DC Tom Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/126369858.html I tend to be a numbers guy, but I'm clueless on this one. The referenced shareholders' meeting was two days ago. Anybody got any ideas on how the Packers VP comes up with these numbers? I suppose a small population like Green Bay has would tend to make a team's "economic impact per person" higher, but there must be more to it than that. Dallas and San Diego have much bigger populations than Buffalo, but both teams are cited as having a much greater "econmic impact per person" on their communities than the Bills do. I'm stumped. The difference probably goes to NYS in taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brewcity Cheesehead Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 First, thanks for the info. Second, for comparison purposes, I found a 1996 study (15 years ago) that estimated that the Bills had a $111.5 million gross economic impact on the local community in 1996. That 1996 study was done at a time when possible renovation of Ralph Wilson Stadium was being debated, so it could be a biased position paper of sorts. On the other hand, you would expect the gross economic impact of any NFL team to have grown significantly over the last 15 years, given the increased overall popularity of the NFL during that time. I don't know if the 1996 study was the source of the Packer VP's Buffalo number - - seems unlikely because it's so old. But if it WAS the source, you would need to use a "Buffalo community" population figure of 3.28 million people to arrive at the $34/person Buffalo figure. I'm no expert on Green Bay, but it doesn't seem fair to me use 250,000 people to calculate a "Packer impact" number while using 3.28 million people to calculate a "Bills impact" number. Finally, it still seems odd to me that the Packer VP presumably had easy access to community impact numbers for OTHER NFL cities. It seems like the figures may have been in something put out by the league office, because it seems unlikely that the Packer VP would have much incentive to look up or calculate such numbers on his own initiative. Do you happen to know if that Packer VP sits on any NFL committees? It might help us figure out where the Buffalo $34 number came from. http://www.ppgbuffalo.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sports-subsidies-issue-fact-sheet-final.pdf Jason Wied's Bio. Seems to have a background in law. The $34/person does seem incredibly low, and the only way I could see such a small number is if there is almost nothing in the community in the form of Bills-themed restaurants and bars in the area surrounding RWS, and very few people come in from out of town for the home games... I'm not familiar enough with the Bills to say that it does or doesn't sound right for the franchise. As far as the total economic impact, I know you can measure the impact as "gross" or "net", of which net would be a much lower figure... don't ask me how its calculated though and which one was reported at the shareholder's meeting (I don't know). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Jason Wied's Bio. Seems to have a background in law. The $34/person does seem incredibly low, and the only way I could see such a small number is if there is almost nothing in the community in the form of Bills-themed restaurants and bars in the area surrounding RWS, and very few people come in from out of town for the home games... I'm not familiar enough with the Bills to say that it does or doesn't sound right for the franchise. As far as the total economic impact, I know you can measure the impact as "gross" or "net", of which net would be a much lower figure... don't ask me how its calculated though and which one was reported at the shareholder's meeting (I don't know). i dont doubt that the $34 number is a result of a glitch where they used impact within x miles, and a lot of the hotels and such being further from the stadium, and near the stadium being more residential. i do however believe that the impact in buffalo is far smaller than your average city at this point. this is also not a secret nfl number as someone hypothesized, this is likely calculated through somewhere like the local conventions and visitors bureau just about annually (or atleast it is here in new orleans). we are talking money coming into the economy from outside the city which focuses on hotels, restaurants, etc... heavily. i would even venture the guess that mid 90s bills brought close to as much to the economy as current bills who havent made the playoffs in over a decade. the nfl is bringing in huge funds, but theres a reason that bills ticket prices have remained stagnant. there isnt the local revenue, and it isnt a destination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 I would guess it's based on a formula of how much money the team brings to the area (tickets, food, hotel rooms, etc.) divided by the population of the city. But I can't see how San Diego would be that high. Interesting, because Buffalo has a bigger stadium than both. Everyone high-tails it out of there after the game. No money spent. That number is a load of horsespit. If the Bills left town, Buffalo would die. Beyond wacky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Beyond wacky. Funny that you're the only person to think so. Then again, it's not surprising at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Green Bay would not exist if the Packers did not exist. It's a tiny town. Anyone remember "The Terror of Tiny Town", the only all-midget western movie? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7K1DmbMPZZ8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Funny that you're the only person to think so. Then again, it's not surprising at all. I'm the only one who doens't think that if the Bills left, Buffalo "would die"? You've bested yourself! Buffalo has weathered many tough hits, yet it never "died". Losing the Bills would be a huge psychological (though not economic) blow, but the city would continue to exist and it would move forward. To even suggest the city would fall because of the loss of a sports team is just idiotic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 (edited) That number is a load of horsespit. If the Bills left town, Buffalo would die. Do you eat your morning cereal with a load of LSD to get you started in your delusional visions of the world without a Ralph entreprise? Where do you come up with such nonsense? If the region loses the Bills it would be disappointing. It would have no consequential economic impact on the region. How could it? It doesn't have much of an appreciable economic impact as it now stands. Edited July 31, 2011 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 I'm the only one who doens't think that if the Bills left, Buffalo "would die"? You've bested yourself! Buffalo has weathered many tough hits, yet it never "died". Losing the Bills would be a huge psychological (though not economic) blow, but the city would continue to exist and it would move forward. To even suggest the city would fall because of the loss of a sports team is just idiotic. Do you eat your morning cereal with a load of LSD to get you started in your delusional visions of the world without a Ralph entreprise? Where you do come up with such nonsense? If the region loses the Bills it would be disappointing. It would have no consequential economic impact on the region. How could it? It doesn't have much of an appreciable economic impact as it now stands. Talk about idiotic and tripping on LSD. But wait, let me guess: if someone other than Ralph owned the team, it would have an economic impact? That's a rhetorical question because it's obvious to everyone (else) that the Bills have a huge psychological AND economic impact on the region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 Talk about idiotic and tripping on LSD. But wait, let me guess: if someone other than Ralph owned the team, it would have an economic impact? That's a rhetorical question because it's obvious to everyone (else) that the Bills have a huge psychological AND economic impact on the region. There would be minimal economic impact on the region if the team was relocated. There is currently little economic impact while it functions (seven regular season games) in the region. As far as the psychological impact it would be disappointing if the franchise moved. But the area has little say in the matter. The current buffoon owner holds the cards on that issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts