- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Why are professional sports franchises allowed to shakedown cities for arenas?
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:08 pm
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:08 pm
I saw in the news today that apparently the Spurs are trying to get the city of SA to fund a new arena for them, wtf. If the taxpayers are partially (or fully?) paying for it, why aren't they considered part owners? Seems the cheese heads had the right idea.
29
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:08 pm to The Scofflaw
Because it keeps working
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:09 pm to The Scofflaw
Because they are held hostage by the team's ability to move to somewhere that will. Especially true of small and midsized cities.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:10 pm to The Scofflaw
Because if they don’t the team can find another city that would love to have them
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:11 pm to The Scofflaw
Seemed like after the exposure of the Marlins stadium boondoggle we were getting away from taxpayers funded stadiums. Seemed like owners were becoming more like property developers
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:14 pm to The Scofflaw
quote:
Why are professional sports franchises allowed to shakedown cities for arenas?
Do you really not know the answer to this question? Do you need us to explain it to you like you are 5?
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:15 pm to redneck
Yes.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:16 pm to The Scofflaw
Other big businesses shakedown the public, why wouldn't sports teams?
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:21 pm to The Scofflaw
If the city does not help pay for the stadium/arena the team moves elsewhere as there are plenty of cities begging for teams. Original city then loses out on hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue every year. Hope that is simple enough for you.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:28 pm to The Scofflaw
Because the average citizen is a moron.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:32 pm to The Scofflaw
quote:
Spurs are trying to get the city of SA to fund a new arena for them, wtf. If the taxpayers are partially (or fully?) paying for it, why aren't they considered part owners?
the city will own the arena they pay for, but not the team that uses it.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:34 pm to danilo
quote:
Seemed like owners were becoming more like property developers
they are 100% property developers first sports team owners second, just look at the Braves.
The result will be a less competitive, more exhibition like environment across all sports. you’re seeing it already.
This post was edited on 8/21/25 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:35 pm to The Scofflaw
quote:
why aren't they considered part owners?
They would be owners of the building, not owners of who they lease to.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:37 pm to The Scofflaw
Because the politicians cave in.
There's no "allowing" any more than if say...Piggly Wiggly went to Breaux Bridge and said, "If you don't help us build a new store, we're out of here".
Breaux Bridge would laugh at Piggly Wiggly, but state legislators and city councils don't laugh at the Saints, Astros or Bulls when something they say something like that. They fork over taxpayer money.
There's no "allowing" any more than if say...Piggly Wiggly went to Breaux Bridge and said, "If you don't help us build a new store, we're out of here".
Breaux Bridge would laugh at Piggly Wiggly, but state legislators and city councils don't laugh at the Saints, Astros or Bulls when something they say something like that. They fork over taxpayer money.
This post was edited on 8/21/25 at 3:39 pm
Posted on 8/21/25 at 3:53 pm to Draconian Sanctions
quote:more a function of the amount of money in professional sports period…
The result will be a less competitive, more exhibition like environment across all sports. you’re seeing it already.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 4:24 pm to The Scofflaw
Didnt, the city of KC just tell the owners to Shove it when it came to a new stadium.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 4:25 pm to The Scofflaw
One of the saddest things in sports is when you realize dozens of owners are truly in it to maximize profit and nothing more
Posted on 8/21/25 at 4:25 pm to The Scofflaw
It sucks. The Spurs current arena opened in 2003. It’s fine. I’ve always said I don’t need bells and whistles to enjoy a game. All of these luxury suites, bars, social media walls, etc will raise the cost of your ticket. The average fan will continue to get priced out.
This proposal by the Spurs is supposedly going to be funded 40% by the organization, but it also includes a renovation to the Alamodome…not sure why. That venue is paid off though and makes money, which is rare these days.
This proposal by the Spurs is supposedly going to be funded 40% by the organization, but it also includes a renovation to the Alamodome…not sure why. That venue is paid off though and makes money, which is rare these days.
Posted on 8/21/25 at 4:30 pm to usc6158
quote:
Because they are held hostage by the team's ability to move to somewhere that will. Especially true of small and midsized cities.
Also the league let the A’s deliberately tank and spike ticket/concession prices in a plot to ruin fan support and there will be no repercussions for it
This post was edited on 8/21/25 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 8/21/25 at 4:32 pm to The Scofflaw
Didn’t they get a new arena after they left the Alamo Dome? Wtf arenas should last way longer than 20 years now days before a new one is warranted.
This post was edited on 8/21/25 at 4:34 pm
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News