Man, where's your holiday spirit, Grinchy? What's another $500 million or so towards baseball? And it's gonna pay huge dividends...
You know all those summer days, where you just sit on your bum, watching the tube and figuring out something to liven up the afternoon? Well, now you can sit on your behind for three hours AND spend $20 to watch the same game you could've seen on TV!
I think he was an Orioles fan.
Ok, full discloure--I'm stoked to the point of bypassing old loyalties that the Nats are in town. My family's had O's season tickets since forever, but I already have more pieces of Nationals gear in my closet than Orioles (only one t-shirt to zero Orioles stuff, but still). Yeah, you can root for both teams, but it's kind of cool to be present at the creation of a new franchise, a la the Ravens. Check in with me when Washington's lost 95 games, though; my December idealism likely will fade to a September blase.
Hopefully my heart's not clouding my head...but I do find your argument flawed. The baseball money wasn't waiting around to save our schools, fight crime, or underwrite any noble cause. It's the kind of cash that only appears for these special civic projects that pay off the masses. Right or wrong, I don't know, but I also question whether you can throw money at failing schools and make them better. Look at all the different tactics (private sector involvement, co-ops, etc.) that have succeeded or failed at improving inner city education independent of a massive capital investment. Really, America's public school system is in need of a major reshuffling, particularly in the urban areas, but we can leave that conversation to these guys for now.
Also, I know Zimbalist and the other economists' analysis is that professional sports represent a minimal or negative impact on a city's economy...but in contrast to my empirical nature, my gut doesn't let me buy that either. Look at Camden Yards/Jacobs Field/etc. Maybe it's a patchwork, plastic surgery approach to fixing aging cities, but the human traffic that is drawn to an under-developed area just feels revitalizing. Head down to the MCI Center one night this winter--a big question mark when the Wizards first built it--and the buzzing crowds will prove the point. Or I'll just let Abe Pollin and the gang tell me instead.
You know all those summer days, where you just sit on your bum, watching the tube and figuring out something to liven up the afternoon? Well, now you can sit on your behind for three hours AND spend $20 to watch the same game you could've seen on TV!
I think he was an Orioles fan.
Ok, full discloure--I'm stoked to the point of bypassing old loyalties that the Nats are in town. My family's had O's season tickets since forever, but I already have more pieces of Nationals gear in my closet than Orioles (only one t-shirt to zero Orioles stuff, but still). Yeah, you can root for both teams, but it's kind of cool to be present at the creation of a new franchise, a la the Ravens. Check in with me when Washington's lost 95 games, though; my December idealism likely will fade to a September blase.
Hopefully my heart's not clouding my head...but I do find your argument flawed. The baseball money wasn't waiting around to save our schools, fight crime, or underwrite any noble cause. It's the kind of cash that only appears for these special civic projects that pay off the masses. Right or wrong, I don't know, but I also question whether you can throw money at failing schools and make them better. Look at all the different tactics (private sector involvement, co-ops, etc.) that have succeeded or failed at improving inner city education independent of a massive capital investment. Really, America's public school system is in need of a major reshuffling, particularly in the urban areas, but we can leave that conversation to these guys for now.
Also, I know Zimbalist and the other economists' analysis is that professional sports represent a minimal or negative impact on a city's economy...but in contrast to my empirical nature, my gut doesn't let me buy that either. Look at Camden Yards/Jacobs Field/etc. Maybe it's a patchwork, plastic surgery approach to fixing aging cities, but the human traffic that is drawn to an under-developed area just feels revitalizing. Head down to the MCI Center one night this winter--a big question mark when the Wizards first built it--and the buzzing crowds will prove the point. Or I'll just let Abe Pollin and the gang tell me instead.
posted by DD at 5:55 PM
2 Comments:
I'm not into sports enough to put a post but...the MCI center, at least according to that link, was PRIVATELY funded. I've no problem with that. Some stadiums will have a positive effect and be profitable ventures for everyone involved.
But if is, then why do you need government money?
MLB was going to pull out of the DC plan unless the DC government promised to pay for the stadium if no private investors chip in. (From the WaPo article:"Major League Baseball executives had threatened to pull the Nationals franchise out of the city last week because of the provision that said the stadium project would die if private money was not found.")
That is a REALLY BAD SIGN. It means the MLB doesn't think this is going to be a profitable enough venture to draw in savvy investors.
I'm into sports enough that I have to write a response.
Here's the conventional wisdom. There are two separate financial transactions that need to be made: 1) The buying of the team and 2) the building of the stadium. The investors are going to put up X dollars--let's say $500 million--for the rights to buy the team from Major League Baseball, which currently owns the Nationals. However, there's the tricky issue of the other $500 million to fund a stadium--who shoulders that load?
If it's the investors...then that's $500 million less that the investing group will have to spend on the team, and the money spent on the team goes straight to the current baseball executives. If it's the citizens of DC, well, there might be a trickle-down effect in terms of antagonism towards the team etc but the immediate payout to current baseball executives is kept high. So it's in baseball's best interest to keep private funds out of public construction.
I don't think anyone questions that DC held a fair amount of leverage before the snafu happened the past weeks. The city is a huge media market (I believe 8th in the country, the largest not to have baseball), very well-off, and as the WaPo reported today, is bordered by growing counties in Virginia and Maryland. Very attractive to baseball, which had committed itself publicly to finally moving the team and would have been in a bind to at least keep the Nationals in DC for one year while looking for a new home. After all that's transpired, however, it seems that council members may have blown their advantage and gotten few concessions, if any--the spin is it was a face-saving deal for all involved.
Alright--I'm off to the Bahamas in t-minus 6 hours. Hopefully we'll still have a baseball team when I get back.
Post a Comment
<< Home