Time and time again, it's been shown that giving public money for sports stadium does not provide a ROI for the community it's been built in. All professional sports stadiums should be built with...
Time and time again, it's been shown that giving public money for sports stadium does not provide a ROI for the community it's been built in. All professional sports stadiums should be built with the owners private money, and this is coming from a massive sports fan. I definitely understand the heart break of losing your local team, but it's crazy that we even allow these owners to push us around like this.
Not that I doubt it much, but I would like to see sources to back this up to support my position that there's zero need to give public money to private entities and it's actually a net negative.
Time and time again, it's been shown that giving public money for sports stadium does not provide a ROI for the community it's been built in.
Not that I doubt it much, but I would like to see sources to back this up to support my position that there's zero need to give public money to private entities and it's actually a net negative.
I've found that this Berkeley article does a decent job of explaining and linking several studies that show the money is more productively spent directly into the community. There was also a lot...
I've found that this Berkeley article does a decent job of explaining and linking several studies that show the money is more productively spent directly into the community.
There was also a lot of talk recently about the Buffalo Bills new stadium and how the economic impact is about the same as building a new department store
I, too, would love a reputable study or three to cite/bookmark for when this comes up IRL. I'll do some digging on my own when I get free time (ha!) and see if I can't hand out a few.
I, too, would love a reputable study or three to cite/bookmark for when this comes up IRL. I'll do some digging on my own when I get free time (ha!) and see if I can't hand out a few.
While this is very true, it's also not necessarily applicable here. The reason why sports stadiums don't pay off as a public investment is that a community's entertainment dollars are fungible....
Time and time again, it's been shown that giving public money for sports stadium does not provide a ROI for the community it's been built in.
While this is very true, it's also not necessarily applicable here.
The reason why sports stadiums don't pay off as a public investment is that a community's entertainment dollars are fungible. This makes intuitive sense: you aren't changing your savings rate just to attend more MLB games, but you might go to fewer movies.
One of the angles where all of this changes, however, is if a city can attract new entertainment dollars from outside of their city. In that case one isn't simply moving money around locally, but importing it from another city's current entertainment dollars. This isn't plausible in almost any other city, but it's not inconceivable for a city that's already a tourist destination like Vegas.
Now, that doesn't mean that the state couldn't have stood its ground and eventually have gotten an MLB team anyway. And there's still no good rebuttal to the "Well you could always use the exact same funding tools to pay for programs that more directly and efficiently benefit citizens" argument. I'm not arguing that it's the best possible outcome, just pointing out that the ROI calculus is significantly different for Nevada than pretty much every other location. Even though it's certainly not the best investment it's not as obviously terrible as pretty much every other stadium that receives public funds.
This is definitely a solid point, the more entertainment options they have in Vegas the more potential they have to bring in tourist revenue. Not everyone is a gambler, but there's so much to do...
This is definitely a solid point, the more entertainment options they have in Vegas the more potential they have to bring in tourist revenue. Not everyone is a gambler, but there's so much to do there now that you can have a great time even without ever stepping foot into a casino. I'd guess this may be one of the few cities where the math may turn out to be a positive, even if those dollars could be put elsewhere.
A's fan here. Thank you for your condolences. It's been a long time coming, but I wish the league would just force a sale of the team instead. This is one of those times I feel like boycotting...
A's fan here. Thank you for your condolences. It's been a long time coming, but I wish the league would just force a sale of the team instead. This is one of those times I feel like boycotting baseball, in general, is a good idea. MLB could have made the team better, but chose not to because of billionaire dollars.
MLB supporting this instead of pushing the A's into Howard Terminal makes no sense. Vegas nets the other owners over a billion dollars expansion fee. Oakland won't. Yet they're willing to just...
MLB supporting this instead of pushing the A's into Howard Terminal makes no sense.
Vegas nets the other owners over a billion dollars expansion fee. Oakland won't. Yet they're willing to just give the market to Fisher?
Oakland has been slowly bled of it's sports teams. It's such as shame because they are such die hard fans. Even when the warriors were terrible they were named "best fans in the NBA". The Raider's...
Oakland has been slowly bled of it's sports teams. It's such as shame because they are such die hard fans. Even when the warriors were terrible they were named "best fans in the NBA". The Raider's fans would dress to the 9s. And the As, well watching the As was just such a great opportunity to have a cheap hot dog and beer and watch the game from damn near next to the outfielders. I'm really sad they have all left and really sad for the local community.
The horrible billionaire owner who's consistenly torpedo'd the team in order to relocate and sell it through intentional mismanagement gets rewarded for his shady practices by given exactly what...
The horrible billionaire owner who's consistenly torpedo'd the team in order to relocate and sell it through intentional mismanagement gets rewarded for his shady practices by given exactly what he wants.
Great. I'm glad my team (Blue Jays) has competent ownership at least.
I could see an argument for putting these stadiums in the middle of nowhere as a way to get the traffic out of the main areas people hang out. But that also assumes we're going to be car-dependent...
I could see an argument for putting these stadiums in the middle of nowhere as a way to get the traffic out of the main areas people hang out. But that also assumes we're going to be car-dependent forever.
Time and time again, it's been shown that giving public money for sports stadium does not provide a ROI for the community it's been built in. All professional sports stadiums should be built with the owners private money, and this is coming from a massive sports fan. I definitely understand the heart break of losing your local team, but it's crazy that we even allow these owners to push us around like this.
Not that I doubt it much, but I would like to see sources to back this up to support my position that there's zero need to give public money to private entities and it's actually a net negative.
I've found that this Berkeley article does a decent job of explaining and linking several studies that show the money is more productively spent directly into the community.
There was also a lot of talk recently about the Buffalo Bills new stadium and how the economic impact is about the same as building a new department store
I, too, would love a reputable study or three to cite/bookmark for when this comes up IRL. I'll do some digging on my own when I get free time (ha!) and see if I can't hand out a few.
While this is very true, it's also not necessarily applicable here.
The reason why sports stadiums don't pay off as a public investment is that a community's entertainment dollars are fungible. This makes intuitive sense: you aren't changing your savings rate just to attend more MLB games, but you might go to fewer movies.
One of the angles where all of this changes, however, is if a city can attract new entertainment dollars from outside of their city. In that case one isn't simply moving money around locally, but importing it from another city's current entertainment dollars. This isn't plausible in almost any other city, but it's not inconceivable for a city that's already a tourist destination like Vegas.
Now, that doesn't mean that the state couldn't have stood its ground and eventually have gotten an MLB team anyway. And there's still no good rebuttal to the "Well you could always use the exact same funding tools to pay for programs that more directly and efficiently benefit citizens" argument. I'm not arguing that it's the best possible outcome, just pointing out that the ROI calculus is significantly different for Nevada than pretty much every other location. Even though it's certainly not the best investment it's not as obviously terrible as pretty much every other stadium that receives public funds.
This is definitely a solid point, the more entertainment options they have in Vegas the more potential they have to bring in tourist revenue. Not everyone is a gambler, but there's so much to do there now that you can have a great time even without ever stepping foot into a casino. I'd guess this may be one of the few cities where the math may turn out to be a positive, even if those dollars could be put elsewhere.
Another day, another check written in public funds to a private entity that doesn't need it.
Oh look, another greedy billionaire ruining something people love. Condolences to any Oakland folks on here.
A's fan here. Thank you for your condolences. It's been a long time coming, but I wish the league would just force a sale of the team instead. This is one of those times I feel like boycotting baseball, in general, is a good idea. MLB could have made the team better, but chose not to because of billionaire dollars.
MLB supporting this instead of pushing the A's into Howard Terminal makes no sense.
Vegas nets the other owners over a billion dollars expansion fee. Oakland won't. Yet they're willing to just give the market to Fisher?
Oakland has been slowly bled of it's sports teams. It's such as shame because they are such die hard fans. Even when the warriors were terrible they were named "best fans in the NBA". The Raider's fans would dress to the 9s. And the As, well watching the As was just such a great opportunity to have a cheap hot dog and beer and watch the game from damn near next to the outfielders. I'm really sad they have all left and really sad for the local community.
The horrible billionaire owner who's consistenly torpedo'd the team in order to relocate and sell it through intentional mismanagement gets rewarded for his shady practices by given exactly what he wants.
Great. I'm glad my team (Blue Jays) has competent ownership at least.
Putting the issue of publicly funded stadiums for billionaires aside, do we really need another stadium in the middle of a desert?
I could see an argument for putting these stadiums in the middle of nowhere as a way to get the traffic out of the main areas people hang out. But that also assumes we're going to be car-dependent forever.