Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

I just used Judge's figures because I'm a Yankee's fan and he was the first person to come to mind.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

.

Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

Out of curiosity, whose side are you on? It would help matters if you hit "quote reply" when responding.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Public money being used to build a sports complex is troubling, for sure.

However, the workers who produce the product are not the ones who should be the target of this topic. Consider:

More than 10% of Forbes 400 members own sports teams.... investing in any NFL franchise has proven to be wildly successful over the past two decades. Since 1998, when Forbes started publishing sports team valuations, NFL clubs have appreciated nearly 1,500% on average."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/justinbirnbaum/2022/09/27/the-richest-sports-team-owners-on-the-2022-forbes-400/?sh=5201aa566c2c

.

Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

What is YOUR point, Linda?

RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

Our city just used taxpayers money to build a sports complex, a realitively rare large ice complex. 4 sheets of ice. So they can handle large tournaments very efficiently. 20 - 30 teams, each with all the kids and parents, restaurants are filled, hotels are filled, gas stations and everything are cooking. They are booked two years out. Lots of $$$$ where it simply didn't exist before.

That's what sports complexes bring in, Ticket prices are a tiny portion. So i***ts will look at the cost of a beer, or a hot-dog, or a ticket... and say " well I don't want to spend that much money to go to watch a team that I don't care if they win or lose... So its all worthless", but you probably wouldn't go unless it was free! YOU ARE NOT THEIR MARKET! Meanwhile the intangible additions to everything surrounding it that you do benefit from are ignored.

Move away! There are many cities that have none of it. But there are a whole lot of things they won't have as well, like nice hospitals, or good doctors, or airports, or ... well... much of anything including the stuff that are a total drain, like museums, or parks that you do support and value.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

1. Without the athletes, pro sports would not exist.

2. If pro sports brings in billions to owners, why criticize the athletes? How should the billions be "fairly" divided?

3. The comparison between doctors' salaries and pro athletes' salaries is a false argument. You dismissed my comments about insurance companies and patients as irrelevant, but athletes' incomes have nothing to do with doctors' incomes. Insurance companies and for-profit hospitals are the most relevant factors in discussions about whether doctors earn "enough" given their years of sacrifice and training.

Since I've said all the above at least twice already, I'll depart. I understand your emotion in this discussion because of your recent life-saving surgery. All the best, AP. See you in the photo section!

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

You are yanking another of my gripe chains now. I have no problem with the “profits” brought in by big sports and even big business like Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, etc. I also get that pro sports and stadia in big cities stimulate the economy with huge ripple effects on everything from construction jobs to tourist shops, hotels and restaurants. But given that these profits are derived from the paying public I believe those profits should be more equitably distributed back to the public. Put a cap on salaries and distribute the rest in some manner. NOBODY needs to earn more than $10M (or $50M; or $100M; pick a reasonable limit) per year! NOBODY! If pro athletes and team owners were limited to “reasonable” salaries it would not cost hundreds of dollars to go to a game.

I clearly do not have a good understanding of big business and economics. But maybe nobody does. Maybe a few have simply figured out what works and they just keep playing the game of bilking the little guy to pad their wallets. And the recent big bank failures confirm to me that some business models are built on very unstable foundations that people falsely thought they understood.

Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

1. I'm not saying that athletes shouldn't get paid what they're worth. I just think they're not worth what they're getting.
2. Less, but equitable amounts going to the athletes. All of the crazy money that some players are pulling in is coming out of the owner's pockets, so your argument doesn't hold water here either.The owner's are giving up a lot of money to acquire these athletes and where do they get that money? From us...admissions, souvenirs and on and on.
3. This entire discussion is comparing sports figure's and doctor's (and others) salaries. I'm not talking about insurance or anything else. I'm talking about one thing and you're talking about something else. I'd be glad to continue, but I don't think we'll ever see eye to eye.

JohnSwanda Loc: San Francisco

The owners also get a lot of money for the TV rights, and we get to watch them free - the advertisers pay.

JohnFrim Loc: Somewhere in the Great White North.

And advertising costs eventually get paid by the consumer.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

OK, let's try a few more times. I'm not getting anything else accomplished today anyway


Who or what determines their worth? Pro sports are for-profit businesses. Free market economy.


Salaries are part of the cost of running any business. Nothing would be going into a team owner's pocket if there were no players. And, currently, less goes into the pockets of owners who do not have superstars and large fan bases.

Yes, of course we fans "pay the price." Again, that is true of all for-profit businesses under capitalism.


I'm curious what factors you believe determine a physician's income? I read that a big chunk is productivity. That means the amount of money a physician brings to the practice. In this country, that means insurance companies.

flip1948 Loc: Hamden, CT

I remember back in the early 80s the University of Connecticut decided to enter division 1-A football (now called FBS). The first thing that popped into my mind was "they can't even win in the Yankee Conference, how are they going to compete in division 1-A."

Because the rules for 1-A had changed they needed a stadium that held 30,000 fans and somehow they convinced the state legislature to pony up the $30 million for the stadium.

I was right...it was a total waste of $30 million.