little Caesars Arena in Detroit will include public money to help pay for the arena. That funding was passed in 2014, when the city declared for bankruptcy. The project of that arena, dubbed District Detroit, is going to be including retail, residence and other redevelopment to the area. The same can be made for the Arena District in Edmonton.

Arenas do not cost $150-200 million dollars like they did 20-25 years ago when much of the NHL’s current infrastructure was built. Arenas cost around $500 Million and even more. Little Caesars Arena will end up costing $732 million. Rogers Place in Edmonton cost $480 million.

Public money, ticket taxes etc. will all need to be included in this arena funding. The mayor is quite honestly “off his rocker” to not think that. Very rarely do owners fully fund their building.

The current funding plan for the CalgaryNEXT project, a project that makes complete and logical sense for all parties involved, $450 of the $890 million is funded by the Calgary Sports and Entertainment group. That is a fair financing plan for a facility that all Calgarians could benefit from. The only one who doesn’t seem to agree is the mayor. I also do not like his comments he has made towards the ownership group and Gary Bettman in regards to the arena.

Ramina Shlah

Sorry Dan, but I gotta side with Alex and Jonathan here. I’m also definitely siding with Nenshi here. With how much money the owners actually have, it’s really not fair to be asking for the majority of the money towards a new arena to be public money. Especially when Calgary’s economy has been somewhat down the last couple of years.

Question 2: Realistically, how likely do you think the Calgary Flames would actually relocate?

Jonathan Boulanger

Unlikely. The fans in Calgary are too loyal and too much of a quality fanbase for the team to move. We would never let that happen. I am confident that one way or another this thing will work itself out.

Alex Hoegler

Zero, zero, zero chance. Put it this way: The Arizona Coyotes haven’t moved despite losing the NHL millions each year and finishing last in attendance most years.

There’s zero way the Flames are moving when they sell out every game and have proven to be one of hockey’s most epic markets.

Dan Raicevich

I hate to say it, but I could see it happening. Quebec City is a market ready to roll, with a beautiful brand new building. Seattle or Portland is a potential NHL market that could entice the ownership group. Yeah, the possibility of relocation is there and its the ABSOLUTE last resort

If the Mayor Nenshi wants to play hard ball, making unrealistic demands for a team in dire need of a new arena, his team could walk out the city doors.

Ramina Shlah

I don’t think they would. At some point, either the owners or Nenshi will cave. But I really don’t see the Flames relocating, especially in such a big hockey market town.

Question 3: If worse comes to worse and the Calgary Flames do end up relocating, how soon do you think Calgary would get a new team?

Jonathan Boulanger

I’d like to think pretty soon after. Like I said, Calgary’s fan base is one of the best in the league, and I find it hard to believe that the NHL would jeopardize that.

Alex Hoegler

In a parallel universe — if the Flames were to move — it would hopefully only take three to five years. Commissioner Gary Bettman would feel horrible about taking this team away from a great city and fans, so he’d feel inclined to get them back ASAP. But again, the Flames aren’t relocating.

Dan Raicevich

The hardest question of the day. This could be years, even decades. You rarely see the NHL go back to cities it moves from. Small markets like Calgary, even harder. Atlanta didn’t get an NHL team for nearly 20 years. Winnipeg had to wait 15 years to get a team to relocate there. Denver waited 13 years to get a team to relocate there. Quebec City has been waiting 22 years to get a team back, and they still do not have one.

It would be years, and I mean YEARS to get a team back in Calgary.

Ramina Shlah

Like Alex said, it’d definitely be three to five years. I think they would probably build a new arena first and that would take a few years, but then that sort of defeats the purpose of them relocating in the first place. I don’t think a relocation will happen, but it wouldn’t be too long after that Calgary would get a new hockey team.

Question 4: How much money do you think should be used from public money on a new arena and how much should the owners pay? (Keep in mind that out of the Calgary Flames six owners, two of them have networths over $2 billion, one has a $6 billion company, and three are among the 100 richest Canadian’s list).

Jonathan Boulanger

This area is really out of my expertise I’m sorry I can’t really give a definitive answer.

Alex Hoegler

New arenas these days easily cost over $1 billion. But if the owners really want a new arena, then they should fork out the money. We know that’s not going to happen. I think no more than $300 million of public money should be used. But I’m sure at least double of that will be needed to get a new arena project started.

Related Story: Flames New Arena Wishlist

Dan Raicevich

A 50/50 split is always fair. The ownership group is not like Stan Koenke, owner of the Los Angeles Rams, who can just casually drop $2 Billion on a stadium plan. By doing a 50/50 split, the city of Calgary can charge rent to the Flames to play in the arena. The ticket revenues they make can help pay off the building with a Ticket Tax/User Fee. The public funding of a CRL, a Controlled Revitalization Levy, is a reasonable model to fund the arena. It is commonly seen in newer arenas that are built across North America. It was a funding plan used in the new Oilers arena. A ticket tax is commonly used in the funding of a new arena.

50/50 split seems to be fair, even a 60/40 split would be ideal (60 percent paid by CSEC). This is common practices across the board in funding for new arenas.

Ramina Shlah

I definitely agree with Alex here. I’d like to see more than two-thirds of the money being owners money and less than one-third being public. But that’s ideally. Realistically, I don’t think that would happen. If a compromise were to happen, it would most likely be that the public is paying at least 50% of it. Which isn’t right, but that’s business in this day and age I guess.