Would investing in a 7th Canadian NHL franchise be a waste of government money? I hear a lot of people saying that, so let's take a look at the revenue that the Canadian NHL franchises generate. In 2008, the Toronto Maple Leafs sold an average of $1.9 million dollars in tickets to each home game, which works out to roughly $78 million dollars per season. The other Canadian franchises were not far behind, with Montreal at 1.7, Vancouver at 1.4, Calgary at 1.3, with Montreal and Ottawa rounding out the list at 1.2 per game. The federal government earns $4 million dollars per year in GST revenue just off ticket sales at the Air Canada Center. The financially weakest NHL franchise, Ottawa, generates $2.5 million annually in tax dollars. That does not count concession sales, merchandizing, or advertising revenue.
And how about employment income? Between office staff, concessions, janitors, hosts, conversions, security, et all, an NHL arena would employ between 300-500 people. These people collectively would earn several thousand dollars in income each game, which over a 41 game home schedule would translate to millions of dollars in employment income annually which produces even more tax revenue for the government. I would estimate that each franchise generates 10-20 million dollars in tax revenue for the Canadian government each year. They employ hundreds of people, and provide a product that Canadians want to pay to see, from which they derive pleasure.
And how about those rich millionaire athletes that everybody loves complaining about? They buy expensive houses, expensive cars, and other luxury items that are...you guessed it...taxed by the government. They pay income tax, a lot more than the janitor mopping the floors after the game. Franchises generate revenue and jobs, certainly a lot more than an art gallery, bike path, bridge to nowhere, or dog park. Helping bring the NHL back to Quebec City is not a waste of government money, it is an investment in future earnings.
It's very simple really. If no one in private enterprise is willing to put up the money then it is probably not a good idea. When the government bails out or funds something they took the money from someone else.
ReplyDeleteBy your logic the government should be building factories and offices all over the country and giving them to business so they can create jobs.Great thinking Comrade
ReplyDeleteIt is very difficult to raise private money for a major construction project during an economic downturn. It is in fact quite common for arena construction to be built with a contribution of public money in North America, which is a fair trade for the millions in tax revenue that the government will collect from the operation of the facility.
ReplyDeleteIf this were the case then I guess the horrendous sums given to the auto companies are justified. That money, supposedly, kept jobs which allowed people to keep spending. Government subsidies to any privately owned company should be anathema to a conservative.
ReplyDeleteyour love of hockey is clouding your judgement
ReplyDeleteAs I believe this contract would include maintenance and upkeep for many years you have to compare it to who is doing that for all the other arenas you mentioned.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, it is quite common for the stadium to be built with an injection of public funds in North America, a trade show for the millions in tax revenue that the government try to use the facility. Public subsidies to a private company should be anathema to a conservative.
ReplyDelete