Comparación de los perfiles de solidificación entre las buza S60 y S73

250

Direct Visitor Super Bowl Spending 2002-2014

Spending (in millions)

Source: Sullivan, S.P. “Super Bowl's economic impact on N.J.: At least 75% below NFL estimates.”

Upon these three examples that were provided, the trend is very similar to the rest of the team venues. Whether the Super Bowl was hosted in Texas, Florida, or Detroit, the actual impact on the economy was just a fraction of initial estimate. The NFL has a tendency of over estimating Super Bowl impact on local cities when in reality it is much less than anticipated. However, since the game of football is widely popular based on demand, cities would rather gain a little than not have anything at all. Even though the use of public subsidizing stadiums is becoming less and less popular, cities and states will continue to use part of the public funds to help build these venues because they see it as too much of a risk to let the team move elsewhere.

CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSION

All in all, the idea of subsidizing NFL stadiums has grown less popular with the mass public. The results continue to suggest that, as with this research, the economic impact is not large enough to justify the use of public funds towards venues. The main reasons why city governments still advocate for building stadiums for NFL teams are because of jobs! Not only that, but proponents claim that building facilities improve the economy in four different ways. The main argument is that by building venues create construction jobs. The fans that attend game events or also work for the franchises generate new spending within the local community and expanding employment further.

Also, teams attract tourists and companies to the city, which then expand local spending and creating additional jobs. Lastly, with all the new spending created there is a

multiplier effect, which causes yet even more spending and job creation.

Supporters of subsidizing stadiums claim that economic growth is spurred that eventually they become self-financing. However, by the time that point is reached, the team may have relocated to another city. The subsidies that are used become offset by the revenues from ticket sales, sales tax on merchandise, and also on property tax from the economic impact from the stadiums. However, as the results tend to show, arguments in favor of using public funds due to the resulting economic impact are false. The NFL inflates economic impact when a city hosts the Super Bowl. The research done revealed that when a Super Bowl event takes place in a host city, the actual economic impact on the city is just a fraction of the total amount the NFL initially stated. Cities subsidize on

average half of the total cost of the venue, yet by hosting a Super Bowl only yields a fraction of the public funds that were used.

On the contrary, the NFL is such a popular league that fans demand it

overwhelming. Since franchises know this, if public funds are not used towards stadium financing then they use the threat of relocation. This action then forces officials to act quickly and usually end up in subsidizing the venues. A clear example of this is in the St.

Louis market. The team is looking to relocate to Los Angeles while officials in St. Louis are coming up with a stadium plan to keep the team with roughly half in public funds being used. However, the city of St. Louis is still paying off the bonds on the old venue.

If the new stadium gets built the city will end up having to extend the bonds causing taxpayers to continue to pay for the stadiums for an additional thirty years. Yet, data shows that by having a Super Bowl in the city will not result in economic growth large enough to pay off the debt of the stadiums. Therefore, it should not be in the best interest of the St. Louis community to help subsidize a venue for the franchise.

The question then turns to whether or not the Los Angeles market should help subsidize a stadium for an NFL team. The league continues to flirt with the idea of having a professional football team in the Los Angeles area only if it is good for both the NFL and the city. Right now there are two competing Los Angeles area stadiums to attract NFL teams. The Inglewood project estimates that 40,000 jobs would be generated and $1 billion per year would go to the local economy due to the events. The Carson stadium would create more than 13,000 jobs and about $530 million in economic growth.

These estimates are known to be inflated, however, whether it is due to the added revenue or job growth, cities will still see some impact that they will benefit from. The

community must therefore come up with an agreement between the costs and benefits of subsidizing an NFL stadium.

To conclude this research, therefore, this paper once again synthesizes and

analyzes what previous research has shown for years; that subsidizing NFL stadiums does not generate the needed economic impact in the city in order to justify the use of public funds on an estimated billion dollar venue. However, this outcome really depends on the cities and individuals. If by using public funds on a stadium to get people back to work, then the benefit may outweigh the cost because the government will then look great by creating jobs, especially in a depressed city. For the most part, though, the conclusion is that public subsidies are not worth the fraction of economic growth generated from the stadiums.

Bibliography

Baade, R. A., Baumann, R. W., & Matheson, V. A. 2008. Assessing the Economic Impact of College Football Games on Local Economies. Journal Of Sports Economics, 9(6), 628-643.

Baade, Robert A., Robert Baumann, and Victor A. Matheson. 2008. "Selling the Game:

Estimating the Economic Impact of Professional Sports through Taxable Sales."

Southern Economic Journal 74, no. 3: 794-810.

Baade, R. and Matheson, V. 2006. “Have Public Finance Principles Been Shut Out in Financing New Stadiums for the NFL?” Public Finance and Management, Vol. 6, No. 3: pp. 284-320.

Berr, Jonathan. "The Super Bowl's Economic Impact: Super-hype?" CBSNews.

Coates, D., & Humphreys, B. R. 2011. The Effect of Professional Sports on the Earnings of Individuals: Evidence from Microeconomic Data. Applied Economics, 43(28-30), 4449-4459.

Davis, Michael C., and Christian M. End. 2010. "A Winning Proposition: The Economic Impact of Successful National Football League Franchises." Economic Inquiry 48, no. 1: 39-50.

Kaempfer, William H. 1998. "Sports, jobs, and taxes: The economic impact of sports teams and stadiums." Journal Of Economic Literature 36, no. 4: 2188-2190.

Kahane, Leo H., and Stephen, eds. Shmanske. 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Sports Economics. Volume 1. The Economics of Sports. n.p.: Oxford Handbooks., 2012.

Lotterman, Edward. 2014. "Real World Economics: NFL Acts as One Would Expect."

TwinCities.com. December 14, 2014.

http://www.twincities.com/business/ci_27126044/real-world-economics-nfl-acts-one-would-expect.

Murphy, Kevin M., and Topel, Robert H. “The Economics of NFL Team Ownership.”

http://pirate.shu.edu/~rotthoku/papers/The%20Economics%20of%20NFL%20Tea m%20Ownership.pdf.

Pinckard, Cliff. "Super Bowl XLVIII's Economic Impact on New York, New Jersey Being Questioned: A Closer Look (poll)." Northeast Ohio Media Group.

Quinn, Kevin G., ed. 2012. The Economics of the National Football League: The State of the Art. n.p.: Sports Economics, Management and Policy series., 2012.

Quirk, James, and Rodney D. Fort. 1997. Pay dirt: The business of professional team sports. n.p.: Second edition., 1997.

Scully, Gerald W. 1995. The market structure of sports. n.p.: Chicago and London:, 1995. EconLit.

Sullivan, S.P. 2014. “Super Bowl's economic impact on N.J.: At least 75% below NFL estimates, experts say.”

"The Economic Impact of Super Bowl XLVI." Rocketport Analytics. July 1, 2012.

Vrooman, John. "The Economic Structure of the NFL."

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/econ/faculty/Vrooman/VROOMAN-NFL.pdf.

Vrooman, John. 2009. Theory of the perfect game: competitive balance in monopoly sports leagues. Rev Ind Organ 34(1):5–44.

Zimbalist, Alex. 2010. Reflections on salary shares and salary caps. J Sports Econ 11(1):17–28.