Key Findings¶
1. Observed Prices Are Profit-Maximizing¶
Stadium beer at $12.50 is approximately profit-maximizing ($13.87 optimal) when accounting for:
Taxes ($1.30/beer)
Production costs ($2.00/beer)
Internalized costs (varies by volume, C = 62.3(Q/1000)^2)
2. Stadiums Already Internalize Some Externalities¶
Crowd management, brand damage, and experience degradation are already priced in:
Convex cost function:
At low prices ($5-7): Internalized costs become prohibitively high
This explains why stadiums don’t sell cheap beer despite apparent profit potential
3. Significant External Costs Remain¶
Society bears $4.00/beer in external costs:
Crime & violence: $2.50
Public health: $1.50
Current taxes ($1.30) cover only 33% of these costs.
Pigouvian tax gap: $2.70/beer
4. Price Ceiling ($7) Has Mixed Effects¶
Pros:
Consumer surplus: significant gains (+$3.9%)
More affordable access
Cons:
Stadium profit: $-34.5M/season
Externality costs: increase (+$130.7%) due to higher consumption
May face legal/constitutional challenges
Net: Complex welfare trade-offs with distributional concerns.
5. Pigouvian Tax is More Efficient¶
Adding $2.70/beer tax:
✓ Internalizes external costs
✓ Raises $8.7M/year for affected communities
✓ Reduces consumption to optimal level
✓ No deadweight loss (price = social MC)
✓ Economically efficient
Recommended policy: Pigouvian tax over price controls.
Policy Recommendations¶
Recommended: Pigouvian Tax¶
Implement $2.70/beer additional tax on stadium alcohol
Consumer price: $13.87 → ${{ pigouvian_consumer_price }}
Consumption: reduces to optimal level
Revenue: $8.7M/year
Allocate to Bronx community, public health, police
Alternative: Moderate Hybrid¶
If political constraints:
Moderate tax (+$1.50/beer)
Earlier sale cutoff (6th inning instead of 7th)
Purchase limits (2 beers per transaction)
Not Recommended: Price Ceiling¶
Large stadium revenue loss
Increases externalities
Potential legal challenges
Less efficient than taxation
Broader Implications¶
For Other Stadiums¶
This framework applies to all sports venues:
NFL, NBA, NHL stadiums face similar trade-offs
Internalized vs external costs distinction is general
Optimal taxation varies by local externality levels
For Alcohol Policy¶
General principle: Distinguish internalized from external costs.
Monopolists (stadiums, bars, restaurants) internalize negative effects on their own customers.
Policy should target true external costs (non-customers, public goods).
For Price Control Theory¶
Important insight: Observed prices may reflect internalized externalities, not just production costs.
Standard models that ignore firm’s internalization of customer experience effects will mis-predict optimal prices.
Limitations¶
Static model: Doesn’t capture long-run effects (season tickets, loyalty)
Single representative consumer: Ignores heterogeneity
No substitution: Doesn’t model pre-game drinking or smuggling
Partial equilibrium: No competition from other entertainment
Perfect enforcement: Assumes price controls fully enforced
Future Research¶
Rowdiness Feedback Loop: Explicitly model the negative utility of non-drinkers from high aggregate beer consumption.
Convex Externalities: Investigate how social externalities (crime, health) might increase non-linearly with consumption.
Heterogeneous consumers: Deeper dive into casual vs regular fans, potentially expanding consumer types.
Dynamic model: Repeated games, learning, habit formation.
Substitution patterns: Pre-game bars, tailgating.
Spatial analysis: Crime externalities by distance from stadium.
Empirical validation: Natural experiments with policy changes.
Final Thought¶
The key innovation is recognizing that monopolists internalize negative effects on their own customers.
This is why simple supply-demand models fail to predict stadium pricing - they miss the convex experience degradation costs that stadiums face.
For policy: Focus on true external costs (crime, public health) that remain uninternalized. Current taxes cover only 33% of these costs.
Optimal policy: $2.70/beer Pigouvian tax, raising $8.7M/year for NYC.