I agree with your point $450M sounds high. Not sure how many people can fit in the stadium but lets say we have 50,000 visitors for 9 days. Each person would have to spend $1000 per day. I was very close to going to Russia and we were budgeting $250 per day, 4 friends in a hotel room that was like $300 per day plus meals, beer etc. Press and VIP may spend a lot more but not that much. Of course there will be a lot of people from Alberta without tickets just attending the public areas and spending in restaurants and bars and maybe some hotels but not to make up for $450M.
The income generated comes from a variety of sources. Not sure if you are familiar with the financial innards of major sports events, but having worked in 2 of these in the past (Brazil 2014 FIFA World Cup, still as an intern and Rio 2016 Summer Olympics as a Financial Consultant), I am 100% convinced that the total impact in the economy, over the course of the entire summer, can easily reach the 450M mark. The city will host matches in at least 2 weeks and the fans that come spend their money and the revenue from tickets, itself, is fairly irrelevant as a matter of fact, in the total impact.
The 450M number (which might be a little lower, but is just as probable to be higher) does include a lot of revenue not considered in your sum there: increases in local spending and, despite the crisis and the current state of the economy, Alberta is one of the places with the largest household available income ON EARTH, airport revenue, residual tourists (especially people who come from places further away will stay for longer, even after the event is over and considering summer is festival time, here, I bet a lot of people would feel encouraged to stay a week, or at least a few days longer, or come earlier) and the whole preparation which creates jobs and boosts the economy for, at least, a few months before and a few after. Not to mention all of the worldwide exposure that will start having an impact WAY BEFORE the event.
Sorry to disagree with earlier posts about being chosen by a big team as training center. Not going to happen, the quality of facilities here is just not up to par to what is available in hundreds of pro and college facilities in the US, plus footballers and their wives love their shopping and know where the deals are. Also it would be a long flight anywhere for their games. I think Florida and Texas will get most of them with some south Atlantic and Midwest states taking the rest.
Footballers frankly don't usually care about the money side of things in their shopping. Most of them will make in a month what any of us will make in a decade and even the "poor" ones will usually make more than a good paying job gives you in a year in a single month. That said, nowadays, with the performance side of things taking each day more the spotlight, it has become more and more common for major teams to be in more "isolated" places, where they can focus on training and whatnot. Not to mention the specific logistics that are considered. Being close to the cities where you'll be playing can be an asset and the combination of these two things might lead to a surprise. ALSO, on this side of things, the players have ZERO influence in that and the federations and confederations usually open bids for facilities to compete for them (openly or not). Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay, for example, stayed in pretty unexpected places several times in the past 3 or 4 World Cups. Not saying that it will happen, but we MIGHT get. And even if we don't, we might get matches involving them and it increases, yet again, exposure and makes the city more desirable for fans.
Not sure how the LRT fits into the picture, there will be a lot of buses, there always are, people go to world cups in groups so UBERs will be popular and so will be rental cars.
If I was setting priorities I would invest in improving public spaces around the stadium, change our silly liqueur laws and leverage our proximity to the mountains and other attractions to try to make people plan longer stays or maybe make another trip soon.
The LRT is happening, one way or the other, and there are SEVERAL reasons why we should think about having it completed before the World Cup:
1 - The city will be exposed and scrutinized by the media, around the globe. Wouldn't it be nice if all of the people out there, from potential students/immigrants to potential investors (big and small) could see the city with a brand new LRT line, all of the landscaping done and the city looking aesthetically pleasing, modern and clean, instead of a big construction site, with obstructions everywhere, orange cones and machines crossing the Downtown core (which will be the most exposed area and ALREADY is a concern)?
2 - Wouldn't it be really good for the city if one of its major attractions (like it or not) was connected to the LRT network and it was safe, easy and quick for tourists to get there? Instead of the tourists taking old buses, passing through, again, A LOT of construction and taking more than half an hour, uncomfortably, to get there, they can hop on a brand new train, enjoying the new landscaping and all of the developments around and hop off in a pretty transit centre right where they wanna go? And guess what: these people have social media presence, they will influence others and can do harm or improve perception about the city.
3 - We don't need to think just about people coming and going to the Stadium. Edmonton has quite a few areas that would benefit from the LRT network being more complete, either because it would make it easier for people to get to them with the new stops (West Edmonton Mall, specifically) of because it would allow for people with less money to spend to stay longer by staying in cheaper hotels further from the Downtown core (again, the west end comes to mind).
4 - The extra spending to speed it up also brings economic benefits, such as more jobs in the short term, which boosts any economy; puts the system in full operation earlier, meaning revenue comes sooner, rather than later; unlocks some future developments that are, certainly, waiting for it to be done (or close to it).
There are others, or the ones mentioned above could be split and discussed in more detail, if you'd prefer, but it is unquestionable that there are advantages to plan on speeding up the construction. It is not like we'd be putting another 2.3 billion dollars on it, for crying out loud. We're far from spending a lot of money to host it, in any case, and we are not doing what cities in South Africa, Brazil and Russia did, building megalomaniacal projects JUST for the sake of hosting a few games, never to be used again (or to be underused, at the very best scenario). The Valley Line West was already planned and approved way before we even thought about hosting this event, the funding for this isn't (and shouldn't) be budgeted in the hosting costs and, therefore, if speeding it up can be done without hurting the city financially, there's no good reason why it shouldn't.
That said, if the costs of doing so are prohibitive then yeas, we should not consider it. Fortunately, I don't believe they are and, even more, I believe that the timeframe that was given, of 5 to 6 years, with the current budget, is entirely possible in the lower margin of this interval. I actually believe this timeframe to be conservative, even, considering that the Valley Line Southeast, with a much more complex and time consuming infrastructure (tunnel, bridge, uphill section and elevated section) is going to take roughly 5 1/2 years, with all of the delays (it broke ground in April 22, 2016 and will most likely be operational by the end of summer/early fall 2021). The west section has a longer elevated section and a small bridge (Groat), but the overall construction challenges are a lot smaller.