cvanvol Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Seems worth it for the Tax Payers. Since it's being used a WHOLE WAPPING 8x a YEAR. IT IS how many times does it have to be pointed out that it is making the state money.... therefore it is benefitting the tax payers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 http://portfolio.populous.com/people/radecic_scott.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 (edited) There's 20 million reasons. That's the amount of direct revenue the Bills bring to NY state each year. Why is this so hard to understand? Why do people not get this??? THE BILLS MAKE THE STATE MONEY TO KEEP MAKING THAT MONEY YOU KEEP THE BUSINESS HAPPY Hahah read the last three or four posts somehow people dont get it What you don't get is the 20 million is what (reportedly) the state gets now for their overall revenue/budget. Renovating the stadium will cost the state $100 million or whatever the sum will be. It will not be paid for unless the Bills start paying more in taxes as a result of the renovation than they do now. Edited October 21, 2011 by Mr. WEO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 http://portfolio.populous.com/people/radecic_scott.html That is awesome what Scott has done with his life. I remember him as a pretty good player, but probably remember him most as the guy who had to give up his number to Biscuit. Those are some very nice stadiums that he's worked on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 What you don't get is the 20 million is what (reportedly) the state gets now for their overall revenue/budget. Renovating the stadium will cost the state $100 million or whatever the sum will be. It will not be paid for unless the Bills start paying more in taxes as a result of the renovation than they do now. How do you think other states that have used taxpayers' money to build new stadiums for their existing teams recouped their money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvanvol Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 What you don't get is the 20 million is what (reportedly) the state gets now for their overall revenue/budget. Renovating the stadium will cost the state $100 million or whatever the sum will be. It will not be paid for unless the Bills start paying more in taxes as a result of the renovation than they do now. ???? it will be paid over years this is an investment.... It will be paid for and then some which is why any state government would build or help finance stadiums. What are you trying to say?? What you don't get is the 20 million is what (reportedly) the state gets now for their overall revenue/budget. Renovating the stadium will cost the state $100 million or whatever the sum will be. It will not be paid for unless the Bills start paying more in taxes as a result of the renovation than they do now. Pay 20 Million now - - - The bills make more money which means more taxes... They stay in buffalo People buy tickets and concessions and merchandise all making the state more sales tax... After a certain number of years the tax income generated by the bills offsets the cost of renovations... All other tax money generated by the bills is NY state making money off the investment... - - - What dont you get about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 What dont you get about this? It's more about what he chooses not to see. As per usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 (edited) IT IS how many times does it have to be pointed out that it is making the state money.... therefore it is benefitting the tax payers At least so far, I haven't seen any explanation of just how Collins came up with his $20 million figure. So at present, we simply don't know if, from a purely financial perspective, any proposed stadium renovations would be a good investment of public funds. As just one example of how politicians create biased studies, they sometimes estimate the amount of sales tax that fans will pay at the stadium. Even if they don't pad that figure, it's only an estimate of a "gross" economic impact. It ignores the "net" economic impact created by related changes in consumer spending. Think of it this way - - if the Bills moved to another state, would every dollar that NY State residents would have spent on Bills-related tickets and merchandise (thereby creating sales tax revenue) be saved instead? Obviously not. Some of those dollars would get spent on other merchandise and entertainment within Erie County and/or NY State, thereby generating sales tax revenue anyway. Do you have any idea if the "study" Collins mentioned took this into account? Until you do, you have no idea if the conclusions of the study make any sense at all. "Garbage in - - Garbage out" applies just as much to economic estimates as it does to computer programming. Personally, I would like to see the stadium renovated, as I suspect most of us would prefer. But in a society where everybody thinks they are somehow entitled to their slice of the pie and then some, I'm not yet convinced that the public funds that get spent on stadium improvements will ever be recouped on a net basis. Let's see the actual "study," and critically examine the assumptions it makes. Just my 2 lira. Edited October 21, 2011 by ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRQ_BillsFan Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 You mean other than the Browns and the Colts? Also, the Sonics had trouble drawing fans to games. Not for the Bills. Collins is mistaken. The 20 million that the Bills pay in taxes (really?) per year is already in the state revenue stream/budget and paying for whatever NYS pays for. It would not pay for the extra 100 million for the stadium unless the state connected that money to a decrease in funding for something else in their budget going forward. Of course, that's never going to happen. Not if the team were to move. It would be lost revenue as well, but permanently not just for 4 - 6 +/- years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 What you don't get is the 20 million is what (reportedly) the state gets now for their overall revenue/budget. Renovating the stadium will cost the state $100 million or whatever the sum will be. It will not be paid for unless the Bills start paying more in taxes as a result of the renovation than they do now. And if they don't help pay for the stadium and the team leaves NY, they lose 20 Million a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRQ_BillsFan Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 (edited) At least so far, I haven't seen any explanation of just how Collins came up with his $20 million figure. So at present, we simply don't know if, from a purely financial perspective, any proposed stadium renovations would be a good investment of public funds. As just one example of how politicians create biased studies, they sometimes estimate the amount of sales tax that fans will pay at the stadium. Even if they don't pad that figure, it's only an estimate of a "gross" economic impact. It ignores the "net" economic impact created by related changes in consumer spending. Think of it this way - - if the Bills moved to another state, would every dollar that NY State residents would have spent on Bills-related tickets and merchandise (thereby creating sales tax revenue) be saved instead? Obviously not. Some of those dollars would get spent on other merchandise and entertainment within Erie County and/or NY State, thereby generating sales tax revenue anyway. Do you have any idea if the "study" Collins mentioned took this into account? Until you do, you have no idea if the conclusions of the study make any sense at all. "Garbage in - - Garbage out" applies just as much to economic estimates as it does to computer programming. Personally, I would like to see the stadium renovated, as I suspect most of us would prefer. But in a society where everybody thinks they are somehow entitled to their slice of the pie and then some, I'm not yet convinced that the public funds that get spent on stadium improvements will ever be recouped on a net basis. Let's see the actual "study," and critically examine the assumptions it makes. Just my 2 lira. I agree garbage in garbage out... You probably know this but it isn't even that simple as a large portion of Bills fans do 't live in the county or the state. I have seen these studies done by both sides to show impact and goold or bad. Problem is they never show the formulas, use bogus. Numbers as you have suggested and purposely confuse the calculations so they can not be confirmed. Every city that believes they are large enough would bend over backwards to get an NFL team, some at any cost. There has to be a reason, and money talks in this country. Find me a city that wouldn't secure an NFL team for 100 mil. I don't think you could. Edited October 21, 2011 by SRQ_BillsFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I agree garbage in garbage out... You probably know this but it isn't even that simple as a large portion of Bills fans do 't live in the county or the state. . . Agreed. If the Bills left Buffalo, there would be a net loss of sales tax money - - but some portion of it would be collected anyway based on substitutue purchases. If you had the data about where the game day fans live, you could make some reasonable estimates about what % might actually be lost on a net basis. I have seen these studies done by both sides to show impact and goold or bad. Problem is they never show the formulas, use bogus. Numbers as you have suggested and purposely confuse the calculations so they can not be confirmed. Every city that believes they are large enough would bend over backwards to get an NFL team, some at any cost. There has to be a reason, and money talks in this country. Find me a city that wouldn't secure an NFL team for 100 mil. I don't think you could. Sounds reasonable - - but there's a chance that the money that's "talking" to the political decision-makers is private developer money. For example, if the AEG backed stadium gets built in downtown LA, the value of nearby AEG-owned downtown properties will go up. If the AEG money is what's talking to the SoCal politicians, it's not so clear to me that the public as a whole benefits financially. OTOH, if you're a football fan in SoCal who likes to attend NFL games in person, quality of life is worth something, too, even if you can't put an exact dollar figure on it. And I admit that I tend to be cynical about government spending in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 And I admit that I tend to be cynical about government spending in general. For good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Agreed. If the Bills left Buffalo, there would be a net loss of sales tax money - - but some portion of it would be collected anyway based on substitutue purchases. If you had the data about where the game day fans live, you could make some reasonable estimates about what % might actually be lost on a net basis. Sounds reasonable - - but there's a chance that the money that's "talking" to the political decision-makers is private developer money. For example, if the AEG backed stadium gets built in downtown LA, the value of nearby AEG-owned downtown properties will go up. If the AEG money is what's talking to the SoCal politicians, it's not so clear to me that the public as a whole benefits financially. OTOH, if you're a football fan in SoCal who likes to attend NFL games in person, quality of life is worth something, too, even if you can't put an exact dollar figure on it. And I admit that I tend to be cynical about government spending in general. If you think the money the Bills generate is mostly through sales tax, you're barking up the wrong tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cvanvol Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 If you think the money the Bills generate is mostly through sales tax, you're barking up the wrong tree. Really? You think their corporate tax is more? I really have no idea about any of that but i would think just looking at it that the sales tax generated would be more.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 Really? You think their corporate tax is more? I really have no idea about any of that but i would think just looking at it that the sales tax generated would be more.... Depends upon how you want to look at it. The vast majority of people going to Bills games live in New York State. So if they did not spend money in the Buffalo area on those 8 or 9 days a year, they would still be spending it in New York and thus the sales tax would get to the state Bills game or no Bills game. So the true net impact of sales tax is negligible. Corporate tax, however much that is, should outweigh the net sales tax impact and would all go away if the Bills moved out of state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICanSleepWhenI'mDead Posted October 22, 2011 Share Posted October 22, 2011 If you think the money the Bills generate is mostly through sales tax, you're barking up the wrong tree. Actually, I prefer to howl at the wrong moon. But until we know exactly how Collins calculated his $20 million/yr figure, none of us know which tree to bark at. Have you seen anything that shows how Collins came up with his number? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 Actually, I prefer to howl at the wrong moon. But until we know exactly how Collins calculated his $20 million/yr figure, none of us know which tree to bark at. Have you seen anything that shows how Collins came up with his number? This might help: http://www.ppgbuffalo.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/sports-subsidies-issue-fact-sheet-final1.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 (edited) all i know is that people can carp all they want about "taxpayer dollars", but to me, i want my "taxpayer dollars" used to solidify the bills future in buffalo. if one thinks the 80 million will be "wasted" "corporate welfare" whatever, i say forget about it! the tired argument about money to fix roads, education etc, doesnt matter. the politicians pi$$ away the money anyway, why not use some of it on a tangible project like a stadium upgrade? i say do it! Edited October 23, 2011 by dwight in philly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted October 23, 2011 Share Posted October 23, 2011 How do you think other states that have used taxpayers' money to build new stadiums for their existing teams recouped their money? They raise taxes or float bonds. But several posters here are actually suggesting that the "20 million" the Bills pay the state per year would "pay off" the 100 million in 5 years. This, clearly, makes no sense at all. It should be obvious that in order to pay for a new outlay, the state either has to raise revenue (taxes, bonds) or cut outlays for other projects. Unless a new stadium or renovation results in new/increased tax revenue from the stadium, then the state can't recoup its investment. Pretty simple. ???? it will be paid over years this is an investment.... It will be paid for and then some which is why any state government would build or help finance stadiums. What are you trying to say?? Pay 20 Million now - - - The bills make more money which means more taxes... They stay in buffalo People buy tickets and concessions and merchandise all making the state more sales tax... After a certain number of years the tax income generated by the bills offsets the cost of renovations... All other tax money generated by the bills is NY state making money off the investment... - - - What dont you get about this? I have already discussed the bolded part, so not sure what you are unsure of. See above. If the Bills don't generate more income as a result of the new stadium upgrades and therefore pay more taxes (i.e. MORE than the 20 million they reportedly pay now), the state loses money. In order for the Bills to generate more tax dollars to "pay for" the renovations, they will have to significantly increase the prices of tickets and all of their revenue generating products. If that's what you're trying to say, I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts