[valo403]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Ahem...

http://deadspin.com/5946564/no-the-c...on-is-canceled

These stadium economic impact projections always contain the same fallacy. They assume that if people aren't spending their money on sporting events, they're not going to spend it at all. That's not true. People tend to spend whatever disposable income they have, and if they're not going to hockey games, they're going to do something else with it. More trips to bars, restaurants, concerts, etc. So a lockout could actually funnel more money back to the city—if Ilitch didn't also own concert venues, movie theaters, food distribution companies, restaurants, the Tigers, and a casino.

A lockout hurts the players, the fans, and the owners who aren't losing money on their teams. The Red Wings are one of those few teams in a good hockey market, turning a big profit—Ilitch doesn't want a lockout. (As we explained, this is about big market owners vs. small market owners, rather than owners vs. players.) Nobody wants there to be hockey more than Mike Ilitch. Hell, he's publicly spoken out against the salary cap. Because he's the one who stands to lose tens of millions, not the city of Detroit. Detroit would take a very minor hit, nothing it can't handle. To imply otherwise is baseless scaremongering.

Funny that they use Detroit there seeing as it's one of the cities that stands to lose big time due to the lockout. Going to a Wings game is pretty much the only reason a lot of people ever venture to downtown Detroit during the winter. People will still be spending sure, but they'll be doing it in Royal Oak, Livonia and Windsor.