Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NinjaLanternShark t1_jdelh82 wrote

Article mentions:

> Last year economists John Charles Bradbury, Dennis Coates, and Brad Humphreys reviewed more than 130 studies conducted over 30 years, finding “clear and unambiguous evidence” that sports stadiums and arenas do not generate strong economic benefits for host communities.

At the end of that paper's exec summary is this line:

> Economic activity in and around sports facilities on game day represents a transfer from other local commercial activity and comes at the expense of existing local businesses

42

ell0bo t1_jdev8s9 wrote

You cherry picked one heck of a quote there... I can do that too

>First, and perhaps most important, nearly all empirical studies find little to no tangible impacts of sports teams and facilities on local economic activity, and the level of venue subsidies typically provided far exceeds any observed economic benefits

This study mainly looks at the question of "is it good for government to subsidize the stadium". That isn't the question here though. Hence why your quote is followed by: > Overall, consensus findings from economic research demonstrate that public subsidies to fund sports stadiums and arenas likely do not pass a cost-benefit test.

Another fun quote out of context: > economic research clearly identifies evidence of important intangible social benefits from hosting sports activities, which indicates that sports teams do produce positive spillovers through quality-of-life amenities, consumer surplus, and community pride benefits in some circumstances

17

NinjaLanternShark t1_jdf0tbg wrote

To be fair, if you're going to pull quotes, the "conclusion" section of a research paper is about the best place to do so.

And I'm very glad that, at present at least, it doesn't look like the stadium is looking for any public funding or subsidies. I have no doubt they'll make it an opportunity zone and give them a 10 year tax abatement though.

13

SanjiSasuke t1_jdg5e3a wrote

The land already has an abatement. It will have that abatement no matter what does or doesn't go there, so its immaterial on the city side.

2