Guess who's paying for the AS game? - Page 2
Old 10-03-2013, 06:15 PM   #21 (permalink)
useless

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,200
Representing:
Default

It's not a bad investment at all, and who knows if the NBA's decision was contingent on government involvement.

I wonder if that 1/2 million is for police/security, or if the extra security will need to be funded in addition to the 1/2 million.
EggsToTheBBQ is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 06:38 PM   #22 (permalink)
If I ruled the world...

Sippin' On Myself
 
KoolAid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Yes
Posts: 3,624
Representing:
Default

At first my thoughts were, psh 500k is nothing for the provincial gov't. But thinking about it I realized how else this could've been used. Imagine that 500k going to fixing up one of the many crime-ridden areas in the city.
KoolAid is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 07:19 PM   #23 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XiaominWu View Post
sure.... but would we not have gotten the game without that $500K?
that's not the point, the point is that this event benefits the local economy and I have no problem if the city invests 500k for something like this. I'm not qualified to comment whether the 100M is legit or not, but there's no denying that it will bring a ton of revenues, far more than 500k. So if MLSE went to the city and formed some kind of partnership to go after the all star, I don't see what's wrong (also don't get what the fact that MLSE is a very rich corporate has to do with this).

Of course, had the city funded an arena for somebody like MLSE, that's a whole different discussion. When you put down 200-300M, the economic benefits have to be evaluated very carefully to see if this is justified.

To people who say that 500k put towards this purpose or that would be money better spent, that's illogical. If 500k invested in this event yieled 5M in local taxes, that gives you a net profit of 9x the original amount, which in turn can be distributed to those original purposes.

The only thing I don't get is why did MLSE even bother to ask for 500k, they must have anticipated there will be negative feedback which are probably not worth the amount. I think it's far more likely that those 500k are, like somebody said earlier, funds towards security/police etc and not actual cash contributions.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 07:22 PM   #24 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingRap View Post
This fits within the age old ideology that somehow the CONSUMPTION of sport is something that the public purse should be funding. The only sport the government should be investing in is the PRACTICE of it, not its commodity. Put that 500,000 into amateur sports. Lord knows they need it. If MLSE wants to say that Toronto is a world class city, then put your money where your PR is and fork over the 500,000 as thank you to the fans and people of Toronto for supporting a team that's pathetically performed over its 20 year history.
that's shortsighted, the city puts money in a lot of events with the hope of generating increased revenues. A smart government will find ways not just to better spend existing funds, but also increase the funds available to spend in the first place.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 07:24 PM   #25 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX View Post
I can't wait for Rogers to up my cable bill so they can better serve my needs. Very little of the 100 million dollars coming into the city will be coming my way. Strip clubs and limo services will see some green. It will be a short-lived injection of cash, not anything that will stimulate the economy in a sense that creates a constant circulating of that cash.

Mr Tannenbaum is a very rich man. He is a life-long Liberal supporter. He's seeing some of the benefits of being a rich man that supports the Liberals. Fuck them all. It's stupid.
unless those limo and strip clubs are not paying their taxes, there's a guarantee that a significant portion of those 100M will go back to the city. And it will add a little bit to the brand image of Toronto and maybe some of those one-time visitors will return some day with their kids and spend more money in the city.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 07:27 PM   #26 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowfax View Post
Sorry but this "myth" is a complete crock of shit..that theory is something politicians have been shoving down people's throats for decades

$500,000 bones could go a long way in helping inner city kids etc etc etc etc
what myth, you may disagree with the amount (although I strongly doubt you have any backing for your disagreement), but even if the event only attracts 20k visitors to the city and those visitors only spend $500 for the weekend, and that right there is 10M. And we all know that the kind of visitors to the all star tend to spend a lot more than $500. Heck, 3 nights in a good 4+ stars hotel will cost several times that amount. 100M may be on the high side, but there' s no way it will be less than 50M.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 07:56 PM   #27 (permalink)
LOG
is pounding the rock!

Senior Member
 
LOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,168
Representing:
Default

I agree with moremilk no matter how you look at it, Allstar weekend will bring a ton of money to our economy. It is called
Quote:
tourism multiplier:
Direct spending-Money spent by tourist on services they need on holiday

Indirect spending- this represents expenditure of tourism business on goods and services

induced or additional spending- this is expenditure by the resident community of income earned directly or indirectly from direct spending (tourist expenditure)

also very important: capture rate (indicates the amount retained in local economy)
(source:International and Sustainable tourism course book and my prof.)
LOG is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 09:34 PM   #28 (permalink)
LX
synapse jelly

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,677
Representing:
Default

Love your logic moremilk. 500k had to be thrown at the richest among us because there will be benefits to the economy. There will also be further costs to the taxpayers. And your suggestion that 20,000 people will surely spend 2500 for a weekend, at a minimum, sounds like someone that is really working hard to make this ridiculous expenditure seem justifiable. It is not. If it was, don't you think the logical thing for the government to do would be to announce it proudly, rather than to try to quietly pass it on to the parties that clearly do not need it? This is a political reach-around. Nothing more. And the benefits cited are bs.

http://thesportjournal.org/article/u...impact-studies

Quote:
On the events side, nearly every national or international sporting event elicits claims of huge benefits accruing to the host city. For example, the National Football League typically claims an economic impact from the Super Bowl of around $400 million (National Football League, 1999), Major League Baseball attaches a $75 million benefit to the All-Star Game (Selig et al., 1999), and the NCAA Final Four in Men’s Basketball is estimated to generate from $30 million to $110 million (Mensheha, 1998; Anderson, 2001). Multi-day events such as the Olympics or soccer World Cup produce even larger figures. The pre-Olympics estimates for Atlanta’s Games in 1996 suggested the event would generate $5.1 billion in direct and indirect economic activity and 77,000 new jobs in Georgia (Humphreys & Plummer, 1995).

In many cases, variation in the estimates of benefits alone raises questions about the validity of studies. A series of economic impact studies of the NBA All-Star game produced numbers ranging from a $3 million windfall for the 1992 game in Orlando to a $35 million bonanza for the game three years earlier in Houston (Houck, 2000). The ten-fold disparity in the estimated impact of the event in different years serves to illustrate the ad hoc nature of these studies. Similarly, ahead of the 1997 NCAA Women’s Basketball Final Four, an economic impact of $7 million was estimated for the local economy in Cincinnati, while the same event two years later was predicted to produce a $32 million impact on the San Jose economy (Knight Ridder News Service, 1999). Such increases cannot be explained by changes in general price levels or growth in the popularity of the tournament. Instead, they are explained by the fact that economic impact studies are highly subjective and vulnerable to significant error as well as manipulation.

In further cases, the size of an estimate can strain credulity. The Sports Management Research Institute estimated the direct economic benefit of the U. S. Open tennis tournament in Flushing Meadows, NY, to be $420 million for the tri-state area, more than any other sporting or entertainment event in any city in the United States; this sum represents 3% of the total annual direct economic impact of tourism for New York (United States Tennis Association, 2001). It is simply impossible to believe that 1 in 30 tourists to New York City in any given year are visiting the city solely to attend the U. S. Open. Similarly, the projected $6 billion impact of a proposed World Cup in South Africa in 2006 would suggest that soccer games and their ancillary activities would represent over 4% of the entire gross domestic product of the country in that year (South Africa Football Association, 2000).
And I suggest people look at the PDF on this site regarding negligible benefits from sports subsidies. It goes in depth as to how inflated the impact of mega sporting events end up being.

http://econjwatch.org/articles/do-ec...nd-mega-events

Quote:
Abstract

This paper reviews the empirical literature assessing the effects of subsidies for professional sports franchises and facilities. The evidence reveals a great deal of consistency among economists doing research in this area. That evidence is that sports subsidies cannot be justified on the grounds of local economic development, income growth or job creation, those arguments most frequently used by subsidy advocates. The paper also relates survey evidence showing that economists in general oppose sports subsidies. In addition to reviewing the empirical literature, we describe the economic intuition that probably underlies the strong consensus among economists against sports subsidies.

Last edited by LX; 10-03-2013 at 10:07 PM.
LX is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2013, 11:51 PM   #29 (permalink)
enjoying having the keys to destiny

perusing ancient database
 
ClingRap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The far side of the Universe.
Posts: 1,947
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by moremilk View Post
that's shortsighted, the city puts money in a lot of events with the hope of generating increased revenues. A smart government will find ways not just to better spend existing funds, but also increase the funds available to spend in the first place.
Explain to me how directing funds to amateur sport is shortsighted? And you should check your facts, it isn't the city kicking in. It's the PROVINCE! I'm one of many people who don't live in Toronto and see the redistribution of wealth funneled there as grossly disproportionate. Spare me the population, economy, blah blah blah. And oh, as a public employee, I'm raked over the coals by the powers that be for every expense and I completely understand why. It's about accountability. Throwing 500k at some rich people who could completely fork that over is indicative of the opulence plaguing politics. Now that's shortsighted.
ClingRap is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 12:00 AM   #30 (permalink)
kicking himself for being so emotionally invested in the Roller-coaster Raptors

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,510
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KoolAid View Post
At first my thoughts were, psh 500k is nothing for the provincial gov't. But thinking about it I realized how else this could've been used. Imagine that 500k going to fixing up one of the many crime-ridden areas in the city.
or paying off 1/2000th of eHealth or 1/1000th of moving the proposed Oakville hydro plant...

500K is chump change for the provincial gov't, and the local economy will probably benefit at least that much from the all-star weekend.
BballWatcher is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 12:14 AM   #31 (permalink)
La Decima!!!!!

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 7,223
Representing:
Default

Some of you guys sound like Thatcher, Reagan and Brian Mulroney
LET'S GO RAPTORS!!!!! is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 07:41 AM   #32 (permalink)
LX
synapse jelly

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,677
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BballWatcher View Post
or paying off 1/2000th of eHealth or 1/1000th of moving the proposed Oakville hydro plant...

500K is chump change for the provincial gov't, and the local economy will probably benefit at least that much from the all-star weekend.
So, because the Libs have sucked so badly, this small amount of sucking is pretty good in relative terms?

You're missing the point - it's an entirely unnecessary waste of a large amount of money, no matter how much anyone wants to characterize it as a drop in the bucket. EHealth was due to gross incompetence. The power plant fiasco was about placing the interests of the party above all else. Shameful stuff. But does that mean they get to make out like this half a mill was needed to get an economic benefit back in return? Because I'm not even sure they are trying to do that. Why are you? They were doing this as quietly as they could, because it's obviously ridiculous and disgusting.
LX is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 09:38 AM   #33 (permalink)
a baller

Senior Member
 
bjjs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,701
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX View Post
I can't wait for Rogers to up my cable bill so they can better serve my needs. Very little of the 100 million dollars coming into the city will be coming my way. Strip clubs and limo services will see some green. It will be a short-lived injection of cash, not anything that will stimulate the economy in a sense that creates a constant circulating of that cash.

Mr Tannenbaum is a very rich man. He is a life-long Liberal supporter. He's seeing some of the benefits of being a rich man that supports the Liberals. Fuck them all. It's stupid.
Tannenbaum owns the On Route chains along the 401 along with uber rich Italian company Autogrill. How did he swing that deal...It's a license to print money if you really think about it. I'm not sure what the particulars are, I'm sure he leases the land from the government, but I don't see anybody else given the same opportunity? He and Autogrill have essentially been handed a retail monopy along the 401 to service a gazillion drivers a year.

Last edited by bjjs; 10-04-2013 at 09:49 AM.
bjjs is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 02:55 PM   #34 (permalink)
raptor jesus

Senior Member
 
Don Vito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,926
Representing:
Default

It's all political...the gov wants to show they care about Canadian sports
Don Vito is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 06:50 PM   #35 (permalink)
Is hating ISO ball

Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 180
Representing:
Default

Think it all the way through.

The money is already budgeted and the government has a very high return on investment for this money. Where else do you want that budgeted money to go? It's great that Tim L is getting government involved
deaner is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 07:02 PM   #36 (permalink)
LX
synapse jelly

In the Paint


 
LX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,677
Representing:
Default

The government isn't getting any return. Zilch. Zippo. It is not an investment. It is a handout to dudes that do not need anything close to a handout, but will apparently be happy to take it. Unless you're saying the All-Star game would not happen without the province contributing. Oddly, they made no announcement, so that wouldn't seem to be the case, and thinking it through, it seems a little silly to think that would be the case.

Last edited by LX; 10-04-2013 at 07:05 PM.
LX is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 07:26 PM   #37 (permalink)
LOG
is pounding the rock!

Senior Member
 
LOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 9,168
Representing:
Default

I don't see why do people make such a big deal..
Sure i get it they could easily make it happen without 500k, from the government. But we don't know how is that money is going to be used, maybe it's something that will benefit the city in the way (ex basketball court(s)). If not it is wasteful, but still AS will bring back more than 500k to the economy. Lets wait and see how are they going to spend it
LOG is online now   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 07:53 PM   #38 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

so it appears the money comes from a special fund with money allocated for initiatives to bring tourism to Toronto. I think it's lame that a company like MLSE applied for it, since 500k is chump change for them and not worth the negative publicity.

still, MLSE has the same right to apply and get these funds like any other festival that I'm sure does the same thing (from tiff and nuit blanche to carribana and pride parade).

Also, since these are funds pre-allocated for exactly this type of thing, they can't be used for other purposes such as building courts etc. If people have an issue with the government having this fund for this purpose, that's something else. I would argue this is a great thing, but probably this is not the place to have that argument.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 07:55 PM   #39 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ClingRap View Post
Explain to me how directing funds to amateur sport is shortsighted? And you should check your facts, it isn't the city kicking in. It's the PROVINCE! I'm one of many people who don't live in Toronto and see the redistribution of wealth funneled there as grossly disproportionate. Spare me the population, economy, blah blah blah. And oh, as a public employee, I'm raked over the coals by the powers that be for every expense and I completely understand why. It's about accountability. Throwing 500k at some rich people who could completely fork that over is indicative of the opulence plaguing politics. Now that's shortsighted.
you misundestood me, I don't have a problem with spending on amateur sport. What I was saying is that criticizing an investment of A in something will bring 10x A back and calling for that A to be spent directly is shortsighted. I thought that's obvious, since it's clearly better to have 10 x A to spend that A.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2013, 08:03 PM   #40 (permalink)
whatever

Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 9,651
Representing:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LX View Post
Love your logic moremilk. 500k had to be thrown at the richest among us because there will be benefits to the economy. There will also be further costs to the taxpayers. And your suggestion that 20,000 people will surely spend 2500 for a weekend, at a minimum, sounds like someone that is really working hard to make this ridiculous expenditure seem justifiable. It is not. If it was, don't you think the logical thing for the government to do would be to announce it proudly, rather than to try to quietly pass it on to the parties that clearly do not need it? This is a political reach-around. Nothing more. And the benefits cited are bs.

Upon Further Review: An Examination of Sporting Event Economic Impact Studies | The Sport Journal



And I suggest people look at the PDF on this site regarding negligible benefits from sports subsidies. It goes in depth as to how inflated the impact of mega sporting events end up being.

Do Economists Reach a Conclusion on Subsidies for Sports Franchises, Stadiums, and Mega-Events? Econ Journal Watch: sports, subsidies, stadiums, arenas
I don't get what difference does it make if MLSE is rich or poor, this has nothing to do with that. The goverment (city, province or federal - whatever) should make the decision not based on who else benefits, rather on whether it makes economic sense or not.

And I'm sure the 100M is an optimistic figure, it would be naive to expect otherwise. The forecast was almost certainly a range and it's almost guaranteed MLSE took the high end of the range, probably rounded it up as well. Still, whether its 50M, 70M or 100M, you can't seriously question that fact that this event will bring major dollars and a large crowd in TO?

Between all the players, their families, the entire NBA upper crust, from GMs to the league's head office, all the media, celebrities, star gazers and outside fans, I wouldn't be surprised to see 20k+ people coming to Toronto at a time when nobody really wants to come here (to in february is not the most attractive destination). And like I said, some of these people may even return one day if they like it here.

What these people will do is buy hotel tickets, restaurant meals, gifts, visit some of the local attractions, use cabs, drink in bars, give tips and yes, go to strip clubs maybe. There will be a lot of businesses and individuals who will directly benefit and the government will rake in a nice windfall in extra taxes.
moremilk is offline   Boss Key Wife Key Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright RaptorsForum.com 2005-2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24