Many businesses get tax breaks and such which I would consider a type of subsidy. I don't know of any getting direct payments from the state, but I also don't know of many that bring as much outside money into the state or outside money into New Orleans as do the Saints.

NOTE: I am against the way Benson is handling things and I don't particularly care for the amount we are paying especially in light of his unwillingness to oopen his books. I do believe that even after these payments are made the state is making some money or New Orleans is making some money. I just don't want my statements criticizing this poll to undermine my original premise on the subject.

So let me get this straight. You think there's really a difference in tax credits and incentive payments?

Payments-I give you 100 dollars, but forcibly take 200 dollars from you.
Tax credits- I forcibly take 100 dollars from you, instead of 200.

Yeah, thats a huge difference. LOL.

Direct Payment v. Tax Break (Normal tax rate: 40%, Incentive: 20%, break: 20%)


High Income Year ($100 Million)
Tax Break: $20 Million. Saints save $20 million, state makes $20 million. Win win.
Direct Payment: $15

Zero Income
Tax Break: Saints save zero, state makes zero. Both are not impacted by the other.
Direct Payment: $15 million. Saints win big, state loses big.

Get the difference?



The total economic impact of the Convention Center in 2003 was $2.56 billion.

The total economic impact of the Convention Center in 2003 was $2.56 billion.

The Saints claim to be worth $400 million in economic impact on the State in a year, according to an impact study which I, personally, don't believe. But if you take that as true, then does it stand to reason that if $737 million is not enough for the Saints over the next 20 years, then the State should also be willing to spend nearly $5 BILLION on the convention center in the next 20 years????

I mean, it generates FAR more money than the Saints.


The Saints claimed to have $7.8 million in Operating Income in 2004. You're telling me that there are few businesses in the State that don't have a greater economic impact?

Every national retailer in the State of LA generates more taxable revenue than the Saints. The Saints generated $33 million in total gate receipts last season. Think Walmart generates $33 million in revenue in LA? Think that they employ more people? Where's there $15 million per year subsidy?


There were over 2.1 million night stays booked in hotels in New Orleans last year. I'd be shocked if in the 8 games that the Saints play they generated 100,000 of those nights. What's a stay at a hotel in NO cost? $100 a night? $200? That's $400 million in economic impact right there and the Hotels are taxed MORE than average. Where's their subsidy?

Bottom line - the Saints are a big business, but more importantly they are a status symbol. It is important for the State to try to keep them, but to suggest that they are truly one of the most important economic contributors to the State is just unrealistic. I bet the River Boat Pilots generate more revenue in a year than the Saints.

If there are 1 million people in NO (there are roughly 1.33 in the metro area according to the 2000 census), then the tourism industry in New Orleans alone generates $8.9 BILLION in annual economic impact. That's more than 22 times the $400 million that the Saints claim to generate (which is a questionable figure to begin with).

So, if your argument is that the Saints generate important and necessary money for the State, and as a result they are worth paying to keep amongst the most profitable in the industry, why shouldn't the state agree to spend $16 BILLION over the next 20 years ($737 million x 22) on improving and supporting the tourism industry in New Orleans alone?

After all, tourism is FAR more important to the State than the Saints. Tourism in New Orleans has declined in recent years. Hotels, restuarants, and other tourism-related businesses have lost money - shouldn't the State be concerned and willing to pay them to keep their profits up and keep tourists coming to NO? After all, tourism is the largest industry in the State. :)

Yes, I know it's apples and oranges. The point is that saying that the Saints generate money and therefore they deserve to gets some back for free is bad logic... unless you're willing to apply that to every industry - which, of course, as this demonstrates, is assinine.

And if they said NOT ONE SINGLE businesses in LA will get a dime of my money I'd be all for NOT giving any to the Saints. But they don't. They pick and choose who they want to give my money to.

When tax and spend democrats starts spouting fiscal responsibility, I call BS on that.

agree wit Scotty, depends on who was polled. put it to a vote and the fans might not win, but it wont be a 3:1 margin!

This is getting dangerously close to a political debate, so I'll proceed carefully. Let me ask two questions:

1. Can you name any other business in the State of Louisiana that gets its subsidies through direct payments from the State, as compared to through tax breaks?

2. I can name lots of businesses with greater "economic impact" than the Saints that operate in Louisiana. Can you name any business that has a larger subsidy relative to its economic impact than the Saints?

Those two issues, in my mind, make this a different question than with any other business in the State.