And if another city is willing to pay for a stadium, then the team should move there. They should take the best offer.

The markets of NY and LA and Dallas don’t need to pay to keep their franchises because the owners make so much money there.

But if you’re an owner in Jacksonville or Oakland, and another city of comparable size says “we want you here and we will pay for your stadium for you to come here,” then you should go to the best offer.

There are more cities wanting a franchise than there are franchises. Therefore the scarce resource wins. NFL franchises are the hot blonde cheerleader in high school. You’ve got to take her to nice restaurants and pick her up in your dad’s Porsche or she’ll find another guy who will.

This is even more true in the NBA because the NFL profit sharing means that you can still make great money in Jacksonville or Green Bay. But the nba is different. Seattle doesn’t want to pay for a stadium? Fine go to OKC where they appreciate you and will pay for your stadium so you can make more.

From a city standpoint, it is also usually worth it to pay for the stadium. The Jazz provided much needed cred to the state for years. Cities and stadiums revitalize areas, give your city a marketing boost, and if you don’t have a team you aren’t a real city. What would Green Bay be without the packers? Gary Indiana… even if it isn’t financially viable in the short term, the intangible advantages mean it is worth it.