Re: [Mpls] Fw: stadium

[Brobson34]

Perhaps Mr. Jacobsen is using divisive, abrasive rhetoric to cover his very shaky position. Yeah, anecdotally you can surmise that the stadium looks like it would be a winner, what with all those examples he cites, but in study after study, the economic impacts of a big stadiums and arenas are at best a crapshoot, and on balance don't generate as much money as they cost--look it up. Beyond the anecdote, where are your studies, Mr. Jacobsen? This is increasingly true as time goes on--as more cities build these monstrosities and their appeal diminishes, and as the barons of the game continually make a mockery of fan loyalty and any pretense of fairness. Check out the example of the Detroit Tigers, or the Rockies, or the Diamondbacks, and so on.
The only thing that brings people to the ballpark on a consistent basis is not bells and whistles, but a winning ballclub. The Twins proved this last year. But the only way to consistently build a winning ballclub in baseball's current economic climate is to spend as much money as franchises with much bigger media markets, or national cable television connections, or ego-driven owners who don't mind losing millions for the sake of a little fame. A new stadium won't solve that problem.
Finally, for all the huffing and puffing of the pro-stadium crowd, I think the skeptical-stadium folks have showed great restraint in not pointing out how much money their position has already saved taxpayers. If we'd listened to the shrill pollyannas who fell for the Charlotte blackmail or Pohlad's loan disguised as a gift, we'd all be forking money hand over fist. To be rigorously skeptical about a stadium proposal is not socialism, Mr. Jacobsen, it's common sense.

Britt Robson
Lyndale