CHILLY FIRED - Packers are COACH KILLERS!

[Joemailman]

I read an interesting article about three years ago - where, I cannot remember - that made a strong case that there is no case in which a publicly financed stadium has benefits that outweigh the costs. The direct economic impact of a stadium occurs in a very limited area of any downtown - if you took the same amount of money that a stadium would require and put it into a downtown development authority, the entire city and state would receive far greater benefits for a far wider range of any given city.

I know that same argument was made back when the Bears were talking about a new stadium, before the decision was made to renovate Soldier Field. What usually happens in a case like the Vikings have (threatening to leave completely) is that politicians cave rather than be known forever as the ones that let the city/state's favorite team get away.

[Fritz]

Not sure about that Fritz. I had a client who owned hotels in GB, Appleton and Oshkosh and every playoff game was another $30,000 dropped to the bottom line on each hotel. 3 hotels filled for two nights in mid-January is a owner's wet dream. Then there is the sales tax on the room, room tax and people buying food & beverage which you collect sales tax on.

Dan, that's three hotels for two nights of a year. And if you look at how much taxpayer dime is dropped on a stadium - millions and millions, right? - that two-night stand, plus the other eight home games - how many weekends a year is that, nine or ten out of 50-some weekends? - that's not a very good rate of return compared to investing in infrastructure, and luring businesses with tax breaks.

Besides, the kinds of jobs that a new stadium will get you are mostly in the low-paying part of the service sector - hotel jobs, restaurant jobs - as opposed to using an equivalent amount of taxpayer cash to invest in a city's infrastructure and in bringing businesses in that will bring in a more professional class of people, who will themselves then start to go out on weekends, go to restaurants, and the like.

M yopinion is that the whole "it-is-good-for-the-economy" argument completely ignores what you could do for a city and state's economy by taking that exact same amount of taxpayer coin and investing it in other, more useful ways.

[ThunderDan]

Dan, that's three hotels for two nights of a year. And if you look at how much taxpayer dime is dropped on a stadium - millions and millions, right? - that two-night stand, plus the other eight home games - how many weekends a year is that, nine or ten out of 50-some weekends? - that's not a very good rate of return compared to investing in infrastructure, and luring businesses with tax breaks.

Besides, the kinds of jobs that a new stadium will get you are mostly in the low-paying part of the service sector - hotel jobs, restaurant jobs - as opposed to using an equivalent amount of taxpayer cash to invest in a city's infrastructure and in bringing businesses in that will bring in a more professional class of people, who will themselves then start to go out on weekends, go to restaurants, and the like.

M yopinion is that the whole "it-is-good-for-the-economy" argument completely ignores what you could do for a city and state's economy by taking that exact same amount of taxpayer coin and investing it in other, more useful ways.

Fritz its 10 weekend a year, and with the playoffs it can be another 2. That is almost 25% of all weekends. Have you tried to book a hotel on a GB Packer weekend. There are none to book in a 50 mile radius so its hundreds and hundreds of hotels. Think of the impact for restaurants, bars, etc.... We had to stay in a Microtel Suite in Oshkosh one year because that was all that was available.

Without hard numbers I think it would be hard to argue either side with any certainty.

[pbmax]

Not sure about that Fritz. I had a client who owned hotels in GB, Appleton and Oshkosh and every playoff game was another $30,000 dropped to the bottom line on each hotel. 3 hotels filled for two nights in mid-January is a owner's wet dream. Then there is the sales tax on the room, room tax and people buying food & beverage which you collect sales tax on.

There are several studies (not the ones provided by teams) that point out that the largest source of revenue claimed by the economic impact reports involve discretionary income that would otherwise be spent on alternate activities. Not that the absence of a team would be net neutral, but that the largest financial drivers are wildly overstated. Visitors, taxes and hotel/restaurants, etc. would take a hit, but those account for a small percentage of the claimed economic impact.

Green Bay might be an exception given that the ticket base is from all over the state and the community is smaller. But overall the claims of impact are grossly exaggerated by teams. Cities, like an athletic department at a University, they hope its neutral and then reap ancillary benefits not tied directly to the game (prestige, donations, good will).

[pbmax]

Just some light reading:

http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1997/summer_taxes_noll.aspx

http://news.illinois.edu/news/04/1117stadiums.html

http://www.sabernomics.com/sabernomics/index.php/2008/05/sports-stadiums-and-economic-development-a-summary-of-the-economics-literature/

http://www.imakenews.com/cppa/e_article000623460.cfm?x=b11,0,w

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv23n2/coates.pdf

This was just a Google search and a brief glimpse would indicate these articles will take the view that the impact is overblown. I welcome opposing evidence, articles, etc. I might pay for reading the impact Jerry said that Cowboys Stadium would have. Texas sized claims indeed.

[Fritz]

Great, PB. Way to go. Trying to get factual information involved when Dan and I were perfectly fine making vague claims. We could've ended up flaming each other if you'd have left the damn facts and studies out.

This is sports talk, man. Don't you know that facts get in the way?

[ThunderDan]

Great, PB. Way to go. Trying to get factual information involved when Dan and I were perfectly fine making vague claims. We could've ended up flaming each other if you'd have left the damn facts and studies out.

This is sports talk, man. Don't you know that facts get in the way?

Hey Fritz let's flame PB for fucking our thread up.

[Fritz]

Agreed. He and Patler are always throwing those goddamn facts around.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Dan, that's three hotels for two nights of a year. And if you look at how much taxpayer dime is dropped on a stadium - millions and millions, right? - that two-night stand, plus the other eight home games - how many weekends a year is that, nine or ten out of 50-some weekends? - that's not a very good rate of return compared to investing in infrastructure, and luring businesses with tax breaks.

Besides, the kinds of jobs that a new stadium will get you are mostly in the low-paying part of the service sector - hotel jobs, restaurant jobs - as opposed to using an equivalent amount of taxpayer cash to invest in a city's infrastructure and in bringing businesses in that will bring in a more professional class of people, who will themselves then start to go out on weekends, go to restaurants, and the like.

M yopinion is that the whole "it-is-good-for-the-economy" argument completely ignores what you could do for a city and state's economy by taking that exact same amount of taxpayer coin and investing it in other, more useful ways.

Completely agree with you Fritz. THe only case I've seen that's different is the Verizon Center (Wizards / Capitals) where the arena was a centerpiece of large neighborhood improvement. I havent lived here that long, but from what i've heard, the impact and improvement was substantial.

[gbgary]

don't know if anyone noticed but if you have directv (don't know if it's on dish) there is a show called vikings weekly. for last week they reran the previous week's show previewing the upcoming Packers game. they totally avoided a show with the game's outcome, chilly's firing, and bf's dramatics.

[MadScientist]

I can see that the impact on a large city would not generally be worth the expense of a stadium, but I would think GB would be an exception. GB without the Packers would be another forgettable Midwestern town, with no reason for any outsiders to go there.

I realize this is a Vikings thread, so perhaps if they put the new stadium inside the Mall of America, it would have the desired impact.

[MichiganPackerFan]

Vikings asked for a new stadium, and all they received was a Big Top!!!

[Guiness]

The way the cities/municipalities/counties choose to pay off the stadiums is atrocious, I might add.

I had to go to Houston on business a couple of years ago, and was dumbfounded at the surcharges on my flight and rental car. Some sort of a sport's authority charge on the flight, motel room had a surcharge, and the rental car had a "per day" fee of like $9 tacked on! I was there to work, and was certainly not going to benefit from any of that crap, and annoyed at having to pay for them.

I returned the rental car to a lot in town, and rented another one (no surcharge because I didn't pick it up at the airport) and moved to a motel in Keady. It was a bit of a pita, but the principal of the thing really ticked me off.

I have avoided Houston at least partially for that reason (another is that it's a shitty city). You'd think someone would clue in to how stupid the idea is. I guess in their mind, they're grabbing money from people who aren't voters in their area.

[MichiganPackerFan]

The way the cities/municipalities/counties choose to pay off the stadiums is atrocious, I might add.

I had to go to Houston on business a couple of years ago, and was dumbfounded at the surcharges on my flight and rental car. Some sort of a sport's authority charge on the flight, motel room had a surcharge, and the rental car had a "per day" fee of like $9 tacked on! I was there to work, and was certainly not going to benefit from any of that crap, and annoyed at having to pay for them.

I returned the rental car to a lot in town, and rented another one (no surcharge because I didn't pick it up at the airport) and moved to a motel in Keady. It was a bit of a pita, but the principal of the thing really ticked me off.

I have avoided Houston at least partially for that reason (another is that it's a shitty city). You'd think someone would clue in to how stupid the idea is. I guess in their mind, they're grabbing money from people who aren't voters in their area.

Texas doesn't have an individual income tax, so they have to get their cash somewhere!!!

[Guiness]

Texas doesn't have an individual income tax, so they have to get their cash somewhere!!!

Well, I do have income tax, and don't appreciate paying their's as well!