NFL, Super Bowl Stadium, Atlanta Falcons discussed on Special Programming
And let's see what happens when we actually charge a portable prices for food rather than have people do all of their eating and drinking a head of time. And then going to the Major League Soccer games in the NFL games there. Let's charge a portable food there. They have triple the amount of food they're selling their, although the prophets aren't much, but they've tripled the amount of food. They sell their by not gouging people with monopoly prices. So this is one one time where I'm not actually going to trash the local owners. This is this is a really a great fan thing. Much better for the fans and not any worse in terms of the bottom line for the for the stadium operators. Okay. True or false in the case of. Atlanta. Home Depot co founder and owner of the Atlanta Falcons. He uses the stadiums. Arthur banks spent a significant amount on this year Super Bowl stadium. Yeah. So again, as you alluded to earlier, this is about a one point six billion dollar stadium. We don't have a perfect guess about how much of the public subsidy is because a lot of the subsidy is in terms of obligations to keep up the stadium over the next thirty years. But it looks like about seven hundred million out of the one point six billion was public money, which means the other nine hundred million was was the was blanks money. So yeah, that's a that's a big contribution on his part. Roughly average of what we're seeing for NFL owners over the last roughly ten years. So in the end does hosting a Super Bowl cost the city or benefit less than the committees and the NFL suggest. Yeah. So again in Atlanta, the NFL says this is about a four hundred or five hundred million dollar benefit for the city of Atlanta. Economists like myself who are not connected in any way. Okay with the NFL or the host committees. When we go back and look at cities that have hosted these big events, we actually get numbers somewhere ranging between about thirty two hundred and thirty million dollars of of economic impact on the city. That's something that you shouldn't turn your nose up at. But it's also a fraction of what's being claimed. And it's not too far off from the amount of contributions in terms of the cost to the city of putting those that game on after fifty two Super Bowls. Is there anybody out there challenging this paradigm at all? So at least one thing I think we have seen is that in the aftermath of the great recession in two thousand eight at least we've seen the amount of public subsidies for stadiums. Actually going way down in the twenty years before two thousand eight we had about eighty major stadium projects across the country. The average public contribution was about two thirds of the cost with team owners only picking up about a third since two thousand eight those numbers of actually reverse. So about two thirds of the cost of a typical new stadium over the past decade has at least been private rather than public. So I think in the aftermath of the great recession. We were saying, look, it's it's a bit distasteful to be, you know, laying off teachers and firefighters and police officers when we're handing out hundreds of millions of dollars to again billionaire owners and millionaire players, and so we have seen at least, you know, quite a bit of pushback on that. And for other big events like the. Olympics. It's becoming actually quite difficult to find people willing to put up the sort of money that you need to host one of those events Victor Matheson from the college of the Holy Cross. Thank you so much for joining us on all of it. Well, thank you very much for having me. And of course, go patriots. We'll see about that. We'll be right back with our weekly culture. Check in with WNYC's, Charlie Herman and a special preview of all the black history month team programming at the sheen.