The Tiger Chasm

tiger_woods121507.jpgThe rumblings from the last week’s decision to discontinue the popular International PGA Tour event at Castle Pines are still reverberating through the golf world, and Golf Digest’s John Hawkins isn’t pulling any punches:

The death of the International last week, however, was a big deal for a bunch of reasons. If no longer a marquee non-major, this was a solid mid-level tour stop in a major metropolitan market–not some CVS Charity Classic or B.C. Open. It is by far the most notable tournament loss in Tim Finchem’s 13 years as commissioner. Ten months ago Denver was on the short list of potential hosts for a FedEx Cup playoff tilt. Now the Mile High City is six feet under. “Players aren’t going to react well to this,” says eight-year veteran Joe Ogilvie, a member of the tour’s policy board. “You can’t do a better job of running an event than Jack Vickers and the people at Castle Pines.”[ . . .]
The International’s demise is a dangerous sign as to the widening chasm between Tiger events and the non-Tigers. Never have the haves and have-nots been so easily defined or so mindlessly categorized by the presence of a single player–it’s the frightening downside of Woods’ competitive dictatorship. When he doubles the size of a viewing audience in a strong golf economy, the rich get richer. When he does it in lean times, the poor get really poor.

Along the same lines, ESPN.com’s Bob Harig discusses the increasing risk of putting on a non-Tiger tour event:

Sponsoring a regular PGA Tour event costs in the neighborhood of $7 million per year. That money covers a portion of the purse, a television advertising commitment, a fee to the PGA Tour and to the tournament. Spread that out over the six-year length of the network contracts, and you’re talking about $42 million or more.
It is a hefty price, especially given the modest television ratings. Those small numbers — usually in the 2 million-to-3 million range for a weekend network telecast — were always justified because they were reaching the “right” kind of people Ö i.e. those with disposable income. With golf, less meant more.
But as the price has kept going up, those company executives began looking at the numbers more closely. And some of them have started to say that enough is enough — especially if Woods doesn’t play.

And guess what side of that chasm the Shell Houston Open is on?

Evaluating jock broadcasting

Microphone.jpgCharlie Pallilo passes along this clever Chuck Klosterman/Esquire article that compares the playing careers of various former professional athletes with their current careers as broadcasters. Klosterman is on target with most of his comparisons, including this one on Bill Walton:

Bill Walton: A megalomaniac whose insights often seem wholly unrelated to the game he’s actively watching, Walton has an on-air persona that can be akin to Jerry Garcia vomiting through a version of “Sugar Magnolia.” That said, the Red Rocker is fearless and unpredictable, and the fact that Walton overcame a childhood stutter makes his loquaciousness something of a marvel. Still, this guy (when healthy) was probably the most complete post player who ever lived; he’ll never argue with Snapper Jones as efficiently as he threw outlet passes to Larry Steele. Better as a player.

Klosterman also nails it in pointing out that Bill Rafferty puts fellow basketball analysts Billy Packer and Dick Vitale to shame. Here is the entire piece.

Baby talk on energy?

WSJ%20logo2.gifSo, I think it’s safe to say that, after this blog post, Cato’s Jerry Taylor is not going to be asked to contribute a piece to the Wall Street Journal’s ($) next special section on alternative energy:

One could spend a lifetime slamming dross in the news pages of the Wall Street Journal – particularly when it comes to energy. Only the driving need to be more productive with my time keeps me from doing so on a daily basis. But when something as bad as this insert comes along, something must be said.

Taylor is not impressed with Houston-based Peak Oil advocate, Matt Simmons, either:

Moving right along, page two features recommended readings from Matthew Simmons, the most prominent proponent of the idea that the worldís oil fields are about to run dry. This, to put it charitably, is a minority perspective among oil analysts. That the Journal turns to someone like Simmons – and only Simmons – to lay in print the groundwork for readers interested in knowing more about the oil industry speaks volumes. Much more intelligent conversations about oil with Daniel Yergin and Robert Mabro are briefly referenced as on-line supplements.

Then, Taylor takes off on the John Biers article about Houston’s leadership in promoting alternative energy initiatives:

Reporter John Biers mails in a vacuous piece titled ìTexasí New Teaî about how Houston is poised to become the center of the renewable energy biz, transforming the former oil town into the international headquarters of Big Green, Inc.. While his article might as well have been written by the cityís Chamber of Commerce, it would be nice to provide some perspective. For example, how much capital is flowing in to Houston to underwrite renewable energy investments versus how much capital is glowing in to Houston to underwrite fossil energy investments? I can guarantee you that the dollars associated with the latter are light years beyond those associated with the former and that rising oil prices are doing far more for the cityís economic health than anything else. He might have also asked how much of that venture capital is being driven by government regulation and subsidies. The answer would be ìall of itî – which speaks volumes about how precarious those investments might be.

Here is Taylor’s entire piece. Enjoy.

The depravity of prison

Shawshank.jpgRegular readers of this blog know that I frequently criticize the deplorable condition of Houston’s local jail facilities. Also, it will surprise no one that I don’t agree with the governmental policy of throwing wealthy businesspeople in prison for engaging in merely questionable business transactions, and I also am not supportive of the largely futile policy of locking up thousands of citizens for nothing more than a personal drug problem. Not to mention the absurdity of locking up legitimate businesspeople who simply facilitate bettors engaging in online gambling.
One of the primary reasons for my opposition to needless imprisonment of citizens is the deplorable state of many American prisons. Inasmuch as I visit jails and prisons from time to time, I am not surprised by the foreboding nature of this Christopher Hayes post (HT Ezra Klein) excerpting a part of this Human Rights Watch report on prison rape. The story reinforces graphically why imprisonment is a horrifically overused remedy in America’s criminal justice system.
Not all prisons in the United States are like the one described in the report. But many — particularly in the widely inconsistent state systems — are every bit as bad. And don’t think for a minute that all public officials are particularly interested in changing the status quo. Remember when the attorney general of California once suggested a similar fate to the one described above for the late Ken Lay? The deeply ingrained inhumanity of many American prison systems is one of the primary reasons to be vigilant in opposing the demagogues in our society who advocate increasing criminalization and imprisonment of American citizens.
In this timely National Journal op-ed,, Stuart Taylor examines the brutality of America’s sentencing laws, noting that a “world-record 2.2 million people [populate] our nation’s prisons and jails. Justice aside, there are better ways to spend scarce tax dollars.” Meanwhile, Scott Henson reports on the status of current legislative efforts to bring sanity to the Texas prison system.

The fading allure of the “Superstar Cities”

night%20Houston%20skyline.jpgUrban economics expert Joel Kotkin (previous posts here) reports on the myth of the “superstar cities” in this WSJ ($) article and he sums up the bullish prospects of cities such as Houston in comparison to supposed superstar cities such as New York, San Francisco and Boston:

Economic and demographic trends suggest that the future of American urbanism lies not in the elite cities but in younger, more affordable and less self-regarding places.
Over the past 15 years, it has been opportunistic newcomers — Houston, Charlotte, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Dallas, Riverside — that have created the most new jobs and gained the most net domestic migration. In contrast there has been virtually negligible long-term net growth in jobs or positive domestic migration to places like New York, Los Angeles, Boston or the San Francisco Bay Area.
What as much as anything distinguishes elite places — what Wharton real-estate professor Joe Gyourko calls “the superstar cities” — are their absurdly high real-estate prices. New York, Boston, San Francisco and Los Angeles have long been more expensive than, say, Dallas, Houston or Phoenix — but in recent years the difference in price, he calculates, has increased beyond all reason. San Francisco prices since 1950, for example, have grown at twice the national rate for the 50 largest metropolitan areas.[. . .]
This perhaps explains why the largest companies — with the notable exception of Silicon Valley — have continued to move toward the more opportunistic cities. New York and its environs, for example, had 140 such firms in 1960; in 2006 the number had dropped to less than half that, some of those running with only skeleton top management. Houston, in contrast, had only one Fortune 500 company in 1960; today it is home to over 20. Houston companies tend to staff heavily locally; this is one reason the city was able to replace New York and other high-cost locales as the nation’s unchallenged energy capital. Another example of this trend is Charlotte’s rise as the nation’s second-ranked banking center in terms of assets, surpassing San Francisco, Chicago and Los Angeles, indeed all superstar cities except New York.

Houston’s own urban policy wonk, Tory Gattis, has more of the Kotkin article and provides his own series of posts on why young cities such as Houston are well-positioned to take advantage of opportunities that are not rich enough for the superstar cities. Not a bad position to be in, folks.

Five big health care issues

stethoscope021407.jpgEconLog’s Arnold Kling, who is doing some of the best thinking these days on reforming America’s dysfunctional health care finance system, identifies in this TCS Daily op-ed the five big questions in health care:

1. What will we do about the large projected deficit in Medicare?
2. What can we do to reduce government subsidies for extravagant use of medical procedures with high costs and low benefits?
3. What should we do about the health care needs of the very poor?
4. What should we do about the health care needs of the very sick?
5. What should we do about a scenario in which both income inequality and the share of average income devoted to health care rise sharply?

Kling goes on to discuss our social fetish with health insurance, which is really not insurance at all:

If you ask me what kind of health insurance I would like for my family, my instinct is to answer, “None.” The only reason we have health insurance now is to avoid the stigma of being called “uninsured.”
Somehow, health insurance has become a social fetish. I could travel to the far reaches of the globe, and almost everywhere I would find merchants where my credit is good and my dollars are welcome. But here at home, trying to enter a local hospital with nothing but a wad of cash and a credit card would be like urinating on the sidewalk.

Read Kling’s entire piece. As the WSJ’s ($) Holman Jenkins pointed out awhile back, government policy has exacerbated these issues and is unlikely to solve them through greater involvement in the system:

The tax code is the original hectoring mommy behind our health-care neuroses. It gives the biggest subsidy to those who need it least. It pays the affluent to buy more medical care than they would if they were spending their own money. It prompts them to launder our health spending through an insurance bureaucracy, creating endless paperwork. It prices millions of less-favored taxpayers out of the market for health insurance. It fosters a misconception that health care is free even as workers are perplexed over the failure of their wages to rise.

The legend of Pistol Pete

Pistol%20Pete2.jpgPistol Pete Maravich was a paradox, an incredible basketball player blessed with a talent on the level of a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird and Michael Jordan, but cursed with a celebrity that ultimately made him the Elvis of basketball. During a remarkable brief period in the late 1960’s, Maravich, Rick Mount at Purdue and Calvin Murphy at Niagara put on a shooting and scoring competition in college basketball that had never been seen before and will likely never be seen again. Maravich was the best all-around player of the three, a veritable Jerry West clone with a touch of Bob Cousy, Steve Nash and Harlem Globetrotter thrown in for good measure. It is no stretch to say that Pistol Pete is responsible for introducing professional basketball to the entertaining way in which such top flight NBA teams as the Phoenix Suns and the Dallas Mavericks play the game today.
I didn’t have an opportunity to watch Maravich play in person while he was in college and basketball wasn’t on television anywhere near as much back then as it is now, so Maravich’s brilliance while playing at LSU wasn’t see much outside of Louisiana and the SEC college towns. But after moving to Houston in the early 1970’s, I saw Maravich play the Rockets many times and he was clearly way ahead of his time. This NY Times Sunday Book Review reviews a couple of new biographies of Maravich, inluding “Pistol” by former New York Daily News sports columnist Mark Kriegel. I picked up a copy of “Pistol” at the bookstore last week and it was like reading a Maravich-led fast break — you can breeze through it no time.
The book is as much about Pistol Pete’s father Press as it is about Pete. Press was an excellent basketball player in his day and went on to become a well-regarded high school and college coach. However, as Press became obsessed with making Pistol the best player ever, his coaching and fathering became compromised. Although that part of the story is sad in many respects, it’s still interesting to learn how Press trained young Pete to become a basketball phenom. In one drill, Press would make young Pete lie prone in the backseat of a moving car and dribble a basketball out the door while Press sped the car up or slowed it down, testing Pete’s reflexes and ability to control the ball. Press would proudly show his son off to other coaches and players, almost like a circus act.
Press’ obsession produced a remarkable basketball talent. Maravich averaged an NCAA record 44.2 points a game in his three seasons at LSU before basketball adopted the three-point line. Given Pistol’s shooting range, he certainly would have averaged over 50 points a game during his collegiate career had the three-point line been in effect. He was named the college basketball player of the year in 1970 and and was signed by the Atlanta Hawks after a bidding war between the Hawks and the Carolina franchise of the old ABA.
But there was also a huge toll to what Press had created. Pistol was already a heavy drinker and quite likely an alcoholic. Pistol needed the ball in hands most of the time to be effective, which some pro players resented. And Press wasn’t around in Atlanta as the coach to coddle his basketball creation (Press was LSU’s coach while Pistol played there).
So, after four mostly disappointing seasons in Atlanta, Maravich was traded to the expansion New Orleans Jazz, which was just the NBA’s ticket to fill the then new Superdome. Back home, Pistol won his first NBA scoring title in 1977, averaging 31.1 points a game. In one memorable game at the Superdome, Maravich torched the Knicks for 68 points in a game that many longtime NBA fans still consider the best individual performance in NBA history.
But Bourbon Street was not a good training table for Maravich, who also suffered a serious knee injury in New Orleans that undermined the quickness that had made his floor game so extraordinary. After kicking around the NBA for a few more seasons, the bright flame of Pistol Pete’s basketball genius flared out.
However, in a fascinating twist, Pistol Pete’s life became even more interesting after he quit playing basketball for a living. Pete watched Press raise a grandaughter the way he should have raised Pete and, spurred by an embrace of evangelical Christianity, Pistol cared for his ailing father lovingly during his dying days. Then, as quick as one of his no-look passes, Pete was gone, too, felled by a congenital heart defect at the age of 40 while playing a pick-up game in a church gym.
Sadly, much of the video of Maravich during his salad days at LSU was stolen years ago and has never been recovered. So, much of the legacy of this remarkable talent must be passed along by those of us who were blessed to see him play. Thus, as you watch Steve Nash put together a third straight MVP-caliber season this year for the Phoenix Suns, recognize that, in many respects, you are watching the modern version of Pistol Pete Maravich.

The Razorback Soap Opera

Razorback.jpgLast week, it was the institutionalized fanaticism of signing day in minor league professional football. Following on that drama, this Hog News post is dispositive evidence that there is not enough to do in Arkansas:

So many people desperately want someone to come forward and tell the truth. The problem with that is many of the key players in the latest Arkansas football saga have to move forward and continue their lives. They have to protect their futures. Anyone who has attempted to tell the truth this past year has had their character, reputations and even their careers attacked by those who believe it is in the best interest of the program to prevent it. But the facts related in these writings are true and have been verified.

Read the entire piece, at your own risk. ;^)

Judging the Judges

gavel011307.jpgThis is an intriguing idea — a website with anonymous comments about federal judges around the country.
Many considerations go into assessing litigation risk — strength of legal case, quality of witnesses, timing, relative financial strength of the parties, etc. However, a good understanding of the judge’s tendencies is sometimes the most valuable nugget of information.
There are not all that many comments on the website, yet. But it could develop into a valuable market device to assist parties and lawyers measure litigation risk. It will be interesting to see whether this catches on. Frankly, it should.

“It’s nice to have a train car to myself”

Las%20Vegas%20monorail%20021207.jpgAbout a year ago, this post noted the boondoggle status of Las Vegas’ then new $650 million, 4.4 mile monorail project. As is typical with such boondoggles, passage of time does not make the problem any better:

Donna Washington loves riding the Las Vegas Monorail, but not for a reason that would cheer its owners.
ìIn my town, the trains are always jam-packed, so itís nice to have a train car to myself here,î said Ms. Washington, 44, a Chicagoan vacationing here. ìI do wonder, though, where all the people are.î[. . .]
. . . ridership numbers for the Disney-inspired system, which stops at nine hotel-casinos and the Las Vegas Convention Center, are falling amid a lackluster marketing campaign, technical problems and revenues so far below projections that Wall Street fears that a default on its bonds could occur by the end of the decade.
December was the monorailís worst month, with 18,197 riders per day, far below the 53,000 predicted by studies used to sell the bonds to investors and to persuade public officials to give up public right of way. Despite a management shakeup in mid-2005 that purged the company of its founding executives, the systemís average ridership plunged 31 percent in 2006, to 19,219 per day.
The companyís new chief executive, Curtis L. Myles III, said that drop was somewhat anticipated after fares were raised in December 2005 to $5 a ride from $3. That move increased revenues by 4 percent, to $31.4 million for the year, still far short of the $44.9 million needed to break even. The total cost of the system per year is about $61 million; the monorail receives about $16 million in advertising revenues from companies like Sprint, which is about to start providing wireless Internet access on the trains and has a 15,000-square-foot store at the convention center stop.
Mr. Myles acknowledged in an interview that the companyís cash reserves, estimated by Fitch at about $89 million, would run dry by 2010 if revenues did not improve. To break even, he said, the monorail would need to increase ridership by about 50 percent.

And can you guess the Las Vegas Monorail Company’s proposed solution? Of course, double-down on the monorail bet — a $500 million expansion!
Read the entire article. And yes, a similar thing could happen here.