Owners make lots of money from their teams that isn't included in Basketball-Related Income (BRI, the number that gets split 57-43). For example, luxury seats are a big percentage of profits, but only 60% of luxury seat revenue is included in BRI (and then split 57-43). The other 40% is free and clear to the owners. If owners were truly losing money, things wouldn't be run on a Cadillac basis. There are many ways to cut costs, such as staying at 4-star hotels, not 5-star. Their behavior belies their words.
Owners make lots of money from their teams that isn't included in Basketball-Related Income (BRI, the number that gets split 57-43). For example, luxury seats are a big percentage of profits, but only 60% of luxury seat revenue is included in BRI (and then split 57-43). The other 40% is free and clear to the owners. If owners were truly losing money, things wouldn't be run on a Cadillac basis. There are many ways to cut costs, such as staying at 4-star hotels, not 5-star. Their behavior belies their words.
Well, this thing about telling me I'm not logged in, so I have to log in again and re-post, finally produced a double entry. I'm surprised it took this long. Gotta go. If I don't click fast, it'll say I'm not logged in.
If anyone's interested, here's the NBA players (Kobe, Durant, Rose, et al) playing in the Philippines.
That whole tape is just pre-game stuff. In that Philippines game, players were paid well, while yesterday in Seattle, they worked for free. Yet we keep hearing that foreign teams can't afford what the NBA can.
The players being guaranteed an exact % of BRI in many areas hampers the leagues ability to invest in projects that increase revenue. For example, say the owners can start a project that pays $90 million in China advertising, which is the only direct cost, and it will generate $160 million in additional revenue. Sounds like a great investment right? It should bring a profit of $70 million. The problem is the players get $91 million of that revenue (57%) so the project ends up with $181 million of total expenses and would cost the owners $21 million. As a result the owners never embark on the project and both sides receive $0, even though it would be a clearly profitable project.
Yeah I see the problem now. I'll be honest I only think Superstars deserve money, let the rest get whatever.
True, the first few years will be difficult, but eventually players coming from college or overseas will start to bring stardom back to the league. If they start from scratch again they can maybe do a better job- open the game up by getting rid of zones, widen the key, train refs better/or have some sort of instant replay... lower salaries, lower ticket prices... not a bad idea, really. They can continue the lockout until the NBA players locked out come to their senses and if it never happens, they have a new league and eventually it will take off. If the players come around and accept a new CBA that will keep them millionaires, then the players in the new league will be free agents and be incorporated into the NBA.
There won't be a lockout imo, don't worry. At least not through the whole season. For the most part people don't want to watch mediocrity. Look at the other 20+ boring teams in the league right now that are struggling. The NBA's ratings are poor when the wrong teams are in the Finals. Even the Lakers need a good opponent or people won't watch. People want to see superstars succeed or fail, no one cares if Chauncey Billups wins 0 or 7 championships.
Can the owners legally start a new league? Or even play with replacement players? The owners locked out the players, the players were perfectly happy how the previous CBA was working. If the owners started a new league and didn't honor the pre-existing contracts signed by both owners and players I think we would have many lawsuits.
Sources: NBA, union to meet Monday By Chris Sheridan NEW YORK -- One month after the NBA lockout began, the heavy hitters will finally be back at the bargaining table Monday. Commissioner David Stern, union director Billy Hunter and their top lieutenants have agreed to resume collective bargaining discussions, sources told ESPN.com Wednesday, for the first time since talks broke down hours before NBA owners imposed a lockout July 1, shutting down the league for the first time since the summer of 1998. The sides remain far apart on the parameters of a new deal, but the decision to meet face-to-face again is one of the first possible signs of progress after four weeks of stagnancy. Aside from Stern and Hunter, the meeting is expected to include NBA deputy commissioner Adam Silver, players association president Derek Fisher and Peter Holt of the San Antonio Spurs, the head of the owners negotiating committee. When the sides last met on June 30, the players offered a six-year agreement in which they would cut their take of basketball-related income (BRI) from 57 percent to 54.6 percent -- or $100 million per year over the six years. Owners are seeking a 10-year agreement with a hard salary cap, and their most recent proposal targeted paying the players at least $2 billion in salaries in each of the 10 seasons. Players have argued that their cut of BRI would be cut from 57 percent to less than 40 percent under the owners' most recent proposal, while owners have maintained they need fundamental financial changes to an operating system in which they claim 22 of the league's 30 teams lost money last season. The union disputes that contention. Attorneys from the league office and the players' union met July 15 ago to conclude the annual BRI audit, and it was agreed that the sides desired to put the negotiations on a faster track than they were on during the 1998 labor dispute, when nearly seven weeks elapsed between the last pre-lockout negotiating session and the first bargaining session after the imposition of the work stoppage. But that dispute was not settled until late-January of 1999, forcing the cancellation of games because of a work stoppage for the first time in the league's history. Last Friday, a number of prominent player agents met with Hunter and urged him to consider fast-tracking a move toward decertification, which would enable the player to sue the owners in federal court on anti-trust grounds. Hunter, however, prefers to await a ruling from the National Labor Relations Board on an unfair bargaining practices complaint the union filed earlier this year. Chris Sheridan is a senior NBA writer for ESPN.com. Follow Chris Sheridan on Twitter: @csheridanespn
Nice D-Fish inteview. http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/nba/story/_/id/6816981/nbpa-prez-derek-fisher-lockout-weirdly-quiet
I'm actually not sure. Especially since this is a lockout. That said, I'm sure they work their way around league rules.
Not related, but this means more work for the HCP! Too bad it doesn't start THIS fall! http://articles.ocregister.com/2011..._pac-12-commissioner-larry-scott-fox-and-espn
Remember when Sheed told off the Portland reporter (which one was it again?) at an interview, including accusing Stern of making $8 million per year? For a week now, I've read that Stern makes $23 million. This says it could be more. Only about 3 owners know what he makes. It says everyone's afraid to ask, and forgets Sheed's courage/bluster. http://probasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/08/01/how-much-money-does-david-stern-make/
That article links to this Wojnarowski article. http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_talks_080111
