Exactly, Adam - this is how cities justify spending millions to build
stadiums for pro teams - the revenue generated by the stadium more than pays
for it in the long haul. Providence is willing and able to pay for
security, police, traffic, etc ahead of time because they know that the
extra sales tax receipts at the end of the month will more than cover their
costs. Don't cry for the host cities or the local taxpayers. The patrons
who travel in to the city are the ones who pay those costs, but they are
also the ones who are benefiting from the services - fair trade in my books.
Robb
-----Original Message-----
From: The College Hockey Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Wodon, Adam
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 10:28 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: USCHO Article regarding Tournament Expansion to 16
> The implication is this is a NET profit for the NCAA? Does this include
> the extra costs incurred by the host city , for security, police,
> traffic control, etc.? I doubt it...your local taxes pay for that, and I
> bet it is typically a large number.
The local costs incurred by the host city, are irrelevant to the topic ...
but nonetheless, the host city more than makes up for those costs, for sure.
Providence said it raked in millions from hosting the event.
> On a different but related topic (revenue as a motivator) as far as I
> know, there are only a couple of D-1 universities that actually make a
> NET PROFIT from intercollegiate sports, one I am pretty sure is
> MIchigan, with 104 K at each football game ... but most LOSE.
We are not talking about the universities here ... we are talking about the
NCAA. Their costs to run two extra regional sites -- vs. -- the extra
revenue those two sites would bring in. Net Profit.
AW
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
HOCKEY-L is for discussion of college ice hockey; send information to
[log in to unmask], The College Hockey Information List.
|
