Sunday, November 16, 2014

Henderson: New Stadium May Make Us a Better Place, But Won't Make Rays a Better Team

Joe Henderson hit another home run on the Rays' Stadium Saga today, penning a column that puts the difficult decisions in proper perspective: don't build a stadium to make the Rays more competitive; build a stadium because you want the team to play in Tampa Bay for generations to come.
As franchises in all pro sports like to say, it’s about being “competitive.”

If you look at the numbers, though, I’m not sure the way the Rays have to do business changes that much with a new stadium. They would have more money, yes, but at the same time, revenues are escalating in many franchises around the majors.
This is a point I've written about ad nauseam:  a new stadium might draw 25,000 fans, but it won't make much of a difference to the Rays' bottom lines.  I may have tweeted it a few times too:
Henderson's Sunday column continues with a look at all that TV money:
The real difference-maker for franchises is in the rights fees they draw from cable companies because, unlike national TV money, it isn’t shared with other franchises.
...
Their ratings have generally been strong, ranking in the upper half of MLB teams for the last several years. Even if the Rays can negotiate a deal that doubles their Fox Sports money (a major assumption) though, how does that stack up with $340 million a year the Los Angles Dodgers will receive through 2038 from SportsNet LA?

Do we have to ask why former Rays executive vice president Andrew Friedman bolted Tampa Town for a job running the Dodgers in Tinsel Town?
This is the exact problem which led me to write about Bud Selig's lasting legacy of competitive imbalance last month.

Which leads Henderson to conclude "scrap(ing) about $700 million together to build" a stadium has nothing to do with making the Rays more competitive:
For all the talk about the Rays as a crown jewel for Tampa Bay, no one has yet come up with a regional idea to pay for a new stadium.
Mention regional cooperation on something like this and it’s like when the waiter brings the bill for dinner, and everyone at the table looks the other way or reaches for their cellphone until someone finally gets stuck with the check.

I’ve always felt there is only one reason that any city gets involved in projects like this. Raymond James Stadium was built because voters decided they wanted professional football in town, not because of the alleged economic bonanza these franchises bring to a community.

If the Rays get a new stadium, it will be for the same reason. One side of the bay will have decided we’re better off with baseball than without, and we’d all like a better place to watch the games.

It won’t be for the economic impact, and it certainly won’t be because the Rays will start spending like the Yankees and Boston Red Sox. Take it or leave it on that basis.
#Truth.

2 comments:

  1. Wrong. Economic impact will be the reason. The decision will be made by a very small number of people. Ultimately, some portion of public financing may be put to a vote, and the reasons people vote yes will be many and varied.

    If it comes to that, some will vote yes only because they want the Rays in town. Some will vote yes because of economic impact. if a stadium financing ballot question is bundled with other community projects, some will post because of those projects.

    I agree that the point of a new stadium is not to make the team more competitive. Instead it is a choice about what kind of community we want to have.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Regarding Joe's statement:
    "I’ve always felt there is only one reason that any city gets involved in projects like this. Raymond James Stadium was built because voters decided they wanted professional football in town, not because of the alleged economic bonanza these franchises bring to a community."

    Per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_James_Stadium,
    "On September 3, 1996, the voters of Hillsborough County, Florida approved, by 53% to 47% margin, a thirty–year, half–cent sales tax to build new schools, improve public safety and infrastructure, and to build the Buccaneers a $192 million new stadium entirely with public money"

    So voters decided they also wanted improved public safety and infrastructure. If there had been a 'naked' vote on public funding for RayJay, the outcome could very well have turned out differently.

    ReplyDelete