tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post6962387355381090149..comments2024-03-28T09:22:36.967+13:00Comments on Offsetting Behaviour: Hooton on Sports Econ 101Eric Cramptonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-90816608565567542132015-04-08T12:01:01.020+12:002015-04-08T12:01:01.020+12:00Oh wow. Didn't know about the Field of Schemes...Oh wow. Didn't know about the Field of Schemes stuff you've linked. Thanks!Eric Cramptonhttp://offsettingbehaviour.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-16132464378128303812015-04-07T15:20:05.518+12:002015-04-07T15:20:05.518+12:00I of course agree that subsidizing stadiums is sil...I of course agree that subsidizing stadiums is silly, but a few nitpick points.<br /><br />There is now actually a real paper in SEJ arguing the 1996 Olympics did good: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/soej.12004/abstract<br /><br />Zimbalist is a sell-out a should not be cited (even setting aside the fact that his political economy and policy prescriptions in Baseball and Billions are ridiculous): http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2013/01/29/4452/zimbalists-rays-need-stadium-statement-made-while-under-contract-with-mlb/<br /><br /><br /><br />I'm actually pretty sure you can get plausible looking results "showing" a multiplier greater than one is commonplace for these types of things, but it's very rare in the literature because no professional economist is politically motivated to do it.Ryan Murphynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-37434708038780696522015-04-04T06:09:35.440+13:002015-04-04T06:09:35.440+13:00Bread and circuses, nothing has changedBread and circuses, nothing has changedLondonmannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-53268657140814112082015-04-01T12:12:05.243+13:002015-04-01T12:12:05.243+13:00In the US, where sports stadiums are often the sol...In the US, where sports stadiums are often the sole domains of a single team, the owners, and local politicos regularly tout the supposed benefits to the surrounding area in order to gain public (read "tax payer") funding. It has long been my, and others, belief that if the stadium were such a profitable venture, why doesn't the team owner pay for it and reap the financial benefits for himself. He already knows the fiscal reality.RingwoodRamblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-9704691995375106242015-03-31T19:59:23.437+13:002015-03-31T19:59:23.437+13:00Very interesting post. I'll put in an OIA requ...Very interesting post. I'll put in an OIA request for any reports or research that refers to the work of Andrew ZimbalistJim Rosehttp://utopiayouarestandinginit.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-51888254389470311852015-03-31T09:38:44.813+13:002015-03-31T09:38:44.813+13:00"justify them on the basis of their being a f..."justify them on the basis of their being a fun party " - so right. The first month after we moved to Wgntn the City put on one of its occasional fireworks displays. From a hillside position, you got a fantastic 30 minutes of loud noises and bright lights. The next day, a few complaints in the paper about how the city had blown $100,000 in 30 minutes of extravagance. But anyone I spoke to said they were more than happy to spend a couple of dollars in their rates each year to have such a good time, so good value for money I think, without any pretense that it had a long-term economic value.VMCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-50332563445626065232015-03-31T09:24:18.874+13:002015-03-31T09:24:18.874+13:00You can see more of National's 2005 Iwi/Kiwi s...You can see more of National's 2005 Iwi/Kiwi style billboards here: http://www.electionads.org.nz/category/2005-general-election/?party=national-party&format=billboardNZ Election Adsnoreply@blogger.com