The recent hosting of Super Bowl XL in Detroit gave the adjacent Canadian city of Windsor, Ontario, the opportunity to ‘coattail market’ the event and reap some obvious benefits. For a modest $250,000 investment, Windsor was billed as the co-host and the local media cooperated by providing very positive coverage of this win win’ arrangement. Using Hiller's (1998) linkage model for analyzing the impact of mega sporting events, the authors use qualitative methods to determine the extent to which the city enjoyed tangible returns as a result of this unique co-hosting arrangement. On-site interviews with selected sport bar owners and a content analysis of local and national newspapers yielded data to support Hiller's model. Viewing mega sporting events in the economic and political context of the host city provides a more balanced landscape from which conclusions might be drawn. In particular, the unexpected outcomes known as parallel linkages are useful in tempering the sometimes exaggerated claims of economic impact that are so often used before, during, and after the staging of these hallmark events.
AndranovichG., BurbankM., & HeyingC. (2001). Olympic cities: Lessons learned from Mega-Event Politics. Journal of Urban Affairs, 23(2), 113–131.
3.
BaadeR., & MathesonV. (2004). Super Bowl or super (hyper) bole? Assessing the economic impact of America's premier sporting event (working paper No. 198). Williamstown, MA: Williams College Department of Economics.
4.
BrownA., & MasseyJ. (2001). Literature review: The impact of major sporting events. London (UK): UK Sport:.
5.
BurnettC. (2001). Social impact assessment and sport development. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 36(1), 41–57.
6.
CatherwoodD., & Van KirkR. (1992). The Complete Guide to Special Event Management, London: Wiley.
7.
ChalipL., & CostaC. (2005). Sport event tourism and the destination brand: towards a general theory. Sport in Society, 8(2), 218–237.
8.
ChalipL., & LeynsA. (2002). Local business leveraging of a sport event: managing an event for economic benefit. Journal of Sport Management, 16, 132–158.
9.
ChenD., (2006). ‘Mayor hints at CFL bid’. The Windsor Star, 3 February, p.A1.
10.
CollinsM., & JacksonG., (1998). The economic impact of sport tourism. In StandevenJ. & De KnopP. (Eds.). Sport Tourism (pp. 169–201). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
11.
DayanD., & KatzE. (1992). Media events. The live broadcasting of history. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
12.
DinhamT. (2006). Politics and decision making: The process of building an entertainment complex in the municipality of Windsor. Unpublished independent study project, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
DuffB. (2006, February 3). Well Done, Detroit, Windsor. The Windsor Star, p. A1.
15.
DwyerL., MellorR., MistilisN., & MulesT. (2001). A framework for assessing “tangible” and “intangible” impacts of events and conventions. Event Management, 6(3), 175–189.
EssexS., & ChalkleyB. (2004). Mega-sporting events in urban and regional policy: A history of the Winter Olympics. Planning Perspectives, 19(1), 201–232.
18.
FredlineL., JagoL., & DeeryM. (2003). The development of a generic scale to measure the social impact of events. Event Management, 8(1), 23–37.
19.
GrattonC, & TaylorP. (2000). Economics of Sport & Recreation. London (UK): E & FN SPON
20.
GrattonC, DobsonN., & ShilbyS. (2000). The economic importance of major sports events: A case study of six events. Managing Leisure, 5, 17–28.
21.
HallC. M. (1992). Hallmark Tourist Events. London (UK): Bellhaven.
22.
HallC. M. (1997). Mega-events and their legacies. In MurphyP. (Ed). Quality Management in Urban Tourism.London (UK): John Willey and Sons.
23.
HendersonG. (2006, February 2). ‘Bad press is great’. The Windsor Star, p. A3.
24.
Henley Centre for Forecasting, (1986). The economic impact and importance of sport in the UK. Study 30. London (UK): The Sports Council.
25.
HillerH. (1998). Assessing the impact of mega-events: A linkage model. Current Issues in Tourism, 1(1), 47–57.
26.
JonesH. (1990). The economic impact and importance of sport: A council of Europe coordinated study. Sport Science Review, 13, 26–31.
27.
KaplanD. (2006, January 30-February 5). Canada joins neighbour Detroit in festivities. Street & Smith's Sport Business Journal, p. 24.
28.
KésenneS. (1999). Miscalculations and misinterpretations in economic impact analysis. In JeanrenaudC (ed), The economic impact of sport events (pp 29–39). Neuchâtel (Suisse): Editions CIES.
29.
LajoieD. (2006, June 2). Super Bowl impact $20 m. The Windsor Star, p. A3.
30.
LeytonJ. (2005, December 9). A speech to members of the NDP in Windsor. NDP Newsletter, p.1
31.
LongleyB. (2006, February 2). Windsor superbly sinful. City offers forbidden pleasures. Toronto Sun, p.1.
32.
MartinD., & ReevesL. (2001). The whole world isn't watching (but we thought they were): SBXL and United States solipsism. Sport in Society, 4(2), 213–236.
33.
MathesonV. (2002). Upon further review: An examination of sporting event economic impact studies. The Sport Journal, 5(1), 1–6.
34.
MathesonV. (2005). Contrary evidence on the economic effect of SBXL on the victorious city. Journal of Sport Economics, 6(4), 420–428.
35.
MondelloM., & RisheP. (2004). Comparative economic impact analyses: Differences across cities, events, and demographics. Economic Development Quarterly, 18(4), 331–342.
36.
MullinB., HardyS., & SuttonW., (2000). Sport Marketing (2nd ed.). Champaign (Ill): Human Kinetics.
37.
NFL (1999). Super Bowl XXXIII generates $396 million for South Florida. Report NFL, 58, 7.
O'BrianD. (2006). Event business leveraging: The Sydney 2000 Olympics Games. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(1), 240–261.
41.
PorterP. (1999). Mega-sports events as municipal investments: A critique of impact analysis. In FizelJ., GustafsonE. and HadleyL. (Eds.). Sports Economics: Current Research (pp. 3–11). Westport, CT: Praeger Press.
42.
PreussH. (2005). The economic impact of visitors at major multi-sport events. European Sport Management Quarterly, 5(3), 281–301.
43.
RealM., (1975). Super Bowl: Mythic spectacle. The Journal of Communications, 25(1), 31–49.
44.
RitchieR., & SmithH. (1991). The impact of mega-events on host region awareness: A longitudinal study. Journal of Travel Research, 30(1), 3–10.
45.
RobsonC., (1994). Real World Research (pp.272–281). Oxford: Blackwell.
46.
RocheM. (1992). Mega-events and micro-modernisation: On the sociology of the new urban tourism. British Journal of Sociology, 43, 563–600.
47.
SchmidtD. (2006, February 3). Foreign media eager to explore Windsor. The Windsor Star, p.A2.
48.
SéguinB. (2006). Update: Ontario automotive industry current situation and competitive outlook. ADM Industry Division Economic Development & Trade, February 16
49.
SturmA. (2004), Tails, you win. Healthcare Financial Management, May, p.1
50.
SullivanH. (2006). Who will win? Everything's “super” about Super Bowl XL and Windsor-Essex are major players. Windsor Life Magazine (February/March 2006), 13–15.
