Andrew Zimbalist, a sports economist at Smith College, told NJ.com in a recent Q&A that the study that produces that $500-600 million figure is based on "false science":
The studies that they do that I’ve seen—they don’t make all of them available—but the ones that I’ve seen use input-output analysis and produce reams of data that an uninformed observer would look at and say, ‘Well, this is science.’ The NFL certainly wants people to believe that it’s science.
S.P. Sullivan at NJ.com did a great breakdown of the true costs and benefits of Super Bowls and what New Jersey and to a lesser extent NYC can expect from this year's Super Bowl. Sullivan interviewed quite a few experts who said the NFL numbers just do not add up:
Matheson says the rosy economic figures being offered by the NFL and host committees are flawed in part because the parties funding them have an economic interest in reporting big numbers. They also focus on economic activity created by the game without factoring in economic activity prevented by the game, he says.
"The way that the studies go wrong is that they do a pretty good job estimating all the economic impact that does occur because of the Super Bowl, but they don't do a very good job of estimating the impact that doesn't occur," Matheson said.
No comments:
Post a Comment