|
Post by cougar222 on Jan 23, 2011 20:49:49 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by tp2005 on Jan 23, 2011 20:52:27 GMT -5
This is getting scary close for Quebec, I think they have officially passed Winnipeg as being the first city in line. Good thing I'm never right, anyway!
Is it just a coincidence that news about ASG wanting to shake off the Thrashers was released the same day as Quebec announcing a new arena?
(Seriously, I have no idea)
|
|
|
Post by rtabaracci on Jan 23, 2011 20:53:57 GMT -5
Quebec has in no way passed Winnipeg for #1 on the relocation list. There's 20 billion reasons why
|
|
|
Post by pegger5 on Jan 23, 2011 21:05:50 GMT -5
This is getting scary close for Quebec, I think they have officially passed Winnipeg as being the first city in line. Good thing I'm never right, anyway! Is it just a coincidence that news about ASG wanting to shake off the Thrashers was released the same day as Quebec announcing a new arena? (Seriously, I have no idea) Good thing you are never right... Winnipeg is first in line and that is because of TNSE having 15 years of relationship with NHL..
|
|
|
Post by cougar222 on Jan 23, 2011 21:20:09 GMT -5
The Freep has added more to their article. How could they say it would be unprofitable for a private business?
Also could TNSE approach the feds for some funding for their upgrades to add 3000 more seats?
"The proposed facility, which has already received financial backing from the provincial and municipal governments, is considered a prerequisite for the potential return of NHL hockey.
While it might prove popular locally and help the Conservatives make inroads in the province, any federal funding would carry obvious political risks.
The demand for federal cash for sports teams could quickly spread across the country and create regional grievances in areas that don't receive it.
Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Regina and Hamilton have all expressed interest in new sports venues or upgrades to existing ones.
A report by Equipe-Quebec _ a group working to attract the Winter Olympics in 2022 _ recommends building an arena. But it also concedes the building would run a deficit unless it attracted an NHL tenant.
According to a study conducted by Ernst & Young, a new arena would bring in $8.4 million a year with an NHL tenant and $7.8 million without a professional club.
The cost of financing and maintaining an arena could be far higher. According to Claude Rousseau, president of Equipe-Quebec, the expenses would be between $36 million and $41 million annually, rendering the building unprofitable for a private business.
But over the longer term, the project would generate $500-$600 million over 40 years and governments would reap the benefits."
|
|
|
Post by 14pac03 on Jan 23, 2011 21:31:09 GMT -5
Quebec has in no way passed Winnipeg for #1 on the relocation list. There's 20 billion reasons why and why not 2 relocation at same time? two number 1
|
|
|
Post by rtabaracci on Jan 23, 2011 21:57:48 GMT -5
well, here's the biggest reason. Time. No doubt in my mind that both Winnipeg and Quebec will have teams again, but Quebec is still at least 5 years away. Still need to secure financing, find a location, hire an architect, get the design done, hire and construction firm and finally, build the damn thing. Oh yeah, then there's that little thing about a team being available at that point in time. As we've seen here, that's not as easy as it may seem. IIRC, the Feds said like a year ago that there were open to the idea. Their latest comments dont sound any different. Like everything else in life, I'll believe it when I see it. Whatever ends up happening, I'm going to be pissed if Quebec gets anything more than 50 mil. Time to quit treating them like the spoiled sibling. Bunch of bourgeois b*tches
|
|
|
Post by 14pac03 on Jan 23, 2011 22:03:50 GMT -5
well, here's the biggest reason. Time. No doubt in my mind that both Winnipeg and Quebec will have teams again, but Quebec is still at least 5 years away. Still need to secure financing, find a location, hire an architect, get the design done, hire and construction firm and finally, build the damn thing. Oh yeah, then there's that little thing about a team being available at that point in time. As we've seen here, that's not as easy as it may seem. IIRC, the Feds said like a year ago that there were open to the idea. Their latest comments dont sound any different. Like everything else in life, I'll believe it when I see it. Whatever ends up happening, I'm going to be pissed if Quebec gets anything more than 50 mil. Time to quit treating them like the spoiled sibling. Bunch of bourgeois b*tches We know that lol Did you know we have a old arena with 15,500 seats name Colisée Pepsi 2-3 years is more accurate for a team
|
|
|
Post by jetsorbust on Jan 23, 2011 22:08:23 GMT -5
I have to say, I'm simply not worried about Quebec at this point.
If they get this arena built and we still don't have a team I'll start to worry... but if we don't have a team in the time it takes to build an arena there is a problem anyways.
Right now Winnipeg is still at the top of the list - and that is why TNSE's relationship is so valuable.
This is just my opinion, but we have all seen that getting into "the club" is about more than just money.
|
|
|
Post by 14pac03 on Jan 23, 2011 22:16:09 GMT -5
not like balsilie lol
he is a reject hahaha
|
|
|
Post by rtabaracci on Jan 23, 2011 22:40:34 GMT -5
Colisee Pepsi is about as suitable as Winnipeg Arena was, I'm sorry to say. The NHL is past the days of temp arenas. That thing will need to be built before a team moves, IMO
|
|
|
Post by Oracle on Jan 24, 2011 10:34:21 GMT -5
Re: Quebec montreal.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110124/mtl_peladeau_011124/20110124/?hub=MontrealSportsLooks like the Peladeau is going to step up and at least spend some of his own money on an Arena in Quebec. The highlights from the article: "Pierre-Karl Peladeau announced Sunday night that he has made a "substantial" offer to the capital to help build the proposed $400 million facility. It's a big switch for Peladeau, who as recently as September said he was not willing to spend one dime on an arena. The Harper government calls the move by Peladeau "a step in the right direction." "
|
|
|
Post by ReJ40 on Jan 27, 2011 1:05:52 GMT -5
well, here's the biggest reason. Time. No doubt in my mind that both Winnipeg and Quebec will have teams again, but Quebec is still at least 5 years away. Still need to secure financing, find a location, hire an architect, get the design done, hire and construction firm and finally, build the damn thing. Oh yeah, then there's that little thing about a team being available at that point in time. As we've seen here, that's not as easy as it may seem. The design is already done. Hence why they know the price tag. monblogue.branchez-vous.com/images/bloge_a_marcel/9245%20%20MAQUETTE%20COLISEE.jpgLike others have said, the NHL normally has no problem running in an older arena (in this case, Colisee Pepsi) as long as the new arena is confirmed and in the process of being built. Basically, as soon as they rubber-stamp this, Quebec City's NHL campaign kicks into gear. By the looks of it, that might not be very far from now.
|
|
|
Post by neufeld on Jan 27, 2011 1:20:35 GMT -5
well, here's the biggest reason. Time. No doubt in my mind that both Winnipeg and Quebec will have teams again, but Quebec is still at least 5 years away. Still need to secure financing, find a location, hire an architect, get the design done, hire and construction firm and finally, build the damn thing. Oh yeah, then there's that little thing about a team being available at that point in time. As we've seen here, that's not as easy as it may seem. The design is already done. Hence why they know the price tag. monblogue.branchez-vous.com/images/bloge_a_marcel/9245%20%20MAQUETTE%20COLISEE.jpgLike others have said, the NHL normally has no problem running in an older arena (in this case, Colisee Pepsi) as long as the new arena is confirmed and in the process of being built. Basically, as soon as they rubber-stamp this, Quebec City's NHL campaign kicks into gear. By the looks of it, that might not be very far from now. Not so fast, there seems to be a little bit of nonsense going on here. All the better for The Peg for this year. The Canadian Press - ONLINE EDITION Group to determine whether $400 million is proper evaluation for Quebec City arena By: Alexandre Robillard, The Canadian Press Posted: 01/26/2011 7:20 PM | Comments: 10 | Last Modified: 01/26/2011 9:26 PM Print E–mail 1Share0Share1Report Error QUEBEC - The real cost of a new hockey arena in Quebec City, currently estimated at $400 million, is expected to be known only around the end of the year. A spokesman for Quebec City's municipal government says work will begin in February to determine whether the $400-million figure cited by Mayor Regis Labeaume is accurate. Francois Moisan says it will take between six and nine months for the evaluation to take place. The provincial government is also studying the price tag, with officials already having noted that Labeaume's cost estimate had a margin of error of 75 per cent. The arena has become a hot political potato, with the federal government stressing that private-sector money would be a necessary condition for any federal investment in the project. Quebecor CEO Pierre Karl Peladeau said last weekend he has offered ''tens of millions of dollars'' to help build the facility, a comment that federal Public Works Minister Christian Paradis called encouraging. Labeaume is hoping the construction of a new arena will help Quebec City get another National Hockey League team more than 15 years after the beloved Nordiques left for Colorado. While it might prove popular locally and help the Conservatives retain some seats in the area, any federal funding would carry obvious political risks. The demand for federal cash for sports teams could quickly spread across the country and create regional grievances in areas that don't receive it. Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Regina and Hamilton have all expressed interest in new sports venues or upgrades to existing ones. Premier Jean Charest's Liberal government has committed to providing $180 million — or 45 per cent of the $400-million project — and Quebec City has said it is willing to spend $50 million. When Charest committed the 45 per cent last September, he also mandated Infrastructure Quebec to evaluate the construction costs. Normand Bergeron, the head of Infrastructure Quebec, agreed last year that such a move was necessary because the cost study Labeaume had in his possession had a margin of error of 75 per cent.
|
|
|
Post by hartfordwinnipeg on Jan 27, 2011 2:40:59 GMT -5
Even if you were to use let's say the Colisee, the NHL still has standards for their buildings. Would the NHL forgo those standards for 2-3 years while a new arena is being built?
|
|
|
Post by ReJ40 on Jan 27, 2011 13:02:45 GMT -5
Even if you were to use let's say the Colisee, the NHL still has standards for their buildings. Would the NHL forgo those standards for 2-3 years while a new arena is being built? There is no way to know for sure, but looking at past experience... - ...when Tampa Bay joined in 1992, they played out of the "Expo Hall", a tiny 11,000-seat bandbox for a year (maybe two?) then switched to Tropicana Field until finally St Pete Times Forum opened in 1996. www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPMcETlTa9s- Ottawa played out of the 10,585-seat Ottawa Civic Centre from 1992-96. Again, not NHL-caliber but it did the job and the NHL was OK with it. www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4Q6shaqPdU#t=02m45s- San Jose started in 1991 playing from the oddly-named "Cow Palace". A 10,000-seat arena that was originally a building that hosted livestock expositions. Not the most glamorous of NHL houses, but it worked and the NHL OK'ed it! www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-b3qTVOuzo&feature=relatedAfter seeing those buildings, Le Colisee (Capacity 15,100) would be a suitable house for a year or two until the Nordiques' new house is built.
|
|