Interesting stuff. Lots of info on market size, total market, suites per corporation and other geeky things. Too good not to share.
P.16: "Bay Area: Number of Major League Franchises: 6" "Population per major league franchise 1,025,800" This not a helpful stat b/c many people are fans of the Niners/Giants/Warriors/Sharks etc... not just loyal to one sport alone.
The economics of public subsidies for stadiums do not work, it's always a loser for the taxpayers. This is especially so with NFL stadiums, which cost a billion dollars and are only used 8 times a year due to the NFL's schedule. It would make a little more sense if the Niners and Raiders shared the stadium, then it would be used 16 times a year. I still can't believe the city of Santa Clara voters approved the Niners stadium ballot measure.
Public parks never make money, guess we shouldn't make any of those? Public schools lose money so we shouldn't build any of those with taxpayer money either? Libraries? Museums? That's a tired argument. It's not about a stadium or arena making money in the long run for a city or region, it's about what the city or region gets out of it. Imagine the Bay Area with NO professional sports teams. Get my drift? Having homes for professional teams is part of what gives people pride in the places they live and improves quality of life. Things that are intangible and can't be expressed simply in make/lose money, not to mention all of the other parts of the economy that are effected that are connected to a place.
slightly off topic in this off topic thread... Just finished the baseball san jose walking tour of the downtown stadium site led by a redevelopment guy. Let skip that meetings held last week with mlb and city of san jose went very well.
Parks, schools, libraries, public transportation, police/fire, are assets that are owned by taxpayers. Sports teams are assets that are owned by billionaires and mega millionaires. You end up subsidizing an asset for a billionaire. The new stadium adds a ton of value to the franchise, and the owner gets to reap all of that benefit with higher yearly revenue and a higher sale price when he finally sells the team. The taxpayers see none of this. If taxpayers pay for half a stadium, they should be compensated with stock in the club (just like we got stock from the banks in exchange for the 2008 bailout, much of which the feds have now sold at a profit).