Simply a discussion of state subsidies has attracted lobbyists from Grand Rapids and Lansing who want a piece of the pie for stadiums in their cities if Detroit gets a check. Economist Robert Baade of the Heartland Institute, an Illinois think tank, analyzed the effects of professional sports teams and stadiums on economic development in thirty-six metropolitan areas. The results, he found, overwhelmingly indicated that professional sports is not statistically significant in determining economic growth rates. Baade showed that stadiums led simply to a realignment of jobs away from other leisure activities as well as from manufacturing. Government-subsidized stadiums usually benefit team owners and players at the expense of the taxpayers and the fans, Baade's work revealed.
Subsidies encourage waste, inefficiencies, and inflated salaries.
Stadiums built at taxpayer expense often become huge liabilities and require perpetual bailouts, like Pontiac's Silverdome. Analysts at the Buckeye Center for Public Policy Solutions in Dayton, Ohio come to the same conclusion. They cite studies of stadium projects in Indianapolis and elsewhere to suggest that If city officials, business leaders and local citizens believe a sports stadium is needed and financially sound, private capital should be raised independently to finance the project. Economist David Littmann of Comerica Bank in Detroit points out that there's no need for the state of Michigan to get into the stadium business as an investor sharing profits with private interests. The University of Michigan stadium, completed in 1927, was financed by a private bond offering that guaranteed to subscribers preferential seating between the 30-yard lines for 10 years, Littmann notes.