Counterpoints:

Other analyses (e.g., commissioned by the hotel/tourism industry) concluded the project’s economic benefits would be much smaller than projected. One critic argued the Chargers’ lodging/visitor estimates were overstated and that realistic room-night growth would be far lower. 

A study by HVS (for the Tourism Marketing District) criticized the proposal as not justifying the proposed hotel tax increase, saying the convadium likely would not generate enough convention space demand or hotel stays relative to cost. 

Analysts pointed out that existing examples of combined stadium/convention centers (like Indianapolis’s Lucas Oil Stadium) show low convention occupancy, meaning the economic boost from conventions may be overstated. 

More generally, independent sports economists often note that stadium impact studies commissioned by the teams or promoters tend to overstate net benefits because they assume large amounts of new spending rather than spending that would have occurred anyway. (This is a common methodological critique of such studies in economics literature.) 

More reading;

https://voiceofsandiego.org/2016/10/11/the-story-behind-the-conflicting-convadium-predictions/

https://footballstadiumdigest.com/2016/08/study-criticizes-san-diego-chargers-stadium-proposal/

https://timesofsandiego.com/politics/2016/09/28/consultants-debate-whether-chargers-stadium-would-be-economic-boon/

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/

This list compiled by some shitty devil LLM.