Wonder why the Lakers were able to get a possible 2nd three peat?

Not that they stole Pau (although the reality is without Pau Memphis reinvented itself in 3 years and look good going forward!), its because they were not pussified and traded Shaq (sign and trade). That enabled them to get other assets and make a deal with Memphis with plenty left to win with.

should be interesting to see if they are able to restock in the next few years when Kobe retires.

Knicks are a "Product" in the MSG stable of "content" to fuel revenue.

Any person willing to bring Isiah back with all his baggage clearly does not care about the "fan".

This is a problem for me going forward. This keeps me from going "Fishmike" on the latest round of the "Blame Game" but also keeps me from being a total "Marv" homer about this team.

We all come to this forum because of our interest in basketball operations, which is ultimately what makes us fans. I know most like to think that being a fan is something sacred, but it's really not. We're consumers of his product. The underlying economics are no different than being a fan of Frito Lay (Cheetos), Honda (Civic), or Jessica Alba's body (of work).

Moonangie wrote:The key difference between this view (i.e., Knicks as "product" with fans as "consumers") has to do with brand affinity: Most of us didn't switch from Coke to Pepsi during the last decade of hoops ignominy because at our core we are fans of the City, the team, the history of the sport. We don't switch teams because we are loyal. If the Knicks were a product with us as consumers, we would all have become Lakers or Celtics fans many years ago.

So I don't think it's an apt analogy. We are more like devotees and the Knicks are our cult.

disagree

the economic terminology to describe the Knicks as you just wrote would be:

a product with an inelastic substitution

DrAlphaeus wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

Moonangie wrote:The key difference between this view (i.e., Knicks as "product" with fans as "consumers") has to do with brand affinity: Most of us didn't switch from Coke to Pepsi during the last decade of hoops ignominy because at our core we are fans of the City, the team, the history of the sport. We don't switch teams because we are loyal. If the Knicks were a product with us as consumers, we would all have become Lakers or Celtics fans many years ago.

So I don't think it's an apt analogy. We are more like devotees and the Knicks are our cult.

disagree

the economic terminology to describe the Knicks as you just wrote would be:

a product with an inelastic substitution

Sounds a lot like Cable TV to me.

exactly. there's a synergistic pairing there, and exactly why the Yankees have their own cable TV station (or control their distribution platform)

DrAlphaeus wrote:Yup. Both businesses built on long-standing monopolies, be it local or national.

So the Nets are DISH Network to the Knicks' Cablevision: they are cheaper but crap out in a rainstorm? I can't figure out who/what is FiOS in this analogy now.

FiOS is glitzy, trendy, and high quality, but consumers only use half the product bundle. They're the Heat.

Moonangie wrote:The key difference between this view (i.e., Knicks as "product" with fans as "consumers") has to do with brand affinity: Most of us didn't switch from Coke to Pepsi during the last decade of hoops ignominy because at our core we are fans of the City, the team, the history of the sport. We don't switch teams because we are loyal. If the Knicks were a product with us as consumers, we would all have become Lakers or Celtics fans many years ago.

So I don't think it's an apt analogy. We are more like devotees and the Knicks are our cult.

Winning brings in the causual fan. They will jump on the band wagon. Hardcore (pun intended) fans won't jump but they are a small majority in the scheme of things. The swing fan is were the money is. That is where the big numbers are.

Thats What spooked Dolan about Melo. Melo was going for the money.

YEah, I do fear teh Nets. They are not about what you can see. Its what could be coming.

Melo would have blown the Knicks out of the water for the swing fan.

Knicks are not like the Yankees where they have a legacy amung the generations. Mets make the world series its a big buzz cuz its NY and the causual fans piles on the bandwagon.

Melo is a show. Deron williams won't do that.

Knicks HAD to get Melo and it had to much to do about the marketing.

In any event this is were are and what we are dealing with.

Might as well go all in and get Rubio for that matter. Fields and TD for Rubio. Move Chauns to the 2.

Then GIve Bieber season tickets also.

knickstorrents wrote:I know there is a better way to do things. Not all teams are treated as just 'products'.

disagree

owners that constantly strive to create value for their fans/clients/consumers focus on refining their product. This requires knowing your fanbase intimately and delivering the product they desire. The owner that effectively does that is typically held in high regard

CashMoney wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

knickstorrents wrote:I know there is a better way to do things. Not all teams are treated as just 'products'.

disagree

owners that constantly strive to create value for their fans/clients/consumers focus on refining their product. This requires knowing your fanbase intimately and delivering the product they desire. The owner that effectively does that is typically held in high regard

Please see New York Yankees to affirm the statement.

New York Yankees