The headline question is most apropos considering the Tribune-Review’s story:
“Pittsburgh’s tourism agency said Monday the 2026 NFL Draft generated about $177 million in economic impact across the region, but the claim could not be independently verified because the agency declined to release the two studies upon which it based its assessment.”
That’s not acceptable. We cautioned months ago, citing seasoned observers, that any economic impact studies sponsored by those who promote such events should not be taken as an article of faith.
And if you’re not willing to cough up the studies to back up your claims, eyebrows and red flags must be raised. That should have been a given, considering right out of the gate, promoters juiced the attendance numbers by counting one person who attended each day of the NFL Draft as a separate attendee.
That’s fundamentally dishonest.
As the Trib’s Julia Burdelski reported, VisitPittsburgh “released a colorful 15-page report but did not publish the studies conducted by Sportsimpacts or Trajektory. Neither company immediately responded to requests for comment Monday.”
And when asked for the studies, “Madeleine Buckley, a Visit Pittsburgh spokeswoman, directed a TribLive reporter back to the tourism agency’s report, which, she said, contained information from the two companies’ analyses.”
Ah, yes, circular obfuscation always helps promote confidence in a public agency’s claims.
What’s next, will VisitPittsburgh contend the studies are “proprietary”? And while we’re at it, how much did VisitPittsburgh spend on the studies it will not make public? Were taxpayer dollars used or was it paid for through some foundations’ donations?
And here’s a real kicker:
On the very day that VisitPittsburgh released its big, glowing and slick report, Jerad Bachar, the agency’s president and CEO, wasn’t even in his office for the week. He was “out of town and no one at the agency was available for interviews,” the Trib reported.
Were they, are they, afraid to take questions about its economic impact report?
Sell it, babies, sell it!
That said, there was an effusive, canned, statement from Bachar. It was rah-rah-sis-boom-bah-ism at its worst.
(Do remember, this is the same VisitPittsburgh cited in a 2023 Allegheny County audit for not practicing correct financial management practices and a general lack of transparency.)
Alas, the Trib allowed Frank Gamrat, executive director at the Allegheny Institute, to bring some much-needed perspective to the matter, noting that it’s unlikely that the NFL Draft will create any lasting jobs, spark a major influx of new businesses or offer enduring economic benefits.
He reminds that VisitPittsburgh’s cheerleading left out those who saw negative effects from the event. Think of those businesses beyond the draft’s footprint that found their stores and restaurants emptier than expected during the three-day event, though they’d paid extra staff to be on hand and stockpiled additional inventory, Gamrat told the Trib.
Neither did the economic impact report mention the millions of public dollars used to stage the NFL Draft.
And here’s another delightful slice from the Trib dispatch:
Councilman Anthony Coghill, D-Beechview, said hotel occupancy figures during the draft prove that the city has enough rooms to host major events in the future.
But, in doing so, Gamrat told me that Coghill undermined the supposed need for a new multimillion-dollar convention center hotel that is expected to see heavy public financing.
VisitPittsburgh’s too slick, studies’ hiding NFL Draft economic impact report only undermines the agency’s work and further tarnishes its reputation. How can the public trust it moving forward? It can’t. Why should it?
Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).
