Chiefs expected to move from Arrowhead to Kansas state

[chris98251]

Looking at the Title


What kind of permits are needed to move a Stadium across state lines, and do they have to repair all the telephone poles and bridges they take out. I can imagine that the trucks towing and lead and trailing vehicles say EXTRA WIDE LOAD on them.

 

[NoGain]

Yeah, definitely a case of socialism for the rich. They're working/exploiting the system to maximize their revenues and net worth's. What's new?

At least for the fanbase the move isn't a geographical tragedy, other than it crosses a state line. It's not like the team is moving halfway across the country. I'm sure long time ticket holders, however, will get financially and otherwise screwed over to some degree by the move.

It is what it is.

 

[Torc]

I don't want to get into a discussion of economic/political systems. Essentially there are 2 choices: People can pay for a stadium that they won't own and for massive amounts of tickets...or...they can watch on tv when the re-branded team plays in their new location.

Or better yet, business owners pay for their own facilities, and fans buy product. Boeing and Microsoft get tax breaks, but the state doesn't build their office buildings for them. Sports teams should be the same way.

 

[flv2]

Or better yet, business owners pay for their own facilities, and fans buy product. Boeing and Microsoft get tax breaks, but the state doesn't build their office buildings for them. Sports teams should be the same way.

Fair enough. By the same logic if a large business organisation like 1 of those 2 wants to move then they should be able to do so.

 

[James in PA]

Hey! These NFL owners have a family to feed!

 

[Hawkstorian]

Team is moving like 20 miles to a state of the art facility. People do realize that Arrowhead isn't in Kansas City either.

 

[IndyHawk]

Or better yet, business owners pay for their own facilities, and fans buy product. Boeing and Microsoft get tax breaks, but the state doesn't build their office buildings for them. Sports teams should be the same way.

These "tax breaks" mean higher taxes for everyone else to cover, it
doesn't just not exist, you know that right?

 

[Shane Falco]

So long Arrowhead. That stadium has been a part of football my whole football watching life.

 

[Blitzhawk]

View attachment 76814

Looking at the Title


What kind of permits are needed to move a Stadium across state lines, and do they have to repair all the telephone poles and bridges they take out. I can imagine that the trucks towing and lead and trailing vehicles say EXTRA WIDE LOAD on them.

Nah, should fit on the roads fine with their deflated ego at the moment.....playoffs!!?? PLAYOFFS!!??

 

[Torc]

These "tax breaks" mean higher taxes for everyone else to cover, it
doesn't just not exist, you know that right?

Every policy decision comes with compromises and tradeoffs, for sure.

In the case of those larger companies getting tax breaks....Microsoft has 50,000 employees in Washington State. Boeing has almost 67,000. When you attract those companies to the state, you increase your tax base and provide an economic impact. The Seahawks employ.....well, it's hard to tell. Googling it came up with 446 and 623 employees. I'm not sure if that includes the players....but that's a much smaller tax base (albeit the players at least are a lot of dollars, especially if they live/spend in state). In exchange for a billion dollar stadium that the taxpayers maintain and the team gets the revenue from.

 

[Hawkinaz]

I saw a YouTube short today where the poster was giving all the information on how much the Chiefs are getting and the city/county where they are moving to has to give up, if it is true it seems like it’s definitely a one sided deal

 

[Glasgow Seahawk]

I saw a YouTube short today where the poster was giving all the information on how much the Chiefs are getting and the city/county where they are moving to has to give up, if it is true it seems like it’s definitely a one sided deal

Interesting how some areas will allow that and in others the electorate would absolutely freak out.

Lumen field still feels pretty modern but if they ever had to rebuild it I wonder how it would be funded. Guessing some tax breaks similar to climate pledge arena but the electorate not fully paying for it.

 

[ivotuk]

"Toto, I don't think we're in Missouri anymore."

In a player survey, the Kansas City Chiefs had the worst facilities in the NFL. Now they get brand new ones.

What some cities don't take in to account is that a football team in their vicinity generates a ton of money! Hotel bed taxes, property taxes on the stadium, property taxes on all the homes that players and coaching staff buy or rent, taxes on tickets, Concerts and other activities at the venue, Airport taxes, taxes on travel tickets, and landing fees, gas stations and grocery stores, sales tax, etc, etc, etc. Add to that, free advertising that attracts tourists to their city/county, jersey sales, stadium tours.

All of this and more is being exported to Kansas tax base.

 

[NoGain]

I really wonder how financially net beneficial NFL teams are to their communities in relation to the costs such communities incur supporting those teams in the form taxes and other supportive services? After all, the teams only play at home in their communities about 10-12 times a year if you factor in pre-season games and the playoffs in addition to the regular season. Did communities like San Diego, St. Louis, Oakland, Baltimore, and Los Angeles really take a net financial hit when their teams left their communities?

I know there are a lot of factors involved when trying to calculate such a thing, but count me dubious when it comes to people talking about the financial importance/urgency of having or keeping an NFL franchise in their communities. Admittedly, I've never done any kind of a deeper dive into the issue, just skeptical about it.

This has nothing to do with things like civic pride, or the emotional attachments to a team by the fan bases. I'm just talking about overall financial numbers and benefits here.

I do know one thing, however. The owners are doing very well from a revenue and net worth standpoint in comparison to the great majority of other investments they might have made with their money in recent decades.

 

[Appyhawk]

If I'm not mistaken new stadiums leapfrog into top category for hosting a super bowl That event alone produces a gazillion dollars.

 

[Torc]

The lowest value team is the Bengals, at $5.5 billion. The commanders sale was for over $6 billion. Even if owners were taking a loss (which they aren't by a long shot) they make bank when they sell the franchise.

 

[Glasgow Seahawk]

I really wonder how financially net beneficial NFL teams are to their communities in relation to the costs such communities incur supporting those teams in the form taxes and other supportive services? After all, the teams only play at home in their communities about 10-12 times a year if you factor in pre-season games and the playoffs in addition to the regular season. Did communities like San Diego, St. Louis, Oakland, Baltimore, and Los Angeles really take a net financial hit when their teams left their communities?

I know there are a lot of factors involved when trying to calculate such a thing, but count me dubious when it comes to people talking about the financial importance/urgency of having or keeping an NFL franchise in their communities. Admittedly, I've never done any kind of a deeper dive into the issue, just skeptical about it.

This has nothing to do with things like civic pride, or the emotional attachments to a team by the fan bases. I'm just talking about overall financial numbers and benefits here.

I do know one thing, however. The owners are doing very well from a revenue and net worth standpoint in comparison to the great majority of other investments they might have made with their money in recent decades.

https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2015/07/stadium-economics-noll-073015#:~:text=Sports%20stadiums%20do%20not%20generate,public%20financing%20of%20sports%20stadiums.

This says no if its just nfl alone. I wonder if they have other sports like ncaa, mls etc of it would eventually.

 

[Glasgow Seahawk]

If I'm not mistaken new stadiums leapfrog into top category for hosting a super bowl That event alone produces a gazillion dollars.

I'll be pissed if Kansas gets a super bowl (if its open air) and Seattle didn't. It's freezing in kc

 

[NoGain]

https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2015/07/stadium-economics-noll-073015#:~:text=Sports%20stadiums%20do%20not%20generate,public%20financing%20of%20sports%20stadiums.

This says no if its just nfl alone. I wonder if they have other sports like ncaa, mls etc of it would eventually.

It's a bit older of an article, but it's probably even more relevant today.

 

[RiverDog]

These "tax breaks" mean higher taxes for everyone else to cover, it
doesn't just not exist, you know that right?

The argument is that if the team leaves, there won't be any tax to collect anyway.

I'm against public funding for private professional sports teams, but I would rather see a federal law that prohibits for-profit professional sporting organizations from receiving public funds so that teams don't play one jurisdiction against another.

But on the other hand, there are places, like the LA area where SoFi was built entirely with private financing, that have a lot more private funding available than in some place like Kansas City or Minneapolis.

It's a pretty tough issue with no good solution.