IBJNews

Uncertainty over 2012 Super Bowl puts hotels in a bind

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A looming dispute between National Football League players and owners could result in a rescheduled 2012 Super Bowl or outright cancellation of the game—scenarios that have hotel operators in the city pacing the sidelines.

“What can we do but wait?” said Jesse Ghumm, manager of the downtown Hampton Inn. “Right now, booking anything anywhere near the Super Bowl date is a very carefully calculated risk.”

Hoteliers, who arguably have the most to gain from hosting the Super Bowl, also have the most at risk.

Greg Tinsley, the Conrad Indianapolis manager, said he has blocked out the first three weekends of February 2012 to accommodate a potential change in the date of the Super Bowl, which is scheduled for Feb. 5. The Conrad has pledged 90 percent to 95 percent of its hotel rooms and all its meeting space to the event.


“That’s a lot of inventory to lock down for maybe an entire month, and not know what the eventual payoff will be,” said Robert Tuchman, executive vice president of Premiere Global Sports, an Illinois-based sports travel and marketing firm. “From a logistical standpoint, moving the dates of the Super Bowl is a complete nightmare. What happens if the event gets canceled altogether? Who covers that expense?”

Phil Ray, manager of the downtown Omni Hotel, said the issue becomes much more critical in early 2011.

“That’s when reservations for rooms start coming in—12 to 13 months in advance,” Ray said. “That’s when we’ll need answers.”

Planners still optimistic

At issue is a dispute pitting NFL players against owners, and owners against one another over how league revenue should be divided. Owners have already opted out of the existing labor agreement and say if they can’t get a deal worked out with players, they’ll lock them out and scuttle the 2011 season.

Officials with the local organizing committee and Indianapolis Convention & Visitors Association said planning for the game’s scheduled date is proceeding at full speed in spite of the labor issue. ICVA Chief Executive Officer Don Welsh declined to comment on the uncertainty hoteliers are facing.

Mark Miles, the Indianapolis Super Bowl Host Committee’s liaison to the NFL, thinks there is little to worry about.

“In talking to team owners and others within the NFL, we’re very optimistic,” Miles said. “We see virtually no chance the Super Bowl doesn’t happen. It comes down to the date.”

Local Super Bowl organizers and hoteliers have already agreed to hold open the weeks of Feb. 5 and Feb. 12. But an extended labor dispute could easily push the game to late February or even early March. Indianapolis already has a major convention, Dealer’s Expo, set for later in February.

It’s not clear what would happen to the multimillion-dollar legacy project on the city’s east side or other costly preparations if the Super Bowl is canceled altogether.

It wouldn’t be as simple as putting Indianapolis in line for the next year. New Orleans has already been awarded the 2013 Super Bowl, and planning there is under way.

“We feel like we have a real partnership with the NFL and could work through any contingency,” Miles said.

In spite of the assurances, local hoteliers are getting increasingly skittish.

“They’re sitting there holding huge blocks of hotel rooms for two weekends they’re not sure will be used,” said Tuchman of Premiere Global Sports. “Then what do you do with the rest of February and early March?”

The city can hardly risk losing the 2012 Super Bowl, Tuchman said, so city tourism officials and hoteliers will likely have to craft contracts for events and room rentals for those weekends that can be altered or canceled with no penalty.

But that’s no cure-all. The unknowns surrounding the 2012 Super Bowl are enough to scare off convention business, Tuchman said. “A lot of organizations won’t want to sign a deal with such uncertainty.”

NFL strife rare but real

Among North America’s major sports leagues, the NFL has one of the best track records of maintaining labor peace. There hasn’t been a work stoppage since 1987. In 2006, when things looked dire, players and owners came together at the 11th hour.

But the last-minute nature of that settlement planted the seeds of the current dispute.

In 2006, owners agreed to a contract that resulted in higher salaries and bonuses for players.

Instead of 55.5 percent of NFL revenue, the players now are entitled to 60 percent. The salary cap has jumped from $85.5 million per team in 2005 to $127 million in 2009, a 45-percent increase. A number of owners say their profits have dropped from 10 percent a year to 4 percent since 2006, results the NFL Players Association disputes.

Although the owners ratified the 2006 pact, they are not happy about their decision and opted out last year, a move that causes the existing contract to expire at the end of this season. Parties have agreed that next season will be played without a salary cap, but that’s a temporary solution. A new contract is needed for the 2011 regular season and beyond.

Observers say there hasn’t been such a division between players and owners since the historic free-agency and salary-cap pact of 1993 was signed.

“We are closer to labor strife in the NFL than we have been in a long, long time,” said Mark Maske, who covers the NFL for The Washington Post. “These are two sides that are very dug in, very entrenched in their positions.”

Some have argued that, because there’s so much money at stake for players and owners, a deal will get done.

Sam Farmer, who covers the NFL for the L.A. Times, disagrees.

“I think it is most likely that there will be a lockout,” Farmer said. “The simple argument that this won’t happen because there’s too much money at stake isn’t compelling enough. That was the argument [in 2006] when the owners felt they got themselves into a bad deal, and they unanimously opted out of it.”

“I would predict that the start of the season could be delayed and the Super Bowl could be played later in the year,” Farmer added.

The dispute doesn’t just pit owners against players. Owners are also arguing among themselves about revenue sharing, which could further complicate negotiations.

Large-market owners such as the Dallas Cowboys’ Jerry Jones and the Washington Redskins’ Daniel Snyder are looking to keep as much of the revenue as possible. Owners such as the Indianapolis Colts’ Jim Irsay are trying to assure the revenue sharing stays robust enough to keep small-market teams like his financially competitive.

No one knows when a deal will be reached, but if it hasn’t been resolved a year from now, local tourism officials will have real reason to worry.

“If they enter the 2010 season without a deal, I think we’re headed for labor strife,” said Mark Rosentraub, dean at the University of Michigan and an author of two books about major-league sports operations. “Trust me, local Super Bowl planners in Indianapolis don’t want to see the next season start without a labor agreement in place. That would be a very bad sign that there is going to be protracted—perhaps hostile—negotiations.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT