The Pros And Cons Of The Funding Of NFL Stadiums

It is evident that hosting the Olympics games is no walk in the park. The countries trusted with this task have to spend billions to make the games a reality. Some people believe that the countries, even after spending billions of dollars benefit from the games, while others believe that the money can be spent elsewhere more efficiently. To reach a conclusion, one must study all of the different impacts in all of the different sectors the games have.

Although the NFL won’t admit to it, the National Football League is most definitely a monopoly. In order to become a monopoly, you have to take control of the market are in, in this case, it is football. Monopolies are characterized by high barriers to entry, and almost zero competition, and great amounts of power. Monopolies are commodity controlled by one party, in this case, the commodity is football and the party is the NFL.

The past 20 years have witnessed a massive transformation of professional sports stadiums in North America and the rest of the world. In the United States and Canada alone, by 2012, 125 of the 140 teams in the five largest professional sports leagues, the National Football League (NFL), Major League Baseball (MLB), National Basketball Association (NBA), Major League Soccer (MLS), and National Hockey League (NHL), will play in stadiums constructed or significantly renovated since 1990. This new construction has come at a significant cost, the majority of which has been covered by taxpayers. Construction costs alone for major league professional sports facilities have totaled in excess of $30 billion over the past two

     Possibly those who are most effected by the sport’s industry’s willingness to abandon a community are the dedicated fans. When Al Davis moved the Oakland Raiders to Los Angeles, he pulled away from some of sport’s most loyal fans and also hurt his football team. The NFL’s Colts and Cardinals have also had failures on the field since their moves. These three teams are proof that all the greed that was put into the moving of their franchises hasn’t brought them more success or in some cases less success.

Sports Stadiums are an iconic staple of American tradition. However not everything about these venues is positive. Team owners take advantage of laws and fans to meet their own goals. Citizens and city officials from various locations have taken up their grievances with the NFL in the past. And it has gotten to the point where even political parties join together to bring to light issues with the organization. NFL stadiums are not good for cities because they take advantage of tax payers, hurt citizens on an economic level and cost them billions in subsidies.

While growing up in the state of Texas I was introduced to National Football League (NFL) at a very young age. Not only was I obsessed with great players like Emmitt Smith and Michael Irving, I had a more finical appreciation for the lucrativeness associated with the NFL. My young adulthood as well as my teenage years was spent playing and learning football with the aspirations of hopefully making it to the NFL. Unfortunately, my playing days ended with tryouts at Texas Tech University, but my love for the game has remained stagnant over the years even till this day. The NFL today is Americas most watched sports league and has taken the crown as the most lucrative and unique economic force in sports. Forbes offered approximations stating that on average, the NFL generates more than $6-9 billion a year in revenues alone. A third of the individual franchises in the league were appraised at over more than $1 billion while the other franchises average nine figures or higher. The NFL as an organization generates its revenues through a multitude of ways ranging from huge television contracts, in-stadium ticket sales, advertising ads paid for by sponsors and merchandise. Their business model unlike most other leagues, is centered on a hard salary cap on player contracts which provides cost certainty with its sponsors. In this paper, I will examine the economic and historical narrative associated with the growth of the NFL’s

Contrasting to Document 1, by Caio Megale from What did the World Cup do to Brazil’s economy? about why having the World Cup in Brazil is ultimately a great benefit to Brazil, Document 2, by Paul Dimeo from Hosting Major Sports Events: Hidden Costs and Policy Dilemmas, believes that the harms of hosting a major sporting event in no way outweigh the negatives. Overall, Document 2’s argument is stronger because of the author’s more effective use of inflammatory language, use of statistics, and outside sources, even though Document 1 does have a much stronger credibility. These articles, though, find very similar neutral effectiveness of reasoning and addressing counter arguments.

Sports teams are a symbol of a cities pride. Take for example the Chicago Cubs. They create a sense of loyalty toward that city. However, none of that would happen without a stadium. Stadiums and teams can play a very important role in a cities economy, or they could also be irrelevant. To decide whether or not they are useful or not you must first understand each side of the argument. So first, let’s examine the pros of having a stadium within your city. Then, we will discuss the harms of having one. And finally, decide which side is more beneficial for the economy.

To connect to the economic power that generates through the Super Bowl one must understand the historical pattern of revenue, ticket cost, and attendance the game exhibits in the week leading up to the actual showdown. The ticket prices of the Super Bowl are the main catalyst into understanding what every consumer is willing to spend and how much revenue the game brings to that city. In 1967, the first Super Bowl tickets were no higher than 12 dollars and the average price of a home was less than 25,000 dollars (Smith, 2012). In 2016, the average ticket price was 1,325 dollars making a big ascendance from 1967 (Depietro, 2017). Therefore, this also shows how the game has become more popular since it has come into existence and ticket prices

In the United States, new sports stadiums are commonly seen as a vital part of the redevelopment of a city having a great economic growth with the production of jobs and a positive income builder. After this, the owners of the pro sports teams with millions and millions of dollars of subsidies for the construction of new stadiums and arenas and expect these facilities to generate economic benefits exceeding these subsidies by large margins. However, a growing body of fact indicates that professional sports facilities, and the franchises they are home to, may not be engines of economic benefit anywhere claims Sachse, “. In reality, sports franchises typically account for a very small proportion of the total economic output of the cities in which they reside.” Some economical studies on the amount of income and employment in US cities find no evidence of positive economic benefits associated with past sports facility construction and some studies find that professional sports facilities and teams have a net negative economic impact on income and employment. It just shows that these results suggest that at best, professional sports teams and facilities provide non-pecuniary benefits like civic pride, and a greater sense of community, along with consumption benefits to those attending games and following the local team in the media; at worst, residents

Economic theory introduces us to four different types of markets: perfect competition, monopolistic competition, oligopoly, and monopoly. Professional sports teams operate in an environment that is different than the typical business structure. The goal of this paper is to look at this industry, in particular the NFL, in an economics context and gain an understanding of the market structure of this unique industry. To do this I will discuss a brief history of the National Football League in the U.S. and how this organization is structured. I will also discuss typical market structures and type of

Each of the  stadiums are funded in unique ways, communities do not benefit from new stadiums, and stadiums do not save a struggling downtown. Foremost, stadiums hurt public schools, and this money should be used for more important public services.  There are many  reasons we subsidize sports, but stadiums do not help the economy, and there are no net benefits from stadiums.  Teams strive for new stadiums to create an image,  but there are  options so that a community will not loose a team to another city without building a new stadium.

This directly impacts the projected NPV of the project as almost 95% of the cash flows are derived from this boost in sales. In addition to the financial support, remodeling the Stadium location also fits well with their business strategy. Some of the key supporting evidence includes a high percentage of the target market in the trade area at 42% of college educated adults, and a population with the highest median income of the group at $65,931. Most important to Target however, would be the maintenance of their brand. As a company that places a high value on the image of their brand, revitalizing a lagging store would both keep their presence in the local area and potentially draw more customers to an upgraded location. The final decision would be to accept the project under no budget constraints, but not issue new debt or equity to achieve it.

The Olympic Games is one of the biggest and most unrivaled sporting events in the entire world. At first it may seem like a huge plus or advantage for a city or nation to host this event. However on the contrary there are a lot of negative aspects that occur when a nation hosts this event. While the event is taking place, from the outside it looks like a state of the art, prestigious event that it is. Some of the problems that are caused by hosting Olympic games deal with, stadium development, local resident life, security issues, and many others that will be discussed. One of the big problems when dealing with a mega event such as the Olympic Games is the stadiums, which get built, and how they get abandoned or not used after the games are finished. This is one of the major problems surrounding the Athens 2004 games. Many of the stadiums and infrastructure are left untouched and abandoned to this day.

America is in the midst of a sports construction boom. New sports facilities costing at least $200 million each have been completed or are under way in Baltimore, Charlotte, Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Milwaukee, Nashville, San Francisco, St. Louis, Seattle, Tampa, and Washington, D.C., and are in the planning stages in Boston, Dallas, Minneapolis, New York, and Pittsburgh. Major stadium renovations have been undertaken in Jacksonville and Oakland. Industry experts estimate that more than $7 billion will be spent on new facilities for professional sports teams before 2006.