Why the NFL's Ban on Blackouts is Self-Serving

Acknowledging TV revenues are surpassing stadium revenues, the NFL has announced the suspension of its controversial blackout policy for 2015.

It was just three years ago the league lowered the threshold for a blackout from a 100% sellout to just an 85% sellout.  But it was no concession to the fans...it was for the betterment of the league's bottom-line because the threat of blackouts had lost its mojo.

So likewise, this year's suspension of the blackout policy isn't a concession to fans...it's an acknowledgement that the league doesn't need to threaten fans to buy tickets as long as they keep watching on television.

Sternberg Does, In Fact, Get Why St Pete Rejected His Last Offering

Taking a look back at a Martin Fennelly column from this past week, he wrote how Rays' owner Stu Sternberg "doesn't like (his) potential villain role":

He added, “I still don’t quite understand where the opposition is necessarily coming from. The one thing that came out of the (city council) was the idea about our development rights, which was never our intention, and it obviously got a little bungled there that day, but we cleared that up right away. And yet, still, there’s always something else, something else. We don’t even know what it is that we can do differently, and it’s little bit dismaying.

“I just don’t exactly know why the council people feel it’s not in the best interest of the citizens of St. Petersburg to get the land back, develop the land, have a bunch of taxes coming in, create construction jobs, create long-term jobs, still have baseball in your midst and guarantee that baseball is going to be in your midst for multi-, multi-, multigenerations. I don’t get it.”

But Sternberg does get it - he gets that council's job is to protect the financial interests of its citizens.  And many on council don't feel they're getting enough in exchange for letting the team break the terms of the deal it signed.

It's just that Sternberg's job happens to directly conflict with council's: he needs to get the Rays out of their current contract - for as little as possible - so they can explore new stadium sites in Tampa (or elsewhere) without damaging the bottom line.

And that's why we've had eight years of stalemate in the Stadium Saga.

Times' Trigaux Lists "10 Tampa Bay Projects We Can't Afford to Screw Up"

Courtesy of the Tampa Bay Times.  Pay attention to these, Rays fans.  Trigaux's grades reflect progress so far:

1. Transportation that works. Our mass transit strategy — how shall I say this politely? — stinks. Hillsborough County's plan bombed a few years ago in a voter referendum, then Pinellas County tried its own version in 2014 with equally disastrous results. Now we seem to be passing this ill-planned dud back to Hillsborough, setting that county up to go 0 for 2.

Anybody who says this area can simply keep relying on more roads clearly does not drive enough around here at peak traffic times. Even if we do build more roads, the clear trend is toward more tolls. Either way, toll roads or mass transit, transportation is going to become more expensive.

But will it become more efficient? Could Tampa Bay actually deliver a regional solution to a regional transportation problem? So far, it's proved a sadly laughable process. Grade: D
 
2. A viable next home for the Tampa Bay Rays. The small-town pettiness that's infected the debate over the whereabouts of a future baseball stadium should make you wonder if we still really want a Major League Baseball franchise here. St. Petersburg's lasting tunnel vision still limits the Rays from looking broadly across the region for a potential site that might draw more than last-place attendance numbers. Tampa and Hillsborough sound macho enough when insisting they have the sports mojo and real estate the Rays seek. Then they cry pauper when talk turns to a modern-day stadium with a price tag of three quarters of a billion dollars or more by the time the Rays clear the legal quagmire of their Tropicana Field contract. Grade: C

10. Regional cooperation. The idea of "regionalism" often prompts a backlash from local communities who see threats to their self control. Yet more than half the projects on this list could be improved upon, if not solved, with greater regional cooperation of political will, economic ambition and, yes, money. The key is to understand when working at the regional level can really help (see Nos. 1, 2, 6, 7 and 9) and when it's not necessary. Tampa Bay claims it's becoming more regionally conscious. I see modest progress on the best of days and major backpedaling on the worst of days. But good grief — keep trying. Grade: C-

Sternberg Encourages St. Pete to Move Past Those Pesky, No-Tax-Payin' Baseball Tenants

An annual rite of spring, Rays' owner Stu Sternberg offered up some thoughts down in Port Charlotte today.

Here's an excerpt, courtesy of the Trib's Roger Mooney:

On the ongoing stadium issue:

“I’ve been very animate and clear that I want to find the pinpoint perfect spot in the Tampa Bay region. I still believe in the (Tampa Bay) area more so than people at (Major League) Baseball, more so probably than the national media. I believe in it and I want to make it work, but it has to be in the right spot.

“Those who follow the game and follow the way attendance goes at sporting events, we, more than any other market, need to be pinpoint perfect on where our next facility is going to be, whenever that happens.”

*****
On if there is any new proposal to get out of the Tropicana Field contract with the city of St. Petersburg. (In December, city council rejected an plan that would have given the team three years to explore stadium sites in Hillsborough and Pinellas.)

“It could have happened. It went for a vote way back in December and much to my dismay nothing came of it. I understand we can’t just snap our fingers. But from the mayor’s (St. Petersburg Mayor Rick Kriseman) vantage point, he’s been in office for a little more than a year, true to his word he was willing to explore things toward the end of the season with us to try to hammer out an agreement. True to mine last year I wasn’t going to press on it until he got his legs under him.

“In two month’s time, we (Rays and Kriseman) are able to hammer out an agreement that I think is a bit unfair to us and a bit unfair to the city if people want to look at it that way. But certainly, at our level of where we can see to make this thing work and went before a (city council) vote in December and didn’t pass.

“So now I’d like to think the mayor has some work. Maybe there’s something else we can do. We have spent time speaking to most if not all of the people on the council. We remain open to having meetings with them 24 hours a day, seven days a week at any point in time. I still don’t quite understand where the opposition is coming from.

“The one thing that came out of the commission was the idea about our development rights, which was never the intention and obviously got a little bungled that day, but we cleared that up right away, and yet there’s always something else.

“We don’t even know what it is we can do differently. It’s a little bit of a dismay because the mayor is somebody who had a hell of a mandate coming in here to run this city and do things, and I think the mayor is looking out for the citizens of St. Petersburg, recognizing that having baseball in their mists, whether it’s in St. Petersburg, Pinellas or Tampa, is in the best interest in the citizens of St. Petersburg.

“I just don’t know exactly why the council people feel it’s not in the citizens of St. Petersburg’s best interest to get the land back, develop the land, have a bunch of taxes coming in, create construction jobs, create long-term jobs, still have baseball within their mists and guarantee that baseball is going to be here for multi-, multi-generations. I don’t get it.”

Interesting notion - if it's in St. Pete's best interest to develop land as something other than tax-free baseball land, why would it be in Tampa's best interests to do the opposite?  It's a question covered in this blog before.

On the perception that he is not being truthful about his motives to either stay in the area or move the team to another part of the country or Montreal:

“If I were a fan on the other side of it, there’s a tendency not to necessarily believe what the owner of the baseball team has to say. The walk that I walk has been what it is. I’m true to my word. I try to be as honest as I can about payroll going up, payroll going down, ‘Where do we stand in the future?’ This is not about trying to play people or anything.

“We tried to build a stadium seven years ago (in downtown St. Petersburg). We tried in earnest and it fell flatter than a flat pancake. The timing necessarily wasn’t right for whatever reason. There was some opposition. We’re still at it. We could take any of those other routes. We’re here to compete, we’re here to win, we’re here to have baseball grow in the region even though we’re last in attendance.

“It’s still a magical thing for me and my family and for the fans that follow us and the hundreds and hundreds of thousands who watch us on TV and listen to us on the radio... We have a very dedicated following, and that’s who we’re here to play for."

Pinellas Again Discusses Increasing Bed Tax for Stadium(s)

The Pinellas Tourist Development Council - in charge of the county's lucrative bed tax - spent the day debating whether there should be a cap on capital projects funded by tourists, according to the Times' Tony Marrero.

Those in favor of building a new Rays stadium and/or new spring training facilities oppose a cap;  but many hoteliers favor a cap to ensure the county's biggest tourist-draw, the beaches, money gets spread across the county's biggest tourism draw:

The council, of which (St. Pete Mayor Rick) Kriseman is a member, voted 7-4 to recommend to the Pinellas County Commission that spending on capital projects such sports stadiums account for no more than 40 percent of the revenue raised by the county's tourism tax. Kriseman wants a 50 percent cap to make more money available for projects such as renovating Al Lang Field and the recently-announced plan to build an 1,800-seat baseball stadium at Walter Fuller Field, both in St. Petersburg.
...
Wednesday's joint meeting with the County Commission was called after Kriseman and other community leaders raised concerns about a previous cap proposal. Comments from commissioners indicated there is still hope that Kriseman and allies such as Dunedin Mayor Julie Ward Bujalski, who announced Wednesday that her city will ask for as much as $50 million in bed tax money for a new stadium and training facility for the Toronto Blue Jays, can convince four of seven commissioners to approve the higher cap.

But wait, there may be a way to keep everyone happy!  Except people visiting Pinellas hotels, of course:

The overall pot might grow even larger. At (Commissioner John) Morroni's suggestion, the tourist council agreed to consider approving a sixth center (sic) of bed tax that Pinellas is allowed by law to levy as a high-impact county that brings in at least $30 million in annual bed tax revenue.

Kriseman and others have said revenue from the sixth cent could be targeted for a new Rays stadium. After the meeting, Kriseman said the county should not raise the tax unless there's a specific need for it.

"Unless somebody tells me something that convinces me otherwise, I think we ought to put that sixth cent in our pocket," he said.

Rays Stick with Marketing Campaign that Sold 17,857 Tickets/Gm Last Year

"If it's a winner, why switch?" Tampa Bay Times business columnist Robert Trigaux rhetorically asks, in describing the Rays' recently-unveiled 2015 marketing campaign, which will once again feature the "Rays Up" mantra.

Trigaux reports how "Rays Up" seemed to resonate with fans in 2014; which, after another last-place attendance finish, begs the question of what would attendance have looked like with an unsuccessful marketing campaign?!?

Jokes aside, there's something to be said for sticking with a single campaign and reinforcing what you want fans to take away from it.  With all the other changes Rays fans will see on the field this year, at least the message from the front office will be familiar.

Among the tidbits revealed in Trigaux's piece:

• Watch for the Rays (sunshine) "burst" graphic that appears on player hats and shirts to gain an even higher profile. "It's kind of our Nike swoosh," says Brian Richeson, Rays vice president of sales and service. Also watch for more "Carolina blue" on Rays uniforms rather than the darker cobalt blue so commonly used by some other teams. And fans that purchase "flex pack" games (three, six or nine games, for example) receive their tickets on a Rays card, introduced in 2014, that this year will feature parking at the Trop at half price.

• More than two dozen promotional giveaways at games this year will range from a Rays cowboy hat (6/26) and fedora (8/8), to a Rays camo tank top (5/24), an intense looking Chris Archer bobblehead (4/25) and, for comic relief, a Longoria-styled rubber duck (4/19).

• Noting the 10-year anniversary of the Rays under owner Stu Sternberg, Fernandez and Rays Foundation head Suzanne Luecke want to leverage the "Rays up" message in the team's expanding community involvement, with projects ranging from Take Stock in Children education scholarships, Chris Archer's involvement in the Big Brothers Big Sisters mentoring program and a Be Water Smart effort to help reduce child drownings, among other campaigns.

Also Making it Impossible to Enjoy a Game Under the Florida Sun: the Florida Sun

According to the CBC, Montreal's mayor met with St. Pete's Mayor Rick Kriseman this weekend while on his spring break in Florida.

"I told Denis Coderre not to touch my team," Kriseman was jokingly quoted in an otherwise-forgettable article that also dropped the "Devil Rays" name unintentionally.

My favorite passage, attempting to describe the team's problems with the Trop:

The roof isn't retractable, making it impossible to enjoy a game under the Florida sun.

Also making it impossible to enjoy a game under the Florida sun: the Florida sun.  Clearly the author hasn't spent much time here in the summer.

John Oliver Takes on March Madness, NCAA

John Oliver is killin' it over on HBO - not uncovering new investigations, but by shining a solar-sized spotlight on previous investigations that need more attention.

This week, it's the NCAA's unwillingness to pay college athletes:

(not suitable for blasting speakers while at work)

Decades Later, Still Hard Feelings From Trop Neighbors

My WTSP colleague Eric Glasser takes a deep look at much of the bitterness, resentment, and distrust that exists in Midtown St. Pete 30 years after the city used eminent domain to drop Tropicana Field into the middle of a historic minority community.

When the promised jobs and economic development failed to come, residents grew distrustful of the city...and now that we're talking about an economic boom downtown from the possible departure of the Rays, those residents (and their descendants) wonder where their share of the profits are:

Hundreds of people lost their homes and livelihood as the City used its power of eminent domain to make room for what would eventually be called Tropicana Field.

It would sure be nice, says Grayson, if they'd consider sharing some of the wealth it created with the decedents of the displaced.

"But you think they'd do that?" she laughs, "No."
...
"It was a whole community. We had stores, they had restaurants and all of that. It was just gone. They just took it," says Grayson. "It's over now. But I just wish you could've been different."

It's a good story - check out the short article and video here.

Kriseman, Rays Team Up for Latest Agreement

Big announcement from St. Pete Mayor Rick Kriseman and Rays' President Brian Auld today...but it has nothing to do with where the Rays play, according to the Tampa Bay Times.  Although it did have something to do with Pinellas County's bed tax revenues, a potential source of Rays stadium funding:

Kriseman announced plans Wednesday to build an 1,800-seat stadium at the Walter Fuller baseball complex in western part of the city.

The facility would be renamed Walter Fuller Baseball Championship Field.

The mayor said at a noon news conference that the city would likely seek funding for the project from Pinellas County's convention and visitor's bureau or the county's Tourist Development Council. He did not provide a cost estimate or a timetable for construction.

The facility is part of a long-planned transition of baseball operations away from Al Lang Stadium in downtown, which has been transformed into a soccer stadium for the Tampa Bay Rowdies under an agreement with Rowdies owner Bill Edwards.

The Walter Fuller field would be used for the city's baseball programming, including its international baseball season featuring developmental players from Puerto Rico and Canada.

According to Kriseman and architectural renderings released Wednesday, the new Walter Fuller facility would have the feel of an intimate minor league ballpark. Plans appeared to call for a deck along the first base side of the park.

The mayor said the stadium would bring many people to a part of the city they wouldn't normally travel to.

On another baseball matter, Kriseman said he has been talking to City Council members and hopes to complete an agreement by Opening Day with the Tampa Bay Rays that would allow the team to look outside the city for a new stadium site.

A city press release added Walter Fuller would play home to nine international games this year, with Canadian and Puerto Rican teams playing minor-leaguers from the Tigers, Yankees, Orioles, Phillies, and Pirates.

Former mayor Bill Foster brought international baseball to Al Lang several years ago, but it never quite developed into the huge draw he had hoped.  Nevertheless, it's better than no spring baseball in St. Pete!

The "Murky" Economics of Spring Training...and How Florida Could Do it Better

This time of year, we don't just see a lot of "spring training is back" stories, but also a lot of "spring training means big bucks" stories.  Every reporter in Florida - including yours truly - has done them at some point.

But as this blog has covered before, reporters don't challenge outrageous economic impact claims enough...even though the claims seldom hold water.

Last year, I showed how Charlotte County's Rays Spring Training impact report wasn't worth the paper it was printed on, let alone the tens of thousands of dollars the county paid for it.

And the National Center for Business Journalism detailed how teams force cities to bend over backward to finance new stadiums without the benefit of clear direct economic benefits.

And Neil deMause wrote on FAIR.org how most reporters ignore warning signs and just repeat whatever claims are handed to them on a platter.

Sadly, in 2015, most news reporters just don't do a good job covering sports business stories.  Last week, one story on Tampa's FOX station reported the seven MLB teams that train in Florida (there are really 15) meant $753 million to Florida annually (calling BS on that study).  Then again, those numbers seem to have come from the governor's office, so take them with a grain of salt.

ALSO READ: If MLB Teams Had No Stadium Subsidies, Would They End Spring Training?

Shall we dissect more examples?

A 2013 Blue Jays spring training economic impact report - commissioned by the City of Dunedin, which is trying to get county funds to upgrade the Jays' facilities - claimed $80 million in annual economic impact. 

However, the report uses questionable methods to get to that number, including trying to take responsibility for the spending of 25,000 out-of-state visitors who acknowledged they were in Florida primarily for something other than baseball.

Then there was a 2009 Grapefruit League economic impact report, commissioned by the state, which wasn't all that bad, actually.  But it didn't mention anything about the "substitution effect" of spring training gobbling up the disposable income of Floridians who may have otherwise spent the money in other areas.  So $96 million of economic impact from Florida residents wasn't "new" economy from Spring Training, just expenditures transferred from other Florida industries such as movie theaters, beach restaurants, theme parks, etc.

Sommer Mathis writes in "Spring Training Stadiums Are a Bad Investment, And No One Cares" that "the economics of spring training are murky at best, and a truly bad bet at worst."  This isn't because anyone questions how out-of-state tourists are flocking to Florida for baseball...it's because Florida and Arizona have made so many concessions to MLB, the biggest benefits to taxpayers are negated by having to constantly put tens of millions into new stadium projects.

It's a complicated ROI argument, and nobody has a precise answer. Spring Training is a great thing for Florida...which makes it all-the-more frustrating when legislators pass new stadium subsidy laws that their own staffers indicate will have "an indeterminate negative fiscal impact” on spring training.  Gov. Scott signed that bill into law last year.

If MLB Teams Had No Stadium Subsidies, Would They End Spring Training?

If we stopped subsidizing spring training, would MLB teams stop training in Florida?

Doubt it. 

Yet for five years, Governor Scott has supported a subsidy arms race with Florida's only spring training competitor, Arizona.  It seems to be to great benefit to the "special interests" Scott has railed against.

Why not just sign a peace treaty and protect taxpayers, Governor?

Vinik Finally Gets Bed Tax Money for Arena Update

Four years after Lightning owner Jeff Vinik announced he'd pump $40 million into the Ice Palace - with or without help from the county bed tax - and millions more a year later, Hillsborough County approved a 50/50 split with Vinik on a new round of 2015 and 2016 upgrades, according to the Tampa Tribune.

Mike Salerno reports the $25 million renovation will include the arena's club level, restrooms, and concession stands:

Earlier on Wednesday, the Hillsborough County Commission approved a plan to reimburse Lightning owner Jeff Vinik $12.5 million of the cost of those upgrades after they’re completed.

“When the arena was designed and developed in the mid-1990’s a true club level was contemplated but never constructed,” Lightning President Steve Griggs said in a statement. “Our goal is to build a club level with proper amenities for our season ticket members and other guests wishing to sit in this area.”

...

In return for the community’s investment, Merrill said the Lightning agreed to extend their non-relocation agreement through May 31, 2021. If the team leaves before then, Vinick (sic) agreed to pay the county $5 million for operations and maintenance.

...

Other upgrades to the arena that won’t be as visible to fans include a modernizing of the locker rooms and spaces that performers and the media use, which haven’t been upgraded since the arena opened in 1996, the team said. There are also plans to install an internet protocol television system that will allow computerized menu boards at concessions and a master system for controlling the arena’s video monitors.

Flashback May 2012:

"Sometimes Public Funding is Necessary" for Public Stadiums

Devout reader Scott Myers put this on my radar a few weeks back, but I'm only now catching up on it:  Former Cincinnati Mayor Jerry Springer and Keith Olbermann discussing public subsidies for stadiums.

Springer admitted "there's no economic reason" for a city to build a stadium, but "sometimes public funding is necessary" to build them because they are legit civic assets.

Olberman agreed, adding if building stadiums made economic sense, owners would just build stadiums themselves and keep the profits.  But alas, "that's what voters are for," he explained:



This weekend in the Tampa Tribune, columnist Joe Brown summed up Springer's post with, teams should stop "play(ing) the economic-development card," and focus on their real benefits to the community, a sense of identity:

When a team is winning, it’s hard for most local residents not to get swept up in the enthusiasm, as the championship runs of the Bucs, Rays and Lightning have shown. It’s something that can unite a community as few other things can.

Nobody in St. Petersburg is asking for an economic impact study for the city’s new pier. It will be built because it’s considered a part of its beautiful waterfront, something to enhance the quality of life here, just like a city park or a museum. The same applies to Tropicana Field.

“Generally communities say this is something they want even if it doesn’t make economic sense,” said (St. Pete Councilman Karl) Nurse on the funding of a new ballpark for the Rays.

True. So now the city council will have to decide what’s in the best interest of St. Petersburg and the Tampa Bay area’s baseball fans.

“Are the Rays willing to accept the fact that they are located in a growing television market which, no matter where you put a stadium, is going to be inconvenient for a third or 40 percent of the region?” asked Nurse.

As they often say on TV, stay tuned.

St. Pete Council Talks Rays Again Thursday

THURSDAY UPDATE: Council moved right past the baseball discussions, saving their voices - and opinions - for another day.

After St. Petersburg's council voted to pitch the mayor on their plan for keeping the Rays, the following appears on tomorrow morning's council agenda:

(a) Resolution of the City Council of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida expressing its desire to keep St. Petersburg the home of the Tampa Bay Rays for decades to come.

(b) Resolution of the City Council of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida requesting
Administration to provide City Council with a proposed scope of work and cost to retain a consultant to determine the economic impact to the City of St. Petersburg from

1. the Tampa Bay Rays remaining in St. Petersburg beyond the term of the use agreement,
2. the Tampa Bay Rays relocating to Hillsborough County following the term of the use agreement or prior to the end of the term of the use agreement subject to City Council approval, and
3. the Tampa Bay Rays relocating to a location outside the Tampa Bay region following the term of the use agreement or prior to the end of the term of the use agreement subject to City Council approval.

(c) Resolution of the City Council of the City of St. Petersburg, Florida requesting the Tourist Development Council to

1. propose an amendment to the Tourist Development Plan to provide that an allocation of one percent of the five percent tourist tax revenues be available to finance the construction of a new stadium in St. Petersburg for the Tampa Bay Rays unless it is concluded that the Tampa Bay Rays will not build a new stadium in St. Petersburg, and
2. recommend such proposed amendment to the Tourist Development Plan to the Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners.

Don't expect too much from the Mayor on the new deal he apparently negotiated - he's only talking to council behind-the-scenes about it and I was told "no records exist" when I made a request to the city for a draft of the agreement.

According to a Times profile of Brian Auld, the Rays' president is also working - on a limited basis - behind-the-scenes with willing councilmembers.

But for now, as always, I'll be keeping an eye on the developments for you tomorrow:
Tweets by @StadiumShadow