January 21, 2008

Sonics: We don't help the economy after all

Remember when I warned about "the ironic possibility of the [Seattle] Sonics' own inflated economic impact figures being used against them in lease settlement negotiations" as they try to escape their KeyArena lease? Now that the lease is the subject of a lawsuit by the city of Seattle, the Sonics owners have unleashed a can of preemptive chutzpah, filing a court brief in which they state:

"The financial issue is simple, and the city's analysts agree, there will be no net economic loss if the Sonics leave Seattle. Entertainment dollars not spent on the Sonics will be spent on Seattle's many other sports and entertainment options. Seattleites will not reduce their entertainment budget simply because the Sonics leave."

This is undeniably true - it's the substitution effect in a nutshell - but it is a pretty amusing thing to hear a pro sports team admit in court. At least one sports economist thinks so too:

Rodney Fort, a professor of sports management at the University of Michigan, who has criticized the economic-impact claims made by pro-sports teams, called the Sonics' latest argument "the best chuckle" he's had in a long time.

"It would seem that the value of the Sonics is a 'contingent' value - contingent on the purposes of the Sonics ownership," Fort said in an e-mail. "On the one hand, when the Sonics are trying to get the public to pitch in on a new arena, they are worth tens of millions to the Seattle area. On the other hand, when they are trying to beat their KeyArena lease, they are worth nothing to the Seattle area."

Whatever its impact on the court case, the real test will be to see what effect this has on news coverage: Now that the Sonics have all but admitted that economic-impact claims are a load of hooey, will newspaper reporters start noting that in their coverage? We'll see, but past evidence isn't real encouraging.