Economic Impact of the 34Th America’S Cup in San Francisco
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Economic Impact of the 34th America’s Cup in San Francisco A report prepared by the Bay Area Council Economic Institute December 2013 for the San Francisco America’s Cup Organizing Committee Acknowledgments The Bay Area Council Economic Institute wishes to thank the following organizations for their support for the development of this analysis: The City and County of San Francisco, and specifically the Office of Economic and Workforce Development, the Controller’s Office and the Port of San Francisco. The America’s Cup Event Authority, ORACLE TEAM USA, and the America’s Cup Challengers. The San Francisco America’s Cup Organizing Committee and the ONESF: Celebrate the Cup initiative, through their many generous individual donors and local corporate partners, including: URS Corporation, Kilroy Realty Corporation, PWC, the Bay Area Council, San Francisco Travel, America’s Cup Summer Concert Series, Sportsmark and the San Francisco Giants. This report was prepared by the Bay Area Council Economic Institute for the San Francisco America’s Cup Organizing Committee. Sean Randolph (President & CEO) oversaw the development of the study and also contributed to its drafting. Tracey Grose (Vice President) oversaw the completion of the report. Saori Hamidi (Research Associate) provided research support. Jon Haveman (Principal at Marin Economic Consulting) directed the economic impact analysis. Chris Yalonis (Communiqué Partners) developed the survey instruments and conducted the surveys of event-related organizations, spectators, and local businesses. Alex Foard (Research Associate) provided research support for the economic impact analysis. The Economic Institute also wishes to thank the businesses and civic organizations that gave their time for interviews and provided supporting information. The Bay Area Council Economic Institute 353 Sacramento Street, Suite 1000 | San Francisco, CA 94111 www.bayareaeconomy.org | [email protected] Bay Area Council Economic Institute is a partnership of business with labor, government, higher education, and philanthropy that works to support the economic vitality and competitiveness of the Bay Area and California. Its work builds on the twenty-year record of fact-based economic analysis and policy leadership of the Bay Area Economic Forum, which merged with the Bay Area Council in January 2008. The Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) is a founder and key institutional partner. The Economic Institute also supports and manages the Bay Area Science and Innovation Consortium (BASIC), a partnership of Northern California’s leading scientific research universities and federal and private research laboratories. Through its economic and policy research and its many partnerships, the Economic Institute addresses key issues impacting the competitiveness, economic development, and quality of life of the region and the state, including infrastructure, globalization, science and innovation, energy, and governance. A public-private Board of Trustees oversees the development of its products and initiatives. Contents 4 Executive Summary 6 Introduction 8 The America’s Cup: A Long History and a New Chapter 8 History 1851-2010 9 AC34 11 Scope of the Event in San Francisco 11 America’s Cup World Series 2011-12 11 2013 Events 12 America’s Cup Summer Concert Series 12 The Red Bull Youth America’s Cup 12 The AC Open 13 America’s Cup Challenger Series - The Louis Vuitton Cup 13 The America’s Cup Finals 13 Regional Tourism 15 Estimating Economic Impacts 15 Spending Patterns 17 Economic Impact of Spending 20 Implications for Tax Revenue for the San Francisco General Fund 21 Comparison with Past Events in Valencia and Auckland 22 America’s Cup Economics: Considerations 23 A Profile of America’s Cup Visitors: Spectators and their Spending 27 Local Business Impacts: Case Studies 33 Conclusions 34 Appendix A: Methodology 40 Appendix B: IMPLAN Input-Output Methodology 42 Appendix C: Spectator Survey Approach A Bay Area Council Economic Institute Report | December 2013 Page 3 Executive Summary The 34th America’s Cup (AC34) generated between $364.4 million and $550.8 million in economic activity in the City of San Francisco. Although the number of teams competing in the events turned out to be much smaller than originally anticipated, the range of activities associated with the Cup attracted visitors from around the country and around the world, generated significant business activity, and produced new tax revenue for the City of San Francisco of between $5.79 million and $6.68 million. One of the event’s unique features was a new class of yacht, the AC72, which can travel much faster than conventional vessels. Its high cost, during a global recession, had the effect of reducing the number of syndicates participating in the race.1 An accident that destroyed an Artemis Racing vessel and caused the death of a team member also prevented Artemis Racing from participating in the round robin phase of the Louis Vuitton Cup. With the reduced field of competitors, this led to “races” in which one vessel sailed alone. Although still remarkable, a single sailboat is not the attendance draw that an actual race might be. These developments had the effect of reducing spectators, particularly during the Louis Vuitton Cup. These circumstances combined to lower the number of spectators and reduce the economic impact of AC34 below what was originally anticipated. Nonetheless, this competition drew more than 700,000 visits to the waterfront for the Louis Vuitton Cup and America’s Cup Finals, benefitted hundreds of small and other businesses in San Francisco and the Bay Area, and generated significant tax revenue. One legacy of the event is the new cruise terminal at Pier 27. While planning for the terminal began before AC34, the timeline of its construction was accelerated in anticipation of the Cup. This analysis therefore provides alternative economic impact estimates, with and without the cruise terminal included. In developing this analysis, the Economic Institute collected information on spending related to AC34 activities across ten groups of “Agents” including spectators, syndicates and event management. Local businesses were also interviewed in order to better understand detailed spending patterns. The ten primary sources of AC34-related spending analyzed in this study were: 1 Some syndicates chose to observe from the sidelines just how these new sailing vessels would perform. Page 4 A Bay Area Council Economic Institute Report | December 2013 1. City of San Francisco 2. Cruise Terminal Construction 3. Syndicates 4. Spectators 5. America’s Cup Event Authority (ACEA) 6. America’s Cup Summer Concert Series 7. Super Yachts 8. Media 9. Sponsors 10. Volunteers Key Findings The event generated $325.38 million in total expenditures by participants and spectators. • Direct spending related to the event by the ten primary sources exceeded $325.38 million. • Including the design and construction of the cruise terminal, spending exceeded $440.71 million. When the full effects of this spending are considered (as spending by participants and spectators is circulated through the economy), there is a larger economic impact. • Total economic output resulting from Cup activities exceeds $364.4 million. • Including the cruise terminal, the total economic impact exceeds $550.8 million. The event and related activities supported the equivalent of thousands of new jobs in San Francisco. • The event directly generated the equivalent of 1,715 one-year jobs in San Francisco. • Including the cruise terminal, 2,300 one-year jobs were added. • When broader economic impacts are included, new employment totaled 2,863, and 3,858 with the terminal. AC34 generated substantial tax revenue for San Francisco from a range of sources: hotel, payroll, retail, and parking. • Total City tax revenues grew $5.79 million as a result of AC34-related activities. • Incorporating the economic activity associated with the construction of the cruise terminal, the City gained $6.68 million in tax revenues. AC34 showcased San Francisco and the Bay Area to an international television audience in over 200 countries. • This provided high-value media exposure to a large number of potential visitors. • Because these long-term impacts are difficult to quantify, they are not included in this analysis. A Bay Area Council Economic Institute Report | December 2013 Page 5 Introduction The America’s Cup is considered the world’s most important sailing event. Following BMW Oracle’s victory in the 33rd America’s Cup (AC33), in Valencia, Spain, the Cup returned to the United States for the first time since 1995, with San Francisco as the host city for AC34. Spectator venues were constructed for viewing the races and other events at the America’s Cup Park at Piers 27/29 and at America’s Cup Village at Marina Green. These locations also hosted the America’s The 34th Cup World Series events, the AC Open, the America’s Cup Finals, the Louis Vuitton Cup (America’s Cup Challenger Series), the Red America’s Cup Bull Youth America’s Cup, and the America’s Cup Summer Concert Series. One of the lasting legacies of AC34 is the new cruise terminal drew more at Pier 27. While plans for the terminal preceded discussions of than 700,000 AC34, its construction was enabled and accelerated by the Cup. visitors to the AC34 pushed the envelope in boat design. The AC72, a new class of yacht, can travel at speeds of up to 50 knots (57.5 miles per hour), San Francisco much faster than conventional vessels. The speed and high-tech design of the AC72s added to the excitement of the race, requiring waterfront. superior athleticism from the best sailors in the world. However, the high cost of building and operating these vessels and the uncertainty surrounding their performance also had the consequence of reducing the number of participants in the race. Some syndicates chose to first observe the new racing vessels. Also, the racing syndicates were being formed in the immediate aftermath of a major global recession, and some expected Challengers could not secure sufficient financial backing to mount full Cup campaigns.