I'm a thousand times on board with this project, but this is a hilarious use of "others argue". Have the economists not considered, argues the head of a business lobbying group, that they can "make sure" this one works?
But Joel Maxcy, vice president of the International Association of Sports Economists, which analyzes sports financing, said arenas already tend to be underutilized, sitting empty for 150 days a year.
“To me it would be very difficult for two similar arenas, hosting similar type events, to coexist in such close proximity,” he said. “There are only so many sport and entertainment events that can be supported by the region."
Others argue that Long Island, with a population of nearly 3 million and one of the wealthiest consumer bases, can support both arenas.
“Populationwise, the region is big enough to accommodate both arenas,” said Kevin Law, president of the Long Island Association, the area’s largest business group. “The key will be to make sure that the Nassau Coliseum gets the same quality events that the new facility at Belmont gets.”
(I think the project is good because the Isles having a Long Island home contributes a lot of hard-to-quantify good to the community, this particular land was already severely under-utilized, and it's a mechanism for expanding transportation access. But yeah, the LI arenas are obviously going to be under-utilized and it's pretty clear the counter-argument is pure magical thinking.)
