Economists Agree: Publicly Financed Sports Stadiums Are a Bust

This article originally appeared in print under the headline "Economists Agree: Publicly Financed Sports Stadiums Are a Bust."
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Its about creating jobs though. Stadiums and sports teams employ many people at all levels of incomes, from parking attendants to team physicians.
I'm not saying that's right or wrong, just that I think most publicly funded sports stadiums are not supposed to have a positive ROI, theyre supposed to create jobs and benefit the local economy. Whether they actually achieve that goal or not....idk
The benefits to the local economy are generally touted through returning the investment via ticket sales and tourism. I'm in a big sports area and several stadiums have been built over the years and those were the two promises - mainly because the existing number of people employed would stay roughly the same with the new stadium.
The problem is that if they want a stadium, they should have to build them via their own proceeds. Instead, the franchises pay a quarter or less of the construction costs and then reap huge profits from ticket sales.
Publicly Financed Sports Stadiums Are a Bust