Sports Authority may need taxpayer rescue

[TJones]

The stupid arses at SA wouldn't be crying about a bailout if they would just go ahead and level that eyesore they call The Astrodome and make it a friggin' parking lot already and charge $10 to park !!! Geez.......the answer is staring at them daily as they gaze out their highrise offices on Fannin. WAKE UP SA !!!!!!

[AtticaFlinch]

Never said they did. I was merely correcting the misperception that Detroit's teams aren't any good.

That was my fault. After watching one mandatory Lions game every Thanksgiving for most of my life, and after having developed an irrational hatred for Bill Laimbeer early on in life, and after watching that godawful 8 Mile, I guess I just sorta started equating all of Detroit with suckage. My bad.

[samagon]

There's more to it than just that. There's added value that can't be quantified or itemized. You know, like the whole downtown revitalization that was kicked off with the building of Enron... er Minutemaid Park. I'm sorry that economic growth and the creation of jobs aren't important to you, but they're pretty important to most people in town. Just because precise money values can't be itemized on a ledger sheet doesn't mean there's no positive impact.

As for our economic woes and lack of a championship of late, well... at least we aren't Detroit.

Edit: And, the Astros did win an NL championship just a few years ago. Sure, they were blown out in the World Series, but they still got there. The Rangers, the Expos and the Mariners have never been. Not even to get blown out.

when discussing anything related to sports, there are always 'intangibles' lol.

I agree though, and it would be awesome if the owners would build their own stadiums, but if one town says "no", another will say "yes".

and do we need the sports teams? well, it comes back to what we have gained as a result of the sports teams being here, 30k people driving into downtown 80 days out of a year generates something other than just ticket sales, even if it is just more money for the people running the parking lots at $10 a car. but there is so much more than that, vic and anthonies was built at that location specifically around the ballpark, and lots of its business is generated specifically because of that, the bus, luckys pub, etc, there are a lot of other places that benefit.

if that isn't seen, then well, I don't know what to say.

[RedScare]

when discussing anything related to sports, there are always 'intangibles' lol.

I agree though, and it would be awesome if the owners would build their own stadiums, but if one town says "no", another will say "yes".

and do we need the sports teams? well, it comes back to what we have gained as a result of the sports teams being here, 30k people driving into downtown 80 days out of a year generates something other than just ticket sales, even if it is just more money for the people running the parking lots at $10 a car. but there is so much more than that, vic and anthonies was built at that location specifically around the ballpark, and lots of its business is generated specifically because of that, the bus, luckys pub, etc, there are a lot of other places that benefit.

if that isn't seen, then well, I don't know what to say.

Realistic studies (as opposed to the ones the sports team owners fund) suggest that very few fans travel from outside the metro area to spend money, meaning that the money spent on tickets, parking and food is taken from other local businesses and spent at the stadium. The net increase in revenue is near zero. This is why the stadiums are not considered economic generators.

That said, there is an intangible effect of sports teams...at least when they win. The end result is that taxpayers vote to fund these stadiums because they WANT them, and because they WANT the teams located in their city. The fact that they coast us a few bucks extra in taxes is considered worth it. Even I voted for the stadiums. My gripe is more of an overall disdain for the pro leagues and owners who built the stadiums in a way that maximizes prices. This has 2 negative effects. One, the regular fan cannot afford the tickets anymore. Two, because the stadium is now a cocktail party for the upper middle class and a corporate entertainment event, the actual GAMEDAY experience sucks. Go to College Station or Austin on Saturday (even in 90 degree weather) and watch the crowds go wild. Then return to Houston on Sunday to watch the crowd show up by the 2nd quarter and sit on their hands, since it is not cool to cheer for the team. Same with the NBA (baseball is not as bad).

[AtticaFlinch]

Realistic studies (as opposed to the ones the sports team owners fund) suggest that very few fans travel from outside the metro area to spend money, meaning that the money spent on tickets, parking and food is taken from other local businesses and spent at the stadium. The net increase in revenue is near zero. This is why the stadiums are not considered economic generators.

Well, I really don't care if Sugarland's or the Woodland's revenues are decreasing as the city of Houston proper is drawing more revenue from those 'burb's residents. The 'burbs have long been a parasitic leech on the city proper. Residents of the 'burbs use city infrastructure and amenities without contributing to the tax base, so if some suburban dweller purchases lunch at Benihana Downtown rather than at the Woodlands Mall (or wherever it may be), then so much the better. I do understand your point that it contributes nothing to the gross metro product, but really, I can't be arsed to even feign concern for the health of the 'burbs, so unless it contributes to the city directly, it's not doing any good in my book.

That said, there is an intangible effect of sports teams...at least when they win. The end result is that taxpayers vote to fund these stadiums because they WANT them, and because they WANT the teams located in their city. The fact that they coast us a few bucks extra in taxes is considered worth it. Even I voted for the stadiums. My gripe is more of an overall disdain for the pro leagues and owners who built the stadiums in a way that maximizes prices. This has 2 negative effects. One, the regular fan cannot afford the tickets anymore. Two, because the stadium is now a cocktail party for the upper middle class and a corporate entertainment event, the actual GAMEDAY experience sucks. Go to College Station or Austin on Saturday (even in 90 degree weather) and watch the crowds go wild. Then return to Houston on Sunday to watch the crowd show up by the 2nd quarter and sit on their hands, since it is not cool to cheer for the team. Same with the NBA (baseball is not as bad).

Ok, I totally agree here. I wonder if it's because we've become too gun shy to actually begin cheering when we're anticipating some sort of stupid misstep by a coach or a key player that causes our hope to dissolve faster than gto250us' faith in the government.

[RedScare]

Well, I really don't care if Sugarland's or the Woodland's revenues are decreasing as the city of Houston proper is drawing more revenue from those 'burb's residents. The 'burbs have long been a parasitic leech on the city proper. Residents of the 'burbs use city infrastructure and amenities without contributing to the tax base, so if some suburban dweller purchases lunch at Benihana Downtown rather than at the Woodlands Mall (or wherever it may be), then so much the better. I do understand your point that it contributes nothing to the gross metro product, but really, I can't be arsed to even feign concern for the health of the 'burbs, so unless it contributes to the city directly, it's not doing any good in my book.

Not so much the burbs but all of the local shops all over the city and metro that would have been the recipients of that disposable income are now losing it to the one billionaire who owns the team...much like Walmart gets our shopping dollars instead of all the little hardware and clothing stores that used to get our dollars. Except, at least Walmart hires our contractors and pays to build its own stores. Here, our billionaire made US pay to build his store that takes revenue out of our pockets.

Ok, I totally agree here. I wonder if it's because we've become too gun shy to actually begin cheering when we're anticipating some sort of stupid misstep by a coach or a key player that causes our hope to dissolve faster than gto250us' faith in the government.

No, it is simply the numbing effect of affluence. It makes us sedentary and lazy. We drive bigger cars, we move around less, we pay for valets, we demand wider seats, and we sit around at sporting events. It is rather insidious, really. It even causes us to disparage the outdoors for anything other than perfect weather. I saw a post the other day claiming Houston weather inhospitable for 5 months of the year. May and September? Inhospitable? Maybe a couple of days or even a week or two in a bad year. But, both entire months? That's the numbing effect of affluence right there! That, and the air conditioned stadiums themselves!

[AtticaFlinch]

Not so much the burbs but all of the local shops all over the city and metro that would have been the recipients of that disposable income are now losing it to the one billionaire who owns the team...much like Walmart gets our shopping dollars instead of all the little hardware and clothing stores that used to get our dollars. Except, at least Walmart hires our contractors and pays to build its own stores. Here, our billionaire made US pay to build his store that takes revenue out of our pockets.

I have to wonder how some of the people who typically promote lassaiz-faire capitalism over regulation on this board would have any problem with that. It's absolutely brilliant capitalism at it's most unregulated, brilliant self. Not only are these team owners selling the product, but they're selling the means of production too. They're making money coming and going. This is the absolute, purest form of free enterprise, and the craziest thing is, both the purchaser of the means of production and the purchaser of the product are the same party. It's us! I can't get over how brilliant this is, but I honestly hadn't ever considered this before your last response. I now consider myself somewhat more enlightened and way more in awe than I was five minutes ago.

But, now I fear that someone like gto250us will read your post and then this response and his head will explode. On the one hand, you have free, unfettered capitalism doing what capitalism does - make money any way possible, and on the other hand, he's paying taxes for something and someone is taking his precious from him. He must not know which end to get violent about. Oh, what a fun paradoxical irony!

[samagon]

Not so much the burbs but all of the local shops all over the city and metro that would have been the recipients of that disposable income are now losing it to the one billionaire who owns the team...much like Walmart gets our shopping dollars instead of all the little hardware and clothing stores that used to get our dollars. Except, at least Walmart hires our contractors and pays to build its own stores. Here, our billionaire made US pay to build his store that takes revenue out of our pockets.

I agree, a lot of money goes to the stadiums, however, who knows whether all those people would have gone out at all that day? they may have decided to stay at home and drink beers and order a pizza, rather than heading downtown, paying $10 to park, using a pedicab to get from the lot to the game, going to the bus, or Lucky's for some drinks before the game, or Vic and Anthony's after the game, or one of the clubs downtown. During the summer I ride my bike downtown every weekday, the ballpark is part of my route, and I see this happening all around the ballpark, it is exciting, and feels good to see all of that vibrancy happening downtown.

I was riding around downtown yesterday shooting some pictures, and drove by the area around the ball park, and I remembered back to what that area was like previous to the stadium.

I had a girlfriend who went to incarnate word academy, which is right there by the stadium, it was a scary area, there were tons of buildings that were just there, no windows, I'm sure people squatting, etc.

Go to that area now, it has changed, for the better. There are places there that maybe would not be there, if it weren't for the stadiums, and they draw people to the area, during games, and even when there aren't games.

By the same reasoning, we should have as much distaste for Discovery Green, as that draws money from other areas as well, and the price of that was partially ours as well.

Whether the downtown stadiums sparked the regrowth, or whether the growth was happening anyway and the stadium was a little more heat to the already burning fire, I don't know.

No, it is simply the numbing effect of affluence. It makes us sedentary and lazy. We drive bigger cars, we move around less, we pay for valets, we demand wider seats, and we sit around at sporting events. It is rather insidious, really. It even causes us to disparage the outdoors for anything other than perfect weather. I saw a post the other day claiming Houston weather inhospitable for 5 months of the year. May and September? Inhospitable? Maybe a couple of days or even a week or two in a bad year. But, both entire months? That's the numbing effect of affluence right there! That, and the air conditioned stadiums themselves!

People get so used to super controlled environments, 72.5 degrees, and if it is cooler or hotter, you'll never hear the end of it.

This isn't just a problem of Houston, it is a problem of the USA, I remember that thread, and it was about the outdoors magazine saying Houston was a terrible outdoor city because it was hot and muggy here all the time.