[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Now that Games Have Been Lost Should Players Start Working on Forming THeir Own League?
Author Thread
TheGame
Posts: 26632
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
10/11/2011  8:11 AM    LAST EDITED: 10/11/2011  8:12 AM
I found this article on the internet:

Do the Players — and Cities — Really Need the NBA Owners? Posted on July 11, 2011 by dberri
11


The following originally appeared at The Huffington Post. The idea of a players league has been discussed at the Wages of Wins network recently. This post – which introduces the Basketball Players Association League (or BPAL – credit Devin Dignam for the name) – offers some details on why this league is necessary and how it might work.


The 30 owners of the National Basketball Association have told the players to take a substantial pay cut. And if the players don’t agree, these players are not going to be playing in the NBA for a long time. Which means fans of the NBA are not going to see basketball played at the highest level for a long time.

Such extortion is not uncommon for NBA owners. Just ask the people of Sacramento. Earlier in the year it looked like the Kings were on their way to Anaheim. This move was motivated by the apparent unwillingness of the people of Sacramento to build a new arena for the Kings. When Kevin Johnson — former NBA player and current mayor of Sacramento — indicated he would find a way to publicly finance the Kings’ place of business, the owners of the Kings indicated they would postpone the move to Anaheim.

Unfortunately for cities that host an NBA team, this behavior is often the norm. Robert Baade and Victor Matheson have noted that since 2000, eight NBA teams have begun playing in new (or renovated) stadiums. As the following table indicates, the cost of these stadiums has exceeded $2 billion. Of this cost, $1.75 billion – or 84.1 percent — came from public funds.

Such public investment in private companies is hardly common in capitalism. Capitalism normally functions as follows:

•Owners provide capital (i.e. buildings, machinery, etc…).
•Workers provide labor.
•Capital and labor are combined to produce output. The revenue generated by this output is used to compensate owners for their contribution of capital and workers for their labor.
In North American sports, though, taxpayer funds are often providing a significant portion of the capital. But the returns to capital are given to the 30 men who own the NBA teams (again, who often are not providing a significant portion of the capital). And now, these 30 owners want to reduce the returns to labor.

In response, players like Deron Williams have indicated that they plan on taking their talents to Europe. There is another simple solution, though, that would actually allow people of North America to continue watching professional basketball at its highest level.

Once again, two groups are being extorted by the 30 NBA owners: cities and players. A simple solution is for these two groups to come together and form a new basketball league, which I am gong to refer to as the Basketball Players Association League (or BPAL). In the BPAL, the cities would act as owners. Already — as noted — the cities are providing much of the capital. In the BPAL that practice would continue. But instead of just giving the capital to the 30 men who happen to own the teams, the cities would keep the capital and earn the economic returns this capital generates. Meanwhile, the players would continue to provide the labor (and earn the returns generated by their labor).

If we look at population data from the Census Bureau, we already see a number of cities that could host a professional basketball team. For example, Salt Lake City — with a metropolitan population of 1.1 million — currently hosts the Jazz. The following metropolitan areas are a) at least as large as Salt Lake City, b) do not have an NBA team, and c) have hosted a team in professional baseball, professional football, and/or professional hockey: Seattle (3.4 million people), San Diego (3.1 million), St. Louis (2.8 million), Tampa Bay (2.7 million), Baltimore (2.7 million), Pittsburgh (2.4 million), Cincinnati (2.2 million), Kansas City (2.1 million), San Jose (1.8 million), Columbus (1.8 million), Nashville (1.6 million), Jacksonville (1.3 million), and Buffalo (1.1 million). In addition, Canadian cities like Montreal (3.6 million), Vancouver (2.1 million), and Calgary (1.1 million) could also be asked to join. And this list leaves out such places as Las Vegas or even Mexico City.

Of course, these are just the 18 places that don’t have a current NBA team. Once this league is established, one suspects many current NBA cities might decide to end their often one-sided relationship with the NBA.

In sum, there are many places the BPAL could operate. But would this new league be profitable? The NBA currently claims that owning a basketball team is bad business. Although such claims are widely reported in the media, examinations from Arturo Galletti (of the Wages of Wins Journal — see Here and Here) and Nate Silver (of the New York Times) casts serious doubt on the NBA’s claims. Furthermore, Joe Lacob — the newest owner of the Golden State Warriors — had this to say about the ability to make money on an NBA franchise:

This is an incredible business opportunity. Turning this into a winner No. 1 and running this business better in certain ways… Look, sports franchises appreciate 10% a year on average over three decades, the last three decades. There’s no reason to think this won’t appreciate in value. So that is the least of my worries. We will make money on this team in appreciation of value.

In reading this quote, remember Lacob is talking about the Warriors, a team that has missed the playoffs in 16 of the last 17 seasons (in a league where over half the teams get in every year). Given Lacob’s quote — and the analysis of Galletti and Silver — one suspects that the NBA is simply crying poverty in an effort to extract more money from their players.

With the BPAL, though, this behavior can end. The cities and players can come together and form a partnership that ends the practice of 30 men simultaneously extracting money from both workers and taxpayers. And fans can once again go back to watching athletes playing basketball (as opposed to watching basketball players in suits).

Let me close by noting that if the players get serious about this new league, this current lockout will end very quickly. The NBA owners appear to think that players are going to be forced give in. After all, there is only one NBA. But the scarce resource in this conflict is not the 30 owners. It really is the players.

Lacob reportedly paid $450 million for the Warriors. That franchise price only makes sense if LeBron James, Dwight Howard, Kobe Bryant, etc… come play his Warriors. If these players are all in a new league, Lacob will stand to lose much of his investment in the Warriors. And the same story will be repeated for the other 29 owners. Faced with potential loss of the one thing fans are willing to pay to see (i.e. elite basketball talent), one suspects the stand the owners are currently taking will crumble.

And when that happens… well, I still think the players and cities should form their own league. Either way, though, fans will once again get to see basketball played at the highest level in the world.

_______________________________________________________________________

I have always been of the view that the players should form their own league. I would give the NBA until January to soften its stance. If it ultimately cancels the entire season, I would immediately begin negotiating with cities about starting a rival league. DOn't you think most cities would like to get that extra $10-$20 million in profit these teams make and places like NY could bring in an extra $150 million if the city owned the team. There are usuable arenas in virtually every major city in this country. I doubt it would take more than $200 million initial investment to get the league running. The players obviously would make less initially, but once the NBA TV deal expires, who do you think Fox and Espn are going to negotiate with, the league that has Lebron James, D-Wade, and Carmelo Anthony in it, or the old NBA with its d-league players. The new league should be able to get the TV deal and once that happens, players might make even more than they are making under the current system.

Trust the Process
AUTOADVERT
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/11/2011  8:21 AM
The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.
jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
10/11/2011  8:29 AM
This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

TheGame
Posts: 26632
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
10/11/2011  8:48 AM
jrodmc wrote:This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

THere are plenty of people around that can easily afford $200 million to get on the ground floor of a potential $4 billion industry. FInding a few billionaires to buy into the idea will not be a problem as long as they are assured that the league will be a going concern. Basically, the players would have to cut all ties to the NBA and essentially stick to moving forward with the new league. If that happens, getting capital will not be a problem.

There are going to be issues regarding the draft and those type of issues, and eventually every team will need to put a general manager in place, but those issues can be resolved. This new league would not have the expense of the WNBA or all the other things that NBA has obligated itself to and there would be no entry fees per se, so the league should have a more solid financial footing. Really, the only thing holding it back would be the TV deals, and like I said, once those deals expire, I think the networks are going to go with Lebron and Kobe over whatever d-league scrub the NBA showcases. In fact, the new league would not even need to wait. Networks such as CBS and ABC (who don't have NBA contracts) would bid on the games right now as long as they were assured that the league is a going concern. You could probably get those networks to give you a 5 year deal for $300 million or so. It really is not all that difficult to start the new league if there is a strong leadership and all the major NBA players buy-in.

Trust the Process
jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
10/11/2011  8:57 AM
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

THere are plenty of people around that can easily afford $200 million to get on the ground floor of a potential $4 billion industry. FInding a few billionaires to buy into the idea will not be a problem as long as they are assured that the league will be a going concern. Basically, the players would have to cut all ties to the NBA and essentially stick to moving forward with the new league. If that happens, getting capital will not be a problem.

There are going to be issues regarding the draft and those type of issues, and eventually every team will need to put a general manager in place, but those issues can be resolved. This new league would not have the expense of the WNBA or all the other things that NBA has obligated itself to and there would be no entry fees per se, so the league should have a more solid financial footing. Really, the only thing holding it back would be the TV deals, and like I said, once those deals expire, I think the networks are going to go with Lebron and Kobe over whatever d-league scrub the NBA showcases. In fact, the new league would not even need to wait. Networks such as CBS and ABC (who don't have NBA contracts) would bid on the games right now as long as they were assured that the league is a going concern. You could probably get those networks to give you a 5 year deal for $300 million or so. It really is not all that difficult to start the new league if there is a strong leadership and all the major NBA players buy-in.

You keep saying this [phrase in bold]. Exactly how, in your reality, does this assurance happen? And when you figure that one out, can you send me your CC and bank account numbers, I have $18 million in funds I need to transfer to your account due to a merger/acquisition in Morocco that the national government there needs to offload. I give you assurance that this is a going concern...

And these "plenty of people" who can "easily afford $200 million" are going to do what? Give the players 60% of the revenues? Oh I'm sure your world is just chock full of venture capitalists who are dying to get in to a pricey potentiality like that.
Here we are, back at where we started...

Nalod
Posts: 71155
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
10/11/2011  9:36 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Really?

OasisBU
Posts: 24138
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 6/18/2002
Member: #257
USA
10/11/2011  9:48 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Last time I checked the public had a deficit in the tens of trillions, not to mention the unfunded liability that's out there.

"If at first you don't succeed, then maybe you just SUCK." Kenny Powers
nyk4ever
Posts: 41010
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
10/11/2011  9:49 AM
you didnt wanna give us a link to this mysterious article on the internet?
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
Vmart
Posts: 31800
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 5/23/2002
Member: #247
USA
10/11/2011  9:51 AM
Players league funny shyt, 90% of the NBA players wouldn't want to play for that league.
Nalod
Posts: 71155
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
10/11/2011  9:57 AM

Writers have to write. People want to read about the possibiltty of a new league.

Lebron was just asked about it and he said "No".

The article is a nice stab. Set up NBA teams in cities that either failed with probasketball or have just failed to land a team after building an arena. ITs nice. Maybe Woopie Goldburg can make a movie about being a coach?

TheGame
Posts: 26632
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
10/11/2011  10:31 AM
jrodmc wrote:
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

THere are plenty of people around that can easily afford $200 million to get on the ground floor of a potential $4 billion industry. FInding a few billionaires to buy into the idea will not be a problem as long as they are assured that the league will be a going concern. Basically, the players would have to cut all ties to the NBA and essentially stick to moving forward with the new league. If that happens, getting capital will not be a problem.

There are going to be issues regarding the draft and those type of issues, and eventually every team will need to put a general manager in place, but those issues can be resolved. This new league would not have the expense of the WNBA or all the other things that NBA has obligated itself to and there would be no entry fees per se, so the league should have a more solid financial footing. Really, the only thing holding it back would be the TV deals, and like I said, once those deals expire, I think the networks are going to go with Lebron and Kobe over whatever d-league scrub the NBA showcases. In fact, the new league would not even need to wait. Networks such as CBS and ABC (who don't have NBA contracts) would bid on the games right now as long as they were assured that the league is a going concern. You could probably get those networks to give you a 5 year deal for $300 million or so. It really is not all that difficult to start the new league if there is a strong leadership and all the major NBA players buy-in.

You keep saying this [phrase in bold]. Exactly how, in your reality, does this assurance happen? And when you figure that one out, can you send me your CC and bank account numbers, I have $18 million in funds I need to transfer to your account due to a merger/acquisition in Morocco that the national government there needs to offload. I give you assurance that this is a going concern...

And these "plenty of people" who can "easily afford $200 million" are going to do what? Give the players 60% of the revenues? Oh I'm sure your world is just chock full of venture capitalists who are dying to get in to a pricey potentiality like that.
Here we are, back at where we started...


All I am saying is that the players must commit to the new league. The problem is if the investors feel that the marque players will run back to the NBA once the NBA realizes they are leaving and ups its offer, then they will not buy in. If the marque players sign on to the new league with a guarantee that they are in it for the long-haul, that is the "going concern" I am talking about. Obviously, no one can guarantee how long a business can last, but the issue is simply getting a commitment from the star players that they are going to forego the NBA and stick with the new league no matter what.

As for venture capitalist, what are you talking about. There are people lining up to buy NBA franchises for $400+ million. You don't think there will be people willing to fund a new league at half that amount when they can probably immediately negotiate TV deals that gurantee them all their money back. As long as you have the superstars on board, forming the league can happen. People will pay to watch Lebron, D-Wade and the other stars play whether they are in the NBA or not.

Trust the Process
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/11/2011  10:39 AM    LAST EDITED: 10/11/2011  10:49 AM
Nalod wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Really?


Our health "care" system is the best available example but I know very few people who wish that our fire or police department or military would be turned over to private for-profit corporations either. I can't imagine how bad the inequalities would be if each town had to hire its own private police and fire departments. Or how much miscommunication would occur if each airport had to hire its own security agency instead of using the TSA.
Regarding this article: I think this scenario would be awesome in the long-run but it would take a long time to work out. There would probably be at least one lost season.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/11/2011  10:40 AM    LAST EDITED: 10/11/2011  10:41 AM
OasisBU wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Last time I checked the public had a deficit in the tens of trillions, not to mention the unfunded liability that's out there.


Yeah, we have these absurd wars and tax cuts for billionaires that are draining the budget. You can find many European countries that have well-run large governments and also have happier, healthier citizens than we do.
Nalod
Posts: 71155
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
10/11/2011  11:20 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Nalod wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Really?


Our health "care" system is the best available example but I know very few people who wish that our fire or police department or military would be turned over to private for-profit corporations either. I can't imagine how bad the inequalities would be if each town had to hire its own private police and fire departments. Or how much miscommunication would occur if each airport had to hire its own security agency instead of using the TSA.
Regarding this article: I think this scenario would be awesome in the long-run but it would take a long time to work out. There would probably be at least one lost season.

Most towns, cities and counties do have their own police and Fire departements.

TSA would not make sense to regionalize.

Health care is broken BTW. A public system does make sense because of scale. You want every one covered. LIke Social Security.

That is a role Gov't should be doing.

Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/11/2011  11:24 AM
Nalod wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:
Nalod wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Really?


Our health "care" system is the best available example but I know very few people who wish that our fire or police department or military would be turned over to private for-profit corporations either. I can't imagine how bad the inequalities would be if each town had to hire its own private police and fire departments. Or how much miscommunication would occur if each airport had to hire its own security agency instead of using the TSA.
Regarding this article: I think this scenario would be awesome in the long-run but it would take a long time to work out. There would probably be at least one lost season.

Most towns, cities and counties do have their own police and Fire departements.

TSA would not make sense to regionalize.

Health care is broken BTW. A public system does make sense because of scale. You want every one covered. LIke Social Security.

That is a role Gov't should be doing.


They have their own police and fire departments but (as far as I'm aware) they're not privately run.
Nalod
Posts: 71155
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
10/11/2011  11:27 AM
Bonn1997 wrote:
OasisBU wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The public runs most organizations better than for-profit corporations do. Getting rid of the James Dolans makes a lot of sense.

Last time I checked the public had a deficit in the tens of trillions, not to mention the unfunded liability that's out there.


Yeah, we have these absurd wars and tax cuts for billionaires that are draining the budget. You can find many European countries that have well-run large governments and also have happier, healthier citizens than we do.

Bonnie, again your looking at scale. But Europe is finding its system has some bad problems (Retire with full pension at age 55 and only work 45 weeks and have 32 hour work weeks).

But your talking about a socialized tax system and thats a whole other discussion. Nothing wrong with Socialism BTW, but your doing apples vs. Oranges.

jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
10/11/2011  11:41 AM
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

THere are plenty of people around that can easily afford $200 million to get on the ground floor of a potential $4 billion industry. FInding a few billionaires to buy into the idea will not be a problem as long as they are assured that the league will be a going concern. Basically, the players would have to cut all ties to the NBA and essentially stick to moving forward with the new league. If that happens, getting capital will not be a problem.

There are going to be issues regarding the draft and those type of issues, and eventually every team will need to put a general manager in place, but those issues can be resolved. This new league would not have the expense of the WNBA or all the other things that NBA has obligated itself to and there would be no entry fees per se, so the league should have a more solid financial footing. Really, the only thing holding it back would be the TV deals, and like I said, once those deals expire, I think the networks are going to go with Lebron and Kobe over whatever d-league scrub the NBA showcases. In fact, the new league would not even need to wait. Networks such as CBS and ABC (who don't have NBA contracts) would bid on the games right now as long as they were assured that the league is a going concern. You could probably get those networks to give you a 5 year deal for $300 million or so. It really is not all that difficult to start the new league if there is a strong leadership and all the major NBA players buy-in.

You keep saying this [phrase in bold]. Exactly how, in your reality, does this assurance happen? And when you figure that one out, can you send me your CC and bank account numbers, I have $18 million in funds I need to transfer to your account due to a merger/acquisition in Morocco that the national government there needs to offload. I give you assurance that this is a going concern...

And these "plenty of people" who can "easily afford $200 million" are going to do what? Give the players 60% of the revenues? Oh I'm sure your world is just chock full of venture capitalists who are dying to get in to a pricey potentiality like that.
Here we are, back at where we started...


All I am saying is that the players must commit to the new league. The problem is if the investors feel that the marque players will run back to the NBA once the NBA realizes they are leaving and ups its offer, then they will not buy in. If the marque players sign on to the new league with a guarantee that they are in it for the long-haul, that is the "going concern" I am talking about. Obviously, no one can guarantee how long a business can last, but the issue is simply getting a commitment from the star players that they are going to forego the NBA and stick with the new league no matter what.

As for venture capitalist, what are you talking about. There are people lining up to buy NBA franchises for $400+ million. You don't think there will be people willing to fund a new league at half that amount when they can probably immediately negotiate TV deals that gurantee them all their money back. As long as you have the superstars on board, forming the league can happen. People will pay to watch Lebron, D-Wade and the other stars play whether they are in the NBA or not.

Your point makes no sense. The same people who are lining up to buy NBA franchises are lining up to buy that brand, not some generic players league that doesn't even exist, with a model that's NEVER existed for a long haul commitment as an actual, historical entity in organized team sports.

So exactly how many people are paying to watch Lebron and D-Wade and Kobe now?

TheGame
Posts: 26632
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/15/2006
Member: #1154
USA
10/11/2011  12:52 PM
jrodmc wrote:
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

THere are plenty of people around that can easily afford $200 million to get on the ground floor of a potential $4 billion industry. FInding a few billionaires to buy into the idea will not be a problem as long as they are assured that the league will be a going concern. Basically, the players would have to cut all ties to the NBA and essentially stick to moving forward with the new league. If that happens, getting capital will not be a problem.

There are going to be issues regarding the draft and those type of issues, and eventually every team will need to put a general manager in place, but those issues can be resolved. This new league would not have the expense of the WNBA or all the other things that NBA has obligated itself to and there would be no entry fees per se, so the league should have a more solid financial footing. Really, the only thing holding it back would be the TV deals, and like I said, once those deals expire, I think the networks are going to go with Lebron and Kobe over whatever d-league scrub the NBA showcases. In fact, the new league would not even need to wait. Networks such as CBS and ABC (who don't have NBA contracts) would bid on the games right now as long as they were assured that the league is a going concern. You could probably get those networks to give you a 5 year deal for $300 million or so. It really is not all that difficult to start the new league if there is a strong leadership and all the major NBA players buy-in.

You keep saying this [phrase in bold]. Exactly how, in your reality, does this assurance happen? And when you figure that one out, can you send me your CC and bank account numbers, I have $18 million in funds I need to transfer to your account due to a merger/acquisition in Morocco that the national government there needs to offload. I give you assurance that this is a going concern...

And these "plenty of people" who can "easily afford $200 million" are going to do what? Give the players 60% of the revenues? Oh I'm sure your world is just chock full of venture capitalists who are dying to get in to a pricey potentiality like that.
Here we are, back at where we started...


All I am saying is that the players must commit to the new league. The problem is if the investors feel that the marque players will run back to the NBA once the NBA realizes they are leaving and ups its offer, then they will not buy in. If the marque players sign on to the new league with a guarantee that they are in it for the long-haul, that is the "going concern" I am talking about. Obviously, no one can guarantee how long a business can last, but the issue is simply getting a commitment from the star players that they are going to forego the NBA and stick with the new league no matter what.

As for venture capitalist, what are you talking about. There are people lining up to buy NBA franchises for $400+ million. You don't think there will be people willing to fund a new league at half that amount when they can probably immediately negotiate TV deals that gurantee them all their money back. As long as you have the superstars on board, forming the league can happen. People will pay to watch Lebron, D-Wade and the other stars play whether they are in the NBA or not.

Your point makes no sense. The same people who are lining up to buy NBA franchises are lining up to buy that brand, not some generic players league that doesn't even exist, with a model that's NEVER existed for a long haul commitment as an actual, historical entity in organized team sports.

So exactly how many people are paying to watch Lebron and D-Wade and Kobe now?

Dude you have no idea what you are talking about. The Heat players just organized an event in Miami this past week selling tickets for $50 and $100 and it sold out in TWO HOURS. Yeah, people would pay more for NBA franchise but that is a premium for the brand. It does not take $400 million per team to start a team. YOu could start an entire league for half that. The market is there, it just needs an organizational structure and someone with the balls to make it happen. Bottomline, if all of the top stars in the NBA say, we will sign on with a new league, people will pay to watch.

Trust the Process
Nalod
Posts: 71155
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
10/11/2011  1:02 PM
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:
TheGame wrote:
jrodmc wrote:This line of logic is hilarious.

So who's going to draft the teams? The agents? The citizens who live near the venues? THE AGENTS?????

And who's going to front your 200 million which you throw around like chump change in this current economy?

I love the game, but these millionaire enterprise college drop outs are not in any way capable of starting and running something as intricate and complex and involved as a professional sporting league in the 21st century.

These egos can barely survive together from season to season on the same TEAMS, let alone trying to pool together capital and resources to start, run and maintain the massive infrastructure required to run anything even approaching the NBA.

You're smoking some really weird crack.

THere are plenty of people around that can easily afford $200 million to get on the ground floor of a potential $4 billion industry. FInding a few billionaires to buy into the idea will not be a problem as long as they are assured that the league will be a going concern. Basically, the players would have to cut all ties to the NBA and essentially stick to moving forward with the new league. If that happens, getting capital will not be a problem.

There are going to be issues regarding the draft and those type of issues, and eventually every team will need to put a general manager in place, but those issues can be resolved. This new league would not have the expense of the WNBA or all the other things that NBA has obligated itself to and there would be no entry fees per se, so the league should have a more solid financial footing. Really, the only thing holding it back would be the TV deals, and like I said, once those deals expire, I think the networks are going to go with Lebron and Kobe over whatever d-league scrub the NBA showcases. In fact, the new league would not even need to wait. Networks such as CBS and ABC (who don't have NBA contracts) would bid on the games right now as long as they were assured that the league is a going concern. You could probably get those networks to give you a 5 year deal for $300 million or so. It really is not all that difficult to start the new league if there is a strong leadership and all the major NBA players buy-in.

You keep saying this [phrase in bold]. Exactly how, in your reality, does this assurance happen? And when you figure that one out, can you send me your CC and bank account numbers, I have $18 million in funds I need to transfer to your account due to a merger/acquisition in Morocco that the national government there needs to offload. I give you assurance that this is a going concern...

And these "plenty of people" who can "easily afford $200 million" are going to do what? Give the players 60% of the revenues? Oh I'm sure your world is just chock full of venture capitalists who are dying to get in to a pricey potentiality like that.
Here we are, back at where we started...


All I am saying is that the players must commit to the new league. The problem is if the investors feel that the marque players will run back to the NBA once the NBA realizes they are leaving and ups its offer, then they will not buy in. If the marque players sign on to the new league with a guarantee that they are in it for the long-haul, that is the "going concern" I am talking about. Obviously, no one can guarantee how long a business can last, but the issue is simply getting a commitment from the star players that they are going to forego the NBA and stick with the new league no matter what.

As for venture capitalist, what are you talking about. There are people lining up to buy NBA franchises for $400+ million. You don't think there will be people willing to fund a new league at half that amount when they can probably immediately negotiate TV deals that gurantee them all their money back. As long as you have the superstars on board, forming the league can happen. People will pay to watch Lebron, D-Wade and the other stars play whether they are in the NBA or not.

Your point makes no sense. The same people who are lining up to buy NBA franchises are lining up to buy that brand, not some generic players league that doesn't even exist, with a model that's NEVER existed for a long haul commitment as an actual, historical entity in organized team sports.

So exactly how many people are paying to watch Lebron and D-Wade and Kobe now?

Dude you have no idea what you are talking about. The Heat players just organized an event in Miami this past week selling tickets for $50 and $100 and it sold out in TWO HOURS. Yeah, people would pay more for NBA franchise but that is a premium for the brand. It does not take $400 million per team to start a team. YOu could start an entire league for half that. The market is there, it just needs an organizational structure and someone with the balls to make it happen. Bottomline, if all of the top stars in the NBA say, we will sign on with a new league, people will pay to watch.

They sold out a 4,000 seat gym. Its a novelty.

But really, the players can start their own league. What it will make is another story. A league for the benefit of the players not the owners.

Nobody is stopping them. In fact, they have had a few years to get organized. Lebron, Stat, Wade, Baby Bosh and Joe Johnson all last year could have jumped and started their own deal. TV deals could have been made in advance, and every year the league would have competition and perhaps start a contract war over players. But wait, it would mean players would want guarantees! How do you do that? SOmeone got to put up capital. OWners? Whoa, if I put up capital I want equity. And there you go again!

jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
10/11/2011  2:13 PM
A 4000 seat gym. A one time event. And this is enough proof to offset everything else piled up on the other side of the argument.

The liberal imagination. Where amazing happens.

Now that Games Have Been Lost Should Players Start Working on Forming THeir Own League?

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy