TheStig wrote:This whole tax payer stadium nonsense is out of control. These franchises are worth billions and are owned by billionaires and used soley for recreational activities in limited use. It's such a poor use of tax dollars and subsidizing those that need it the least. And only the ownership really sees returns. They could easily retool the stadium and if they had a compelling product, it would still sell out. Chicago Stadium sold out with MJ, Wrigley sells out whenever the team is good or it's a nice summer afternoon and Solider Field is packed even in a blizzard. Just put in nicer seats and a better audio/visual elements and people will be happy.
Taxpayers fund all kinds of real estate developments because that's the neoliberal economy we live in and because sometimes the public sector investments actually pay off and see returns. The logic of publicly-funded stadiums being a money sink is outdated information, frankly. I'm not saying it's a good thing for society or for sports, but take a look at how new stadium developments look over the last 10-20 years and what kind of revenue they're generating for municipalities. The Atlanta Braves, Texas Rangers, San Diego Padres, St Louis Cardinals, Minnesota Twins took a more comprehensive development approach beyond building a ballpark and received public funding because they also built tax-revenue producing amenities. I find it problematic that urban public revenue is almost entirely dependent upon property and sales taxes and tourism (besides governmental transfers), ie consumption, but that's the world we live in so cities and states might as well play ball and get something out of it.
That's to say, the taxpayer can subsidize a new Sox Park but there need to be a lot of stipulations. For one, they need to stay put exactly where they are and develop the 100 acres of parking lots. Chicago and Illinois could use this ballpark as an opportunity to help develop a blank slate on the South Side. It could be an exercise in community development. That can't happen if the private interest funds it entirely himself.
Tangential, the threat of moving the team is an empty one. Reinsdorf threatened a move to St Petersburg once and the state and his buddy the governor gave him a sweetheart deal on a new ballpark. A different team set up shop there, the Devil Rays, and they're the worst-drawing team in the league despite being consistently good. Jerry would have lost so much money if he had moved. Talk about Nashville is the same thing. Chicago is still the third largest metro area in the country and he has a location adjacent to its downtown that's well-connected by highway and public transportation and is frankly a better/more easily accessible facility than the other ballpark in town. What about television revenue, does he think it's gonna be greater in Tennessee? What about that sports network he's setting up with his buddies Brooks Boyer and Shams Charania? Makes a little less sense when you have Chicago hockey and basketball but Tennessee baseball. He ain't moving the team.
