Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Economic impact study on sports facility
Benefits of stadiums in sport
Effects of sports stadiums on a city
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Economic impact study on sports facility
The purpose of this paper is to write about stadium subsidies. The stadium I chose to write about is the Lincoln financial field located in Philadelphia. The reason I chose to write about this stadium is because this stadium is close to my home plus the eagles play at this stadium, and I am a huge eagles fan. I was also told to choose two between the four questions.
What are the benefits to a town of building a new stadium? In my opinion there seems to be more benefits or more of a positive effect from a city building a stadium more than negative. According to the information that I’ve researched it’s one of the few stadiums that seems to have a lot of benefits especially after it was rebuilt.
Some of the benefits that comes with the Linc Field are such as the new stadium now contains a double amount of luxury seats as well as new wheel-chair accessible seats and more modern services. Also it is now open to a lot more sports other than football such as soccer, lacrosse and etc. The stadium has a huge impact on tourism as well which pretty much puts a lot more coin in the government’s pocket. More Jobs are now open to people who live in the city which is beneficial to the cities employment status. Businesses also benefit from stadiums. After every game or event fans rush to different restaurants, bars or etc. which contributes to both the city and the government.
…show more content…
The negative effect of the stadiums being built is that the taxes of the residents increase. Also it can either ruin small businesses or help them depending what companies are involved. The positive of the stadium is it helps players get out into the community to do more for their city. The main point is the government won’t be effected as badly as regular citizens or
Ultimately, there are three exceptionally important criteria for deciding on good candidate for an expansion team. The first criterion is that the stadium must be controlled or owned by the baseball team. The stadium is a crucial aspect because most of the team’s revenue is generated in relation to the stadium. This stadium revenue comprises of ticket sales, parking, merchandise and concessions. Thus, without a stadium, the team will not be able to generate a stable source of revenue. The second criterion is that local ownership must have strong roots within the community. Without ties to the community, fan attendance could decrease. This is because fans could eventually perceive that the owner(s)’s only goal for the MLB franchise was to be profitable. The third criterion is the city must have long-term political support in the community. It is vital to have political support in order to gain financial support throughout the team’s years of existence, especially in tax payer monies. Particularly, this is significant when the team experiences issues or fights that involve the stadium and the land around the stadium. If there is a lack of political support, the expansion teams will not be able to obtain enough for money for stadium renovations, repairs, or to build new stadiums for the same team within the same city. This circumstance was apparent when the New York Yankees used tax revenue generated by New York City to fund the building of their brand new stadium for the 2009 season. Therefore, expansion committees believe it is necessary to confirm that the prospective cities will have enough political support because this political factor will help stabilize and financially support the prosp...
positive or negative impacts on a city. The team that will be focused on is the Montreal
In the last decade, almost all the big cities in the United States, and a few small cities as well, have battled with each other for the right to host big league franchises. Cities spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build new stadiums and offer enticements to private franchise owners. Politicians often push for stadiums and other favors to teams despite not having support from neighborhoods and general opposition across the whole city, especially where these high dollar stadiums would be built.
Throughout the years sports have become more popular in our society. The average American watches at least one of the major sports if not more, but how do these professional sports affect our economy? Many believe that they can bring more profit and jobs to an economy, but is that really the case, or do taxpayers spend a lot of money for a sports team that does not draw in the revenue it is suppose to?
The games also impacted the downtown area of the city as much renewal took place in order for Atlanta to put its best face forward. A more attractive inner city area was the result. Improvements were made to public transportation, retail amenities and public areas such as parks and walkways.
There seems to be a domino effect through out the U.S., new stadiums are being built, teams are demanding that their city build them a new stadium to play in but it is not necessary to build these stadiums. The most obvious change in new stadiums is coming from baseball. In the last 10-15 years many new baseball stadiums have been built, but who is paying for these stadiums? The teams and the owners that are demanding the stadiums, or the taxpayers? The answer is that taxpayers are picking up a huge amount of the cost to build a new stadium.
...the citizens of the city socially. It will provide a great night life, as well as other entertainment venues that can be brought in for use of the stadium. However to sell a stadium in a city by claiming economic benefits involves many risks, it will most likely not benefit the city and its people to have a sports team in your city.
Abstract: The Stadium construction boom continues, and taxpayers are being forced to pay for new high tech stadiums they don’t want. These new stadiums create only part-time jobs. Stadiums bring money in exclusively for professional leagues and not the communities. The teams are turning public money into private profit. Professional leagues are becoming extremely wealthy at the taxpayers expense. The publicly-funded stadium obsession must be put to a stop before athletes and coaches become even greedier. New stadiums being built hurt public schools, and send a message to children that leisure activities are more important than basic education. Public money needs to be used to for more important services that would benefit the local economy. Stadiums do not help the economy or save struggling towns. There are no net benefits from single purpose stadiums, and therefore the stadium obsessions must be put to a stop.
College sports have become more popular throughout the past few years and the NCAA is doing an immense amount of money. This increase in money has caused colleges to become involved in this global debate over whether college athletes should be paid or not. Many athletes believe they should be paid for all their hard work, time, and dedication to the organization. Other people like, Kristi Dosh, believe that college athletes shouldn’t be paid because there are too many questions that haven’t been answered for them to join the opposing side. A lot of questions come up with this debate, like which athletes are going to get paid? Kristi Dosh is an author and an ESPN sports business reporter. Dosh wrote the essay, “The Problems with Paying College Athletes”, on June 9, 2011. This essay was published in Forbes which is a business magazine about sports and money. Kristi Dosh makes a somewhat convincing argument by asking a lot of questions to get her audience to realize how difficult this change is, however; she doesn’t do a very good job giving any citations or statistics to back up her statements. Ultimately, I think Dosh is convincing to her audience, but the weaknesses outweigh the strengths.
These small, mostly private schools are spending millions on Football fields, Gyms, indoor and outdoor tracks and student recreation centers. This battle seems almost unnecessary considering almost zero of these athletes will become professionals and in most cases athletics takes away around 20-25 hours of school work time to there student athletes. Looking at the research there seems to be three reasons why schools sell the idea of how a new facility can bring more then a large bill to the school. These points are first recruiting success that leads to athletic success and the enrollment bump in not only the student athletes but also the student population as a whole. Finally how the sch...
It is true that many cities are financing most if not all of the cost for new athletic complexes. The cost is, in the least, absorbable by the city. The urging of teams to force the pay for the cost of a stadium is a bluff, and should be called by the city. The Yankees will not leave New York and the millions of dollars in T.V., radio and merchandise licensing that a city of that stature can bring. The fact that cities are forced to pay for stadiums is a call for better negotiators for the city, not a reason not to build a stadium.
The sports industry is a very big business that contributes great amounts to the economy in terms of turnover, taxes and jobs. The sports industry has an economic cycle. So it depends on different parts of the year to hold big events. The benefits to be gained are that local communities as suppliers of services and goods obtain increased business.
Football is all about money. Money is football. On the other hand, there is a case to be made for money having a positive effect on football. Some may argue that English football – not to mention the British economy – has benefitted hugely from the cash that has flowed into the game from commercial interests in the form of sponsorship, broadcasting rights and merchandising. If it was looked at as a normal business most people including football fans would likely be lauding the success of the Premier League which would be a massive business success.
Firstly, being the host of a major sporting event such as the Olympics could actually benefit the hosting countries’ economic and cultural benefits of the Olympics. The Olympics have a very wide reach in this modern day with. This is a plus especially with the existence of today’s social media and the Internet. In the economic side, it could actually be a very powerful marketing and publishing tool for the host country. With all the present technology that is available nowadays, it actually is a good way to promote a certain country to the world. This eventually increase the economic level of the country that is hosting it, as they will receive visitors from all over the world and they will eventually spend their money to the host countries, thus improving their economics. Winbey (2014) states that the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics are somet...
Sports are loved by many people, it is not just a game to these people it is a way of life, the industry entertains society and gives them an escape from the norms of life. The continuing growth of the sports industry creates more jobs for people which keeps the economy strong and fewer people from unemployment