FC/OT: John Oliver Explains the Biggest Scam in Sports....

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Publicly funded stadiums. Some of this stuff is absolutely amazing. The Gumbel interview with the Miami Marlins pencil pusher is especially revealing ('We don't open our books cuz tradition!). If you have some time, it's absolutely worth watching and quite stunning to be honest.

 

[WPB_lion]

Publicly funded stadiums. Some of this stuff is absolutely amazing. The Gumbel interview with the Miami Marlins pencil pusher is especially revealing ('We don't open our books cuz tradition!). If you have some time, it's absolutely worth watching and quite stunning to be honest.

View embedded media

While I understand the numbers directly attributable to the city having a professional sports team may not justify the funds spent, I believe there are intangible benefits and prestige associated with a city having professional sports teams that are not being taken into account. As an example, if I were offered the exact job in a city with an NFL and MLB team and in a city without either an NFL and /or MLB team, the city with an NFL and MLB team would hold a definite advantage. The pride associated with a city's professional teams is also an intangible benefit that cannot be measured directly.

I know that when there was talk of the Pirates leaving Pittsburgh, I would have felt terrible had they left. I would feel even worse if the Steelers left. The owners know how attached fans are to the sports teams and the politicians will do literally anything to make sure the teams stay. If you have enough money to buy a professional team, it is literally a license to steal because sitting politicians will do anything to keep the teams in their city / attract teams to their city.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

While I understand the numbers directly attributable to the city having a professional sports team may not justify the funds spent, I believe there are intangible benefits and prestige associated with a city having professional sports teams that are not being taken into account. As an example, if I were offered the exact job in a city with an NFL and MLB team and in a city without either an NFL and /or MLB team, the city with an NFL and MLB team would hold a definite advantage. The pride associated with a city's professional teams is also an intangible benefit that cannot be measured directly.

I know that when there was talk of the Pirates leaving Pittsburgh, I would have felt terrible had they left. I would feel even worse if the Steelers left. The owners know how attached fans are to the sports teams and the politicians will do literally anything to make sure the teams stay. If you have enough money to buy a professional team, it is literally a license to steal because sitting politicians will do anything to keep the teams in their city / attract teams to their city.

I don't disagree with this, and I think the gist of the piece is that the deals mostly suck for the taxpayers, especially those who aren't into professional sports (or those in places who could use the money for something much more useful). I would say that having a pro sports team in a city would be very low on my list of 'must haves', but I get it's that important to some people.

 

[psu00]

I don't disagree with this, and I think the gist of the piece is that the deals mostly suck for the taxpayers, especially those who aren't into professional sports (or those in places who could use the money for something much more useful). I would say that having a pro sports team in a city would be very low on my list of 'must haves', but I get it's that important to some people.

Don't forget the impact a pro sports team has on the local economy- people buying tickets, restaurants, hotels, parking fees, not to mention being able to tax all players that come to the city (philly did this year's ago). I understand the argument over best use of money but there's more to it than just 'paying for a rich owner's stadium'.

 

[cronk]

there was much rejoicing when Orlando's MLS soccer team decided to privately finance their own stadium, I love all the pride the city gets from their sports teams but no team should hold a city ransom, they are private businesses, make them pay for their own stadium (and let them keep their profits)

 

[PennSt8er]

Publicly funded stadiums. Some of this stuff is absolutely amazing. The Gumbel interview with the Miami Marlins pencil pusher is especially revealing ('We don't open our books cuz tradition!). If you have some time, it's absolutely worth watching and quite stunning to be honest.

View embedded media

I thought the OP was gonna post about WWE. That's a big scam too.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Don't forget the impact a pro sports team has on the local economy- people buying tickets, restaurants, hotels, parking fees, not to mention being able to tax all players that come to the city (philly did this year's ago). I understand the argument over best use of money but there's more to it than just 'paying for a rich owner's stadium'.

Did you watch the piece? Economists say the numbers, to include restaurants, hotels, etc., don't justify the use of public funds (for most deals) for stadiums. One even said you would be better off taking the money and dropping it on the populous from a plane. Also note all revenue from the venue, to include non-sports related events, go to the team, not to the city. Look at Philly - all of their stadiums are in one giant parking lot for the most part. What restaurants are there that aren't in the stadiums making any kind of business? How many additional hotels were built around there to host fans? My guess is zero and not many. Taxing the players is funny because their taxes help pay for the stadiums they play in so again, another win for the owners.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

I thought the OP was gonna post about WWE. That's a big scam too.

I said 'Biggest scam in SPORTS'.... .

 

[psu00]

Did you watch the piece? Economists say the numbers, to include restaurants, hotels, etc., don't justify the use of public funds (for most deals) for stadiums. One even said you would be better off taking the money and dropping it on the populous from a plane. Also note all revenue from the venue, to include non-sports related events, go to the team, not to the city. Look at Philly - all of their stadiums are in one giant parking lot for the most part. What restaurants are there that aren't in the stadiums making any kind of business? How many additional hotels were built around there to host fans? My guess is zero and not many. Taxing the players is funny because their taxes help pay for the stadiums they play in so again, another win for the owners.

Didn't get a chance to listen to the piece yet (in an spot where I can't put on video/ audio right now- but I will later). . I'm not sure how economists have reached that broad based conclusion to be honest- too many variables in different cities. Obviously the deal between the city and team/ owner is key. The city shouldn't absorb all cost and then lose out on revenue from non sports events etc. it has to be an even partnership in that regard.

As for philly it's right down the broad street line so they don't need to build new hotels in the parking lots (although they did open that philly live restaurant/ bar area in the parking lot last I heard- haven't been there in a long time). I know the Pittsburgh hotels especially near the point get sold out quickly on Steeler home games. Each city is different and it's up to the city leadership to determine if it's in the city's best interest or not.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Didn't get a chance to listen to the piece yet (in an spot where I can't put on video/ audio right now- but I will later). . I'm not sure how economists have reached that broad based conclusion to be honest- too many variables in different cities. Obviously the deal between the city and team/ owner is key. The city shouldn't absorb all cost and then lose out on revenue from non sports events etc. it has to be an even partnership in that regard.

As for philly it's right down the broad street line so they don't need to build new hotels in the parking lots (although they did open that philly live restaurant/ bar area in the parking lot last I heard- haven't been there in a long time). I know the Pittsburgh hotels especially near the point get sold out quickly on Steeler home games. Each city is different and it's up to the city leadership to determine if it's in the city's best interest or not.

Right; this piece notes that for some cities, the deals are good and work. For others, like in Detroit, the public was put on the hook to finance 60% of a new hockey arena for the Redwings *after* the city had filed for bankruptcy. Why? Because the owner, Mike Ilitch, worth 3.2 Billion, who purchased the team for some $8mm in 1982, has the city and residents of Detroit by the balls.

I haven't been to Pittsburgh in a while but am from there, and I don't know that the North Shore development has delivered what most folks were thinking when they decided to put the two new stadiums there, but my guess is it's better than before.

 

[Obliviax]

Did you watch the piece? Economists say the numbers, to include restaurants, hotels, etc., don't justify the use of public funds (for most deals) for stadiums. One even said you would be better off taking the money and dropping it on the populous from a plane. Also note all revenue from the venue, to include non-sports related events, go to the team, not to the city. Look at Philly - all of their stadiums are in one giant parking lot for the most part. What restaurants are there that aren't in the stadiums making any kind of business? How many additional hotels were built around there to host fans? My guess is zero and not many. Taxing the players is funny because their taxes help pay for the stadiums they play in so again, another win for the owners.

Yeah, this has been an issue for quite some time. When the Browns left CLE, it was because Art Model didn't have enough cash to pay for his kid's inheritance tax so he got MD to give him ~ $100m in cash.

On the other hand, I lived near Pittsburgh when the steel mills collapsed. Then I moved to CLE. Pitt clearly has recovered faster, and I am convinced it is because of the championship years Pittsburg enjoyed. It sealed their "brand" as a championship city and created more investment into the area. CLE, in the meantime, has had one of the worst runs in sports history across all major sports. CLE has an awful branch, people have a chip on their shoulder and nobody wants to come here and play (until James came back).

So, my point is, that these studies don't include marketing and "brand awareness". Did you know Columbus is the largest city in Ohio? Many people don't. Why? It doesn't hasn't had a pro franchise (recent addition of the Blue Jackets, NHL) .

could Penn St cost justify a new 110,000 seat stadium? I am sure not. However, without football and that stadium, PSU would be a cow pasture university commensurate with Ohio University.

 

[jj410]

Didn't get a chance to listen to the piece yet (in an spot where I can't put on video/ audio right now- but I will later). . I'm not sure how economists have reached that broad based conclusion to be honest- too many variables in different cities. Obviously the deal between the city and team/ owner is key. The city shouldn't absorb all cost and then lose out on revenue from non sports events etc. it has to be an even partnership in that regard.

As for philly it's right down the broad street line so they don't need to build new hotels in the parking lots (although they did open that philly live restaurant/ bar area in the parking lot last I heard- haven't been there in a long time). I know the Pittsburgh hotels especially near the point get sold out quickly on Steeler home games. Each city is different and it's up to the city leadership to determine if it's in the city's best interest or not.

The pols and owners hire consultants to do rigged cost-benefit studies. Aside from just straight-out cooking the books, one thing the studies don't address is that those who spend money on the sport would spend it on other entertainment, so you are just shifting the money from one set of merchants to another. The taxes collected, which are only a small percentage anyway, are not any greater. It's seldom a good deal for the taxpayers based on just economics, if you ignore intangibles like civic pride and quality of life.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffrey...ts-stadiums-are-a-game-that-taxpayers-lose/2/

 

[LionDeNittany]

Publicly funded stadiums. Some of this stuff is absolutely amazing. The Gumbel interview with the Miami Marlins pencil pusher is especially revealing ('We don't open our books cuz tradition!). If you have some time, it's absolutely worth watching and quite stunning to be honest.

View embedded media

Not much different from Public Unions. It is very easy to negotiate with people spending taxpayer money. All about kickbacks and votes.

By funding stadiums politicians are riding a free wave of advertising provided by the businesses (NFL as an example of a business)

College stadiums are closer to reality in terms of perks that are reality based.

LdN

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Yeah, this has been an issue for quite some time. When the Browns left CLE, it was because Art Model didn't have enough cash to pay for his kid's inheritance tax so he got MD to give him ~ $100m in cash.

On the other hand, I lived near Pittsburgh when the steel mills collapsed. Then I moved to CLE. Pitt clearly has recovered faster, and I am convinced it is because of the championship years Pittsburg enjoyed. It sealed their "brand" as a championship city and created more investment into the area. CLE, in the meantime, has had one of the worst runs in sports history across all major sports. CLE has an awful branch, people have a chip on their shoulder and nobody wants to come here and play (until James came back).

So, my point is, that these studies don't include marketing and "brand awareness". Did you know Columbus is the largest city in Ohio? Many people don't. Why? It doesn't hasn't had a pro franchise (recent addition of the Blue Jackets, NHL) .

could Penn St cost justify a new 110,000 seat stadium? I am sure not. However, without football and that stadium, PSU would be a cow pasture university commensurate with Ohio University.

Again, the issue here is not whether a pro sports team is good for a city, but whether the public funding stadiums for them is. I think most people like what a nice, new sports venue can add to their quality of life (concerts, sporting events, etc.), but for the public to fund it and only reap ancillary benefits (some job creation, a 'brand') is insane IMO. Why should the owners of the Miami Marlins get every bit of revenue from a concert held in a stadium the public funded for them?

And, honest question, how much impact has the Blue Jackets franchise had on Columbus? Probably hard to tell with tOSU there.

 

[The Spin Meister]

What about lost opportunity costs? First up, almost all stadia are tax exempt, costing host cities more money. And they are used intermittently instead of every day like standard businesses. Football about 11 games a year and a few other things like concerts, so most employees are part time. Worse, they take up prime real estate that could be occupied by numerous other structures that pay substantial taxes. And they would hire a ton more employees, employees that work full time and would patronize local bars, restaurants, retail and other services.

Pittsburgh spent roughly $500 mil on the baseball and football. Imagine if they gave $500M to Apple to build Iphones, GM to build cars, Google to do their nefarious stuff. They would have hired hundreds if not thousands of employees, all making more money and paying lots of taxes and buying homes...more taxes and more jobs. . And paid some serious taxes annually on $500M of property.

 

[Obliviax]

Again, the issue here is not whether a pro sports team is good for a city, but whether the public funding stadiums for them is. I think most people like what a nice, new sports venue can add to their quality of life (concerts, sporting events, etc.), but for the public to fund it and only reap ancillary benefits (some job creation, a 'brand') is insane IMO. Why should the owners of the Miami Marlins get every bit of revenue from a concert held in a stadium the public funded for them?

And, honest question, how much impact has the Blue Jackets franchise had on Columbus? Probably hard to tell with tOSU there.

I don't disagree. The downside is, the team will simply move to another city. I think pro sports teams enjoy some exemptions for taxation and anti-trust. Not sure here. But if so, that should be removed as they hold cities hostage as they did CLE.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

I don't disagree. The downside is, the team will simply move to another city. I think pro sports teams enjoy some exemptions for taxation and anti-trust. Not sure here. But if so, that should be removed as they hold cities hostage as they did CLE.

Part of the game is having owners pit cities against each other; at some point, you'd think they would wise up.

 

[psu00]

Yea

Right; this piece notes that for some cities, the deals are good and work. For others, like in Detroit, the public was put on the hook to finance 60% of a new hockey arena for the Redwings *after* the city had filed for bankruptcy. Why? Because the owner, Mike Ilitch, worth 3.2 Billion, who purchased the team for some $8mm in 1982, has the city and residents of Detroit by the balls.

I haven't been to Pittsburgh in a while but am from there, and I don't know that the North Shore development has delivered what most folks were thinking when they decided to put the two new stadiums there, but my guess is it's better than before.

Yeah, I remember hearing about the Red Wings deal and thinking that was crazy. That said- it's Detroit who clearly has had failed fiscal responsibility for decades. . It all depends on competent city leadership and the individual deals.

As for the cities benefits- don't limit it to just the north side of Pittsburgh (or just the parking lot in Philly). You have to think city wide and not just immediate area of the stadium. I really can't wait to see this Oliver piece later tonight.

 

[anon_xdc8rmuek44eq]

Yea



Yeah, I remember hearing about the Red Wings deal and thinking that was crazy. That said- it's Detroit who clearly has had failed fiscal responsibility for decades. . It all depends on competent city leadership and the individual deals.

As for the cities benefits- don't limit it to just the north side of Pittsburgh (or just the parking lot in Philly). You have to think city wide and not just immediate area of the stadium. I really can't wait to see this Oliver piece later tonight.

Interested to hear your thoughts.

 

[psu00]

Again, the issue here is not whether a pro sports team is good for a city, but whether the public funding stadiums for them is. I think most people like what a nice, new sports venue can add to their quality of life (concerts, sporting events, etc.), but for the public to fund it and only reap ancillary benefits (some job creation, a 'brand') is insane IMO. Why should the owners of the Miami Marlins get every bit of revenue from a concert held in a stadium the public funded for them?

And, honest question, how much impact has the Blue Jackets franchise had on Columbus? Probably hard to tell with tOSU there.

But I think that's the flip side that often gets ignored or minimized in this debate. There's zero reason the Marlins should get 100% of the money from a concert held there. The problem with that (assuming it's true for sake of argument) is that the Miami city officials who negotiated that deal were apparently idiots. They should have insisted that if they funded 50% of the stadium they should get 50% of the revenue it generates. Now that leaves the owner with 3 options- agree, decide it's better he funds it himself through some creative financing, or move the team to another city.

 

[manatree]

.

could Penn St cost justify a new 110,000 seat stadium? I am sure not. However, without football and that stadium, PSU would be a cow pasture university commensurate with Ohio University.

I acknowledge that the publicity that PSU football brings to the university is significant. However, we Penn State fans grossly overestimate that impact.