Sports economists say hosting Super Bowl XLIX won’t create a huge economic boost for the Phoenix, Ariz., metropolitan area, despite thousands of football fans traveling to the area.
Like most Super Bowl host cities, the Phoenix metropolitan area is already a large economy, approximately $210 billion in size. To increase the metropolitan economy by just 1 percent, the Super Bowl would have to create more than $2 billion in economic growth. For comparison, a study funded by the Arizona Super Bowl Host Committee found that visitors spent $218 million when the area hosted the Super Bowl in 2008.
“Economies in locations which are big enough to handle the Super Bowl are very large, so the local impact on the economy as a whole is really quite modest ,” Raymond Sauer, an economics professor at Clemson who founded The Sports Economist website, told the Washington Examiner. “It would have a big impact relative to the economy of Green Bay, Wis., but not so when you’re talking about Miami or Phoenix or Dallas-Fort Worth.”
Since Super Bowls are typically hosted in high-tourism cities, such as Miami, Los Angeles or Phoenix, visitors for the big game often displace other visitors. Those planning golf trips to Phoenix this winter are probably going to avoid visiting the week before or after the Super Bowl, when Super Bowl visitors have already driven up prices. Conventions or summits will locate elsewhere as the Super Bowl and related events take up valuable meeting space.
Temple University Professor Michael Leeds, the President of the North American Association of Sports Economics, told the Examiner, “I have never seen an independent academic study that has shown the benefits of the Super Bowl come anywhere close to the predictions of these booster studies,” such as studies funded by host committees. For example, a 2004 academic paper studied Super Bowls from 1970 through 2001 and found income gains were only 25 percent of the NFL’s claims. It also found a 23 percent probability of the Super Bowl having a negative economic impact.
The taxpayer costs associated with hosting the Super Bowl may even make it a net negative on the local economy. “Many studies actually find some degree of harm,” Leeds said. “Once you cover all the expenses that the city goes to and net out what the businesses would have done anyway, that the city winds up being worse off.”
Taxpayer expenses are not just limited to law enforcement monitoring Super Bowl events. NFL team owners are often able to extract taxpayer funding to help finance stadium construction or renovation. Through the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority, Arizona taxpayers contributed over $300 million to the construction of University of Phoenix Stadium, where Super Bowl XLIX will be played.
Still, some fans might still want to host the Super Bowl for the prestige and reputational benefits that come with being named a host city. “There is some evidence that the presence of a team or the presence of a special event makes people feel good about themselves, makes residents feel happy,” Leeds said. Still, any boost in reputation or happiness is unlikely to cause more tourism.
Hosting the Super Bowl might make the typical Phoenix sports fan feel better about themselves, but the economic boost is minimal at best. “Your average Joe … what’s the real benefit for him or her? … That’s where the numbers are pretty small,” Sauer said.
Fortunately, the current mayor of Glendale, Jerry Weiers, seems to be more honest about the Super Bowl’s economic reality than other officials. “I totally believe we will lose money on this,” Weiers told ESPN The Magazine.
Super Bowl XLIX kicks off this Sunday, pitting the New England Patriots against the Seattle Seahawks.
