Never…repeat never has a sports stadium development ever returned the projected income to a community (tax base). Now there are added benefits, intangibles as in civic pride, identity, et cetera which are important to the fabric of a community’s cultural makeup which cannot be measured directly. It is kind of like a WAR analysis but with a local stimulus package.

It is nothing but corporate welfare, but alas they can do it, do it effectively and since corporations are artificial persons, conceived and consumed only because of a bank account why not.

Now corporate welfare has a long history in the US, dating back to toll roads, ship yards, toll bridges, ferries, ports, railway right of ways, to now airports, highways, TIF’s, broadcast signals, telephone lines, sports stadiums, et cetera….the issue is honesty…

what really is the cost/benefit, not the bull

they’ve spent an awful lot of money luring teams from Florida to Arizona.

If they don’t keep the Cubs, who are overwhelmingly the biggest ST draw, what was the point?

I’ll believe the report generated by Elliott D. Pollack & Company which refutes virtually all the B.S, you’re spewing. Of course now you’ll proceed to slander the motives of this independent consultin firm? Dude, nobody is buying your “champion of the taxpayer” disguise. You wanted Naples and you lost. Be a man and admit it, otherwise go cry to somebody who cares.

I have been reading off and on a book called “Major League Losers”, “The Real Cost of Sports and Who’s Paying for It”, “What Governments and Taxpayers Need to Know” by Mark Rosentraub, Published by Basic Books. I’m only a quarter of the way into the book but it backs up what you are saying. I’m glad the Cubs are staying in Mesa but a bit leery on how good the deal really is for Mesa based on this book. Obviously the book does not address the Mesa deal but it covers all sports and most if not all the deals are bad for the taxpayers.

and the per game average WAS down, although with more teams, more games and a rotten economy, that was expected.

What I find most interesting is that 6 of the top 10 attended Cactus League games of ALL TIME occurred in 2009, and all of them involved the Cubs…although half of them were not at Hohokam.

The studies and “facts” presented by the “anti corporate welfare” folks are just as biased and suspect as those put forth by the Pro factions. Their “consultants” are just as prone to give the people who are paying them the numbers they want to see as anybody else.

Reality and the truth lies somewhere in between.

of the Elliott Pollack study when they used a photo of Gregg Maddux on the cover.

BTW, it has been widely, and erroneously reported that the Pollack study concluded that the Cubs impact on the local economy is $52M. That is not exactly what the study set out to do and not what it said.

The Study was intended to measure what the City of Mesa would lose if the Cubs were to be replaced by an “average” team…i.e., a team that is not the Cubs. The $52M figure is what would be lost if the Cubs were replaced by, say, the Baltimore Orioles.

To quote the study:

“Economic and Fiscal Benefit of the Cubs to the State of Arizona of the most popular team in the Cactus League”

 "The Cubs have a disproportionate economic and fiscal benefit to the State of Arizona compared to a “typical” Cactus League team. To measure this disproportionate impact, the Cubs above-average attendance was compared to the attendance of an “average” replacement team. The analysis, completed by Elliott D. Pollack & Company, assumes that the “average” replacement team participated on the same schedule as the Cubs in the 2009 season.

Overall, Cactus League attendance would have been almost 144,000 attendees fewer, representing a 9.1 % loss in attendance. (Attendance at the replacement team’s home games would have been lower and attendance at the replacement team’s away games would also have been lower.)

Many of the lost attendees would have been out-of-area visitors and so in addition to the game related spending that would result from the lower attendance, there would be a loss in travel related spending, including lodging, food & beverage, transportation, etc. In total, over $31.1 million dollars of Cactus League generated spending would be lost.

The over $31.1 million in directly lower spending would impact the overall state’s economy by over $52.2 million dollars as hotels, restaurants, retail stores, and other businesses would have less activity and in turn lower their payments to suppliers. Lower amounts of spending support fewer employees who spend money in the economy, so the losses become even larger.

In total, the losses (including direct, indirect, and induced) would translate into over 650 lost jobs in the State of Arizona and over $21.1 million in lost wages.

The loss of jobs, wages, and economic activity by replacing the Cubs with an “average” team would also mean lower state tax collections. Lower sales tax collections, lower bed tax collections, lower gas tax collections, lower income tax collections, and others would total over $2.0 million per year. Over a ten year period, the loss would exceed $20 million.