[syrrim]

>Usually, the local government owns the stadium, while the team and its ownership control the revenues. This arrangement leaves taxpayers on the hook for maintaining the stadium year after year, team or not.

From here: https://www.johnlocke.org/policy-position/publicly-funded-st...

The problem for sports stadiums seems to be a monopsony relationship. That wouldn't be true for a fab, which can sell to anyone.

It seems like this relationship is desirable because a sports team can't benefit from all the profit they generate, for example at restaurants near the sports stadium, whereas the city can, by taxing those businesses. I suppose there might be an equivalent relationship with respect to a fab, but I'm not sure what it is.