  Tigersfan9 Member Username: Tigersfan9 Post Number: 65 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 69.14.45.237 |
Marcos Bretón: Wake up to wonders of new arena By Marcos Bretón -- Bee Sports Columnist Published 12:01 am PDT Friday, August 11, 2006 Story appeared in Sports section, Page C1 http://www.sacbee.com/content/ sports/story/14293940p-1513634 4c.html There are some of you who are so polarized on the issue of a taxpayer-funded downtown arena that you dismiss any opinion that doesn't correspond with your own. It's a Balkans mentality descending on Sacramento, one that will be with us until Election Day and perhaps beyond. I carried that attitude with me on a recent trip to Detroit, a day after it was announced that a $500 million arena deal in the downtown railyard was headed for the November ballot. Before leaving for Detroit, it seemed reasonable to at least give this plan a fair hearing, to keep an open mind. Then I talked to Kings co-owner Joe Maloof and, frankly, I got mad. It's nothing against him or his family -- they seem like nice enough people -- but after weeks of back-breaking negotiations, the end result seemed a rout for the Kings' owners. The Maloofs get a $500 million arena, and in exchange pay $20 million up front for future arena repairs and an average of $4 million a year in rent for 30 years. The Maloofs will also keep all the profits from the arena, including for non-Kings events? That rankled all the way to D-Town and on the drive from a suburban hotel to Comerica Park -- until rancor gave way to amazement. Suddenly a downtown appeared that was unrecognizable from the downtown of a decade earlier, when a 1996 Detroit Tigers day game was an unnerving experience. Back then, walking from the parking lot to Tiger Stadium -- in daylight -- was scary in a deserted, dilapidated downtown. Now Comerica Park is a fabulous public space next door to Ford Field, home of the Detroit Lions. Both buildings are central to an urban transformation. "It's become part of the fabric of the community," said Kurt Metzger, director of research for the United Way of Southeastern Michigan and formerly the research director for the Center of Urban Studies at Wayne State University. "It does give you much more of a feeling of security, like this isn't a bad area. It's more festive. It's comfortable enough to walk around." Mind you, Metzger doesn't have financial interests tied to Detroit's sports palaces to color his judgments, though I did talk to business folks as well. Harry Kefalonitis, who owns Harry's Detroit Bar four blocks from Comerica Park, said: "With the stadiums, you can count on the traffic flow of people to spend money. … It's been a great step in creating confidence in investment and infrastructure." Here is where some of you want empirical proof that Detroit's stadiums were economic engines, and you know what? There is no such proof. So I asked Metzger, the former urban planner, and he said: "I have problems with economic impact studies. I see the studies and it's almost universally agreed that stadiums don't pay for themselves. "Is that the be-all end-all of these stadiums? Is that the measure of success? It's very difficult for academics to determine whether certain restaurants or road resurfacing or housing projects were or were not a result of the stadium. … In Detroit's case, they have breathed new life into the community, they are attractive and they do seem to bring people down there." Have they stopped the Ford Motor Company from laying off hundreds of workers? No. Doesn't Detroit still have one of the highest homicide rates in America? Yes. Therefore, didn't Detroit have much bigger priorities than building new sports stadiums? "I came to the United Way to work in the community," Metzger said. "There are always questions of where are your priorities. Sometimes it's easier to build real flashy items downtown than to address social issues. You've got to have both. You've got to have some kind of tax base that will bring money into the community." Which brings us back to the rich guy making money off our backs. In Detroit, local governments paid $135 million of the $360 million Comerica Park, according to news media reports. The rest came via loans and cash from the Tigers' owners, the Illitch family. But they get Comerica Park rent free and keep all the revenues. In percentages, the Illitches' contribution is higher than the Maloofs but couldn't one ask whether Detroit should have offered Illitch millions in tax breaks and booted angry landowners to make way for Comerica Park? A larger social argument would label that obscene. So are we arguing levels of obscenity when weighing Detroit's example, Sacramento's question and public giveaways to sports owners across America? Yeah, but there sits downtown Detroit, much better than it was by any measure. And there sits the abandoned railyard in Sacramento, the focal point of anger from people who probably would dismiss downtown Detroit if they saw it -- and every example that challenges cherished points of view. | ||
Hagglerock Member Username: Hagglerock Post Number: 302 Registered: 03-2005 Posted From: 12.214.243.66 |
So in the words of an outsider, our city government actually did something right? | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2624 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.3.117 |
Great article!! But isn't an ARENA supposed to be smaller and less expensive than a STADIUM?? $500 million sure sounds very pricey! | ||
Alexei289 Member Username: Alexei289 Post Number: 1207 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.61.183.223 |
... ya no shit | ||
Wkl Member Username: Wkl Post Number: 79 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 69.111.110.139 |
Not all the $500 mil is for the arena. To get around a 2/3 majority rule to put this on the ballot, they added a couple hundred mil for other county and local projects. Reporting from somewhere west of Sacramento | ||
Burnsie Member Username: Burnsie Post Number: 554 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 35.12.21.243 |
I can't take the writer seriously after reading these sentences: "Suddenly a downtown appeared that was unrecognizable from the downtown of a decade earlier, when a 1996 Detroit Tigers day game was an unnerving experience. "Back then, walking from the parking lot to Tiger Stadium -- in daylight -- was scary in a deserted, dilapidated downtown." First of all, Tiger Stadium isn't really in downtown. Call me nitpicky, but it simply isn't. Second, walking in the daylight from the parking lot to games wasn't scary if you parked anywhere near the stadium-- and in 1996 there weren't exactly sellout crowds, so there were plenty of spots. I walked from a nearby lot in 1996 to day games several times and never once felt threatened or scared. I think that either the writer was overly paranoid ten years ago, or he inflates his perceptions from then for this article, or he wasn't there to begin with. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1071 Registered: 11-2003 Posted From: 152.163.100.8 |
It's just nice to have someone saying what we did is Detroit is something they want to try to do. | ||
Gistok Member Username: Gistok Post Number: 2627 Registered: 08-2004 Posted From: 4.229.81.100 |
Hmmm, last night I could look at the article in question... today it's just taking me to a registration page... | ||
Paulmcall Member Username: Paulmcall Post Number: 864 Registered: 05-2004 Posted From: 68.40.119.216 |
Walking to Tiger Statdium (day or night) never seemed to be a problem even parking in the neighboorhood over by the postal vechicle parking lot. | ||
Chitaku Member Username: Chitaku Post Number: 635 Registered: 03-2006 Posted From: 69.136.147.97 |
yeah especially during the day! what a pansy | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3973 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.43.2.230 |
Baseball researchers have developed an interesting, if complex, stat known as VORP (Value of Replacement Player). VORP attempts to determine how much more production a given player offers his team over and above the production of the next available player, i.e. a player off the waiver wire or in the minors. With VORP, you can determine if a free agent is actually worth the market price to sign him. For instance if a free agent outfielder (Player X) commands $5 million on the market but a team can replace him with a prospect currently in the minor leagues capable of providing 75% of Player X's production, it might be wise to let Player X go. Replacing him with the prospect at the league minimum and using the leftover $4.7 million in payroll to address another need. That's VORP in a nutshell and it has everything to do with new stadium/arena construction. Take Comerica Park. Ilitch put up about $150 million for the park and the various government entities pitched in an additional $150 million mostly for infrastructure improvements around the park. So all told in cost $300 million to build Comerica Park. Yes, it is hard to argue that Comerica Park has been a good thing for downtown. However, was it a good enough thing to be worth the cost? Call this Value of Replacement Venue (VORV), for the Tigers the replacement venue is a renovated Tiger Stadium. Let's say a Tiger Stadium renovation project would have the same 50-50 financing arrangement as Comerica Park. What would have it cost to renovate Tiger Stadium, with luxury boxes, a solution to the neighborhood parking problems and give Ilitch control of much of the parking revenue. Add to that the repaving of Michigan Avenue, etc? To be honest I don't know but I remember an estimate from the Tiger Stadium Fan Club of around $120 million. Now any group advocating something tends view it through a best-case lens. Let's be safe and inflate that $120 million number to $200 million...$100 million from the Tigers, $100 million from government. Could that renovated Tiger Stadium provided the same benefits as Comerica Park? More to the point, could it have provided more than 67% of the benefits of Comerica Park? In six full seasons (2000-2005) at the CoPa, the Tigers have drawn 11.2 million fans. In the last six full seasons at Tiger Stadium (1993-1999, except 1994) the team drew a little over 8 million fans. So clearly, the newer venue increased fan attendance. However, other factors are in play. Attendance in baseball was depressed across the league in the mid-1990's because of fan resentment after the 1994 strike and the possibility of All-Star game tickets no doubt lured at least some fans into purchasing season tickets in 2005. Also, that 2003 Tigers team couldn't have helped the CoPa's attendance numbers. Taking those factors into consideration, would a renovated Tiger Stadium attracted 11 million fans over the last six years? If the answer is yes, then it is reasonable to assume spin-off business from Comerica Park would not be lost with a renovated Tiger Stadium, just a couple miles down the road. If the answer is no, renovating Tiger Stadium wouldn't have encouraged more fans to attend games, then we need to assess the real value of that spin-off economy. The clustering of Comerica Park and Ford Field obviously created a cost savings because some of the required infrastructure improvements overlap. A value needs to be placed on the savings from infrastructure overlap. For kicks, let's say by clustering the stadia (as opposed to a renovated Tiger Stadium and stand alone Ford Field downtown) government saved $10 million. If anyone can provide a better guess, let's hear it. The more accurate the numbers the better. If Tiger Stadium was renovated, Ilitch would have a smaller debt load of $50 million on Opening Day 2000 and the various governments would have $40 million ($50 million in savings on the project minus $10 million more spent on Ford Field) that could be spent on other development projects in Detroit. Ilitch could do one of two things with his savings - pocket it or use that $50 million not leveraged on other enterprises, say with his other properties downtown. I can't honestly guess what he would have down so, in the interest of being skeptical let's say Ilitch did nothing different downtown between then and now. However, government could have used that $40 million dollar savings on other downtown development projects or that money could have used for other things productive or unproductive, this is government we are talking about. Either way, we now have a realistic Replacement Value for Comerica Park. So the question about Comerica Park's value isn't "did Comerica Park do good things for downtown" but "was Comerica Park more valuable to Detroit than the Replacement Value, i.e. a renovated Tiger Stadium and a savings to government and Ilitch?" I don't know the answer but we will never actually assess the value of the CoPa until we ask the right question. | ||
Herbpowell Member Username: Herbpowell Post Number: 16 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 68.255.164.34 |
"Could that renovated Tiger Stadium provided the same benefits as Comerica Park?" No, Corktown has gotten better with the removal of the the Tigers from that area, I have a hard time believing this was coincidence. Downtown makes more sense for a ballpark. The 150 million for infrastructure also helped with Ford Field. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3974 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.43.2.230 |
Yes but was this the optimum investment for a improving Detroit's baseball stadium situation. With all do respect, Herbpowell but you missed my point entirely. Could have the Corktown's concerns with Tiger Stadium been corrected without a new stadium? Would improvements that have taken place Corktown occured with Tiger Stadium still functioning as a Major League ballpark? Corktown residents I have spoken with never complained about baseball at Michigan and Trumbull so much as the parking situation around the ballpark (i.e. residential lots used as parking lots) and many say that situation still exists. Was there a better resolution for that problem than an entire new stadium? How much of that $150 million in infrastructure is used by Ford Field? Is it $5 million? $10 million? $90 million? The question, again...
| ||
Herbpowell Member Username: Herbpowell Post Number: 17 Registered: 07-2004 Posted From: 68.255.164.34 |
As a resident who could careless about whether Mr. I got his money's worth, he has enough. Second I was only responding to the one quote, and I was responding as a resident. If that money was just 150 million for Detroit to do whatever it wanted with than sure you can make the comparison but it wasn't. I understand what you are driving at but in baseball you have statistics that are reliable that you can see enough of a patern as to come to some kind of reasonable conclusion. I am not an economic expert but I know enough that those economic impact numbers they throw out there are a step away from being made up. (Message edited by herbpowell on August 14, 2006) | ||
Detroitej72 Member Username: Detroitej72 Post Number: 95 Registered: 05-2006 Posted From: 66.184.3.44 |
Many Corktown residents that I know seem to be happy that the Tigers are no longer there. Now all the vacant lots that were saved for 82 days a year can be built on to provide more housing. Also many brokers would buy old houses for peanuts and tear them down for parking. Now people are more likely to renovate the old Corktown homes. Also with the new houses being built it raises the property values for everybody. And you can't argue with all the street traffic thats around the Copa & theater district. Now if only we could bridge it up Woodward to Mid-Town. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3975 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.212.39.81 |
I'm talking to a brick wall here. | ||
Itsjeff Member Username: Itsjeff Post Number: 6608 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.136.149.133 |
I think what Jelk's asking is, have housing values in Corktown gone up since the Tigers moved to Comerica Park? | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3976 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.212.39.81 |
Or to put it another way Itsjeff, would a renovated Tiger Stadium (with the neighborhood's parking concerns addressed) have hampered the rise in Corktown's property values? I repeat renovated Tiger Stadium with parking issues addressed. I don't question that Comerica Park has been "good" for Detroit but whether the positives of the new ballpark were worth the cost relative to the best alternative, which I suggest would have been a renovated Tiger Stadium with parking issues addressed. You might say that would have been an overly idealistic solution but for $150 million in public funds, I would suggest every possible effort should have been made to maximize the return on upgrading Detroit's Major League Baseball facility. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 436 Registered: 02-2006 Posted From: 24.192.25.47 |
With all due respect to all parties, I'd rather watch a dog chase its tail than watch two people have a hypothetical economics discussion. When arguments have more placeholders and assumptions than they have hard facts, it becomes essentially conjecture. Ah economics, proposing the questions, never the answers. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 3977 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.40.84.54 |
I would rather propose questions and drop in educated guesses as placeholders than blindly assume $150 million in public funds were put to good use because people will go to watch a first-place baseball team. |
