The Economic impact sporting events has on the cities hosting them has been widely looked at recently. The Super Bowl is supposed to generate around 550-600 million for New York and New Jersey, but I'm still confused on how estimators actually get these numbers. I agree that sporting events have a lot of positives, but they also have negative impacts on some people involved. Brazil has been in the news a lot lately for the corruption going on because the lower class wants to know how or if they will see the benefits from hosting the world cup. This caused violence and rioting so they are questioning what will happen when the world cup actually comes around and if they can come together and stop the corruption. I don't think this will ever happen over a sporting event in the US anytime soon, but I do think that people will start seeking to see where the economic benefits of hosting are distributed.
The economic impact on cities is always very interesting. Economies tend to boom when a large even such as the World Cup or the Olympics come to a certain country/city. The Super Bowl will definitely cause some talk in what it brings to the New Jersey area. Also will be interesting seeing it being played outside and up north in the cold.
The problem with sporting events is the rise of prostitution. With the increase of tourism in the area more of the lower class people that live on practically pennies a day will be immigrating to these cities because they know that more customers means more money. Here supply will be increasing and thus demand will be supplied. This happened when South Africa held the FIFA World Cup in 2010. In New York poverty is not as bad and AIDS/HIV is not as rampant as in South Africa but there still will be an increase of drug trade, human trafficking and prostitution. The difference with this event is that it is more targeted towards Americans, it is not an international event. Because of this participants do not go to tourist events and thus not as much money is made. But in Brazil tourism is increasing in Peru and other neighboring countries. Prices have already skyrocketed for the weeks close to the next FIFA World Cup in Brazil.
Yeah, I have heard a lot in the last couple years about the economic impact of the cities hosting Olympics. This knowledge was sparked by the Olympics that was held in London. Basically, hosting games is a huge short term benefit, but not always a long term benefit. Not all the facilities are used afterwards. From what I heard about the Olympics in Athens, only the subway network (and one other item I forgot) have been valued by the Athenians. With the Olympics in Sochi, I very much doubt that any of the stuff built for the Olympics will have a lasting impact, hence the buildings will decay. As such, the environmental damage caused by the construction for the Olympics will have been in vain.
4 comments:
The Economic impact sporting events has on the cities hosting them has been widely looked at recently. The Super Bowl is supposed to generate around 550-600 million for New York and New Jersey, but I'm still confused on how estimators actually get these numbers. I agree that sporting events have a lot of positives, but they also have negative impacts on some people involved. Brazil has been in the news a lot lately for the corruption going on because the lower class wants to know how or if they will see the benefits from hosting the world cup. This caused violence and rioting so they are questioning what will happen when the world cup actually comes around and if they can come together and stop the corruption. I don't think this will ever happen over a sporting event in the US anytime soon, but I do think that people will start seeking to see where the economic benefits of hosting are distributed.
The economic impact on cities is always very interesting. Economies tend to boom when a large even such as the World Cup or the Olympics come to a certain country/city. The Super Bowl will definitely cause some talk in what it brings to the New Jersey area. Also will be interesting seeing it being played outside and up north in the cold.
The problem with sporting events is the rise of prostitution. With the increase of tourism in the area more of the lower class people that live on practically pennies a day will be immigrating to these cities because they know that more customers means more money. Here supply will be increasing and thus demand will be supplied. This happened when South Africa held the FIFA World Cup in 2010. In New York poverty is not as bad and AIDS/HIV is not as rampant as in South Africa but there still will be an increase of drug trade, human trafficking and prostitution. The difference with this event is that it is more targeted towards Americans, it is not an international event. Because of this participants do not go to tourist events and thus not as much money is made. But in Brazil tourism is increasing in Peru and other neighboring countries. Prices have already skyrocketed for the weeks close to the next FIFA World Cup in Brazil.
Yeah, I have heard a lot in the last couple years about the economic impact of the cities hosting Olympics. This knowledge was sparked by the Olympics that was held in London. Basically, hosting games is a huge short term benefit, but not always a long term benefit. Not all the facilities are used afterwards. From what I heard about the Olympics in Athens, only the subway network (and one other item I forgot) have been valued by the Athenians. With the Olympics in Sochi, I very much doubt that any of the stuff built for the Olympics will have a lasting impact, hence the buildings will decay. As such, the environmental damage caused by the construction for the Olympics will have been in vain.
Post a Comment