Quote:
Originally Posted by Kavvy
This argument gets used again and again. While I do see the odd major concert, am I the only one who doesn't give a rats @ss if this is one area Edmonton leads us in?
Spend the money on LRT, roads, etc over getting a few more concerts every year.
|
It's all about substitution.
Calgarians went to 41% as many concert-seats as Edmontonians did. So what are the implications?
1) Calgarians aren't as interested in concerts and just don't spend as much money on entertainment (that seems
very unlikely)
2) Calgarians are substituting other things instead of concerts (the libarary, the zoo?)
3) Calgarians are going elsewhere for concerts, such as Edmonton, Vancouver, Phoenix and Las Vegas.
#3 is both the most likely explanation, and - by a mile - the worst, because if they are going to other cities to see concerts, they aren't just spending their concert money elsewhere, they are also attending bars and restaurants, spending travel dollars, shopping, etc.
And that's the multiplier effect. It's impossible to quantify. But suggesting it doesn't exist is just silly.
I will get roasted for this by a certain segment of the poster-base but pretty much everyone I know does the majority of their 'concerting' in Vegas and Phoenix.
Obviously that's anecdotal. And obviously, that doesn't represent everyone. And of course, people would still do some of that even if we had more top concerts here. But the bottom line is that some of that money would stay in the city, pay taxes here, fill our restaurants, etc.
People can glibly say "I don't care if we are missing concerts" (and I don't go to concerts anymore, personally), but to suggest it doesn't affect he city, and to suggest we aren't losing entertainment revenue, restaurant and bar revenue, and significant local tax revenue, is flat out blind denial.
To the bold: the extra taxes means more city revenue for all those things you want