All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Detroit still building hockey arena
7/26/2013 3:46 PM
Detroit's bankrupt, and they're going ahead with building a new hockey arena using hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars.  Is this a smart idea?

http://money.cnn.com/2013/07/26/news/economy/detroit-bankruptcy-arena/index.html


Votes: 13
(Last vote received: 8/22/2013 1:06 PM)
7/26/2013 3:48 PM

Obama will bail Detroit out and they'll get a beautiful new hookey arena, eh?

7/26/2013 4:38 PM
That doesn't sound right.
7/26/2013 4:45 PM
I'd be interested to see the last city that ultimately lost money building an arena for an existing team.
7/26/2013 4:56 PM
Wouldn't it make sense to delay this a little bit, and fix some of the other major problems the city has?  Like, having it take less than an hour for a cop to show up at your door when you call 911?
7/26/2013 5:16 PM
Posted by examinerebb on 7/26/2013 4:45:00 PM (view original):
I'd be interested to see the last city that ultimately lost money building an arena for an existing team.
Miami?

Of course, the verdict isn't in but it seems to be heading in that direction.
7/26/2013 5:51 PM (edited)
Posted by examinerebb on 7/26/2013 4:45:00 PM (view original):
I'd be interested to see the last city that ultimately lost money building an arena for an existing team.
These cities.

It's usually a bad idea for a city to fund a stadium. If it was a good business proposition, the billionaire owner of the team would do it himself.
7/26/2013 6:46 PM
Evidence, please.  I'm sure one has to exist in recent history, but I know of no stadium (constructed for an existing team - the K.C. basketball arena fiasco doesn't qualify) that was a net loss for the municipality that helped fund it.
7/26/2013 7:07 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 7/26/2013 5:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by examinerebb on 7/26/2013 4:45:00 PM (view original):
I'd be interested to see the last city that ultimately lost money building an arena for an existing team.
Miami?

Of course, the verdict isn't in but it seems to be heading in that direction.
Yes, that financing/stadium contract is a clusterf*ck of epic proportions.  Whoever was negotiating on behalf of the city/county should be dragged into the street and shot.  Still though, the bonds are paid via "tourist taxes" speciifically increased for this purpose and, even though the Marlins get the vast majority of gate AND parking (again, horribly inept negotiating by the city/county), eventually it will become a wash at worse.  Property taxes, some revenue from parking, tax revenue associated with the increased traffic and jobs the stadium provides, etc.  It's just going to take much longer there than in most places because the politicans were dumbasses.
7/26/2013 7:30 PM
Posted by examinerebb on 7/26/2013 6:46:00 PM (view original):
Evidence, please.  I'm sure one has to exist in recent history, but I know of no stadium (constructed for an existing team - the K.C. basketball arena fiasco doesn't qualify) that was a net loss for the municipality that helped fund it.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/09/if-you-build-it-they-might-not-come-the-risky-economics-of-sports-stadiums/260900/
7/28/2013 11:23 AM
The Glendale issue has been well publicized and their shortfall is due to a $30 million (or thereabouts) stipend they pay to the NHL and/or the team owners to play in Glendale.  I've never been to Glendale, but it's also my understanding that it's a 30 minute drive from the closest population hub in Arizona.  That's ****-poor planning.

You don't find it odd that you argue against publicly funded stadiums, after arguing that any government spending, even if wasteful, is good economic stimulus?
7/28/2013 11:25 AM
Posted by examinerebb on 7/28/2013 11:23:00 AM (view original):
The Glendale issue has been well publicized and their shortfall is due to a $30 million (or thereabouts) stipend they pay to the NHL and/or the team owners to play in Glendale.  I've never been to Glendale, but it's also my understanding that it's a 30 minute drive from the closest population hub in Arizona.  That's ****-poor planning.

You don't find it odd that you argue against publicly funded stadiums, after arguing that any government spending, even if wasteful, is good economic stimulus?
Municipal governments and the federal government are not the same. The Feds get to play by different rules.
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Detroit still building hockey arena

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.