Economic Voodoo Weasel Style

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

B. Lafferty wrote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

Daly will probably look at the Boston model and build a new Convention
Center just like they did.
http://www.pioneerinstitute.org/rese...apers/wp01.cfm
They did build it and nobody came or is coming. They were just
discussing this because when the Patriots built Foxboro Stadium with
their own money they planned to be able to use it all year round and
found out what businesses and groups really wanted, and what they could
make money on. They have been booked pretty much solid this off season,
and are talking about building an additional hotel and seperate
rational sized center that they are already sure they could lease
calendar dates to groups in 5-10 year blocks for a discount. It's
amazing how much better people who actually have to make a profit
understand and run things as compared to politicians who just keep
jacking up taxes to cover their incompetence, or line their friends
pockets.
Bill C

B. Lafferty wrote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL



The last line in the article: an absolute classic.


"The only interesting thing about this race ... is our city,'' he said.


Magilla

"B. Lafferty" wrote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

The Laffer Curve is real. Here it is a question of where SF and the race tax
revenues are on the curve.

B. Lafferty wrote:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

Does this mean I won't get to meet Papai-hole? D-Damn.
-D-DA74

gwhite wrote:
"B. Lafferty" wrote:


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

The Laffer Curve is real. Here it is a question of where SF and the
race tax
revenues are on the curve.

Considering that one of SF's big economic activities is tourism, and
given the fact that they get a fair number of Euro riders who have done
well here. It seems to me that they could pretty easily make up a
couple hundred grand difference just with the amount of advertising
they could get for tourism by giving/selling Euro broadcast rights to
say Eurosport or Sky.
There are so many ways to cover that amount of money in tourism
marketing from the race it's ridiculously short sighted to not use it
that way. I'm not sure what the advertising budget, and what the
returns for SF are from it's tourism and convention bureau, but my
guess is that they could come up with a lot of ways to turn a profit
well above the disputed figure from Euro tourism and the businesses
that would gain from it for the whole year.
Bill C

Bill C wrote:
gwhite wrote:

"B. Lafferty" wrote:


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

The Laffer Curve is real. Here it is a question of where SF and the

race tax

revenues are on the curve.


Considering that one of SF's big economic activities is tourism, and
given the fact that they get a fair number of Euro riders who have done
well here. It seems to me that they could pretty easily make up a
couple hundred grand difference just with the amount of advertising
they could get for tourism by giving/selling Euro broadcast rights to
say Eurosport or Sky.

snip

Bill C

So you think the city of San Francisco owns the TV rights to the race?
And you also think the city could somehow charge for advertising - how
would they do that?


Thanks,

Magilla

Bill C wrote:

gwhite wrote:

"B. Lafferty" wrote:


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

The Laffer Curve is real. Here it is a question of where SF and the

race tax

revenues are on the curve.


Considering that one of SF's big economic activities is tourism, and
given the fact that they get a fair number of Euro riders who have done
well here. It seems to me that they could pretty easily make up a
couple hundred grand difference just with the amount of advertising
they could get for tourism by giving/selling Euro broadcast rights to
say Eurosport or Sky.
There are so many ways to cover that amount of money in tourism
marketing from the race it's ridiculously short sighted to not use it
that way. I'm not sure what the advertising budget, and what the
returns for SF are from it's tourism and convention bureau, but my
guess is that they could come up with a lot of ways to turn a profit
well above the disputed figure from Euro tourism and the businesses
that would gain from it for the whole year.
Bill C


Do you have any idea how much revenue needs to be spent by tourists in
the city in order for the city to break even on the TAXES collected from
that tourism revenue?

All the taxes from tourism barely covers police costs. The city doesn't
make any money on the race.

Now you know why the dot.com crash happened in Silicon Valley, only a
stone's throw away.

Thanks,

Magilla

MagillaGorilla wrote:
Bill C wrote:

gwhite wrote:

"B. Lafferty" wrote:



http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

The Laffer Curve is real. Here it is a question of where SF and
the

race tax

revenues are on the curve.


Considering that one of SF's big economic activities is tourism,
and
given the fact that they get a fair number of Euro riders who have
done
well here. It seems to me that they could pretty easily make up a
couple hundred grand difference just with the amount of advertising
they could get for tourism by giving/selling Euro broadcast rights
to
say Eurosport or Sky.
There are so many ways to cover that amount of money in tourism
marketing from the race it's ridiculously short sighted to not use
it
that way. I'm not sure what the advertising budget, and what the
returns for SF are from it's tourism and convention bureau, but my
guess is that they could come up with a lot of ways to turn a
profit
well above the disputed figure from Euro tourism and the businesses
that would gain from it for the whole year.
Bill C


Do you have any idea how much revenue needs to be spent by tourists
in
the city in order for the city to break even on the TAXES collected
from
that tourism revenue?

All the taxes from tourism barely covers police costs. The city
doesn't
make any money on the race.

Now you know why the dot.com crash happened in Silicon Valley, only a

stone's throw away.

Thanks,

Magilla

The question is, how much money is SF spending every year on promoting
tourism?
Boston, and Mass. spend a ****load of cash every year to promote
tourism. I know that a lot of the funding for this comes from a
combination of government and private sources, but the SFGP should
still be an easy sell. How hard would it be for the SF government to
negotiate for control of the Euro broadcast rights in trade for the
reducing the police fee. Add up what the cost is per minute for running
commercials and tell me that they can't come out ahead here with some
decent planing and marketing. It may be that the Weasel would hold them
up for a better deal, but it just seems to me that given the level of
exposure, cost of national and international airtime, and positive
image boost for an anti-Bush city that they could make a whole lot more
back over a full fiscal year by doing this intelligently.
I have no doubvt that you could smoke me on a bike, but I've had a
ringside seat watching my old man make more money than most people
could spend. One of the NYC Goldfarbs was my brothers godfather. If you
can't bring experience with a net worth of at least 30 mil to the table
don't bother. He had the Mass. Governor and Billy Bulger on speed dial.
Bill C

Bill C wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:

Bill C wrote:


gwhite wrote:


"B. Lafferty" wrote:


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGGVBUOVE1.DTL

The Laffer Curve is real. Here it is a question of where SF and

the

race tax


revenues are on the curve.


Considering that one of SF's big economic activities is tourism,

and

given the fact that they get a fair number of Euro riders who have

done

well here. It seems to me that they could pretty easily make up a
couple hundred grand difference just with the amount of advertising
they could get for tourism by giving/selling Euro broadcast rights

to

say Eurosport or Sky.
There are so many ways to cover that amount of money in tourism
marketing from the race it's ridiculously short sighted to not use

it

that way. I'm not sure what the advertising budget, and what the
returns for SF are from it's tourism and convention bureau, but my
guess is that they could come up with a lot of ways to turn a

profit

well above the disputed figure from Euro tourism and the businesses
that would gain from it for the whole year.
Bill C


Do you have any idea how much revenue needs to be spent by tourists

in

the city in order for the city to break even on the TAXES collected

from

that tourism revenue?

All the taxes from tourism barely covers police costs. The city

doesn't

make any money on the race.

Now you know why the dot.com crash happened in Silicon Valley, only a


stone's throw away.

Thanks,

Magilla


The question is, how much money is SF spending every year on promoting
tourism?
Boston, and Mass. spend a ****load of cash every year to promote
tourism. I know that a lot of the funding for this comes from a
combination of government and private sources, but the SFGP should
still be an easy sell. How hard would it be for the SF government to
negotiate for control of the Euro broadcast rights in trade for the
reducing the police fee.

snip
Bill C


Threshold would never give that up. Besides, the race rights are not
worth more than the police bill.

I doubt they could get $100k from Eurosport, if that. The police bill
is over $400k


Thanks,


Magilla