nixluva wrote:

tkf wrote:

nixluva wrote:

tkf wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

tkf wrote:

nixluva wrote:

TheloniusMonk wrote:Without the players no one shows up. No one cares. NBA is a ghost town. Case closed. Pay the men. Period.

Exactly!!! I also don't like this notion that the Players haven't invested in this enterprise. For one thing there's such a thing as Sweat equity and the players have that in spades! They sacrifice a lot to become good enough to be a Pro Baller. Not to mention the wear and tear on their bodies which is often irreversible. Owners only risk expendable cash, but not life and limb.

Both parties are invested. It looks like they're going to come up with a fair CBA in the end. However, MOST of the problem that the owners have is self inflicted. Take for example the MLE. There's no rule that you have to use it and yet how many owners have shot themselves in the face using the MLE for players that weren't worth it? That's not something you can blame on the players. How about the Max contracts given to NON Max players like Joe Johnson or even the Rudy Gay 5yr 82 mil contract extension? These teams didn't have make those deals. Players don't pay themselves, owners do.

sweat equity is fine, and they are payed well for that sweat, but unfortunately we live in a world in which you can't buy bentleys and Bimmers with sweat!!

Certain people refuse to believe in a real world. In entitlement fairyland, if you wear out your joints prematurely while playing a sport at the highest levels, you should be given the entire earth, possibly with a 58% cut of the universe.

And again, the players are playing in little venues, and I hate to point this out to all you jock sniffers, but there seem to be ALOT of empty seats shown in the highlight pics of these events.

Without the league and the owners and THEIR buildings and THEIR infrastructure, there is no NBA. In case you forgot, it's the National BASKETBALL Association, not the the Notional PLAYERS Association. Case closed. Comma. Accept your pay and get back to "work". Period. End of sentence.

yea, I agree, entitlement fairyland.. these players are paid that well because the owner know, people come to see them, they know these guys are giving up their physical primes.. well at least some of them.. LOL.. so they are paid on average more than anyone else on the face of the earth pretty much..

At the same time, the owners have made financial investments that equal some small countries GDP.. so it is understandable that these owners want to protect these investments and make some money not only now, but longterm.....

The NBA since the current CBA was signed has reported Major losses every year:

* 05-06: 19 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $220 million
* 06-07: 21 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $285 million
* 07-08: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $330 million
* 08-09: 24 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $370 million
* 09-10: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $340 million
* 10-11: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $300 million
Total = $1.845 billion!

Now does that make any sense to any of you? Most of these teams seem perfectly willing to stay in a business that has lost almost 2 billion and new guys want to buy in right now!!! You have to ask yourself why? The thing is that these owners can write off the losses on their taxes at 35% now and when they sell only pay 15% on their gains. The only time this becomes impossible is if cash flow is so low that they can't sustain, like Sacramento and New Orleans. Most Owners don't look at things short term, year to year. These are long term investments.

Isn't it funny that the league jumped in to buy the Hornets for $300 mil, but Stern refused to sell the Hornets at a profit when a billionaire Larry Ellison wanted to buy the team for $350mil? Gee, why would the NBA not want to sell a team to a perfectly suitable wealthy businessman? That would break up their streak of net loss seasons right before they go into the CBA negotiations. It suits the NBA to have shown such unbelievable losses to strengthen their bargaining position so they can finally force the players into accepting a reworking of the entire system.

The current CBA stunk. I don't know why the owners financial advisers told them they could handle a BRI split of 57/43. Still the owners agreed to it and so here we are. The Problems in the NBA aren't just the players salaries. In truth the real fight isn't with the players. That fight is pretty much over now. The players will have no choice but to take less. The successful small and big market owners verses the small market and unsuccessful owners is the real fight. Trying to drag them to a real revenue sharing and competitively balanced system is the hard part. I can't imagine the Dolan's wanting to share their money with the lesser teams. In the end if they see it the right way, the entire league benefits from a more even distribution of wealth. We'll have to see if they ever get there.

nix, potential buyers know one thing.. The CBA will run out and when it does, a CBA that is more balanced can yield a profit for a franchise owner.. so potential buyers are not looking a the past mistakes of the CBA so much as they are looking at a new CBA in which the owners can negotiate a better cut for themselves.... I am speculating, but I feel safe in doing so that the current owners would tell potential owners that they are going to fix the CBA in order that all of their investments will be protected..

Every CBA the owners come up with was supposed to do this. I don't believe that this one will fix the problems unless the owners with big profits agree to revenue share. The league says they lost 300 Million, well a 50/50 split only gets them 280 million from the players. That's about 9 mil per team!!! Some teams are still going to struggle with margins that slim. If this is about profitability, then it's a poor excuse, cuz that's not really the reason teams aren't profitable.

The league says that 22 teams lost money, but they don't say exactly who lost and how much! It's my belief that in truth most teams are doing well enough to be profitable if they had revenue sharing. Some teams are of course doing great and don't need a player give back. Some teams are so way below water that none of this player squeeze is gonna help them. It's the truly floundering franchises that are in really poor NBA cities that are the source of the problem. The league won't contract and is unwilling to move certain teams to better cities. Ultimately a lack of revenue sharing is the biggest issue.

and my belief is that the players would do better if they engaged in revenue sharing as well.. let lebron and kobe share some of those mega endorsement deals with the other players....

Now what?

nixluva wrote:

tkf wrote:

nixluva wrote:

tkf wrote:

nixluva wrote:

tkf wrote:

jrodmc wrote:

tkf wrote:

nixluva wrote:

TheloniusMonk wrote:Without the players no one shows up. No one cares. NBA is a ghost town. Case closed. Pay the men. Period.

Exactly!!! I also don't like this notion that the Players haven't invested in this enterprise. For one thing there's such a thing as Sweat equity and the players have that in spades! They sacrifice a lot to become good enough to be a Pro Baller. Not to mention the wear and tear on their bodies which is often irreversible. Owners only risk expendable cash, but not life and limb.

Both parties are invested. It looks like they're going to come up with a fair CBA in the end. However, MOST of the problem that the owners have is self inflicted. Take for example the MLE. There's no rule that you have to use it and yet how many owners have shot themselves in the face using the MLE for players that weren't worth it? That's not something you can blame on the players. How about the Max contracts given to NON Max players like Joe Johnson or even the Rudy Gay 5yr 82 mil contract extension? These teams didn't have make those deals. Players don't pay themselves, owners do.

sweat equity is fine, and they are payed well for that sweat, but unfortunately we live in a world in which you can't buy bentleys and Bimmers with sweat!!

Certain people refuse to believe in a real world. In entitlement fairyland, if you wear out your joints prematurely while playing a sport at the highest levels, you should be given the entire earth, possibly with a 58% cut of the universe.

And again, the players are playing in little venues, and I hate to point this out to all you jock sniffers, but there seem to be ALOT of empty seats shown in the highlight pics of these events.

Without the league and the owners and THEIR buildings and THEIR infrastructure, there is no NBA. In case you forgot, it's the National BASKETBALL Association, not the the Notional PLAYERS Association. Case closed. Comma. Accept your pay and get back to "work". Period. End of sentence.

yea, I agree, entitlement fairyland.. these players are paid that well because the owner know, people come to see them, they know these guys are giving up their physical primes.. well at least some of them.. LOL.. so they are paid on average more than anyone else on the face of the earth pretty much..

At the same time, the owners have made financial investments that equal some small countries GDP.. so it is understandable that these owners want to protect these investments and make some money not only now, but longterm.....

The NBA since the current CBA was signed has reported Major losses every year:

* 05-06: 19 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $220 million
* 06-07: 21 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $285 million
* 07-08: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $330 million
* 08-09: 24 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $370 million
* 09-10: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $340 million
* 10-11: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $300 million
Total = $1.845 billion!

Now does that make any sense to any of you? Most of these teams seem perfectly willing to stay in a business that has lost almost 2 billion and new guys want to buy in right now!!! You have to ask yourself why? The thing is that these owners can write off the losses on their taxes at 35% now and when they sell only pay 15% on their gains. The only time this becomes impossible is if cash flow is so low that they can't sustain, like Sacramento and New Orleans. Most Owners don't look at things short term, year to year. These are long term investments.

Isn't it funny that the league jumped in to buy the Hornets for $300 mil, but Stern refused to sell the Hornets at a profit when a billionaire Larry Ellison wanted to buy the team for $350mil? Gee, why would the NBA not want to sell a team to a perfectly suitable wealthy businessman? That would break up their streak of net loss seasons right before they go into the CBA negotiations. It suits the NBA to have shown such unbelievable losses to strengthen their bargaining position so they can finally force the players into accepting a reworking of the entire system.

The current CBA stunk. I don't know why the owners financial advisers told them they could handle a BRI split of 57/43. Still the owners agreed to it and so here we are. The Problems in the NBA aren't just the players salaries. In truth the real fight isn't with the players. That fight is pretty much over now. The players will have no choice but to take less. The successful small and big market owners verses the small market and unsuccessful owners is the real fight. Trying to drag them to a real revenue sharing and competitively balanced system is the hard part. I can't imagine the Dolan's wanting to share their money with the lesser teams. In the end if they see it the right way, the entire league benefits from a more even distribution of wealth. We'll have to see if they ever get there.

nix, potential buyers know one thing.. The CBA will run out and when it does, a CBA that is more balanced can yield a profit for a franchise owner.. so potential buyers are not looking a the past mistakes of the CBA so much as they are looking at a new CBA in which the owners can negotiate a better cut for themselves.... I am speculating, but I feel safe in doing so that the current owners would tell potential owners that they are going to fix the CBA in order that all of their investments will be protected..

Every CBA the owners come up with was supposed to do this. I don't believe that this one will fix the problems unless the owners with big profits agree to revenue share. The league says they lost 300 Million, well a 50/50 split only gets them 280 million from the players. That's about 9 mil per team!!! Some teams are still going to struggle with margins that slim. If this is about profitability, then it's a poor excuse, cuz that's not really the reason teams aren't profitable.

The league says that 22 teams lost money, but they don't say exactly who lost and how much! It's my belief that in truth most teams are doing well enough to be profitable if they had revenue sharing. Some teams are of course doing great and don't need a player give back. Some teams are so way below water that none of this player squeeze is gonna help them. It's the truly floundering franchises that are in really poor NBA cities that are the source of the problem. The league won't contract and is unwilling to move certain teams to better cities. Ultimately a lack of revenue sharing is the biggest issue.

and my belief is that the players would do better if they engaged in revenue sharing as well.. let lebron and kobe share some of those mega endorsement deals with the other players....

The union already took care of the non-elite players. It's called the MLE! What you wrote makes no sense given the fact that the middle class of NBA players did quite well and so much so that the owners are trying to shrink what they can make. Just remember that once again the fault isn't the players but owners who misused the MLE.

send closk

nixluva wrote:

Nalod wrote:Ok, its the owners fault.

Now what?

See that the problem. No matter how many times I write it you aren't paying attention. The players have AGREED that they need to reduce their share of the BRI, that's not an issue. They just don't agree with everything the owners are trying to do in order to pen the players in financially. The players aren't stupid. They know that things are looking better for the league. Revenues and TV viewership have been rising and eventually the league will sign a new TV deal that should be more lucrative. The owners MUST agree to an aggressive revenue sharing plan and also the owners need to do a better job managing their franchises. The league needs to seriously consider either moving or contracting if the teams with double digit million dollar losses don't get their act together.

I get it. We don't agree. You don't think non salary expense is rising.

If Teams gets a better TV deal Revenue will rise. Players can get more. It would be built in.

You think teams should not use interst expsnse to finance purchase of the team as expense. Owners do. Owners cannot command the prices if they could not. Owners then can't sell those teams for such high prices.

We don't agree on some things, and neither do the owners and players. Neither is stupid, neither is right and neither is wrong.

Bonn1997 wrote:

Nalod wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Nalod wrote:Ok, its the owners fault.

Now what?

See that the problem. No matter how many times I write it you aren't paying attention. The players have AGREED that they need to reduce their share of the BRI, that's not an issue. They just don't agree with everything the owners are trying to do in order to pen the players in financially. The players aren't stupid. They know that things are looking better for the league. Revenues and TV viewership have been rising and eventually the league will sign a new TV deal that should be more lucrative. The owners MUST agree to an aggressive revenue sharing plan and also the owners need to do a better job managing their franchises. The league needs to seriously consider either moving or contracting if the teams with double digit million dollar losses don't get their act together.

I get it. We don't agree. You don't think non salary expense is rising.

If Teams gets a better TV deal Revenue will rise. Players can get more. It would be built in.

You think teams should not use interst expsnse to finance purchase of the team as expense. Owners do. Owners cannot command the prices if they could not. Owners then can't sell those teams for such high prices.

We don't agree on some things, and neither do the owners and players. Neither is stupid, neither is right and neither is wrong.

How do you know players "can get more"? It looks like the owners are trying to make sure the players get less.

If the TV deal is higher than current one the players are getting a % of it.

For example.

Say the current deal is 100 mil. They get 57% so thats 57 mil.

Say the new deal is 200 mil but they only getting 47%. Or 94 million.

So 94 more than 57 right? So thats more even thought its less.

Anyway Nix told me new TV deal is gonna be more than old one. I assume its gonig to be more than 10% more. Most deals are. If its less than current deal, then Nixluva is an object failure in the UK space.

Do you have a background in finance or accounting?

Nalod wrote:
Nix,

Do you have a background in finance or accounting?

He should have a doctorate in both by the time this lockout is over. Hopefully he gets a job advising LeBron and we can all say we knew him when.

Nalod wrote:
Nix,

Do you have a background in finance or accounting?

The key points aren't particularly complicated. Sure you can get into the details of accepted accounting practices, but that's some deep Mathematical Alchemy. There are too many ways to represent a company's financial situation. I'm just dealing in the Macro aspects of the league. Some teams are profitable, some teams are on the edge and some teams are deep under water. Simply saying the league owners lost $300 mil doesn't really tell the story of what's happening in the case of each Franchise. Once you look at them individually you can see that many teams could easily climb out of trouble and into the ranks of the profitable. Some teams are almost hopelessly behind.

It's amazing that some small markets have been able to be successful at putting a good team on the court despite the inequity of the big markets verses the small and despite players salaries being what they are. OKC and Memphis have good teams with bright futures. This gets back to my main point about good team management. Building a team the right way is something some teams have done right. San Antonio is a great example. If Charlotte was managed as well as those 2 teams, perhaps they would also be successful. There aren't enough elite players to go around. All teams can do is look to draft their own stars and build from there. Some of the owners are angry about the Celtic, Miami and NY star collecting. Truth is that interest in the league went up after the big 3 in Miami was formed.

For one thing they already have contracts guaranteed for next year that would exceed 50%! How would that work exactly? Why can't they roll the reduction in over time? So the owners are trying to force a 7% BRI reduction, shorter contracts, less for MLE, no Bird if over the cap... When u look at all of the things players already gave ground on it's clear who is negotiating in good faith. Twice now owners have put out ultimatums and preconditions to negotiating. Like the thread says Owners are full of crap!

eViL wrote:

nixluva wrote:I said it from the start and the owners are just proving the point. They are full of crap! I personally don't care if they do a deal of 50/50 or a range of 50-53 as the players offered. It's just a load of crap to accept that the owners couldn't accept a deal at this point. The difference isn't significant enough to hold up the season.

For one thing they already have contracts guaranteed for next year that would exceed 50%! How would that work exactly? Why can't they roll the reduction in over time? So the owners are trying to force a 7% BRI reduction, shorter contracts, less for MLE, no Bird if over the cap... When u look at all of the things players already gave ground on it's clear who is negotiating in good faith. Twice now owners have put out ultimatums and preconditions to negotiating. Like the thread says Owners are full of crap!

i agree with you, but unfortunately, the owners will outlast the players. ewing, houston, LJ, spree, childs, ward, etc. -- all gone. but Dolan still remains. only way to hurt the owners is to never go back. we basically have to abandon the sport. that's our only option.

Which is quite telling when trying to figure out what pro basketball really is right now. The sport is basketball. Pro basketball is about a business and a league. It's obviously not about players playing the sport.

It sucks, but that's life.