Sport as a Good Deal Scholars have rightfully criticized the impacts of sport franchises and stadium deals on urban economies as reported in flawed studies. This may be true in some cases, but to state that all sport franchise deals are losing propositions for taxpayers is misguided. For a professional sport franchise to contribute positively to the local economy, it must induce large net increases in spending from sources outside the designated economy. To be competitive with others as a host site for large-scale sport championships, a community must possess, at a minimum, direct air and ground transportation, adequate number and variety of lodging accommodations, and exhibit facilities. Obviously, without a suitable sport facility, the community would not even be considered.
Domes are the fashion in stadium design, and dome stadium construction costs are substantial.
All domed stadiums in the U.S. have been built with public funds. Economic impact studies essentially seek to determine what would be missed in terms of non-resident direct expenditures had the team in question vacated the local economy. However, resident income retention is equally important to an economy. Ascertaining the amount of resident income leaked from an economy as a result of their attendance at a game in another city also involves opportunity cost projection. Conclusions Stadium financing is a complex arrangement, often involving private investments, state, county and city taxes, and revenues from ticket sales.