[gnicholas]

On the other hand, you can sell a parking spot if there's a DD. I don't know the going rate, but it's at least a couple drinks' worth ($45 spot = 3 x $15 beers)?

On the whole, stadiums may prefer to have a big line of ubers/lyfts lined up to take people home, but it's not like it's a total loss to have DDs.

[DoreenMichele]

From a strictly economic perspective: Free rides homes may mean charging overtime for the spot because they leave their car there overnight and also selling more liquor.

But I don't see why this should be viewed in terms of pure economics. What if people who make beer et al are actual human beings and are bothered by the fact that drunk driving kills people? Since their product is involved, what if some of them feel some personal sense of responsibility to reduce death's due to drunk driving?

[gnicholas]

Totally agree that it's not just a pure business decision. I was just responding to the sentiment of the GP that indicated that stadiums might be supporting plans like this because more drinkers means more revenue. That isn't to say they want people to drive drunk — this was just comparing getting people home via DDs (who don't buy alcohol) or getting more drinkers in the stadium and getting them home safe on uber/lyft.

[beambot]

Except that you're paying for a lot of overhead for those parking spots year round... Not just during the event. Everything from infrastructure (land, buildings), personnel, etc. That's a heavy, real cost to the stadium and surrounding community compared to a few drinks. And that space could be better utilized for shops and housing.

[xapata]

Parking rates, while seemingly expensive, are usually subsidized by the other economic activity of the business.