State film incentives: job creators, or fool's gold?

I've been getting a lot of feedback after having written this article and this one, looking at the efforts by local entrepreneur Bert Hesse and California-based Pacifica Ventures effort to build a massive movie studio complex on the Eastland Mall site. Some of the people writing me in the wake are saying it would be a shame to see North Carolina let its film incentive program die in 2014, as the TV and movie industry jobs created will simply migrate to other states. Others say its a shaky proposition that could leave the city holding a multi-million dollar liability.

I'd relayed the point in one of the stories that some say TV productions, which can stay around for years, might make better investments than movies for states looking to lure productions to town. Dana Arnold,
CEO of Pacifica Ventures, emailed me this response:

Both features and television create longterm crew development that generate permanent jobs.  Yes, permanent jobs! 

It is true that feature films do come and go, but with a competitive, politically supported incentive program… the feature films keep coming (as well as going) and as they come and go, they provide a stream of work to the same local crews, over and over again. 

A carpenter working at framing houses might make $55,000 a year as a "full" time employee working 12 months of the year for one employer ("trackable" full time employment, by job category): that same carpenter would most likely make over $85,000 per year building sets for two different features, but might only work for 7 months (considered part-time, by job category). 

If you were a carpenter, which job would you want???

What is missing in North Carolina is the "brick and mortar" infrastructure of permanent studio facilities… which is what Eastland will provide to Charlotte.

However, as you are well aware, the politics of film and television incentives can be "incendiary": especially when it means financially supporting the major studios with substantial financial incentives to bring their work.  

I find it hard to understand why incentives for auto parts manufacturing, oil drilling, airplane assembly, or chip foundries are somehow more politically appropriate than incentivizing media production.

Given the strong feelings that surround film incentives, I thought it'd be interesting to give one of its more motivated backers a chance to make his case publicly. Having heard him, what do you think?