The Sports economy makes the world go round.

Discussion in 'Economics' started by Amran Sinha, May 7, 2007.

  1. Everyone is accustomed to the maxim 'money makes the world go round'. Certainly, this is true. And sure there are far more important things in life than Sport, like sustainable energy, global warming, space exploration etc. Nonetheless I believe the most powerful driver in maintaining and advancing the global economy is the barrage of sporting events - not free trade agreements - but rather being able to see the Champions League final on tv. World sporting events, whether they be Formula1, tennis grand slams, golf masters, football world cups, cricket series, Olympic games or even the more regular fixtures generate gazillions of dollars!! It would also seem, (especially in Australia where there are no restrictions) sport is a public good. In fact, like eduction, most sporting activity (since its difficult to categorise all sports) is a special public good where there are minimal social costs/ negative externalities. Without the income generating power of Sport and sports crazy people the world economy would collapse.
  2. Like most things, the cost of partaking in, enjoying, supporting, etc. most sports has been over-inflated...just like the going price of hiring Tom Cruise or Gwenyth Paltrow to act. If everyone decided not to pay Tom Cruise $20M movie he'd gladly take offers at $10M, I can guarantee that.

    People like Roman Abramovich and Malcolm Glazer have destroyed the fun in rooting for a team with one or two stars and instead fuel teams with nothing but big money players...although I must say I'm a Man U fan and Chelsea is 10X the worse than a team like Man U that has a lot of non-famous players who play well together, as do Arsenal and the top tier that is.

    Money can ruin a lot, and sports isn't exactly safe from the disease. The only joy I get out of the ridiculously high prices sports stars get paid is seeing the Yankees(with their payroll) lose 5 or 6 games in a row and Shevchenko essentially set his true value at $6M per goal if you divide his goal tally by his cost...then it's funny. Otherwise it's just depressing to see that a team like the Oakland A's are competing with the likes of the is pitiful enough as is. :)