Quote:
Originally Posted by powderjunkie
Arguing about the ticket tax is just stupid semantics...but I'll play too. I would certainly accept that it essentially comes from the owners side, but I think it's too simplistic to simply evaluate it as city vs. owners (and if you do want to keep it that simple, at least evaluate both the costs and the benefits to each side).
The ticket tax is most accurately a user fee. It is mostly redirected revenue, but to say that every penny of a $xx.xx ticket fee would otherwise be tacked onto the face value of a ticket. Supply and demand largely drive ticket prices, but they are not the only factors. It is a preferable set up for both general public perception and consumer behaviour. A $99 face value + $20 ticket tax + $13 in other fees + GST is going to sell more than a $135 all-in ticket. Remember, most people buy tickets in pairs or 4s, so getting an initial purchase decision at a lower cost is huge.
I do think a ticket tax is the best way to fund this project, and should be the largest possible proportion. I also think it's too simplistic to consider it all money right out of the owners' pockets.
|
So if the owners funded the entire ticket tax amount up front as an owner contribution and then decided as part of the marketing of a new arena they would have a price of tickets and an arena surcharge so that people don't get sticker shock would that be a user fee?