Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Mechanicallvlan OP t1_j6tw6bz wrote

Reply to comment by dailycitizen in City of Springfield to purchase Hammons Field by Mechanicallvlan

That was nice to hear, but the city was in very real danger of losing the team if they didn't buy the stadium. If someone didn't buy the park and upgrade it, then the Cardinals were going to move the team.

23

Cthepo t1_j6tyw7g wrote

Meh, not a huge fan of tax dollars going into stadium improvements that the billionaire owners should be paying for. Pretty overwhelmingly, studies show that stadiums are poor to negative investments which don't really add as much economic value as they're sold.

I'm a sports fan too, but IMO the billionaire owners should be the one footing the bill. Did the city council even open it for public discussion on whether to invest the money to buy and pay for the improvments?

51

mophan t1_j6ua85m wrote

Agree. Billionaires buy sports team because it's an expensive hobby that they can afford. A status symbol. They should be responsible for the stadium that comes with those sports teams as well. Not the public.

22

[deleted] t1_j6uq2xs wrote

[deleted]

1

Mechanicallvlan OP t1_j6usa9g wrote

How is that a good example?? This stadium was BUILT privately, and now it is the CITY buying it for much less than the cost to build it. SMH.

ETA:

https://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/35149258/deal-finalized-divide-rams-settlement-money-st-louis

1

booradly t1_j6u76ev wrote

While you are right, I doubt the intent was to invest in it but more to keep the cardinals from leaving and in turn leaving an abandoned stadium for the city to deal with anyways.

17

CandyBoBandDandy t1_j6upvel wrote

It's such a weird system. The city pays for all the upkeep, while the team owners get a ton of money from consessions, advertising, est.

If the proceeds from the games were actually going back into the city, I might be a little more willing. But like you said, it's a bad investment. I'd be very surprised if the city is even able to break even. And then, if the owners even decide to move the team, taxpayers just spent a ton of money for nothing.

10

pjcanfield8 t1_j6xogmx wrote

Socialized loses, Privatized gains. How it’s always worked

7

Mechanicallvlan OP t1_j6ugm51 wrote

Yes, Springfield's $12 million purchase of an existing minor league ballpark [$32 million build cost; ~$50 million adjusted for inflation] and parking lot is definitely comparable to MULTIBILLION-DOLLAR stadium projects in other cities with "median public contribution of $500 million per sports stadium." Good catch, r/springfieldMO.

7

Cthepo t1_j6uik9m wrote

The economic impact of a minor league sports team is even less than that of a major league sports team. People aren't exactly flying out of state to catch a Springfield Cardinals game nor are things like sports bars and such being built around the team.

I don't mind having a baseball team in town; I like the Cardinals. I'm just not gung-ho about subsidizing billionaires with public tax dollars.

21

booradly t1_j6x98u7 wrote

If they were smart the Park Board will use it for other functions other than baseball. One thing that always irritated me was the lack of use of the facilities. Come on, host some concerts, have some baseball tournyments, rent it out for weddings or something.

9

elaborate_hoxha t1_j6vm9df wrote

This city council makes their decisions in the closed lunch meetings. They don’t give a f*ck about community member input. (e.g. Buc-ees)

0

est1967 t1_j6u5zct wrote

City: takes my income without consent

Also City: buys property that apparently is losing money

−9

est1967 t1_j6uaptx wrote

Downvoters: I pay my taxes and vote. However, if this property was making money, why would it be sold to the lowest bidder (the city)? Why should we socialize this baseball stadium that is apparently failing?

−3