News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Las Vegas 'temporary' bridge(s) for F1 race

Started by rickmastfan67, November 14, 2023, 09:00:02 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

The Nature Boy

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2023, 07:18:31 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 16, 2023, 06:02:41 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on November 16, 2023, 05:38:54 AM
Quote from: Big John on November 15, 2023, 04:53:28 AM
Hmm they conveniently left that part out.  It said organizers and hotels were trying to charge exorbitant rares and needed to greatly reduce prices due to lack of demand.

The economic benefits/costs of F1 are being questioned by some as the date approaches.

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/as-vegas-f1-race-approaches-questions-loom-over-lofty-economic-projections
Looks like many large scale events are no longer that big of an economic boost they used to be (if they actually were)
Olympics are often coming into discussion as an example of such event.

I'd argue they often never were the economic boost touted. Cities love to say events bring big money to cities, and there's something to be said for successful events leaving an impression on visitors that may encourage them to travel to the city. But by in large, many events are hyped at first then prices fall. Locals may not come out at much. Well known tourist spots and restaurants may see a boost in revenue, but the smaller places visited by locals often see drops. And even restaurants and bars that are popular to begin with, you're not going to make much more money if they're already filled or booked nornally.

And these are events with facilities already in place. Vegas has been a construction zone for several months. Not really the impression first time and occasional visitors want to see where they get no benefit, and have to deal with other inconveniences.

This is the argument that the anti-public funding for sports arenas crowd misses. Will a city recoup the financial costs of a sports venue? Probably not, but the city may find value in the non-monetary benefits (increased civic pride and increased profile of the city). An an increased profile could lead to more money, but it's difficult to capture that in a study of a stadium's impact.


Rothman

Quote from: The Nature Boy on November 16, 2023, 07:40:32 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 16, 2023, 07:18:31 AM
Quote from: kalvado on November 16, 2023, 06:02:41 AM
Quote from: Ted$8roadFan on November 16, 2023, 05:38:54 AM
Quote from: Big John on November 15, 2023, 04:53:28 AM
Hmm they conveniently left that part out.  It said organizers and hotels were trying to charge exorbitant rares and needed to greatly reduce prices due to lack of demand.

The economic benefits/costs of F1 are being questioned by some as the date approaches.

https://thenevadaindependent.com/article/as-vegas-f1-race-approaches-questions-loom-over-lofty-economic-projections
Looks like many large scale events are no longer that big of an economic boost they used to be (if they actually were)
Olympics are often coming into discussion as an example of such event.

I'd argue they often never were the economic boost touted. Cities love to say events bring big money to cities, and there's something to be said for successful events leaving an impression on visitors that may encourage them to travel to the city. But by in large, many events are hyped at first then prices fall. Locals may not come out at much. Well known tourist spots and restaurants may see a boost in revenue, but the smaller places visited by locals often see drops. And even restaurants and bars that are popular to begin with, you're not going to make much more money if they're already filled or booked nornally.

And these are events with facilities already in place. Vegas has been a construction zone for several months. Not really the impression first time and occasional visitors want to see where they get no benefit, and have to deal with other inconveniences.

This is the argument that the anti-public funding for sports arenas crowd misses. Will a city recoup the financial costs of a sports venue? Probably not, but the city may find value in the non-monetary benefits (increased civic pride and increased profile of the city). An an increased profile could lead to more money, but it's difficult to capture that in a study of a stadium's impact.
Difficult to capture = not likely to be quantifiably significant.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Ted$8roadFan

And now, with the Athletics moving to Las Vegas with the prospect of public funding, the cost-benefit analysis will also be tested (and challenged):

https://www.kron4.com/news/bay-area/nevada-teachers-group-intends-to-sue-over-money-approved-to-fund-as-stadium/

US 89

Sports teams and major events absolutely do raise the public profile of a city. The 2002 Olympics, for example, were huge for Salt Lake City and while the area likely would have grown significantly this century no matter what, the Olympics were almost certainly a nonzero contributor to that. (They also helped kickstart the gradual process of modernizing the state's liquor laws, which I am all for.) Likewise, a place like Jacksonville almost certainly benefits from the Jaguars being there.

The issue with Vegas is it already has a huge national and international profile. It's not like having one more event or sports team there is going to be much more than a drop in the bucket for its popularity on that scale.

jeffandnicole

So apparently the F1 ain't going so well. 8 minutes into practice, a concrete form around a manhole cover failed, wrecking a car's floor. No word on any refunds attendees will receive after shelling out hundreds for a ticket to view the trials, not to mention the overpriced hotel accommodations they paid for.

SSR_317

Quote from: jeffandnicole on November 17, 2023, 09:11:44 PM
So apparently the F1 ain't going so well. 8 minutes into practice, a concrete form around a manhole cover failed, wrecking a car's floor. No word on any refunds attendees will receive after shelling out hundreds for a ticket to view the trials, not to mention the overpriced hotel accommodations they paid for.
Apparently, Nevada state law prohibited the organizers from welding the manhole covers, which is usually standard practice for street course auto races throughout the world. Just goes to show how incompetent these promoters were that a proper method of securing those items was not identified and implemented before allowing cars onto this circuit.

Also, the reason spectators were sent packing was that the security people (and vendors) were all at the end of their shifts and could not legally be compelled to stay on-duty any longer while officials secured all the similar fixtures on the track. Rather than postpone the practice session to the next morning, they ran it at 4 am local time in front of no spectators. The condensed schedule of the weekend no doubt contributed to that decision, which pleased no one... other than the European fan base who could watch it live on TV at a more convenient time.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.