Over the past twenty years, there has been a ninety percent replacement rate of stadiums, more than a hundred new sports facilities, with nearly all of them receiving public funding. The most common enticement for such a large public investment lies in the hope of creating jobs and growing local economies. In addition to direct employment (stadium and franchise staff), indirect employment serving neighboring shops, restaurants, hotels, and public transportation systems are often positively affected as well. Additionally, when new stadiums are erected, a spike in spin-off development often occurs as a result and ultimately has a positive effect of revitalizing the city. Additional potential benefits include an increase in tourism revenue and an increase in tax revenue (University of Michigan). But are the benefits of stadiums ultimately just a pipedream sold to fools? In 1997, Andrew Zimbalist co-authored a book with Roger G. Noll which suggested that “A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment” and further concluded that “no recent facility appears to have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been self-financing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus” (Noll & Zimbalist, 1997).
With all the talk of the economic benefit of creating jobs, it is important to expand on the reality of this suggestion. Most middle-class citizens have an allocated entertainment budget. As a result of a sports team moving into their community, or the refurbishment of an existing stadium, members of the community do not increase their individual entertainment budgets. A mere shift in an existing
Ultimately, there are three exceptionally important criteria for deciding on good candidate for an expansion team. The first criterion is that the stadium must be controlled or owned by the baseball team. The stadium is a crucial aspect because most of the team’s revenue is generated in relation to the stadium. This stadium revenue comprises of ticket sales, parking, merchandise and concessions. Thus, without a stadium, the team will not be able to generate a stable source of revenue. The second criterion is that local ownership must have strong roots within the community. Without ties to the community, fan attendance could decrease. This is because fans could eventually perceive that the owner(s)’s only goal for the MLB franchise was to be profitable. The third criterion is the city must have long-term political support in the community. It is vital to have political support in order to gain financial support throughout the team’s years of existence, especially in tax payer monies. Particularly, this is significant when the team experiences issues or fights that involve the stadium and the land around the stadium. If there is a lack of political support, the expansion teams will not be able to obtain enough for money for stadium renovations, repairs, or to build new stadiums for the same team within the same city. This circumstance was apparent when the New York Yankees used tax revenue generated by New York City to fund the building of their brand new stadium for the 2009 season. Therefore, expansion committees believe it is necessary to confirm that the prospective cities will have enough political support because this political factor will help stabilize and financially support the prosp...
Siegfried, J., & Zimbalist, A. (2000). The economics of sports facilities and their communities. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, , 95-114.
Some of the most prolific franchises in sports, like the Oakland Raiders and Baltimore Colts of the National Football League, have moved to other cities breaking off their loyalty to the hometown fans. More important than the actual moves are the more frequent threatened moves. When teams “play the field” and explore the option of playing in other cities they are able to lure interested cities into giving them just about any royalty they want. New stadiums are only the beginning. The willingness to threaten departure has secured for teams a variety of land deals, lower taxes, more revenues from parking and concessions, control of stadium operations, guaranteed ticket sales, renovation of stadiums with luxury seating, control over neighborhoods and transportation systems, and that’s only the beginning of the list.
There seems to be a domino effect through out the U.S., new stadiums are being built, teams are demanding that their city build them a new stadium to play in but it is not necessary to build these stadiums. The most obvious change in new stadiums is coming from baseball. In the last 10-15 years many new baseball stadiums have been built, but who is paying for these stadiums? The teams and the owners that are demanding the stadiums, or the taxpayers? The answer is that taxpayers are picking up a huge amount of the cost to build a new stadium.
Abstract: The Stadium construction boom continues, and taxpayers are being forced to pay for new high tech stadiums they don’t want. These new stadiums create only part-time jobs. Stadiums bring money in exclusively for professional leagues and not the communities. The teams are turning public money into private profit. Professional leagues are becoming extremely wealthy at the taxpayers expense. The publicly-funded stadium obsession must be put to a stop before athletes and coaches become even greedier. New stadiums being built hurt public schools, and send a message to children that leisure activities are more important than basic education. Public money needs to be used to for more important services that would benefit the local economy. Stadiums do not help the economy or save struggling towns. There are no net benefits from single purpose stadiums, and therefore the stadium obsessions must be put to a stop.
Mitten, Matthew J., James L. Musselman, and Bruce W. Burton. "Targeted Reform of Commercialized Intercollegiate Athletics." San Diego Law Review 47.3 (2010): 779-844. Academic Search Complete. Web. 17 Nov. 2013.
After reading " The Case Against High School Sports" by Amanda Ripley started to make me think. There were many strong points about how the priorities of the sports are beginning to be more important to students than their education. Another great point was that the financing and budgeting is unfairly distributed throughout school districts and is spent more on athletics and clubs and not enough on classes. And I Believe that schools should put certain restrictions on the spending and promoting or in school sports and clubs because of the major drop in national and world comparisons.
College athletes are undoubtedly some of the hardest working people in the world. Not only are they living the life of an average student, they also have a strenuous schedule with their specific sport. One of the most discussed topics in the world of college athletics is whether or not student-athletes should be paid money for playing sports. The people who disagree with the idea have some good arguments to make. Primarily that the athletes get to go to school for free for playing sports. Another argument is that if student-athletes were to get paid then it would ruin the amateurism of college sports. People who are against paying the athletes do not want to see the young people become focused on money. “Paying student-athletes would dramatically shift their focus away from where it should be - gaining knowledge and skills for life after college” (Lewis and Williams). This is very understandable because one of the biggest reasons college sports are so popular is because the athletes play for school pride and for bragging rights. They play because they enjoy the game, not because it is their job. Most people that disagree with the idea of paying the athletes fail to realize what really goes on behind the scenes. At most Universities around the country the bulk of the income the school receives is brought in through the athletic programs. In fact the football and basketball teams usually bring in enough money to completely pay for the rest of the athletic programs all together. To get a better understanding of how much has changed in the world of college sports a little history must be learned.
Over the past twenty years, many things have changed and evolved to impact our economy. From cell phones to music to media, we are all constantly affected. The most influential aspect though, in my opinion, has been America’s biggest game, the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl by all means effects our economies in every way, shape, and form. The sport is one of the most complex social institutions in American Society. Sports effect major institutions of society, including: the mass media, politics, religion, education, and family. The Super Bowl gathers thousands of viewer’s attentions including those who do not usually watch the regular season games.
From 2001 2002 there was a 23% increase in the construction of sports stadiums and arenas with costs of those facilities upwards of $7.8 billion. The growing global sport industry requires that sport facility and event management keep current of new and proven management techniques. Sport Facility Management: Organizing Events and Mitigating Risks by Ammon, Jr., Southall, and Blair, provides readers with a basic introduction to elements of facility management for the full range of sporting and entertainment events. There is a high demand for individuals who are educated and trained in facility management, event organization, and risk management and since the September 11 attacks there has been a great emphasis placed on facility and risk management. Each chapter provides theoretical foundations and practical applications for each critical phase of facility management. The authors provided photographs, case studies, and industry examples to assist the reader in gaining an overall basic, picture of the sporting event and entertainment industry today. The book provides in-depth discussions about positive advances that have made the entire experience easier and more comfortable for fans; and about the negative economic and cultural consequences for sport events after September 11 2001.
Throughout this essay I will focus on the design and development of stadiums from the beginning of the 20th century until the present day.
Bissinger states in his essay that local high schools these days are spending millions of dollars on things such as elaborate stadiums, gymnasiums and even chartered planes to transport their team to big play-off championship games. In the past, schools would sponsor fundraisers to RAISE the money for these t...
... into stadiums for the big games to be played in, like football, hockey, and baseball and other sports to be played in so people can come and watch them to be entertained.
Sports are one of the most profitable industries in the world. Everyone wants to get their hands on a piece of the action. Those individuals and industries that spend hundreds of millions of dollars on these sports teams are hoping to make a profit, but it may be an indirect profit. It could be a profit for the sports club, or it could be a promotion for another organization (i.e. Rupert Murdoch, FOX). The economics involved with sports have drastically changed over the last ten years.
The economic impact of media sports illustrates the central importance of our culture. For example: Statistics show that Americans spend more than $60 billion annually on sports (it is between 1% and 2% of Gross National Product). Being a star in media sports in America means receiving a temporary income of 6 or 7 figures. Personal Identification and Heroes Sports fans often identify themselves with teams, players, and regions so that outcome takes on personal significance to them.... ...