Right Sherman. Except, last year's proposal to build a Sonics in-door entertainment/resaurant plaza at Key would have screwed all those local businesses in Queen Anne even (or ironically) as they would have been paying the 0.5% restaurant tax: Paying to fund their competition.

Seeing as the sonics don't work 7 days a week at keyarena bringing in 7 days of business for those people, your point is moot.

Translation: I will take no position whatsoever and take hundreds of words to do it, and hopefully everyone will realize that I'm smarter than them and Starbucks RULZ!

Well Sherman how has life improved on the Yakima Rez now that George Bush's tax cuts for the ultra rich have been in place since 2001. Are they better off knowing that the millionaires and billionaires are getting a tax cut.

One problem here, Sherman. A Cato Institute study showed that there's no positive impact on a city's economy from the presence of taxpayer funded sports stadiums, and in fact, there may be a negative impact. Now, $300 million put toward bumping up starting teacher pay in Seattle to $50k/year, that would be worthwhile.

@ 2,
Not moot. Ask the bars. Sonics game day is when they make their money. The NBA's new arena biz model puts an end to that by turning places like the Key into a one-stop shop for game day. That would kill the Queen Anne bars as they paid for their own demise.
Leave it the way it is, and the businesses survive.

I'm willing to lay $50 bucks on the line that when you say "Sonics game day is when they make their money" you really mean, "Sonics game day is when they turn their greatest profit margin". I don't belive for a second that any of the bars in lower queen anne would go out of business if the sonics left.

And there ain't just sports bars in lower queen anne. Is OTB gonna go out of business because the sonics leave?

Why can't that bar across the street from the Key (formerly "Chicago's) stay open? Why can I easily get a booth at The Mecca an hour before a Sonics game? Why? Because most people drive to the games, park their SUV and head into the Key to buy $9 beers.

It's different for baseball and football, which have a different type of fan base (families and blue collar) that actually DOES contribute to the economy of the stadia neighborhoods.

This point has been made somewhere on the Slog before, but basically, pro sports teams do not add to the total entertainment dollars spent in a community; they don't grow the pie, but rather just end up taking a bigger slice that people would have spent elsewhere on some other entertainment venues. So, if a pro team closes shop, people will go spend their entertainment dollars at other venues, and those venues will need to hire the difference of whatever arena workers were laid off.

Drew -- laid off is the nice way of saying fuck off.

Sherm is a nice guy, but I don't want to subsidize his addiction with tax dollars.

I think the "no economic benefit" line put out by the Cato Institute and others is a bit overstated. There is a small net plus, as there is with any business that turns a profit. That's where the "turns" in "turns a profit" comes from.

I remember back when we were talking about the Mariners' new stadium. Someone -- I think it might have been my hero Murray Sperber -- came up with some numbers that indicated the Mariners were about as valuable to the region as the downtown Jay Jacobs store. Presumably the impact of the Sonics, with half as many games and half as many people, is less.

The difference, of course, is that no one ever in a million years suggested building Jay Jacobs a new $600 million store with tax money. And if Jay Jacobs had threatened to move store unless they did, people would have laughed.

Jay Jacobs is out of business now, and hardly anyone even notices.

Why is it so difficult for people to understand that you can be a Sonics (or Mariners) fan, and like pro-sports... but just think that a private company should pay for a stadium out of its own profits?

what a dumfuck thing to say, but since it's Mr Alexie, I ain't that surprised...I don't think Lower Queen Anne is going to dry up and blow away if the Sonics leave...they play how many homegames a year? and since the Sonics HOG the arena for those six months a year, big shows and concerts who WOULD play there end up in Tacoma or elsewhere...

Fnarf - "There is a small net plus, as there is with any business that turns a profit. That's where the "turns" in "turns a profit" comes from.

Fnarf - Where do you think the dollars spent on the Sonics are going to do, disappear? Of course not, people will just spend them on other entertainment - other sports, movies, concerts, bars, etc. The only potential loss would be the money from people who travel to Seattle/King country for Sonics games and otherwise would spend their money at home.

Bob, read my entire comment please.

There is a small plus. Businesses turn over dollars. Some of the money comes from out of the area, and some of it stays in people's pockets instead. Every (profitable) business in the city makes a difference, usually small, sometimes big. If you don't understand how economics works, then I don't understand why you have an opinion here.

Besides which your opinion is also mine. A small plus is not remotely worth subsidizing, let alone subsidizing with "the most expensive arena in the NBA" as the team owner stupidly bragged this week. Though we agree, you choose to argue, which is weird.

@13 - exactly. I'm a Mariners fan too - love Ichiro at the plate and used to date a foxy woman with seats right near where he'd catch those baseballs - but the tax subsidy thing is so not cool.

Bob @15 "The only potential loss would be the money from people who travel to Seattle/King country for Sonics games and otherwise would spend their money at home."

Indeed. This is what the Seahawks are for.

We have some first hand experience here in Miami, first with the Heat wanting a better stadium and now with the Marlins, a request that is still on the table.

Our NBA champs, used to have a stadium that was reachable mainly by Metrorail in a back alley location that you could remotely call downtown Miami. Attendance was sparse and very lengthy negotiations, produced the American Airlines Arena on Biscayne Blvd., a few blocks from the downtown Bayside Market Place. I would say that the decision has certainly benefitted the downtown area,a place that very few residents and tourists chose to go after dark.
When the games are at home, the marketplace and all its vendors and shops are hopping and open late. I would say that this has also contributed to new investment and beautification of the downtown area. Recently, the newly constructed downtown Carnival Arts Theatre just a few blocks to the north in a famously "dead area" here called Omni,opened to a packed house.

So now our new governor is going to have talks with the Marlins owners to see what kind of deal can be worked out there. The Marlins will be responsible for a good piece of the money as they should be and the total thought should be, well, who does benefit from all this? Look at the bigger picture here. Look at the widening circle.

I think that major league teams are vital for a city's character. By this I mean the whole city, not just the owners, the high priced players and the season ticket holders. Without major league teams, a city is nowhere. When you root for the team, you are rooting for your city. It is called hometown pride.

If Chopp and the gang tell us they'll start using a cut of the hotel/restaurant/rental tax to massively fund state education, I will happily take that over keeping the Sonics. But you'll notice that Chopp and the gang have no plans to do anything of the sort. They are beholden to all sorts of other corporate and political interests that are more beneficial to their political careers than public schools. My sons' public school has infrastructure problems, a fairly high student teacher ratio, and no professional crossing guards (like many schools used to have). And this is one of the better schools. All over the district, PTAs have been forced to hold fundraisers to try to meet unfinanced needs. I understand why folks are opposed to public funds for a new arena, but the money pool required for that funding and the money pool for education are not the same. Don't pretend otherwise. If you're against the arena, then be against it. And be aware that the loss of the Sonics would not just be a financial blow to many, but an emotional and civic blow, as well. If you take a look around the country, all of the major cities have 3 or 4 major sports teams (and wonderful public transportation!). Without the Sonics, we become Kansas City. Well, a very bookish Kansas City, but still...

Fnarf -

Read what was written, they're looking at the *net* impact (diff between taxes spent subsidizing sports and the business created from such sports), you're only looking at one side of the equation.

Do you honestly believe the uber-Capitalists at Cato are actually arguing that a business would have a negative impact in an absolute sense?

"...no positive impact on a city's economy from the presence of taxpayer funded sports stadiums, and in fact, there may be a negative impact."

lnrxsmz thufpgyzn ftgub wegyqaudx hzyspwdg iufezyvbq pqrv

lnrxsmz thufpgyzn ftgub wegyqaudx hzyspwdg iufezyvbq pqrv