Bernard James

Ms. MacLean
ENG 4U1
February 22, 2015

Money spent on the Superbowl Reasonable?

Every year football fans get together to watch a sporting event like no
other; the Superbowl. The Superbowl is the most viewed and most popular
sporting event in North America. The cost of the Superbowl however,
exceeded twenty billion dollars this year. This money could have gone
towards more important issues, however it was worth it for companies
advertising their products. By analysing the pros and cons, and calculating
the cost of this event, it will be evident that the money spent on the
Superbowl cant be justified, but also how beneficial it was to spend gross
amounts of money on this event.

The amount of money spent on the Superbowl was not reasonable. The
money could have been used toward more pressing matters around the
world such as world hunger or reducing the price of health care in America.
World hunger can be eradicated. A price has been set and estimated by the
United Nations to solve this crisis-$30 billion a year.(The Borgen Project,
The Cost to End World Hunger) The amount of money surrounding the
Superbowl covers over two thirds of the amount needed to help remove

world hunger for one year. Another issue the money that was spent on this
event could go toward is Americas Heath Care. The US has the highest
health spending in the world - equivalent to 17.9% of its gross domestic
product (GDP), or $8,362 per person.(The Guardian, Healthcare Spending
Around the World) The twenty billion dollars spent on the Superbowl couldve
reduced the cost not significantly but by a good enough amount of the
average annual cost. It is more reasonable to spend this large amount of
money on continuing issues rather than on a one day event.

The money spent on the Superbowl is detrimental to the economy of the

host city. It costs tens of millions of dollars to host the Superbowl. The most
recent Superbowl cost thirty million dollars and the cost is increasing every
year. Once you cover all the expenses that the city goes to and net out what
the businesses would have done anyway, that the city winds up being worse
off.(Washington Examiner, The Bad Economics of Hosting the Superbowl)
The amount of money a city spends to host this event can cause them to go
bankrupt. They may provide minimal gains, and sometimes losses, to host
cities, but theyre never major shots in the arm. Cities that believe otherwise,
about stadiums or the events themselves, run the risk of major trouble. For
Glendale, that has become all too true. (Think Progress, The Superbowl
Comes to Glendale, The City Ruined by Sports) The city of Glendale became
bankrupt because they couldnt cover the cost of the arena and they were
already facing financial problems with the recession. Theres no point of

hosting a Superbowl just for bragging rights and prestige, when the financial
suffering outweighs the benefits.

The one good thing that came out of the large amount of spending for the
Superbowl was that companies that had advertisements had millions of
viewers and major profits. Big companies had no problem paying the fee for
having an advertisement played during the Superbowl because it was easily
recovered. For the biggest advertisers, that $3.75 million is truly a pittance.
In fact, some of them make almost as much in profits in an average 3.5
hoursroughly the time it takes to air the Super Bowl itself. (Quartz, A
Superbowl Ad Costs $4 Million) It could also be argued that because this
event is the most viewed and most popular event in North America that it
was reasonable to spend all this money to make it memorable. Reuters
reported that an estimated 160 million viewers worldwide watched the Super
Bowl, meaning about 38.5 million would have watched the game outside the
U.S. (IBTimes, How Many Countries Will Watch the Superbowl) The fact that
this event had more viewers than all the television shows in America
demanded that it should be very flamboyant.

Tens of billions of dollars are spent towards hosting and running the
Superbowl every year, and reached an all-time high of over $20 Billion this
year. This money could have gone towards issues around the world or even
inside the country. The financial problems with hosting the Superbowl

outweigh the advantages, however, benefiters of this spending such as big

companies are rewarded with major coverage and profits for a relatively
small fee. For the most part, the money spent on the Superbowl cannot be
justified, and is beneficial for very few.

Work Cited
1. Abdallah, Leen. The Cost to End World Hunger| The Borgen Project
Feb.15 2013 http://borgenproject.org/the-cost-to-end-world-hunger/
2. Rogers, Simon. Healthcare Spending Around the World, Country by
Country| The Guardian June.30 2012
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jun/30/healthcarespending-world-country
3. Russell, Jason. The Bad Economics or Hosting the Superbowl|
Washington Examiner Jan.28 2015
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-bad-economics-of-hosting-thesuper-bowl/article/2559417
4. Waldron, Travis. The Superbowl Comes to Glendale, the City Ruined by
Sports| Think Progress Jan.30 2015
http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2015/01/30/3616285/super-bowl-comesglendale-city-ruined-sports/
5. King, Ritchie. A Superbowl Ad Costs $4 Million.| Quartz Feb.1 2013
http://qz.com/49855/super-bowl-commercial-is-4-million-big-advertisersmake-that-much-in-the-time-youll-watch-the-football-game/
6. Price, Greg. How Many Countries Will Watch the Superbowl|

International Business Times Jan.29 2015 http://www.ibtimes.com/howmany-countries-will-watch-super-bowl-1799734