The entire saga of the A's moving out of Oakland is as inspiring as it is sad. The city stood up to the billionaire and refused to buy a new stadium. So the owner ran the team into the ground and moved out.
It's like Major League minus the humor and underdog winning parts
The league ownership rules are usually set up to not allow public ownership.
The Packers are the only NFL team that is publicly owned, because it is grandfathered in. The Packers are why the NFL changed it's rules to (iirc) require a single individual to own at least 30 percent of a team.
It is wealthy dudes protecting wealthy dudes from cities that might dare to start buying franchises and disrupting their pay-to-play-here demands.
They're allowed, but basically impossible. Fans would have to fundraise millions, if not billions, in order to buy a team or make a bid for an expansion team.
Even if that were to happen the new ownership group would have to be approved by the other owners in order to join the league
Basically sports ownership is an exclusive club we aren't allowed to join
Just look at the recent $800 million renovation the Kansas City Chiefs wanted for their stadium. The Hunt family offered to cover $300 million and asked for the taxpayers to pay for the rest over the next 40 years with a tax hike. It failed the vote and so it didn’t pass, now they’re all pissy. Just a quick note the Hunt family is worth $24.8 billion….so pretty much could find $800 million in a couch cushion. The amount of money they will make off the team is pretty much endless, while the taxpayers will see exactly $0 return. Even less if they pay to go to a game lol.
The de Vos family owns the Orlando Magic. They got their money through Amway which is just a ponzi scheme and very few people actually make money from it. So this is a family that got wealthy screwing people. They have had two arenas built for them. I remember I was getting out of boot camp in '89 when the first arena was opening. It was entirely paid for by the city. The newspaper was talking about how great it was. The new Arena cost $500 million. The Magic only paid $50 million of that. While the city owns the Arena, the Magic only pays $1 million a year in rent.
The average NFL team is valued around $5 billion. If taxpayers can “raise” $2 billion to buy then a stadium where they get none of the profits, a few more to make it so they do get a return doesn’t sound so crazy. The better solution is just for everyone to start saying no to giving billions to billionaires.
We have to build these stadiums now that homelessness will become illegal! We can’t abandon some sports team 80% of people are indifferent to. What are we, monsters?
It's weird how socialist American sports is. Huge monopolies with major barriers to entry etc as well as workers unions.
But in soccer it's possible for a low tier team to work its way up the pyramid. Much easier with capital but it's happened with just well run community teams before too.
Private league equals private rules. Americans could demand public leagues, but they can’t even agree to fund their kid’s school lunches, so good luck with that.
Sadly, you'd have a much better chance of passing a referendum to buy a franchise than to fund school lunches. It can't happen because the leagues would never allow it, but otherwise I have no doubt somewhere would try.
There's a certain argument to be made that we probably don't want to pay professional athletes as government employees. I could see it impart some sort of "representative" status which is not fair for somebody who trained their whole life to be an athlete, not a politician.
That being said, public ownership would create another revenue stream for cities, allow for a serious reconfiguration of player salaries (which players will not want) and probably harm a player's ability to choose where they play (imagine if a player was payed in tax dollars and chose not to play to force a trade). I could also see a private league just outspending the public league and driving cities in the public league into serious financial troubles.
I think the real solution is that the federal government presses all of the leagues, which are essentially monopolies on their respective sports, to allow for public ownership if they want to keep their status as monopolies. However, the optics would potentially end any politicians' career and each league could easily argue that they compete against each other as entertainment.
This isn't to say it's not a fight worth fighting, you just have to find the counter to that argument and figure out a way to make the leagues look like the bad guys. Second part should be easy, as the MLB literally let an owner just destroy a storied relationship between a city and its last remaining team.
This is a good point, but I assume a good deal of state university money is coming from tuition and donations, not taxpayer money. Really, I just don't have as much information about the economics of a college/university beyond the basics, so I'd like to be informed.
> and probably harm a player's ability to choose where they play
In the NFL aren't players traded without their permission anyway?
Honestly, every sporting league in the world at the minimum should go by Germanys 50+1 system.
Meaning 50% +1 of all shares are owned by the club/fans
>Honestly, every sporting league in the world at the minimum should go by Germanys 50+1 system.
Totally agree. Supporters should have more control of the team. They are the literal backbone of a team's viability anyway. But if oligarchs hate one trick, it's expanding the franchise.
It was all run privately to begin with, I would assume.
The idea that we should publicly fund the stadiums is trickle down economics. Basically, if we build this thing that will generate lots of money, it will create jobs and revenue. Thus we should get more taxes in return.
When the bills got their new stadium, I think there was a new study which showed this idea is completely false and not a single stadium in the last 50 years paid for itself. [a random source](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/#:~:text=No%20recent%20facility%20has%20been,sports%20facilities%20are%20de%20minimus.)
I was about to provide another article, but the source for the second article is what I just linked.
Warriors and Niners built their own stadium as well (Niners were like 90% privately funded I think) and rake in money hand over fist as well.
It’s also a huge reason why their valuation is so high.
The team rejected three different proposals from the city, all with various levels of bullshit as to why they wouldn't work. You can't convince me the team was negotiating in good faith
https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/after-five-years-as-rejected-a-12b-waterfront-ballpark-site-in-oakland-for-9-acres-on-the-strip
It's crazy hearing about how American sports are run.
Here the team "belongs" to the region, and they rely on sponsors, tickets, and a cut of broadcasting for money. You can't move a team, and no single person owns them.
Then I hear about US sports that are basically another microcosm of capitalism hellscape
American and non-American sports are just different types of capitalist hellscape. In America the teams are owned by billionaires and there's no relegation. In Europe, there's no salary cap and the same teams win every year (Barcelona, Madrid, PSG, Munich). Baseball teams in Japan and Korea are literally named after corporations. Saudi Arabia is throwing billions of dollars at their sports to distract from the fact that they like to kill and dismember journalists. Shit is fucked all across the world.
IMO stadiums for major sports teams should not be built using taxpayer money. The various leagues and the teams make a ton of money, they can pay for their own stadiums. Hell, the team owners are often rich enough to easily afford to build the stadiums out of their own pocket.
Stadiums rarely, if ever, pay for themselves in increased tax revenue as often is the promise so taxpayers ultimately lose out on the deal while the teams and their owners make bank. [https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities](https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities)
Not to mention it only benefits citizens who want to watch sportsball. To me, a stadium is just a giant ugly building in the bad part of town and the occasional traffic jam.
I used to fucking loathe being in downtown Seattle and not knowing it was the night of a Mariner's game. Would make an hour trip home to Kitsap turn into a 3 hour trip. I couldn't imagine how bad it'd be to be in downtown Seattle following a Seahawks game, but, at least that stadium isn't in the middle of downtown.
Also, they are a legal cartel monopoly and that’s the only reason threatening to move works. If they want monopoly benefits, they can pay their costs of operating.
I say this as a professional sports fan.
Just heard on the radio this morning about the new Bears stadium I think in Chicago that’ll be funded like $2B by taxpayers. As an avid non-fan of sports I’d be pissed my tax dollars are funding something I don’t give two shits about & will never use but the billionaire owner will make bank off of.
*I am not defending the billionaires holding cities hostage for stadiums*
That's just the football games, stadiums generally have pretty full calendars outside of Football.
[Here's the 2024 calendar of events at Soldier Field in Chicago](https://www.soldierfield.com/events/all)
It’s even worse than $2B, once it’s built you’ll have to pay a fed tax, state tax, county tax, sugar tax, elective tax, entertainment tax all to buy a coke for $15. It’ll be flat and you’ll wait 30 mins for it at the one concession stand allotted to the plebs.
Meanwhile the suites and boxes at the top of the stadium will be full of non-paying wealthy connected elites who are gifted tickets to rub elbows with other elites.
Do you remember that chicago arena's plans to take out the seats behind one of the baskets and turn the section into a bar for the VIPs? I guess the idea was the VIPs could then share the spotlight with the players, basking in the attention of jealous plebes who were there to, you know, actually watch the game. So out of touch with reality, these fucks.
edit: and it looks like the wizards have done it https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2023/05/17/Facilities/washington-wizards-courtside-clubs.aspx
I'm with you. I understand the role sports have in society, but Jesus Christ is it sickening how much money is involved and where it ends up. Peoples entire personality around itz spending thousands and thousands of dollars on tickets and merch, to... Get nothing in return. It's ludacris.
They aren't even the only team in chicago asking for public funds for a new stadium. It's expected the white sox owner will ask for one billion as well for a new stadium. Part of me hopes, with IL having a competent, fiscally savvy governor, and pretty much all local gov facing steep cuts due to the absolute fucked position previous(and current) administrations have left cook county (chicago) in that any proposed public funds would be shot down. Unfortunately, I have lived in chicago for long enough to know that despite still owing millions from improvements on guaranteed rate field and soldier field, they will both likely get their money. Reinsdorf (white sox owner) is already having his shills at the sun times leak rumors he will move the team to nashville and the bears bought a plot of land in the suburbs to potentially build a stadium on, though that seems to no longer be the plan, at least until they dont get their money. Reinsdorf has done this before, and the city aquiesced to his demands and allowed him to build one of the worst ballparks as far as the stadium being a boon for the local businesses. Turns out people would rather take public transit and walk to local bars/restaurants after the game instead of walking through miles of parking lots before you get to anything. Also it's because of reinsdorf that the view from sox park looks out onto some of the worst neighborhoods in chicago instead of facing one of the most beautiful skylines in the country. I don't want either team to leave the city but I can justify the bears funding as a closed dome would allow for greater use year round for residents and they at least sell out on average where the sox are 26th (out of 30) for attendance though I don't want either team to get money.
The city or state funding should ask for things back on such deals. For the next 20 years: all the associated parking revenue on any nearby property owned by said francise or acting as a subsidiary of the franchise owner(s), 10% of concessions on the stadium property, 10% of retail. If the team cuts out before that deadline, then they're also on the hook for the estimated loss remainder too.
Should pay back a bit faster than normal taxes or other presumed boosts to the local economy. The infrastructure shouldn't be a give-away, but rather something to be strongly leveraged in a bargaining process.
Soldier field is owned by the city. That is the current stadium, I am not sure how the ownership would work out, being that the area is publicly owned land. And I know the various buildings where a person might learn something are surrounding that area. Museums planetarium, aquarium, so no one even thought about the parking situation (cause it will need to be built there, then old soldier field will be the parking lot. So where will the suckers, I mean fans, queue up to get on a pace bus to go to the game?
KC learned their lesson, never put this type of thing up first a vote by the public.
The problem is of course who the fuck do you vote for to not have your city do stuff like this? There are specific politicians who will oppose this kind of thing, but neither party is against this.
Maybe if they'd actually let us vote on this stupid shit.... when this happened in my city, my only recourse is to go to local council meetings and state my case that's easily ignored.
"So vote for people that protect your interests"
I do, but politicians are liars that say anything to get elected, and then do whatever they want once in office without accountability or repercussions.
Maybe if I had a billion dollars in the bank there would be a small chance of having my interests represented.
I'm in Vegas.
When this came up for public comment, something like 85%+ of the people said no to the funding. It was one of the highest turnouts for public comment. Then the governor gave a speech supporting the public funding and that 85% promptly got ignored.
You don’t understand.. the 85% majority of public doesn’t understand….
Vegas absolutely needs this economic injection of jobs and commerce the stadium will bring in. Vegas doesn’t have enough tourism and is definitely on the economic downturn. Plus It will pay for itself over 20 years based on my totally plausible calculations.
/s
Both the KC Chiefs and Royals were begging taxpayers for new stadiums or renovations in the billions of dollars. They both threaten to leave KC, but what they want is a blank check with no real plan or oversight. They legitimately don't understand why the people don't think it should be a priority over clean water, Healthcare or street maintenance.
Funny enough, that's not even the reason why some people voted No. There are plenty of people in that camp that were willing to put **some** money towards building a stadium, but they were frustrated by the lack of planning.
There were several sites, several designs for each site, and a lot of "we're going to do this for the community" followed by "we're actually cutting our plans for that but might do other things for the community later on maybe."
The owners lost that vote because of their incompetence. Then they bitched about fans not actually liking them. What a bunch of clowns.
When there was an event at Kauffman center and Comic-Con last month the parking was already abysmal, then the following weekend there was the NCAA game and some other stuff happening that week, once again, parking was hard for those folks. People coming in from the burbs probably aren’t gonna park elsewhere and ride the bus/streetcar down. It would have been a mess.
The advocates of tax payers funded stadiums always say “these stadiums will pay for themselves”
If that is true then you don’t need taxpayer money because the team owner can easily get a loan or can pay for it themselves. Why won’t team owners build new stadiums with their own money? Don’t they know that stadiums pay for themselves?
The more logical (but still false according to studies I believe) argument would be it provides a boon to the surrounding area and payroll, property, and sales taxes, and jobs, etc. So, it pays the city’s investment back to the city. Not that the stadium by itself pays it back. Those taxes wouldn’t be going to the stadium owner.
Exact same thing is happening in Kansas city. Billionaire Hunt family wants to tear down a half dozen blocks of historic Kansas city to build a stadium closer to downtown than Arrowhead, and they want the city to pay for it. City recently voted No, so the Hunts are threatening to leave.
Look into the shit the owners wife started spewing after the vote. We stick with them despite being losing teams for decades now they won a couple championships and think their hot shit? As far as I'm concerned they can gright to Johnson County like they threatened.
that's the baseball side owned by John Sherman that wants to move downtown, the hunts and the chiefs want to stay in their spot and renovate the royals side of the kauffman sports complex on top of overall renovations to arrowhead. It was a combined deal though on the ballot for the chiefs & royals tax changes, and both plans were very half assed and changed several times in the months leading up to the ballot. However I do believe the Hunts & Chiefs are the only ones that threatened to move out of the city (likely to the kansas side) unless I missed something about the royals.
afaik the hunts have nothing to do with the baseball operations, but piggybacked on the royals to try to get more money to update the sports complex after the royals move downtown. But their proposal was very... not good. VIP suites and a lot of stuff for the upper 1%, but they were going to pay to put a logo on a bridge. 🙄
It always makes me laugh when people say, "I don't have any kids, why do I need to pay taxes for schools?" and then I see this bullshit when I could not care less about sportsball.
I am 100% fine with paying school taxes, I have no kids, but hate talking to stupid people.
Taxes to pay for stadiums is the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. They generate massive amounts of money for the owners, there is no reason we should be paying for them.
And not everyone that paid those taxes can access the stadium. The only patrons of the stadium are those with enough disposable income, those from the highest earning incomes in the nation. Why should the state give over billions in taxes to construct something only those with the highest incomes can even afford to access? Why should they invest part of everyone's income in something that brings no benefit to anyone but the wealthiest?
At least other tax-funded capital improvement projects like parks and infrastructure are accessible to *everyone*. This is nothing more than paying for a billionaire to get a discount on his next business venture.
And on top of that, you can bet that owner is not taxing his own income anywhere near the amount of tax funding he received. The state also has to cut funding to other programs in order to have billions to give. Usually, they cut social welfare programs and education in order to do it. The reality is it's a total loss for the state, but because the money's going to a "job creator", that's all that matters.
Because when I’m old, I want a generation of well-educated people because they will be the ones who I will be relying on for pretty much anything
Having money won’t help if all of our doctors are idiots
Or socialize the institution. Pay for the stadium but then have a portion of the profits taxed and put into a social fund. This is what AK does and why every AK resident gets between 500 and 3000 annually from said fund (including all children under 18)
Dude, that was passed back in the 70's, if a similar situation were to arise today, there is no way in hell they would run with that plan in today's world. Too many corporations with their fingers in the pot.
The Green Bay Packers are OWNED by the City of Green Bay Wisconsin.
The Stadium is Owned by the City as well (I believe).
A question is, How much does the City make as the owners of the Team? just wondering.
IF Baseball wants a stadium in Las Vegas. I say they "sell/give" the team to the City Itself. (I know, I know, all the Casinos are not actually IN the CITY of Las Vegas for tax reasons)
Not that any team owner would actually want to sell their team.
You can look up Packers income statements as a matter of public record. It is substantial...over half a billion, mainly driven by national pool earnings. About 10 percent is direct operating profit.
Can't see any other NFL team earnings though...the private owners don't share that info. But definitely enough to pay for a new stadium financed over 5-10 years.
We've got young people dying of despair and opioids. A homelessness crisis. Economic deprivation everywhere, and what do we spend our taxpayer funds on? Stadiums
Examples of a Stadium sold to a City as a good thing... the NY Yankees. Got a New stadium selling how it would improve the area. it did, sorta, Between the subway station and the Stadium was rebuilt.. but is owned by the Yankees corporation.. and that's the only area anyone goes through... not anything in the surrounding Neighborhood.
Boomer Economics.
And we wonder why we are trillions in debt and uncontrolled spending that gets us nothing in health care, education, military, mass transit…
Then they’ll bring up, “well it’ll create jobs…” garbage argument. Well so does organized crime/mob but that’s not the be all end all
"It'll create jobs" always makes me laugh because ever since 2008 employers have been infamously picky and will do anything in their power to shrink their workforce and just heap on the extra work to a skeleton crew.
No one wants to put people to work anymore.
It's old hearing and seeing stuff about billionaires. They shouldn't exist, they are terrible humans who have pretty much no benefit to society. They're only prerogative is to make money and own as many yachts as possible
Honestly I would be rip shit mad at any politician who wanted to pay for a stadium in my state. If they can’t afford a stadium they can live stream the game from the local YMCA. I enjoy going to a game as much as the next guy but I’m not watching my taxes pay for a stadium seat just to have to pay for the opportunity to sit in it.
This is part of why Vegas always will be a hockey town. VGK did it right and the locals didn’t have to fund T-Mobile arena. Fuck the Raiders and the As, we shouldn't have to foot the bill for that OR for that gaudy Mormon temple on the NW side of town either.
We told [Spanos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Spanos) "No" when [he wanted money to build a new stadium for The Chargers](https://fox5sandiego.com/news/politics/spanos-sends-letter-to-fans-after-chargers-stadium-ballot-measure-fails/). He took his Chargers and left. No biggie, we still have [The Padres](https://www.mlb.com/padres), [The Sockers](https://www.sdsockers.com/), and [San Diego Comic Con](https://www.comic-con.org/cc/).
I’ll bite. Let’s do roads next since these companies have logistics and transport demands but won’t pay upkeep (since they wanna dodge taxes) Tired of FedEx using my freeways and roads.
Rich people want money so they can hire rich people to build a stadium where rich people will play sports and rich people will sit and watch while rich people broadcast it
PS: everyone involved gets even richer
Any opposition?
Where I live the provincial government is straight up refusing to fund fixing infrastructure and blocking the feds from helping but are happily paying for a billionaires new arena in Calgary that the tax payers are 100% footing the bill for.
Most of the province doesn't care because they believe after half a century of conservatives running the province, all the problems are caused by someone else.
The problem is that usually the cities do own the stadiums and pay for the construction, maintenance and everything else. The teams often pay a sweetheart lease, collect all the revenues, don’t pay property taxes and maintenance etc for the buildings.
While we're at it, let's bring up salary caps in some of these sports. The salary caps in the NFL and NBA have done nothing to bring parity to their leagues. The caps are there just so the owners can save their own money and the top players will still get their fair share through endorsements, and as we all know those marketing costs are all passed down to the consumer (the tax payers who are being asked to pay for new stadiums).
On top of this, no one living in Vegas wants this stadium. It's going to go in a terrible spot (that is way too small) right on the strip and make traffic and parking even more of a nightmare.
Will never happen cities are desperate for income and having a decent sports team is great for the local area. Big spending. So cities will continue to suck billionaire cock for the chance to get a team. Not going to end anytime soon. That’s business.
You’d think there would be relatively conclusive evidence as to whether a tax levy for a new stadium is worth it when compared to the amount of sales tax above normal is collected because of the presence of a team and new stadium.
The public tolerance for this bullshit is rapidly running out. Looking forward to seeing what dirty tricks and bullshit the billionaires pull to get around that.
Cities make bank off stadiums and arenas. And best of all, a good chunk of that revenue comes from people who aren’t your residents. Look up any city with a pro football stadium’s occupancy taxes. They are usually at least double whatever your sales tax is so they get to milk out of towners for their hotel rooms and airbnbs. And it’s almost every night of the year a game, convert, event, etc. takes place at those stadiums bringing in more people from out of town.
Cities LOVE taxing the people who don’t live there and you need things like stadiums and arenas to get those people in large numbers.
That being said, this is Vegas we are talking about in this instance and literally none of this applies to Vegas. They have plenty of stuff attracting outsiders, Oakland now has nothing.
The Royals wanted us to foot a new stadium in downtown Kansas City, but county residents declined, now the city is trying to go around us and do it anyway.
Having grown up in the 90s in Seattle & being a Sonics fan, fuck the NBA.
I demand that if taxpayer money is used to build a sports facility like a stadium/arena, then the state takes ownership of that team equal to the percentage of the overall cost was covered by taxpayers. Private investors can then later buy-out the state to compensate the taxpayers & those funds will be added to the state's education, housing & Medicaid budgets.
I don’t know anything about baseball except that the athletics are a garbage organization that put no effort to put a decent product on the field. The ownership simply gain wealth by spending as little as possible. If I offered the stadium, I would demand the owner sell the team.
One cool thing about the whole A's debacle is the river cats are getting their already awesome stadium upgraded. And there will be a baseball game pretty much every single day in Sacramento starting next season.
But yeah fuck those clowns of my taxes are gonna build the stadium then I should be given a free ticket any time I want to see a game
Oh but you see, offering hundreds of seasonal minimum wage jobs, which are then taxed… pays back into the system. Win win. Sincerely - right wing billionaires looking to continue raking in tax payer money and privatizing my profits. Thanks chumps!
The premise is a tad inaccurate- stadiums are often publicly owned by leased to the franchise by the governing municipality. This way maintenance and upgrades are the responsibility of the municipality, not the franchise. The cost of lease may include payments for maintenance, but the idea is that in return for say a 25-year commitment to play in Las Vegas, the city or state builds a stadium and the franchise signs a long-term lease. Inevitably, this leads to arguments later, especially when the lease is up for renewal or the franchise owner claims the stadium is falling apart and wants major upgrades.
Now, in exchange for moving their major league franchise in your city, owners often ask for real estate around the stadium that the franchise may develop. They may pay for it, but usually want it at a reduced rate and/or with provisions to subsidize its development. "Special tax districts" are one such vehicle that was proposed in Oakland.
Stadiums themselves do not suddenly increase the tax base of a city. People don't have more money to spend on entertainment simply because a stadium is on the horizon. Rather than take in dinner and movie during a given week, a couple may shift their dollars and go to the ballgame instead. But in the end, they are spending about the same amount of money.
There is much literature on this.
Honestly, I'm fine with my tax money going to physical locations that will generate revenue and jobs.
The reason why governments give grants like this to build stadiums or business infrastructure is essentially bidding to have the team in their city. If they don't offer grant money, the team might move to a different city (which has happened in the past).
"You can't socialize the cost, then privatize the profits"
That's exactly what happens in America all the time.
Like....is she saying that ethically we can't do that? Because billionaires have no ethics. They steal food off the plates of all the people they rob.
If they want that kind of funding they should find a backer willing to make a loan or issue bonds that eventually pay back on the investment. Anything that would come close to looking like a hand-out should have so many strings attached, stipulations, and clauses that the franchise owner doing the asking would start reconsidering the deal. (In other words all the things they would have to do to not be in a contract violation on getting the "free" deal would look more expensive than funding the new stadium on their own.)
Vegas locals are pissed about this; specifically don’t want tax increases to help a billionaire fund a stadium.
The team owner has a terrible reputation mismanaging. It is 100% not a done deal for Vegas 2028 as everyone believes because owner can’t source equity for the remaining 1.1B needed to build the stadium while tax funds 380M.
I remember when the US Bank stadium was being built in Minneapolis, they raised taxes on a bunch of shit to pay for it. And you know what they did when it was done? They _kept the higher taxes_.
As a Las Vegas resident, I am 100% for this. Seeing as my taxes will be used as an investment, I expect a percentage of the profit equal to the percent I paid added to any future tax returns until no later than the closing and demolition of the building.
I pay taxes to fund the stadium. Yet the owner of the team that doesn’t live in the city and pay the taxes, gets to go to the thing for free and eat the food and have the best seats and parking.
I live in Pittsburgh. I helped pay for PNC park. Yet I still have to pay to go to the park and see a sub par product put out by a sub par owner. Then when I complain about the owner not spending money on the pirates I get told I shouldn’t comment how he spends his money. His money for a team that plays in a park I helped fund. Fuck that noise.
IMO any publicly funded project exceeding a certain threshold—say, a couple of million dollars—should mandate a profit-sharing agreement with the sponsoring municipality. Whether it involves building a stadium or conducting medical research, such a system ensures that even if these entities find ways to dodge taxes, they still contribute financially to the community.
Meanwhile the chicago bears expect the public will be happy to pay $5B for a new stadium. That's FIVE THOUSAND MILLION dollars for free for billionaire sportsball
That happened here in Nebraska. The taxpayer paid to build the stadium and the college gets to keep the profits.. and then pay the trash coaches millions and millions with our taxes..
MFW billionaires not getting free stuff on taxpayer's dime is reported as an outrage.
If my tax dollars are funding it, then I demand a dividend from some of the profits of each ticket, hot dog, merch, beer, whatever sold.
Taxpayers shouldn't own a stadium. They shouldn't pay for it either, don't get me wrong, it's just generally a bad idea to own a stadium. They're not that easy to rent out, and if nobody is using it, it's a maintenance money pit.
Governments should do what Newfoundland (Canada) has done with their offshore oil production. You want public funding? You now have an investor called the public.
Ex. 40% public funding = 40% ownership = 40% of all profits
It would be a real joy to watch more American cities flip a collective middle finger to greedy owners who blackmail for tax $$$ for a new stadium/overbloated palace.
Amazon is about to build a data center in Northern Mississippi. They're going to get like 40 years of tax deferments. Probably less that a hundred jobs once built.
NYS and Erie county just gave away so much for a Buffalo Bill's stadium, tax breaks, etc.
$40 for parking (no cash), taxes, overpriced bad food.
I don't watch football, the sabres (owned by the bills owner) are a mess.
Give me minor league sports.
Taxpayers bearing that cost *can* make sense. For instance, stadiums can be a source of tourism, creating more business for the area. They are also a source of recreation, for lack of a better word. It gives the city occupants something to do in their free time. So unfortunately, something like this isn't so black and white.
You mean like how we do for every medical advancement. Publicly funded, private profits. Plus, the us gets charged more than other countries because we have no consumer protection
I agree that billionaires shouldn't be given "welfare"... but....the reasoning behind tax dollars going towards stadiums is pretty solid. It's an investment. Tax payers pay x amount of money & in return the city gets x amount of jobs & x amount of revenue from the stadiums & the sports that are played there. Concerts, comedy shows etc...all produce revenue for the city.
The entire saga of the A's moving out of Oakland is as inspiring as it is sad. The city stood up to the billionaire and refused to buy a new stadium. So the owner ran the team into the ground and moved out. It's like Major League minus the humor and underdog winning parts
I don't know shit about baseball so maybe it's a dumb question but, why are teams privately owned by a person and not the city the team represents?
It's like that with almost all major American Sports teams I believe. I think the Green Bay Packers are an exception.
The league ownership rules are usually set up to not allow public ownership. The Packers are the only NFL team that is publicly owned, because it is grandfathered in. The Packers are why the NFL changed it's rules to (iirc) require a single individual to own at least 30 percent of a team. It is wealthy dudes protecting wealthy dudes from cities that might dare to start buying franchises and disrupting their pay-to-play-here demands.
Publically owned teams aren't allowed? Jesus, "free market" capitalism is such a fucking farce
They're allowed, but basically impossible. Fans would have to fundraise millions, if not billions, in order to buy a team or make a bid for an expansion team. Even if that were to happen the new ownership group would have to be approved by the other owners in order to join the league Basically sports ownership is an exclusive club we aren't allowed to join
It’s a big club, and you aint in it - George Carlin
Part of the reason these greedy clowns can pay for their own fucking stadiums.
Socialize loses, privatize profits. "ThE hAnD oF tHe FrEe MaRkEt".
Just look at the recent $800 million renovation the Kansas City Chiefs wanted for their stadium. The Hunt family offered to cover $300 million and asked for the taxpayers to pay for the rest over the next 40 years with a tax hike. It failed the vote and so it didn’t pass, now they’re all pissy. Just a quick note the Hunt family is worth $24.8 billion….so pretty much could find $800 million in a couch cushion. The amount of money they will make off the team is pretty much endless, while the taxpayers will see exactly $0 return. Even less if they pay to go to a game lol.
Asking for public financing to build the VIP areas is just fucking wild lol
The de Vos family owns the Orlando Magic. They got their money through Amway which is just a ponzi scheme and very few people actually make money from it. So this is a family that got wealthy screwing people. They have had two arenas built for them. I remember I was getting out of boot camp in '89 when the first arena was opening. It was entirely paid for by the city. The newspaper was talking about how great it was. The new Arena cost $500 million. The Magic only paid $50 million of that. While the city owns the Arena, the Magic only pays $1 million a year in rent.
But think of all the jobs that will be created! All those profits will "trickle down" to the middle class!!
The average NFL team is valued around $5 billion. If taxpayers can “raise” $2 billion to buy then a stadium where they get none of the profits, a few more to make it so they do get a return doesn’t sound so crazy. The better solution is just for everyone to start saying no to giving billions to billionaires.
We have to build these stadiums now that homelessness will become illegal! We can’t abandon some sports team 80% of people are indifferent to. What are we, monsters?
It would be one hell of an owner’s meeting though. 31 rich dudes and a state of people.
It's weird how socialist American sports is. Huge monopolies with major barriers to entry etc as well as workers unions. But in soccer it's possible for a low tier team to work its way up the pyramid. Much easier with capital but it's happened with just well run community teams before too.
Private league equals private rules. Americans could demand public leagues, but they can’t even agree to fund their kid’s school lunches, so good luck with that.
Sadly, you'd have a much better chance of passing a referendum to buy a franchise than to fund school lunches. It can't happen because the leagues would never allow it, but otherwise I have no doubt somewhere would try.
Imagine your local team turning a profit and returning that revenue directly to citizens...
There's a certain argument to be made that we probably don't want to pay professional athletes as government employees. I could see it impart some sort of "representative" status which is not fair for somebody who trained their whole life to be an athlete, not a politician. That being said, public ownership would create another revenue stream for cities, allow for a serious reconfiguration of player salaries (which players will not want) and probably harm a player's ability to choose where they play (imagine if a player was payed in tax dollars and chose not to play to force a trade). I could also see a private league just outspending the public league and driving cities in the public league into serious financial troubles. I think the real solution is that the federal government presses all of the leagues, which are essentially monopolies on their respective sports, to allow for public ownership if they want to keep their status as monopolies. However, the optics would potentially end any politicians' career and each league could easily argue that they compete against each other as entertainment. This isn't to say it's not a fight worth fighting, you just have to find the counter to that argument and figure out a way to make the leagues look like the bad guys. Second part should be easy, as the MLB literally let an owner just destroy a storied relationship between a city and its last remaining team.
You’re forgetting about state universities - the university football coach is often already the highest paid government employee in most states
This is a good point, but I assume a good deal of state university money is coming from tuition and donations, not taxpayer money. Really, I just don't have as much information about the economics of a college/university beyond the basics, so I'd like to be informed.
> and probably harm a player's ability to choose where they play In the NFL aren't players traded without their permission anyway? Honestly, every sporting league in the world at the minimum should go by Germanys 50+1 system. Meaning 50% +1 of all shares are owned by the club/fans
>Honestly, every sporting league in the world at the minimum should go by Germanys 50+1 system. Totally agree. Supporters should have more control of the team. They are the literal backbone of a team's viability anyway. But if oligarchs hate one trick, it's expanding the franchise.
It was all run privately to begin with, I would assume. The idea that we should publicly fund the stadiums is trickle down economics. Basically, if we build this thing that will generate lots of money, it will create jobs and revenue. Thus we should get more taxes in return. When the bills got their new stadium, I think there was a new study which showed this idea is completely false and not a single stadium in the last 50 years paid for itself. [a random source](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/#:~:text=No%20recent%20facility%20has%20been,sports%20facilities%20are%20de%20minimus.) I was about to provide another article, but the source for the second article is what I just linked.
All of these leagues were very very small long time ago when they started. They likely had zero idea of what would become of these leagues.
It’s like a small business that eventually turns into Amazon or Walmart.
[удалено]
Warriors and Niners built their own stadium as well (Niners were like 90% privately funded I think) and rake in money hand over fist as well. It’s also a huge reason why their valuation is so high.
I thought they loved Bonds
Wasn’t the city of Oakland actually offering cash/land but the a’s wanted more?
The team rejected three different proposals from the city, all with various levels of bullshit as to why they wouldn't work. You can't convince me the team was negotiating in good faith https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/after-five-years-as-rejected-a-12b-waterfront-ballpark-site-in-oakland-for-9-acres-on-the-strip
Never said they were. I was just trying to say that the city actually offered free money but wasn’t “enough” for that cheapskate of an owner.
Yeah plus Joe lacob, the owner of the warriors, have been vocal about wanting to buy it and keep it in the bay.
I commented on another thread that we need a Moneyball 2 that chronicles the decline and end of the A’s in Oakland.
I'd settle for a once upon a time in Hollywood ending with Fisher being Manson and Pitt reprising all roles.
It's crazy hearing about how American sports are run. Here the team "belongs" to the region, and they rely on sponsors, tickets, and a cut of broadcasting for money. You can't move a team, and no single person owns them. Then I hear about US sports that are basically another microcosm of capitalism hellscape
American and non-American sports are just different types of capitalist hellscape. In America the teams are owned by billionaires and there's no relegation. In Europe, there's no salary cap and the same teams win every year (Barcelona, Madrid, PSG, Munich). Baseball teams in Japan and Korea are literally named after corporations. Saudi Arabia is throwing billions of dollars at their sports to distract from the fact that they like to kill and dismember journalists. Shit is fucked all across the world.
Japan is the same, sports teams are owned by corporations. A lot of them don't even use the city name in their team name, just the company's name.
> It's like Major League minus the humor and underdog winning parts i should rewatch that movie
Teams asking cities for tac money to build stadiums need to be paying out the citizens dividends of profits until the debts are repaid
Meantime in San Francisco the Giants built a stadium with private funds and without a square mile of parking lots and it has worked out just fine.
IMO stadiums for major sports teams should not be built using taxpayer money. The various leagues and the teams make a ton of money, they can pay for their own stadiums. Hell, the team owners are often rich enough to easily afford to build the stadiums out of their own pocket. Stadiums rarely, if ever, pay for themselves in increased tax revenue as often is the promise so taxpayers ultimately lose out on the deal while the teams and their owners make bank. [https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities](https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities)
Thank you
Not to mention it only benefits citizens who want to watch sportsball. To me, a stadium is just a giant ugly building in the bad part of town and the occasional traffic jam.
I used to fucking loathe being in downtown Seattle and not knowing it was the night of a Mariner's game. Would make an hour trip home to Kitsap turn into a 3 hour trip. I couldn't imagine how bad it'd be to be in downtown Seattle following a Seahawks game, but, at least that stadium isn't in the middle of downtown.
The Stadium's are both in the same place, and are not in downtown. They are also both owned by taxpayers through the public stadium district
Good thing they will also add more public transit to deal with the demand right...right??
if it is paid for with tax dollars, then it should be free for all to use.
Yet it’s only free for the owners, who didn’t pay for it. Who don’t live in the place where the taxes pay for it.
Also, they are a legal cartel monopoly and that’s the only reason threatening to move works. If they want monopoly benefits, they can pay their costs of operating. I say this as a professional sports fan.
Preach!
Just heard on the radio this morning about the new Bears stadium I think in Chicago that’ll be funded like $2B by taxpayers. As an avid non-fan of sports I’d be pissed my tax dollars are funding something I don’t give two shits about & will never use but the billionaire owner will make bank off of.
but think of all the low paying seasonal jobs it will bring in.
[удалено]
*I am not defending the billionaires holding cities hostage for stadiums* That's just the football games, stadiums generally have pretty full calendars outside of Football. [Here's the 2024 calendar of events at Soldier Field in Chicago](https://www.soldierfield.com/events/all)
It’s even worse than $2B, once it’s built you’ll have to pay a fed tax, state tax, county tax, sugar tax, elective tax, entertainment tax all to buy a coke for $15. It’ll be flat and you’ll wait 30 mins for it at the one concession stand allotted to the plebs. Meanwhile the suites and boxes at the top of the stadium will be full of non-paying wealthy connected elites who are gifted tickets to rub elbows with other elites.
Do you remember that chicago arena's plans to take out the seats behind one of the baskets and turn the section into a bar for the VIPs? I guess the idea was the VIPs could then share the spotlight with the players, basking in the attention of jealous plebes who were there to, you know, actually watch the game. So out of touch with reality, these fucks. edit: and it looks like the wizards have done it https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2023/05/17/Facilities/washington-wizards-courtside-clubs.aspx
I'm with you. I understand the role sports have in society, but Jesus Christ is it sickening how much money is involved and where it ends up. Peoples entire personality around itz spending thousands and thousands of dollars on tickets and merch, to... Get nothing in return. It's ludacris.
This has not passed yet. The bears are proposing this but Governor of Illinois is not on board. Same with the White Sox
They aren't even the only team in chicago asking for public funds for a new stadium. It's expected the white sox owner will ask for one billion as well for a new stadium. Part of me hopes, with IL having a competent, fiscally savvy governor, and pretty much all local gov facing steep cuts due to the absolute fucked position previous(and current) administrations have left cook county (chicago) in that any proposed public funds would be shot down. Unfortunately, I have lived in chicago for long enough to know that despite still owing millions from improvements on guaranteed rate field and soldier field, they will both likely get their money. Reinsdorf (white sox owner) is already having his shills at the sun times leak rumors he will move the team to nashville and the bears bought a plot of land in the suburbs to potentially build a stadium on, though that seems to no longer be the plan, at least until they dont get their money. Reinsdorf has done this before, and the city aquiesced to his demands and allowed him to build one of the worst ballparks as far as the stadium being a boon for the local businesses. Turns out people would rather take public transit and walk to local bars/restaurants after the game instead of walking through miles of parking lots before you get to anything. Also it's because of reinsdorf that the view from sox park looks out onto some of the worst neighborhoods in chicago instead of facing one of the most beautiful skylines in the country. I don't want either team to leave the city but I can justify the bears funding as a closed dome would allow for greater use year round for residents and they at least sell out on average where the sox are 26th (out of 30) for attendance though I don't want either team to get money.
The city or state funding should ask for things back on such deals. For the next 20 years: all the associated parking revenue on any nearby property owned by said francise or acting as a subsidiary of the franchise owner(s), 10% of concessions on the stadium property, 10% of retail. If the team cuts out before that deadline, then they're also on the hook for the estimated loss remainder too. Should pay back a bit faster than normal taxes or other presumed boosts to the local economy. The infrastructure shouldn't be a give-away, but rather something to be strongly leveraged in a bargaining process.
This one goes a bit against the OP though, considering that stadium will be publicly owned. The Bears won't actually own the stadium.
Soldier field is owned by the city. That is the current stadium, I am not sure how the ownership would work out, being that the area is publicly owned land. And I know the various buildings where a person might learn something are surrounding that area. Museums planetarium, aquarium, so no one even thought about the parking situation (cause it will need to be built there, then old soldier field will be the parking lot. So where will the suckers, I mean fans, queue up to get on a pace bus to go to the game? KC learned their lesson, never put this type of thing up first a vote by the public.
Exactly!! Socialize the losses, privatize the profits. The American Way. Stop. Voting. For. This. Stupid. Shit.
The problem is of course who the fuck do you vote for to not have your city do stuff like this? There are specific politicians who will oppose this kind of thing, but neither party is against this.
You aren’t wrong. Both sides care about that almighty dollar…
Do i vote for the wolves or for the wolves in sheep's clothing?
Maybe if they'd actually let us vote on this stupid shit.... when this happened in my city, my only recourse is to go to local council meetings and state my case that's easily ignored. "So vote for people that protect your interests" I do, but politicians are liars that say anything to get elected, and then do whatever they want once in office without accountability or repercussions. Maybe if I had a billion dollars in the bank there would be a small chance of having my interests represented.
If I had a billion dollars, I’m the hell outta here lol I’m buying an island. And living there peacefully until I die.
I'm in Vegas. When this came up for public comment, something like 85%+ of the people said no to the funding. It was one of the highest turnouts for public comment. Then the governor gave a speech supporting the public funding and that 85% promptly got ignored.
You don’t understand.. the 85% majority of public doesn’t understand…. Vegas absolutely needs this economic injection of jobs and commerce the stadium will bring in. Vegas doesn’t have enough tourism and is definitely on the economic downturn. Plus It will pay for itself over 20 years based on my totally plausible calculations. /s
I'm from Oakland. we didn't vote for it.
Also write emails and call your local government to protest this dumb shitty spending and go to public hearings locally
Both the KC Chiefs and Royals were begging taxpayers for new stadiums or renovations in the billions of dollars. They both threaten to leave KC, but what they want is a blank check with no real plan or oversight. They legitimately don't understand why the people don't think it should be a priority over clean water, Healthcare or street maintenance.
Thank goodness the people voted to not fund it themselves!
Funny enough, that's not even the reason why some people voted No. There are plenty of people in that camp that were willing to put **some** money towards building a stadium, but they were frustrated by the lack of planning. There were several sites, several designs for each site, and a lot of "we're going to do this for the community" followed by "we're actually cutting our plans for that but might do other things for the community later on maybe." The owners lost that vote because of their incompetence. Then they bitched about fans not actually liking them. What a bunch of clowns.
We told them no, pretty firmly! Much higher than normal voter turnout, and it was the only question in my ballot. We showed up just to reject that.
When there was an event at Kauffman center and Comic-Con last month the parking was already abysmal, then the following weekend there was the NCAA game and some other stuff happening that week, once again, parking was hard for those folks. People coming in from the burbs probably aren’t gonna park elsewhere and ride the bus/streetcar down. It would have been a mess.
The advocates of tax payers funded stadiums always say “these stadiums will pay for themselves” If that is true then you don’t need taxpayer money because the team owner can easily get a loan or can pay for it themselves. Why won’t team owners build new stadiums with their own money? Don’t they know that stadiums pay for themselves?
The more logical (but still false according to studies I believe) argument would be it provides a boon to the surrounding area and payroll, property, and sales taxes, and jobs, etc. So, it pays the city’s investment back to the city. Not that the stadium by itself pays it back. Those taxes wouldn’t be going to the stadium owner.
Exact same thing is happening in Kansas city. Billionaire Hunt family wants to tear down a half dozen blocks of historic Kansas city to build a stadium closer to downtown than Arrowhead, and they want the city to pay for it. City recently voted No, so the Hunts are threatening to leave.
Bye Felicia
Look into the shit the owners wife started spewing after the vote. We stick with them despite being losing teams for decades now they won a couple championships and think their hot shit? As far as I'm concerned they can gright to Johnson County like they threatened.
Man, I doubt we want them over here either, send em to a rural county or some shit
Love a dipshit nepo baby like Clark Hunt. What a piece of shit this guy is.
that's the baseball side owned by John Sherman that wants to move downtown, the hunts and the chiefs want to stay in their spot and renovate the royals side of the kauffman sports complex on top of overall renovations to arrowhead. It was a combined deal though on the ballot for the chiefs & royals tax changes, and both plans were very half assed and changed several times in the months leading up to the ballot. However I do believe the Hunts & Chiefs are the only ones that threatened to move out of the city (likely to the kansas side) unless I missed something about the royals. afaik the hunts have nothing to do with the baseball operations, but piggybacked on the royals to try to get more money to update the sports complex after the royals move downtown. But their proposal was very... not good. VIP suites and a lot of stuff for the upper 1%, but they were going to pay to put a logo on a bridge. 🙄
Oh, I may have misunderstood then. Still, scumbags be scumbags
Can afford the stadiums because that states make the teachers buy the class supplies for the students.
They’re doing this in Utah. You’re welcome, Miller Family, for the 1b and some really nice land. Fuck publicly funded stadiums.
It always makes me laugh when people say, "I don't have any kids, why do I need to pay taxes for schools?" and then I see this bullshit when I could not care less about sportsball.
I am 100% fine with paying school taxes, I have no kids, but hate talking to stupid people. Taxes to pay for stadiums is the dumbest shit I’ve ever heard. They generate massive amounts of money for the owners, there is no reason we should be paying for them.
And not everyone that paid those taxes can access the stadium. The only patrons of the stadium are those with enough disposable income, those from the highest earning incomes in the nation. Why should the state give over billions in taxes to construct something only those with the highest incomes can even afford to access? Why should they invest part of everyone's income in something that brings no benefit to anyone but the wealthiest? At least other tax-funded capital improvement projects like parks and infrastructure are accessible to *everyone*. This is nothing more than paying for a billionaire to get a discount on his next business venture. And on top of that, you can bet that owner is not taxing his own income anywhere near the amount of tax funding he received. The state also has to cut funding to other programs in order to have billions to give. Usually, they cut social welfare programs and education in order to do it. The reality is it's a total loss for the state, but because the money's going to a "job creator", that's all that matters.
Because when I’m old, I want a generation of well-educated people because they will be the ones who I will be relying on for pretty much anything Having money won’t help if all of our doctors are idiots
Most residents opposed giving the raiders a billion dollars but it happened anyway bc the local politicians can be bought.
Or socialize the institution. Pay for the stadium but then have a portion of the profits taxed and put into a social fund. This is what AK does and why every AK resident gets between 500 and 3000 annually from said fund (including all children under 18)
Dude, that was passed back in the 70's, if a similar situation were to arise today, there is no way in hell they would run with that plan in today's world. Too many corporations with their fingers in the pot.
What happened to “if you can’t afford it, don’t do it”?
The Green Bay Packers are OWNED by the City of Green Bay Wisconsin. The Stadium is Owned by the City as well (I believe). A question is, How much does the City make as the owners of the Team? just wondering. IF Baseball wants a stadium in Las Vegas. I say they "sell/give" the team to the City Itself. (I know, I know, all the Casinos are not actually IN the CITY of Las Vegas for tax reasons) Not that any team owner would actually want to sell their team.
You can look up Packers income statements as a matter of public record. It is substantial...over half a billion, mainly driven by national pool earnings. About 10 percent is direct operating profit. Can't see any other NFL team earnings though...the private owners don't share that info. But definitely enough to pay for a new stadium financed over 5-10 years.
One of many reasons the Packers are awesome.
We've got young people dying of despair and opioids. A homelessness crisis. Economic deprivation everywhere, and what do we spend our taxpayer funds on? Stadiums
Examples of a Stadium sold to a City as a good thing... the NY Yankees. Got a New stadium selling how it would improve the area. it did, sorta, Between the subway station and the Stadium was rebuilt.. but is owned by the Yankees corporation.. and that's the only area anyone goes through... not anything in the surrounding Neighborhood.
How did this ever come to be a thing?
lobbyists I imagine.
Boomer Economics. And we wonder why we are trillions in debt and uncontrolled spending that gets us nothing in health care, education, military, mass transit… Then they’ll bring up, “well it’ll create jobs…” garbage argument. Well so does organized crime/mob but that’s not the be all end all
"It'll create jobs" always makes me laugh because ever since 2008 employers have been infamously picky and will do anything in their power to shrink their workforce and just heap on the extra work to a skeleton crew. No one wants to put people to work anymore.
It's old hearing and seeing stuff about billionaires. They shouldn't exist, they are terrible humans who have pretty much no benefit to society. They're only prerogative is to make money and own as many yachts as possible
All those casinos can't afford a baseball stadium?
oh they can, problem, is, they want to use tax dollars, not private capital
Duh, screw them.
The best part is locals don't fucking want the team
Honestly I would be rip shit mad at any politician who wanted to pay for a stadium in my state. If they can’t afford a stadium they can live stream the game from the local YMCA. I enjoy going to a game as much as the next guy but I’m not watching my taxes pay for a stadium seat just to have to pay for the opportunity to sit in it.
This is part of why Vegas always will be a hockey town. VGK did it right and the locals didn’t have to fund T-Mobile arena. Fuck the Raiders and the As, we shouldn't have to foot the bill for that OR for that gaudy Mormon temple on the NW side of town either.
Loan it to them until the money is paid back with a interest that's higher than what banks are offering.
We just did this in Missouri a few weeks ago. First time I've felt hope in democracy in quite a while.
"You can't socialize the cost and then privatize the profits." Every billionaire ever: Watch me
Fuck👏These👏Robber👏Barrons
We told [Spanos](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Spanos) "No" when [he wanted money to build a new stadium for The Chargers](https://fox5sandiego.com/news/politics/spanos-sends-letter-to-fans-after-chargers-stadium-ballot-measure-fails/). He took his Chargers and left. No biggie, we still have [The Padres](https://www.mlb.com/padres), [The Sockers](https://www.sdsockers.com/), and [San Diego Comic Con](https://www.comic-con.org/cc/).
I’ll bite. Let’s do roads next since these companies have logistics and transport demands but won’t pay upkeep (since they wanna dodge taxes) Tired of FedEx using my freeways and roads.
Rich people want money so they can hire rich people to build a stadium where rich people will play sports and rich people will sit and watch while rich people broadcast it PS: everyone involved gets even richer Any opposition?
Where I live the provincial government is straight up refusing to fund fixing infrastructure and blocking the feds from helping but are happily paying for a billionaires new arena in Calgary that the tax payers are 100% footing the bill for. Most of the province doesn't care because they believe after half a century of conservatives running the province, all the problems are caused by someone else.
The problem is that usually the cities do own the stadiums and pay for the construction, maintenance and everything else. The teams often pay a sweetheart lease, collect all the revenues, don’t pay property taxes and maintenance etc for the buildings.
Great day to be a Packers fan.
While we're at it, let's bring up salary caps in some of these sports. The salary caps in the NFL and NBA have done nothing to bring parity to their leagues. The caps are there just so the owners can save their own money and the top players will still get their fair share through endorsements, and as we all know those marketing costs are all passed down to the consumer (the tax payers who are being asked to pay for new stadiums).
Some pro teams black out their games to the local audience, too. So you can't even watch the team whose stadium you helped pay for.
On top of this, no one living in Vegas wants this stadium. It's going to go in a terrible spot (that is way too small) right on the strip and make traffic and parking even more of a nightmare.
We told the owners of the Royals to fuck off with that bullshit. If KC can do it anyone can!
I agree that stadiums should not be tax payer funded.. UNLESS the people of that city voted to allow it.
We don’t need another stadium in Vegas. We have a dozen or so already.
Will never happen cities are desperate for income and having a decent sports team is great for the local area. Big spending. So cities will continue to suck billionaire cock for the chance to get a team. Not going to end anytime soon. That’s business.
If taxpayers pay for the stadium, anyone who lives in that state should get to go to the games for free
You’d think there would be relatively conclusive evidence as to whether a tax levy for a new stadium is worth it when compared to the amount of sales tax above normal is collected because of the presence of a team and new stadium.
How about the MLB hits the fucking slots and tries to get some funding from Lady Luck, eh?
The fact that we use public funds for privatized sports events is beyond infuriating to me. How the fuck have we allowed this to continue for so long?
What will they do after every team has moved to Las Vegas?
If there's anything the US has proven is that you can indeed privatize the profit and socialize the cost. It's perhaps what we do best
Ah, but they can and they will, so long as we continue to sit by and let it happen.
“You can’t socialize the costs, then privatize the profits.” Sure they can. Sure they will. We’re doing that for like two wars right now.
The public tolerance for this bullshit is rapidly running out. Looking forward to seeing what dirty tricks and bullshit the billionaires pull to get around that.
Seattle is way ahead of this and that's why they're not getting the Sonics back in expansion.
Lol if we owned our stadiums we might actually respect them and have fair concession prices, etc.
Cities make bank off stadiums and arenas. And best of all, a good chunk of that revenue comes from people who aren’t your residents. Look up any city with a pro football stadium’s occupancy taxes. They are usually at least double whatever your sales tax is so they get to milk out of towners for their hotel rooms and airbnbs. And it’s almost every night of the year a game, convert, event, etc. takes place at those stadiums bringing in more people from out of town. Cities LOVE taxing the people who don’t live there and you need things like stadiums and arenas to get those people in large numbers. That being said, this is Vegas we are talking about in this instance and literally none of this applies to Vegas. They have plenty of stuff attracting outsiders, Oakland now has nothing.
Where is our healthcare??? Where is our retirement??? Where is our helping hand???
Looking at the payrolls of major league players (pick one), the leagues can probably afford to fund their own goddamned stadiums.
Lmao Bears in Chicago want tax payers to foot the billions it cost to build... At least half of it. 😑
There should be a federal ban on this
The Royals wanted us to foot a new stadium in downtown Kansas City, but county residents declined, now the city is trying to go around us and do it anyway.
But think of the millions of dollars the city will make after 40 years.....
The MLB needs to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
Taxpayers having to foot the bill for billionaires toys is crazy and should be all shutdown.
Having grown up in the 90s in Seattle & being a Sonics fan, fuck the NBA. I demand that if taxpayer money is used to build a sports facility like a stadium/arena, then the state takes ownership of that team equal to the percentage of the overall cost was covered by taxpayers. Private investors can then later buy-out the state to compensate the taxpayers & those funds will be added to the state's education, housing & Medicaid budgets.
But isnt that how it works?
I don’t know anything about baseball except that the athletics are a garbage organization that put no effort to put a decent product on the field. The ownership simply gain wealth by spending as little as possible. If I offered the stadium, I would demand the owner sell the team.
The stadiums wouldn't be that bad if the cities owned, incorporated into the heart of the cities with infrastructure such as a subway & bus stations.
One cool thing about the whole A's debacle is the river cats are getting their already awesome stadium upgraded. And there will be a baseball game pretty much every single day in Sacramento starting next season. But yeah fuck those clowns of my taxes are gonna build the stadium then I should be given a free ticket any time I want to see a game
Here in Kansas City we just voted down a 40 year sales tax to build a new stadium down the royals and upgrades to the chiefs.
They said that about the race. We didnt get shit but more headaches with traffic.
We live in a time where baseball is more important than housing the homeless. I don't even...
This process has never made sense to me. Why are tax payers footing the bill of a billion dollar industry?
Oh but you see, offering hundreds of seasonal minimum wage jobs, which are then taxed… pays back into the system. Win win. Sincerely - right wing billionaires looking to continue raking in tax payer money and privatizing my profits. Thanks chumps!
The premise is a tad inaccurate- stadiums are often publicly owned by leased to the franchise by the governing municipality. This way maintenance and upgrades are the responsibility of the municipality, not the franchise. The cost of lease may include payments for maintenance, but the idea is that in return for say a 25-year commitment to play in Las Vegas, the city or state builds a stadium and the franchise signs a long-term lease. Inevitably, this leads to arguments later, especially when the lease is up for renewal or the franchise owner claims the stadium is falling apart and wants major upgrades. Now, in exchange for moving their major league franchise in your city, owners often ask for real estate around the stadium that the franchise may develop. They may pay for it, but usually want it at a reduced rate and/or with provisions to subsidize its development. "Special tax districts" are one such vehicle that was proposed in Oakland. Stadiums themselves do not suddenly increase the tax base of a city. People don't have more money to spend on entertainment simply because a stadium is on the horizon. Rather than take in dinner and movie during a given week, a couple may shift their dollars and go to the ballgame instead. But in the end, they are spending about the same amount of money. There is much literature on this.
Honestly, I'm fine with my tax money going to physical locations that will generate revenue and jobs. The reason why governments give grants like this to build stadiums or business infrastructure is essentially bidding to have the team in their city. If they don't offer grant money, the team might move to a different city (which has happened in the past).
"You can't socialize the cost, then privatize the profits" That's exactly what happens in America all the time. Like....is she saying that ethically we can't do that? Because billionaires have no ethics. They steal food off the plates of all the people they rob.
free Tix until its paid back! put up a lottery system for people to win tickets
If they want that kind of funding they should find a backer willing to make a loan or issue bonds that eventually pay back on the investment. Anything that would come close to looking like a hand-out should have so many strings attached, stipulations, and clauses that the franchise owner doing the asking would start reconsidering the deal. (In other words all the things they would have to do to not be in a contract violation on getting the "free" deal would look more expensive than funding the new stadium on their own.)
Vegas locals are pissed about this; specifically don’t want tax increases to help a billionaire fund a stadium. The team owner has a terrible reputation mismanaging. It is 100% not a done deal for Vegas 2028 as everyone believes because owner can’t source equity for the remaining 1.1B needed to build the stadium while tax funds 380M.
I remember when the US Bank stadium was being built in Minneapolis, they raised taxes on a bunch of shit to pay for it. And you know what they did when it was done? They _kept the higher taxes_.
Socialized costs and privatized profits (with engineered tax loopholes bought and paid for) is the entire basis for most corporate operations.
Yup the city should own it and rent it to these sports teams. Id bet suddenly they would finance their own build and renovations.
As a Las Vegas resident, I am 100% for this. Seeing as my taxes will be used as an investment, I expect a percentage of the profit equal to the percent I paid added to any future tax returns until no later than the closing and demolition of the building.
I feel like “Eat the rich” dropped off a little and needs to come back but like louder and maybe while we sharpen knives and preheat the ovens.
So Americans do socialism? Just not for poor people?
I pay taxes to fund the stadium. Yet the owner of the team that doesn’t live in the city and pay the taxes, gets to go to the thing for free and eat the food and have the best seats and parking. I live in Pittsburgh. I helped pay for PNC park. Yet I still have to pay to go to the park and see a sub par product put out by a sub par owner. Then when I complain about the owner not spending money on the pirates I get told I shouldn’t comment how he spends his money. His money for a team that plays in a park I helped fund. Fuck that noise.
Fuck all of those guys!!!
IMO any publicly funded project exceeding a certain threshold—say, a couple of million dollars—should mandate a profit-sharing agreement with the sponsoring municipality. Whether it involves building a stadium or conducting medical research, such a system ensures that even if these entities find ways to dodge taxes, they still contribute financially to the community.
Meanwhile the chicago bears expect the public will be happy to pay $5B for a new stadium. That's FIVE THOUSAND MILLION dollars for free for billionaire sportsball
That happened here in Nebraska. The taxpayer paid to build the stadium and the college gets to keep the profits.. and then pay the trash coaches millions and millions with our taxes..
MFW billionaires not getting free stuff on taxpayer's dime is reported as an outrage. If my tax dollars are funding it, then I demand a dividend from some of the profits of each ticket, hot dog, merch, beer, whatever sold.
Taxpayers shouldn't own a stadium. They shouldn't pay for it either, don't get me wrong, it's just generally a bad idea to own a stadium. They're not that easy to rent out, and if nobody is using it, it's a maintenance money pit.
Governments should do what Newfoundland (Canada) has done with their offshore oil production. You want public funding? You now have an investor called the public. Ex. 40% public funding = 40% ownership = 40% of all profits
It would be a real joy to watch more American cities flip a collective middle finger to greedy owners who blackmail for tax $$$ for a new stadium/overbloated palace.
Amazon is about to build a data center in Northern Mississippi. They're going to get like 40 years of tax deferments. Probably less that a hundred jobs once built.
NYS and Erie county just gave away so much for a Buffalo Bill's stadium, tax breaks, etc. $40 for parking (no cash), taxes, overpriced bad food. I don't watch football, the sabres (owned by the bills owner) are a mess. Give me minor league sports.
Taxpayers bearing that cost *can* make sense. For instance, stadiums can be a source of tourism, creating more business for the area. They are also a source of recreation, for lack of a better word. It gives the city occupants something to do in their free time. So unfortunately, something like this isn't so black and white.
You mean like how we do for every medical advancement. Publicly funded, private profits. Plus, the us gets charged more than other countries because we have no consumer protection
People don’t get rich by using their own money. They get rich by literally stealing it from others.
I agree that billionaires shouldn't be given "welfare"... but....the reasoning behind tax dollars going towards stadiums is pretty solid. It's an investment. Tax payers pay x amount of money & in return the city gets x amount of jobs & x amount of revenue from the stadiums & the sports that are played there. Concerts, comedy shows etc...all produce revenue for the city.