Indeed, politicians often seem to think that the means of financing the stadium generates free resources that have no alternative uses whatsoever. Meeting the need of the sporting community is a better use of the money. I hope that's the direction we end up taking. It's easy to love shiny new buildings, and even easier when they are believed to be harbingers of local economic development. That's the pitch when it comes to stadiums, multiuse arenas and convention centers.
Little attention is paid to the profitability of the superstructures themselves.
Facilities rarely repay their construction costs, still many are fortunate to simply cash-flow in a given year. As such, the main arguments in favor of publicly financed stadiums, arenas and convention centers stress the economic activity created outside, rather than inside, the walls of these facilities. While such benefits are real and legitimate, they are often inflated and oversold. Pick a number Current research indicates that stadiums and arenas have a particularly bad track record when it comes to delivering on promises of community economic windfalls. There is little research on the economic impact of minor league teams and their playing venues.