Blasphemy- will pro sports franchises in the Northeast and Midwest start to migrate to the South and West on a large scale over the next decade?

[GON]

Nope. Not enough $$ in the Southern cities which don't have a pro team. College Football rules the South and Southeast.

The corporate money is the key component to today's sports franchises. Having Steve's Ace Hardware as a sponsor of a professional sports franchise worked decades ago, but not today.

Supplementally,on MACRO basis all the professional athletes want to play and live in the South and West.

Not if, but when these long time professional sport franchises move from the Upper Midwest and Northeast to the South and West.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

The corporate money is the key component to today's sports franchises. Having Steve's Ace Hardware as a sponsor of a professional sports franchise worked decades ago, but not today.

Supplementally,on MACRO basis all the professional athletes want to play and live in the South and West.

Not if, but when these long time professional sport franchises move from the Upper Midwest and Northeast to the South and West.

Perhaps but what you're forgetting is the stadium. Unfortunately public money is required and there are not many southern cities left who can float the bonds necessary to fund the construction of a NFL stadium. Think over $1.5B.

 

[ripcord]

The elephant in the room with regards to major league sports franchises is the slow motion implosion of over the air and cable television. Will the shift to streaming be the great equalizer in terms of profitability for smaller market teams, or will it further depress their profits and drive those teams to move?

 

[JHZR2]

I will only address the city I care about: The Steelers and Penguins are never leaving Pittsburgh: both are too much a part of the city and have been very successful: sold out stadium and arenas and good TV followers. There have been rumors about the Pirates for years but then it never happens. If the owner found a way to pay for a real major league roster and they started winning again, the Bucs would be very popular and more successful than now. They still draw some fans because seeing a game at beautiful PNC Park is worth it alone.

You’re right, PNC park is great!

 

[y_p_w]

Nope. Not enough $$ in the Southern cities which don't have a pro team. College Football rules the South and Southeast.

I would think the major cities that might be suitable already have a team (or two).

Seattle wants the NBA back. They're the most likely landing spot for a team owner wanting to relocate or an expansion team.

I would have thought that if Paul Allen hadn't already owned the Portland Trailblazers, he would have likely bought the Supersonics to keep them in Seattle. And then there was the group that was looking to buy the Sacramento Kings (which is in a teeny tiny market) in order to move them to Seattle. And the deal they had would have allowed the relocated team to be named the Supersonics as well as claim a right to the history of the Supersonics. Not quite sure what that would have done to the legacy of the Kings, which were previously the Kansas City Kings, Cincinnati Royals, and Rochester Royals. And even before that the Rochester Seagrams in a sponsorship deal.

 

[y_p_w]

The elephant in the room with regards to major league sports franchises is the slow motion implosion of over the air and cable television. Will the shift to streaming be the great equalizer in terms of profitability for smaller market teams, or will it further depress their profits and drive those teams to move?

The broadcasting contracts keep on getting bigger and bigger. And right now I would think the most lucrative deal in the NFL is the one that Amazon is paying to have games on Prime Video. NFL Sunday Ticket then switched from DirecTV to YouTube TV. So yeah streaming is the big deal. But broadcast TV is still how most people watch the NFL.

Other sports are more reliant on regional cable networks.

 

[GON]

Go

The elephant in the room with regards to major league sports franchises is the slow motion implosion of over the air and cable television. Will the shift to streaming be the great equalizer in terms of profitability for smaller market teams, or will it further depress their profits and drive those teams to move?

Good thought provoking post. Maybe the US taxpayers will be required to increase their involuntarily subsidies to professional sport franchises. Involuntarily subsidies go deeper than just tax leavies, it is laws that force mandatory individual payments to cable companies, etc. one example, every American that has cable pays OOA seven dollars per month to ESPN. Mandatory payment, not negotiable or waiverable. Maybe ESPN will lobby for like situation for streaming, who knows.

 

[JHZR2]

The corporate money is the key component to today's sports franchises. Having Steve's Ace Hardware as a sponsor of a professional sports franchise worked decades ago, but not today.

Supplementally,on MACRO basis all the professional athletes want to play and live in the South and West.

Not if, but when these long time professional sport franchises move from the Upper Midwest and Northeast to the South and West.

There are billions of dollars behind many of these old school places. More actually.

The trend south and west was somewhat about taxes, and somewhat about cost of living for lots of folks. Not to mention massive tax giveaways to businesses, which will eventually come home to roost.

Just because some of these cities boomed and put up all kinds of million dollar homes doesn’t mean a whole lot IMO. Urban blight, bulldozing lousy parts of cities, loss of industry, etc. is nothing new. Has been happening since the 50s at least.

The replica isn’t the original, no matter how much some folks want to think it is…

 

[PandaBear]

....San Jose, California????

Santa Clara is practically San Jose and that's where the Levi's stadium is at, so now the whole Bay Area is 9ers.

 

[JHZR2]

Go
Good thought provoking post. Maybe the US taxpayers will be required to increase their involuntarily subsidies to professional sport franchises. Involuntarily subsidies go deeper than just tax leavies, it is laws that force mandatory individual payments to cable companies, etc. one example, every American that has cable pays OOA seven dollars per month to ESPN. Mandatory payment, not negotiable or waiverable. Maybe ESPN will lobby for like situation for streaming, who knows.

They already do every time a bond is floated for a stadium. Or when a sports venue recovery cost is charged on a rental car. And who knows what else.

Cable is another racket… often it is a monopoly enabled by local municipalities. I boycott it fully. Always have.

They are for all those handouts to get companies to move from the NE and CA. The taxpayers pay for that too. No guarantee the revenues pay for it.

And all the migration means that all the folks that voted for bad policies and “ruined” the other locations, aren’t likely to change… and will vote the same policies and ruin the next place. Imagine the mess that will create! Only then instead of having very pleasant places to live, they’re all in places with oppressive heat, many with severe water issues, excess exposure to severe weather, etc. What a deal!

 

[PandaBear]

Sport subsidies are always around. I pretty much always try my best to vote against it.

I think Oakland still haven't finished paying for the Colosseum and then Raider's want a newer one, then left when they didn't get what they wanted.

Same for basically all Olympic game hosting cities, they are always never paid back by the revenue and tax generated and the locals are on the hook with tax.

The problem with that strategy is you need a big and high income city to absorb that. Oakland is not a high income city, maybe San Francisco is. I am not familiar with the South or South East but they need to be mentally prepared to give out all sorts of gov money to keep a team happy, the same one that you likely have fewer, lower income residents to spread it out to. Stadium and tax break is just the beginning of it. I don't think the athletes have a say in it if they want a job paid by the local fans indirectly through taxes.

 

[ripcord]

Sport subsidies are always around. I pretty much always try my best to vote against it.

I think Oakland still haven't finished paying for the Colosseum and then Raider's want a newer one, then left when they didn't get what they wanted.

Same for basically all Olympic game hosting cities, they are always never paid back by the revenue and tax generated and the locals are on the hook with tax.

The problem with that strategy is you need a big and high income city to absorb that. Oakland is not a high income city, maybe San Francisco is. I am not familiar with the South or South East but they need to be mentally prepared to give out all sorts of gov money to keep a team happy, the same one that you likely have fewer, lower income residents to spread it out to. Stadium and tax break is just the beginning of it. I don't think the athletes have a say in it if they want a job paid by the local fans indirectly through taxes.

Bread and circuses, man. Bread and circuses.

 

[clinebarger]

Santa Clara is practically San Jose and that's where the Levi's stadium is at, so now the whole Bay Area is 9ers.

I didn't know exactly where the stadium was, But the Oakland Raiders where right in the same general area correct? Maybe a 2nd team could share the stadium like the Chargers/Rams & Jets/Giants.

 

[JohnnyJohnson]

Blasphemy- will pro sports franchises in the Northeast and Midwest start to migrate to the South and West on a large scale over the next decade?

Seems so many pro sports players want to play in the South and West. And the population growth is in the South and West (Illinois lost a congressional seat for population decline, NY was 64 people away from losing a seat). Can't help but pontificate if franchises from these cities will start to migrate on a large scale over the next decade. Population growth in the West and South, corporate growth in the West and South, and the players want to be in the West and South. Follow the money and the money is West and South.

Would not be shocked if these cities start to lose their pro sport franchises on a regular protocol over the next ten years :
Baltimore
Buffalo
Chicago
Cincinnati
Cleveland
Detroit
Minneapolis
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh

Green Bay is the one exemption. It is owned by its fans, and essentially can't be moved (great story):
https://www.sportscasting.com/who-owns-the-green-bay-packers/

Frankly who could care?