Sports exist for entertainment, not to extort the citizens of their region, many of whom may not even watch said sport. Our taxes built a new football stadium like ten years ago and I'm still pissed about it. And of course they then priced all the seats out of reach of most of the population. If the coaches and players want a new stadium then they can shell out a couple bucks from their multimillion dollar contracts or they can fuck off.what percent of that stadium by you did taxpayers pay for? like 90 percent of it? not the billionaire owner...etc...?
what percent of that stadium by you did taxpayers pay for? like 90 percent of it? not the billionaire owner...etc...?It was 50/50 State and private funding. And of course once it paid itself off 50% of the future profits did not then go back into the state.
It was 50/50 State and private funding. And of course once it paid itself off 50% of the future profits did not then go back into the state.i read this as well. That they much overestimate how much the new stadium will generate in revenue. yeah like none of the future profits go to the state..
There have been studies on the ROI of stadium investments by public funds and it pretty much shows across the board that they're bullshit scams that allow rich investors to get richer under the pretense of providing (temporary construction and shit-paying permanent) jobs.
All cities who want a sports team should pull a green bay packers. At least the money goes back into the city.what is their arrangement though? have vaguely heard of it. So they don't have a billionaire owner?
what is their arrangement though? have vaguely heard of it. So they don't have a billionaire owner?
"The Packers are the only community-owned franchise in North America's four traditional major leagues. Rather than being the property of an individual, partnership, or corporate entity, they are held by stockholders, more than 537,000 in total as of 2022. No one is allowed to hold more than 200,000 shares."oh, cool. Any downside to this method or way of doing it, like packers people have said it is to the traditional method?
I mean seriously wtf can you do about it? Buy it? So unless you got a spare Billion just lying around, either just find a new team to be a fan of or continue to root for them. Being from Jerz, they took the Nets (eventhough I'm a Sixers fan), and the Giants/Jets play here, but are considered NYC teams. So what we got left, Hockey?oh didn't realize that. They are called ny teams , but are like 30 mins away, what difference does it make?
First, there would first need to actually be a major sports team in my city. We only have minor league teams.oh so you do think that even that stadium money makes no difference at all, a drop in the bucket?
Second, I probably wouldn't care. So much tax money is wasted on useless crap that an extra few billion isn't going to make a difference.
The only argument I can see for taxpayers footing the bill is that stadiums generate a fuck load of revenue and create a ton of jobs. But it's a regional benefit with diminishing returns the further away from the stadium site you are.yea i read that the supposed great economic benefit of new stadiums is vastly overrated etc... you really dislike billionaire owners...etc.... does this feeling extend to also the athletes too?
And it's a shit argument because while a couple thousand folks might get a job or a bump in pay, a handful of already-wealthy business owners and millionaires will reap the most benefit so in short fuck no should taxpayers foot the bill. Fuck billionaires.
As a San Diegan, this already happened and I'm still pissed. Instantly stopped following the Chargers.they recently built a new stadium after a threatened move? What percent did the taxpayers pay , of the new stadium?
While they make an absurd amount of money for what they do, I do not believe athletes (and to that end actors,musicians, etc) are overpaid. They deserve the money they make because they are the entertainment. They're the ones putting asses in seats and bringing money into the stadiums/theaters.billionaires should pay for all of it, do you think athletes should pay for any of it?
If anything, the athletes deserve the money and if taxpayers are footing the bill for the stadium then the billionaire "owners" should be cut from the equation and revenue should be generated directly to the state to justify the tax-funded construction. Just make sports teams state-owned entities if they want taxpayers paying for stadiums
they recently built a new stadium after a threatened move? What percent did the taxpayers pay , of the new stadium?
Snapdragon Stadium is owned by SDSU as part of their SDSU West expansion, so it was paid for by donations and bonds to be paid back by Stadium revenue.so but that is still mostly tax money paying for it right, just different wording? snapdragon like that asian ramen company, the only one i know that is remotely close to that name.
oh so you do think that even that stadium money makes no difference at all, a drop in the bucket?
In the grand scheme of things? Yes. If money was distributed more fairly then I would care, but when city budgets range in the tens of billions per year for seemingly no benefit to the citizens, what is another billion every 20 or so years?You do believe that that in your city that most of those tens of billions are wasted? You believe that most of that money is like corruption though, most of it is pocketed by individuals?
You do believe that that in your city that most of those tens of billions are wasted? You believe that most of that money is like corruption though, most of it is pocketed by individuals?
no, stadiums should not involve taxpayer money at all.just that stadium money is not nearly enough for all roads
take those billions and fix the fucking roads instead.
oh, cool. Any downside to this method or way of doing it, like packers people have said it is to the traditional method?I have no idea if it would even be viable today. They did this back in the 1920's in a relatively new league, the amount of money you'd need to raise today would probably make it substantially more challenging.
I have no idea if it would even be viable today. They did this back in the 1920's in a relatively new league, the amount of money you'd need to raise today would probably make it substantially more challenging.What about this way makes it not feasible though?
I have no idea if it would even be viable today. They did this back in the 1920's in a relatively new league, the amount of money you'd need to raise today would probably make it substantially more challenging.If memory serves, it is also how a lot of European football teams are handled. I think it would be doable. The question would be would the NFL allow a new team like that to enter the league.
If memory serves, it is also how a lot of European football teams are handled. I think it would be doable. The question would be would the NFL allow a new team like that to enter the league.I don't think the NFL would care, they get their cut regardless, I'm just not sure you could raise the billions of dollars needed for an NFL team through, what is effectively, crowd-sourcing. The costs associated to running a team have greatly out-paced inflation.
If memory serves, it is also how a lot of European football teams are handled. I think it would be doable. The question would be would the NFL allow a new team like that to enter the league.
just that stadium money is not nearly enough for all roadspretty sure the money spent on just one stadium could fix all the roads in that state it's in
no, stadiums should not involve taxpayer money at all.They already tax you for the roads, politicians just take from that revenue and fill their pockets or spend it on other things instead of fixing the roads. If they spent tax money the way it should be spent we wouldn't have these problems, hell we could cut taxes and still have improved roads, infrastructure, programs, etc.
take those billions and fix the fucking roads instead.
I think it is more a matter of "would the NFL allow a new team period". Only one team has been added in the 21st century, and only 11 teams have been added since the NFL and AFL merged (2 of those being AFL teams that got in a few years after).I think the NFL's focus on expansion now is outside the US, given the increasing number of international games each year. Overall though I was focusing more on the financial viability of that kind of ownership rather than the likelihood.
The only way I could see it happening is if one of the existing teams were sold to a city, which would never happen.
so but that is still mostly tax money paying for it right, just different wording? snapdragon like that asian ramen company, the only one i know that is remotely close to that name.
Well they're bonds issued through the CSU system and get paid back, it's not like tax funded stadiums ever have that tax money paid back directly. Snapdragon is a Qualcomm brand of systems on a chip. I guess they decided Qualcomm Stadium yet again would be weird.Never heard it called that, thought it might be some wording workaround......
Never heard it called that, thought it might be some wording workaround......Never heard which? Snapdragon?
Never heard which? Snapdragon?No the thing they're using to find it , bonds or whatever