From get-go, Petco Park study is bogus

Richard Rider, Chairman, San Diego Tax Fighters Richard Rider, Chairman, San Diego Tax Fighters 2 Comments


This is a bogus study, from a group that quite likely is PAID to provide bogus studies. If I get the time, I’ll later run through some of the fatuous assumptions they used to reach their fatuous conclusions.

This preordained result “consulting” is standard practice in politics. We’ve seen this with compromised actuaries providing skewed data to help approve foolish pension plans, or consultants justifying tax increases. Every stadium subsidy ever passed (or put before the voters) includes one of these bogus studies as proof of the viability of the project.

In the private sector, companies hire research consultants to give their best, honest analysis of past performance and future probabilities. Businesses do not profit from bad advice.

In the PUBLIC sector, such consultants are hired to provide the answers desired — the patina of respectability needed to go forward with unwise financial decisions.

The consultants hired by government understand this. These are hired guns. If they come out with findings that are at variance with the desired results, they likely will never receive another government “consulting” contract.

It would be interesting for this consulting firm to make public their studies that concluded that pro sports subsidies are a bad idea. Likely as not, no such studies exist from this consultant.


Comments 2

  1. Absolutely agree with you. Most of these studies are total BS. They are given the conclusions at the outset and then told to make the study fit.

  2. Don Bauder has more.

    “It’s very cozy in San Diego,” chuckles Heywood Sanders, professor of public administration at the University of Texas at San Antonio and the nation’s leading expert on convention centers. Sanders points out that when the San Diego convention center wanted to hype an expansion, it turned to Conventions, Sports & Leisure International, a firm with offices in metro Dallas and Minneapolis. When the San Diego Regional Economic Development Corp. wanted to show that the $300 million ballpark subsidy had been a success, it turned to — you guessed it, Conventions, Sports & Leisure International. Even though the ballpark area still suffers from economic depression, the consulting firm delivered. Here are just a few of this firm’s past findings: it said a baseball stadium in San Jose would give the local economy a $130 million boost; it said a new Minnesota Vikings stadium would create 13,400 jobs and boost the economy by $1.35 billion; it said a new convention center and luxury hotel would add $37 million a year to the Tucson economy (although politicians wondered where the $210 million cost would come from) and it told San Antonio to invest $200 million in its convention center. However, in the San Antonio case, the projection proved wildly off the market and city officials decided to hire another firm to get a more realistic assessment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.