The Super Bowl is happening again this weekend, so I hear, and with the game taking place in the Los Angeles Rams‘ new stadium in Inglewood, it’s time for the nation’s news media to lose their collective shit over how transformative the new building will be for the city. Let’s watch!
- Spectrum News reports that the stadium has “transformed a neighborhood” that had “a perceived rough reputation” and the Super Bowl “highlights the amount of commercial development happening in the town to the tens of millions of viewers tuning into the game.” The article cites Roy Weinstein, managing director of consultants Micronomics — whose main expertise appears to be in intellectual property rights — as saying the Super Bowl itself will have an economic impact of between $234 million and $477 million.
- The Los Angeles Times reports that the Rams stadium has sent housing prices soaring by 84% since 2016, resulting in a “crisis for renters,” who make up about two-thirds of Inglewood residents.
- Sports Illustrated says residents are charging fans $1,000 a car to park on their lawns for the Super Bowl, but also traffic is such a nightmare on game days that sometimes they can’t get out of their driveways.
The takeaway is clear: An NFL stadium makes stuff happen, for good and bad! But let’s take a closer look at some of the claims.
First off, that $477 million in economic impact can easily be dispensed with: While numbers like these are claimed by the league and sports media every Super Bowl season, when economists look at the actual figures after the game has been held, they typically find numbers only about one-tenth that size. And “economic impact,” remember, is just the amount of money changing hands in your city; the actual impact in terms of added tax revenues will be a further fraction of that fraction, likely in the single millions of dollars, less than you’ll end up spending on added policing for the game.
As for the soaring rents, that’s a tougher call without a more specific breakdown of what exactly is going on with the Inglewood real estate market. Sports venues and other splashy projects certainly can act as giant billboards for new development; that’s one reason lots of developers choose to build them. But housing prices are going nuts in all of Southern California, and the way gentrification works is that lower-income areas like Inglewood will likely see the biggest price increases as wealthier residents spill over from areas that are already full up. The Times story reports that median home sales prices in Inglewood have risen a consistent $25,000 a year since the Rams moved back to L.A. and started stadium construction in 2016, but correlation is not causation, so more research is needed to determine if it’s really a big-ass stadium open 20-30 days a year that’s causing Inglewood housing prices to soar, or if this is like margarine consumption causing divorces in Maine.
One interesting item along those lines: The Times cites a local real estate broker as saying that people are eager to live near the stadium — but then, there are those poor residents in the SI story who are trapped in their homes on game days, so which is it, is the stadium a boon or a blight? Or are people moving to Inglewood because they like the view of a giant alien structure surrounded by parking lots, but then find that it’s a nightmare because of all the cars driving to those parking lots? Or does the stadium have nothing to do with the real estate boom, beyond giving the real estate press an excuse to write about how hot the Inglewood housing market is, which of course serves to make the Inglewood housing market even hotter? The science of housing values has a lot of strange feedback loops that are beyond the scope of this post — though I hope to explore them further someday — but suffice to say that pointing at a new stadium and some yuppies moving to town at the same time and saying “Look, see!” isn’t science, let alone journalism.


