Business Development
PR Strategies
The
Public Perception of Reality
The Key Question on which all else hinges is that of the
public perception of the reality. Public relations strategies are
needed to enable the public and officials, business persons and planners,
to facilitate getting to the same place on the same page. Public
Relations Strategies are to be used in support of the blending of
real estate and overall geographic growth into a community dialogue,
using Internet
Strategies and showing how city/regional growth
success is greatly helped by larger development entities like a newly
renovated stadium.
Assumptions
- Both/and thinking, planning, and doing,
is better than either/or.
- Any NFL team is a hot property.
- Everyone want to control their fate and
destiny, but no one acts in a vacuum.
- There is the potential of $200- $300
million yearly revenue from a mixed-use facility for all to share in a
properly sited and developed stadium that is the anchor for a mixed-use
complex, as
- making the stadium complex a real
estate development mixed use project frees up taxes and other inducements
already on the books, and
- removes the delays and red tape
of having to get jurisdictional legislation for new tax monies
- This is an economic issue (investment),
not just an emotional issue (higher taxes/free ride).
- The economically competitive issue is
a UNIVERSAL: it makes no difference which team, which city: in the 21st
century: without a new stadium, a team cannot remain competitive or appropriately
profitable.
- The issue is NOT a new stadium per se,
but who will builds it: team, community, or joint venture.
- The key to profitability in the 21st
century, is local revenues. To facilitate higher local revenues requires
snew stadiums. Those which do not get new stadiums will move to where they
can ge them.
- The NFL, as any well managed organization
that wants to survive, must necessarily do do what is good for the NFL,
and revenues are what are good for the NFL (as with any other business,
be it profit or not for profit, government or non government). Teams will
go where they'll be able to generate revenues.
- "Troubled economy" is a code
word for politicians to hide behind voters who don't want to pay more taxes
for new stadiums. That is an "either/or" approach. Beacon on
the Hill Sports Marketing can help teams employ a "both/and" approach,
facilitating a new stadium, higher local revenues, with no or minimal increases
in local taxes. Beacon on the Hill Sports Marketing can help end this unnecessary
conflict that by resolving it with appropriate conflict resolution steps.
- Where there is a partnership with a city
in which there are multiple uses for a stadium anchoring a larger development
complex, its construction costs can be taken from shared iinvestvents and
revenues.
- The issue is NOT the team. The issue
is whether a city wants to facilitate the community being able to leverage
an NFL team for the economic well being of the city.
- NO city determines whether a team goes
or stays. Only a team's owner and its contract with the city or old stadium.
It is their property. The conflict comes from falsely making the team and
the city the culprits, like two bad guys on Main Street shooting it out
at high noon. In these cases, the only ones who benefit are
- the consultants giving bad advice
leading to the shootouts, and
- the planners doing the same.
Both the shooters (team and city) lose, but the consultants and
planners still get paid. Any consultant or planner using this adversarial
model will lead to trouble. We recommend the consideration of the
18 Conflict Resolution Models on this web site
This web site can be used to resolve
these unnecessary and usually falsely based conflicts.
- The geographic market is not the issue
either, not in a day of TV when teams in smaller markets can still be competitive
because of shared revenue. The issue is how much revenue a stadium can
generate. Stadium-only revenues will no longer suffice. Mixed-use real
estate stadium complexes with stadiums as anchors are the best bet for
all.
- The only consultants that should be
used are those using models that solve the problem for both sides, recognizing
that the issue is coordinating independent actors (team and city) in the
teeth of their own autonomy. Neither controls the other. Therefore, all
either/or scenarios are disasters. ONLY both/and will win the day. As noted,
the Conflict Resolution Models on this web site can be used to resolve
these unnecessary and usually falsely based conflicts.
The Public Relations
Challenges for any team are the same:
- Demonstrating that a team and its stadium
complex is an important asset to the community and region in BOTH quantitative
economic terms AND qualitative quality of life terms
- Providing workable outside the box suggestions
that will work that can come up with a resolution for all, at once, and
thus being to avoid unneeded fights, obstructions, law suits, and other
forms of delay.
- Include all parties, public and private,
City and team, not just the city.
- Don't blame having a crummy stadium
on the City.
- Don't say its up to the city to fix
it. Make it a joint venture.
- Praise and thank the city for all the
wonderful years, and show how it can be done for the benefit of all parties,
public and private, institutional and individual.
- Do a better job of showing how the team
benefits the city by being an NFL team.
- Don't make the public have to fight
to be a part of the discussion when it should be invited in without having
to ask to be invited.
- Become more inclusive: involving county
and regional participation in the new football complex AND develop new
revenue streams, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER EITHER THE COUNTY OR REGION CONTRIBUTES
DIRECTLY (as they'll contribute indirectly by helping fill the seats
with fans and working to resolve transportation issues). Always leave the
door open for them to return to the table to participate
- Invite a wider circle of influencers.
Impact of a 1986
stadium law
Bill Bradley, opposed to local funding of stadiums (talk about biting
the hand that fed him) was a sponsor of the 1986 law that says 90% of stadium
revenues must go to the teams. He thought this would keep local governments
from taking the step. Instead of allowing shared revenues to pay for stadiums
it placed the onus on local tax payers. The unintended consequence was to place
greater burdens on cities and regions to keep their teams. Stadiums are local
problems requiring local solutions and decision makers, and should have been
left not having to deal with interference from the Feds. This is what understandably
caused the feeding frenzy of stadiums and claim of owners to the revenue. Some
now mistake this as owners fault. It is not. This web site shows how to resolve
these conflicts. And by making the stadium an anchor of a mixed-use real estate
development, it becomes a different entity. There is plenty of revenue to be
generated and, thus, revenue to be made by all, whether in the form of taxes
or in the form of profits.