Well liberals, so Ignatieff is going to buy the quebec vote with a new

[Keepitsimple]

Doesn't this brainiac know that the Liberals are hanging by a thread in Ontario - that they are in danger of losing some seats in Fortress Toronto? Such blatant pandering to Quebec will not play well with Ontarians, or anywhere else outside Quebec. When you're in a hole, the first rule is to stop digging. A lot of Liberals will be shovelling the dirt back into Mr. Ignatieff's hole - the guy is burying himself.

Edited March 15, 2011 by Keepitsimple

[William Ashley]

On more consideration here is my take on the project:

1. Affirmation that it will be a profitable venture

2. Willingness of QC and Quebec to place collatoral on the funds (meaning if the team goes bust or the arena is a loss, the two repay the funds on a given schedule)

3. No Quebec Seperation until the funds are repaid! And Canada keeps the team if they try anything funny before then!

It should also be a multisport olympic stadium that can encorporate - soccer, football and basketball.

(and help improve the chances of a 2050 or something like that olympic bid.

It should also act as a Russian Style Public Colloseum / GYMNASIUM

With publically accessable swimming facilities, a indoor track and cylcing area

and public gyms.

CF and other government employees would have free passes.

School children and cegep college university students would also have free passes.

To fitness facilities.

Also members of the public would be able to buy a LIFETIME PASS. to the fitness facilities... as a share to build them..

as well lifetime seating would be sold in the various sections of the arena to help finance.

The best seats would be auctioned off with the person who wins name engraved on them.

Every seat would be open to this sort of sponsership. Every inch could be opened up this way really... for logos or anything really.

Edited March 15, 2011 by William Ashley

[Evening Star]

For real. I was actually considering possibly voting Liberal and this reminded me of some of the reasons why I shouldn't.

xpost

Edited March 15, 2011 by Evening Star

[SF/PF]

Hey Mr Ignatieff, in fact you can put a price on culture! In Edmonton, the price is $450 million for a new downtown arena and the project is short about $150 million at this point. You can send the cheque to Mayor Steven Mandel, before Friday would be great. Thanks.

Are you kidding? Edmonton doesn't even have a professional hockey team!

[capricorn]

It seems to me that Harper should promise to put pressure on Bettman/the NHL to move a franchise to Quebec City.

Give your head a shake August. Lobbying for an NHL franchise for Quebec City is a non starter. Die hard hockey fans are tuned in to the workings of the NHL and are well aware of this.

I can just visualize the reaction to Harper meeting with Bettman, cap in hand, begging for a Canadian expansion team in Quebec or anywhere else for that mater.

As for Ignatieff, the Liberals are not going to win any seats in Quebec City and his prounouncement will just alienate voters elsewhere in Canada. I reckon that Ignatieff was before a partisan crowd and he just didn't have the energy to tell them something that they didn't want to hear.

It's as if he thinks the MSM in the ROC won't pick up on what he says to the French media in Quebec.

[capricorn]

OK, now the following is what he really said and it does make more sense than what he national post said. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2011/03/14/pol-ignatieff-quebec-arena.html

You know what Topaz? Ignatieff should have been clear on where he stands when he opened his trap in Quebec on March 12. Now it has been cemented in the minds of many that building the Quebec arena is to house professional hockey and a good chunk of the population are against. Don't take my word for it. Just read the comments in your link. I've seen the same reaction in the comments to other media stories.

In any case, committing to funding arenas and the like across the country is ill advised given the present fiscal situation we're in. How much would this cultural adventure cost? Who knows. This flies in the face of the Liberals claiming they can manage the country's economy better than the Conservatives through prudent spending sprinkled with the monetary wizardry employed by Chretien and Martin.

[wyly]

Dumb. Short-sighted.

any dumber than the conservatives offering the corporate world a tax break...both seem equally stupid to me...

[Battletoads]

Why does he even need to bother? Harper already paved the way...

[wyly]

but if financing were offered to each province for major infrastructure development it would be up to each province to decide how to squander the money...that would set up some nasty internal provincial squabbles...

I'd really be pissed if my province used infrastructure money for a new facility for mercenary millionaires to play hockey...a number of new multiplex facilities for amateur sport I'd be okay with...

[Molly]

any dumber than the conservatives offering the corporate world a tax break...both seem equally stupid to me...

Two different ways to be dumb. The first helps no one but ticks off a lot of people, calls credibility into question; the latter makes less noise but costs real money, and does long term damage.

[Keepitsimple]

I remember watching Power and Politics at the time that Conservatives said they would NOT fund the arena. Solomon and the opposition critics were adamant that the Conservatives would find other ways to pander to the arena issue - provide infrastructure money for roads around the arena or some other fancy footwork. Seems pretty funny now that Mr. Ignatieff has made his pronouncement. At least their election platform is starting to take shape.

[PIK]

any dumber than the conservatives offering the corporate world a tax break...both seem equally stupid to me...

Who pays the corporate taxes wyly , we do , if the corps are going to pay more ,they just dump it on to the consumer , that is you.

[Topaz]

Well, if you against what Iggy has said, then you should be against what Harper has done. He gave money to a Quebec ski-doo club and this is buying votes in Quebec. At least, the multifunctional arena could make money for the community and more of it than a ski-doo club. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2011/03/14/17613106.html

[Black Dog]

-edited-

Edited March 15, 2011 by Black Dog

[Keepitsimple]

Can anyone point me to a Globe and Mail or The Star story on this? I haven't been able to find one.

[Black Dog]

I dunno, is there much written about the economic benefits of sports teams? Buffalo and Detroit have all kinds of sports teams and are both still pretty roughed up.

There's a whole sub-field of economists who specialize in looking at the impact of pro sports. The consensus being that they offer marginal economic benefit to the communities in which they are based and definitely not enough to offset the subsidies and transfers that inevitable go along with them.

Yeah, Bettman has been pretty clear. I think if he had his way the franchises in Ottawa, Vancouver, Edmonton and Calgary would be removed and sent down to Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina and New Mexico. Bettman wants US expansion at any cost, and he doesn't give a shit what happens in Canada. In fact, he resents the Canadian teams because most of them don't sell well when they're playing at US arenas. And if the NHL has to actually pay millions of dollars to operate those teams because no one wants to watch them, then that's exactly what it will do. His entire reason for existence is advancing hockey in the US in a desperate, pathetic hope of getting a network contract down there. And the fewer Canadian teams the better.

Yeah he must really hate the Canadian teams and the fact that they bring in more than 30 per cent of the league's revenues.

[BubberMiley]

It's true there won't be any expansion franchises in Canada. But the NHL is waiting to see if the Phoenix Coyotes bonds sell in the next two weeks. They probably won't, so the plan is to move that franchise back to Winnipeg.

Winnipeg was already lined up to get the Trashers, whose owners have said they are not interested in continuing to own the team, but the NHL wants to settle the Phoenix situation first.

So, once Phoenix fails, les Thrashers have nowhere to go next season but a spruced-up Colisee. There are no other markets in the U.S. interested in losing money on ice hockey.

[Moonbox]

So, once Phoenix fails, les Thrashers have nowhere to go next season but a spruced-up Colisee. There are no other markets in the U.S. interested in losing money on ice hockey.

A lot of markets in the US make tons of money...just not so much the ones where there are palm trees outside.

Shortl list of NHL franchises set to fail:

Atlanta

Phoenix

Carolina

Florida

Nashville

Islanders

There are two or three markets in Canada that would happily take some of those on.

Winnepeg

Hamilton

Quebec

It's going to happen it's just a matter of time.

[fellowtraveller]

There are two or three markets in Canada that would happily take some of those on.

Winnepeg

Hamilton

Quebec

Willing to take one on is not the same thing as running one profitably.

The easy part, and it is not so easy, is to build an antertainment palace with public money to house a pro team.

The hard part is to sell out the building of perhaps 19,000 capacity with single tickets costing $100 to $250 per seat for 82 regualr season games, 6 preseason games and playoffs. Repeat this every year forever. It is going to be really hard to do in all three of those places, they are small and the economies are small.

A pair of season tickets will run you around $25,00 cash per year payable in advance. How many Quebec city or Winnipeg fans can afford that every year. The corporate base is small.

Are they expecting the feds to also buy a few thousand season tickets?

If you were wondering about Bettmans reluctance in moving failed franchsises into high risk places in Canada, wonder no further.

Edited March 15, 2011 by fellowtraveller

[PIK]

Well, if you against what Iggy has said, then you should be against what Harper has done. He gave money to a Quebec ski-doo club and this is buying votes in Quebec. At least, the multifunctional arena could make money for the community and more of it than a ski-doo club. http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2011/03/14/17613106.html

So this ski-doo club is owned by billionaires and used by millionaires. Edited March 15, 2011 by PIK

[BubberMiley]

How many Quebec city or Winnipeg fans can afford that every year. The corporate base is small.

wonder no further.

Actually, the Winnipeg corporate base is quite large for a Canadian city, as illustrated. Winnipeg also already has its ownership group in place, including David Thomson, the richest guy in Canada.

It's a different city than it was in the 1990s, and the Canadian dollar is a different currency.

The ducks are all in a row. The only question is which failed southern franchise (Coyotes or Thrashers) moves here.

Personally, I would prefer neither. I hate the NHL.

Corporate head offices, companies of all sizes:

Edmonton: 157

Winnipeg: 129

Ottawa: 101

Corporate head offices, total employment:

Winnipeg: 6,890

Ottawa: 4,667

Edmonton: 3,428

Canada's 800 largest corporations:

Winnipeg: 32 plus three 3 subsidiaries = 35

Edmonton: 25 plus one subsidiary = 26

Quebec City: 16 plus two subsidiaries = 18

Ottawa: 15 plus one subsidiary = 16

Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/globe-on-hockey/winnipeg-by-the-the-numbers/article1933707/

[Smallc]

Winnipeg really isn't the place that it was in the 90s. This is a city growing by more than 10k people per year with economic growth that is solid and steady. There shouldn't be any problem supporting an NHL franchise...and I hate hockey.

[William Ashley]

When addressing these things you must ask why teams like the Jets were moved in the first place - and what has changed since then.

The end all question really is - do people have more time, more disposable income, with a desire to attend hockey games?

Like perhaps the nordiques jersey can look something like

this

http://media.photobucket.com/image/bloc%20quebecois%20jersey/trans1uc3nt/BlocQuebecois.jpg

Or a mix like with a red canadian flag on the back or something...

maybe near the bottom.

Edited March 15, 2011 by William Ashley

[Black Dog]

When addressing these things you must ask why teams like the Jets were moved in the first place - and what has changed since then.

As far as Winnipeg goes, off the top of my head there's:

- a new building

- a much stronger dollar (IIRC it was around 70 cents US, if not lower, when the Jets and Nords moved.)

- a salary cap and revenue sharing

- a billionaire ownership group.

The end all question really is - do people have more time, more disposable income, with a desire to attend hockey games?

It's telling that as much as people kvetch about the rising price of NHL games and their mediocre on-ice performance, attendance for Canada's teams doesn't seem to be hurting much at all.

[Shakeyhands]

It's telling that as much as people kvetch about the rising price of NHL games and their mediocre on-ice performance, attendance for Canada's teams doesn't seem to be hurting much at all.

True since 1967!!!!