• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NBA Lockout: NBPA Rejects Deal, Announces It Will File For Decertification

more economic ignorance
just as i had anticipated
you want us to believe that the owners who are presently losing money while generating income from NBA games will somehow become profitable by not selling sporting events during the strike

you mentioned you have operated a business for twenty years. your profession that losses can be turned into profits by discontinuing income generating operations causes me to question your success as a business operator. reminds me of the adage about how to earn a million dollars in the restaurant business. answer: start with two million

Mark Cuban won an NBA championship last year and lost money. Does that not resonate with you?

Do you not understand that if you make $100 through gate receipts, but you pay out $120 in player salaries and event costs, that you are better off not to have the game in the first place? And you call me ecomomically ignorant?

By your definition of business, no business would ever go out of business.
 
Mark Cuban won an NBA championship last year and lost money. Does that not resonate with you?

Do you not understand that if you make $100 through gate receipts, but you pay out $120 in player salaries and event costs, that you are better off not to have the game in the first place? And you call me ecomomically ignorant?

By your definition of business, no business would ever go out of business.

Marc Cuban doesn't own the Dallas Mavericks in order to make money. Now i'm sure that Cuban would rather make money than not, but historically basketball franchises have been a rather bad bet for turning a profit. As I pointed out earlier, historically most owners owned a team because they loved the sport and wanted a championship, which is the "psychological value" of owning a sports franchise. It was never all about the money, at least until now. I'm sure the loss of 13 million was a small price for Marc Cuban to pay for the championship he got over the Heat. That fact is that historically, owning an NBA franchise was more about the sport and less about the money.
 
Last edited:
Mark Cuban won an NBA championship last year and lost money. Does that not resonate with you?

Do you not understand that if you make $100 through gate receipts, but you pay out $120 in player salaries and event costs, that you are better off not to have the game in the first place? And you call me ecomomically ignorant?

By your definition of business, no business would ever go out of business.
i see that george shinn, the worst NBA team owner, bought a team for $32.5 million and sold it for $300 million ... all the while insisting he sold it for $50 million less than fair market value just so it would remain in the small, unaffluent new orleans market. makes one question why those with money would pay so much for losing operations. so, given your twenty year history as a business manager, explain that for us
 
i see that george shinn, the worst NBA team owner, bought a team for $32.5 million and sold it for $300 million ... all the while insisting he sold it for $50 million less than fair market value just so it would remain in the small, unaffluent new orleans market. makes one question why those with money would pay so much for losing operations. so, given your twenty year history as a business manager, explain that for us

OK, let me explain to you the concept of CASH FLOW. This is complicated, so try to follow. Just because your house is worth $250,000 doesn't mean you have $250,000 in your bank account, even if it's paid off.

Not all businesses are owned to be sold. Jerry Jones will never sell the Cowboys, although it has been reported that his cash flow is problematic the past few years due to the new stadium. The Cowboys are VALUED as one of the top franchises in all of sports in the world, but that doesn't mean it's cash flowing. And if he's not selling, then essentially, the team is worth $0.

Businesses are bought and sold usually on the basis of a cap rate applied to annual revenue streams. For something as rare and exotic as an NBA franchise -there's only 30 of them - that cap rate goes WAY up. It's a prestige buy, not just a business purchase, so the dynamics are very different.

Really, I know you think you've pinned me in the corner, but this pretty 101 stuff, LOL.
 
Last edited:
OK, let me explain to you the concept of CASH FLOW. This is complicated, so try to follow. Just because your house is worth $250,000 doesn't mean you have $250,000 in your bank account, even if it's paid off.

Not all businesses are owned to be sold. Jerry Jones will never sell the Cowboys, although it has been reported that his cash flow is problematic the past few years due to the new stadium. The Cowboys are VALUED as one of the top franchises in all of sports in the world, but that doesn't mean it's cash flowing. And if he's not selling, then essentially, the team is worth $0.

Businesses are bought and sold usually on the basis of a cap rate applied to annual revenue streams. For something as rare and exotic as an NBA franchise -there's only 30 of them - that cap rate goes WAY up. It's a prestige buy, not just a business purchase, so the dynamics are very different.

Really, I know you think you've pinned me in the corner, but this pretty 101 stuff, LOL.
i did notice - but was not surprised - that you were unable to answer the question
maybe twenty years of managing a business has been inadequate
 
i did notice - but was not surprised - that you were unable to answer the question
maybe twenty years of managing a business has been inadequate

And I'm not surprised that you only see this through the eyes of an employee. Selling a business and running a business are two entirely different things. You are entirely basing your argument on selling an NBA team - which is an extremely rare commodity - and you are ignoring basic business fundamentals.

Last year, 22 of the 30 owners lost money from operations of their teams. That's why they feel no need to play. They're better off not playing than losing another gob of money by beating their head against the same wall. Player salaries are not commensurate with cash flow. Simple as that.

Companies make operational cost decisions all the time. That's what the owners are doing. The players have no power in this, other than to play elsewhere. And guess what, elsewhere isn't going to pay them nearly what these owners will unless their name is Kobe or Lebron, and probably not even then.

Meanwhile, Mark Cuban owns the rights to High Definition technology and runs a dozen other companies. He's OK. Where's the income coming from for the backup point guard for the Pistons? Nada.

The owners need only wait, and they can get their cash flow for THIS business in order before play resumes.
 
Last edited:
And I'm not surprised that you only see this through the eyes of an employee. Selling a business and running a business are two entirely different things. You are entirely basing your argument on selling an NBA team - which is an extremely rare commodity - and you are ignoring basic business fundamentals.

Last year, 22 of the 30 owners lost money from operations of their teams. That's why they feel no need to play. They're better off not playing than losing another gob of money by beating their head against the same wall. Player salaries are not commensurate with cash flow. Simple as that.

Companies make operational cost decisions all the time. That's what the owners are doing. The players have no power in this, other than to play elsewhere. And guess what, elsewhere isn't going to pay them nearly what these owners will unless their name is Kobe or Lebron, and probably not even then.

Meanwhile, Mark Cuban owns the rights to High Definition technology and runs a dozen other companies. He's OK. Where's the income coming from for the backup point guard for the Pistons? Nada.

The owners need only wait, and they can get their cash flow for THIS business in order before play resumes.

and still, with twenty years business management experience, unable to answer the question
 
and still, with twenty years business management experience, unable to answer the question

Answered it for you twice, but you still don't grasp the difference between operation fundamentals and value of a business entity.

But OK, here you go. The owner you referred to sold the team for a hefty profit for a multiple of reasons: the increased value of the league, the exclusivity of being the only team in that market, perhaps a new facility that was built that was part of the deal, existing broadcasting contracts that were in place of value, existing advertising agreements that were established, the marketing and branding that had been put in place, the general inflationary aspect of the economy over time, the establishment of numerous outlets to sell paraphrenalia, etc, etc, etc.

Those things weren't necessarily in place when the guy bought the rights to put a team in that market.
And NONE of them have to do with whether or not the team is cash flowing enough as a day-to-day business.

The street value of a company has nothing directly to do with the compensation level of an employee. Players do have a very direct impact on the marketing of a team, which is why they make millions while Susie in accounting makes $40K.

I can no longer believe I'm explaining this.
 
They should disband the NBA it sucks
 
Answered it for you twice, but you still don't grasp the difference between operation fundamentals and value of a business entity.

But OK, here you go. The owner you referred to sold the team for a hefty profit for a multiple of reasons: the increased value of the league, the exclusivity of being the only team in that market, perhaps a new facility that was built that was part of the deal, existing broadcasting contracts that were in place of value, existing advertising agreements that were established, the marketing and branding that had been put in place, the general inflationary aspect of the economy over time, the establishment of numerous outlets to sell paraphrenalia, etc, etc, etc.

Those things weren't necessarily in place when the guy bought the rights to put a team in that market.
And NONE of them have to do with whether or not the team is cash flowing enough as a day-to-day business.

The street value of a company has nothing directly to do with the compensation level of an employee. Players do have a very direct impact on the marketing of a team, which is why they make millions while Susie in accounting makes $40K.

I can no longer believe I'm explaining this.

and you still haven't
you have been unable to explain why a team purchased for $32.5 million is sold for $300 million (possibly discounted from $350 million because it is located in an inferior market) when the team was operating at a financial loss
tell us why it makes economic sense for a team to have appreciated in value that drastically while the team is showing an operating loss
 
They should disband the NBA it sucks

I suspect the NBA would do very well and be very profitable with half the teams it currently has. It would do even better if they could turn back the clock to the late 70's and 80's and recapture that era on the court.

And for heavens sake, putting your hand on the lower half of the ball when you dribble is carrying the ball and a traveling violation. Watching nearly every guard in the league do that simple drives me to distraction.
 
and you still haven't
you have been unable to explain why a team purchased for $32.5 million is sold for $300 million (possibly discounted from $350 million because it is located in an inferior market) when the team was operating at a financial loss
tell us why it makes economic sense for a team to have appreciated in value that drastically while the team is showing an operating loss

I explained it, but you don't get it. Value and cash flow aren't directly related at all.

Let's say you have a one-of-a-kind BMW worth $100K (the Hornets). If you can't afford to put gas in it (no cash flow), what's its practical worth to you? Nothing, unless you sell it.

The next buyer pays a premium because it's the only BMW like that in town (there are no more NBA teams in New Orleans, so there's TREMENDOUS bidding competition). And if he buys it, and he can get gas prices down by 10 percent (player salaries), he might be able to get it to cash flow properly, and he'll have an asset that can appreciate and not drain his personal finances.

People pay good money for businesses all the time that aren't cash flowing. Then, they restructure them, get rid of all the high-earners who's roles can be duplicated by existing personnel, and re-brand the company.

Besides that, you're talking about a guy who purchased the team in the 80s and sold it 10 years ago. Do you really think this is the same economic climate today? The NBA couldn't get its Finals games on live television until around 1980.
 
And I'm not surprised that you only see this through the eyes of an employee. Selling a business and running a business are two entirely different things. You are entirely basing your argument on selling an NBA team - which is an extremely rare commodity - and you are ignoring basic business fundamentals.

Last year, 22 of the 30 owners lost money from operations of their teams. That's why they feel no need to play. They're better off not playing than losing another gob of money by beating their head against the same wall. Player salaries are not commensurate with cash flow. Simple as that.

Not true. First off, the NBA claims that 22 teams are losing money, that doesn't mean the owners are losing money. Cash to cover net losses could come from the owners, they could come from outside investors. We don't know, but what we do know is that the league claims that teams wound up collectively in the hole a little over 300 million dollars. The player's association who has seen the figures and how they add up claims that figure is grossly overstated due to technicalities and accounting practices. They claim the correct figure is just over 100 million dollars.

Meanwhile, a 1% difference in the CBA adds up to 38 million dollars. Owners are asking for another 7 or 8% of the CBA, which obviously adds up to about 300 million dollars, which is (depending on who you believe) more than enough for teams to resume making money.

Incidentally, if the owners are worried about losing money, they can always sell their team for a profit.
 
Not true. First off, the NBA claims that 22 teams are losing money, that doesn't mean the owners are losing money. Cash to cover net losses could come from the owners, they could come from outside investors. We don't know, but what we do know is that the league claims that teams wound up collectively in the hole a little over 300 million dollars. The player's association who has seen the figures and how they add up claims that figure is grossly overstated due to technicalities and accounting practices. They claim the correct figure is just over 100 million dollars.

Meanwhile, a 1% difference in the CBA adds up to 38 million dollars. Owners are asking for another 7 or 8% of the CBA, which obviously adds up to about 300 million dollars, which is (depending on who you believe) more than enough for teams to resume making money.

Incidentally, if the owners are worried about losing money, they can always sell their team for a profit.

Not only that, but that ends up being at least somewhere in between 2 or 3 billion dollars at least over the life of the entire contract.

And it's not just the players that are claiming that the leagues numbers are inflated. Forbes and Nate Silver actually did some of the math and, according to their calculations, the league actually made money last year. Glad that there's finally somebody in this thread who's been keeping up with the situation like me and knows what the **** he is talking about.
 
Last edited:
Not only that, but that ends up being at least somewhere in between 2 or 3 billion dollars at least over the life of the entire contract.

And it's not just the players that are claiming that the leagues numbers are inflated. Forbes and Nate Silver actually did some of the math and, according to their calculations, the league actually made money last year. Glad that there's finally somebody in this thread who's been keeping up with the situation like me and knows what the **** he is talking about.

I believe the owners likely do fudge the numbers. I never cared for the arguement that a guy who buys something for $50 million and it now has a value of $300 million is losing money and the only way he can keep up those losses is if the taxpayers builds him a new building to play in.

That said and I know it's just wishful thinking....I hope this drags out so long that the owners actually do lose money and can only afford to pay the players a fraction of what they are now paid while cutting ticket prices in half to draw in fans.
 
I believe the owners likely do fudge the numbers. I never cared for the arguement that a guy who buys something for $50 million and it now has a value of $300 million is losing money and the only way he can keep up those losses is if the taxpayers builds him a new building to play in.

Yep, what the Forbes analysis discovered was that while the league may have used entirely legitimate accounting techniques, some of them simply weren't kosher from the player's point of view (i.e. franchise purchase amortization)
 
take out nba, nhl, college nba, and college football. Replace it with Ninja Warrior and American Gladiator,

 
Last edited:
Not only that, but that ends up being at least somewhere in between 2 or 3 billion dollars at least over the life of the entire contract.

And it's not just the players that are claiming that the leagues numbers are inflated. Forbes and Nate Silver actually did some of the math and, according to their calculations, the league actually made money last year. Glad that there's finally somebody in this thread who's been keeping up with the situation like me and knows what the **** he is talking about.

Did you know that TV contracts are expected to be reduced in coming seasons due to the NBA's horrible ratings? Advertising is down as well. Nobody is watching this league outside of local viewers of local teams. The NBA finals drew embarassing numbers despite a pretty intriguing matchup.

The owners are tearing this union to pieces and and loving every minute of it. Billy Hunter looks like an incompetent, self-absorbed swine and likely won't survive this with a meaningful post in the end.

Add to that, the owners don't want any more scenarios like what happened with Lebron and Carmelo, where they can just dictate to the owners where they will play and who they'll take with them. They are determined to take control of their league back.

The owners are in the catbird's seat, and they will win this with ease in the end, because again, they don't have to play when not playing is more profitable than playing.

The owner's will be in this league for a long, long time. All these players are accomplishing is losing a year of their short career, and they'll never get back the money they are losing. Just ask the NHL players, who regret the stand they took a few years ago and lost a season.
 
Did you know that TV contracts are expected to be reduced in coming seasons due to the NBA's horrible ratings? Advertising is down as well. Nobody is watching this league outside of local viewers of local teams. The NBA finals drew embarassing numbers despite a pretty intriguing matchup.

The owners are tearing this union to pieces and and loving every minute of it. Billy Hunter looks like an incompetent, self-absorbed swine and likely won't survive this with a meaningful post in the end.

Add to that, the owners don't want any more scenarios like what happened with Lebron and Carmelo, where they can just dictate to the owners where they will play and who they'll take with them. They are determined to take control of their league back.

The owners are in the catbird's seat, and they will win this with ease in the end, because again,
they don't have to play when not playing is more profitable than playing.

The owner's will be in this league for a long, long time. All these players are accomplishing is losing a year of their short career, and they'll never get back the money they are losing. Just ask the NHL players, who regret the stand they took a few years ago and lost a season.

yes, because the nba teams owners have figured out that it is so much more profitable NOT to have anything to sell
imagine how much more money they would make by disbanding the league
 
yes, because the nba teams owners have figured out that it is so much more profitable NOT to have anything to sell
imagine how much more money they would make by disbanding the league

I get it. You're pro-union. I'm not. We've reached an impasse.

Some of these teams are going out of business, but according to your business background, all you have to do is keep the doors open, and the shop will always be profitable. How could 85 percent of all businesses fail? They need only ask you, and their problems are solved.
 
I get it. You're pro-union. I'm not. We've reached an impasse.
no impasse. we have reached a conclusion. you have been shown absolutely ignorant about anything economic. spouting off crap about businesses that cease operations can become profitable while business entities that engage in business activities will remain unprofitable. all you have posted has been inanity

Some of these teams are going out of business, but according to your business background, all you have to do is keep the doors open, and the shop will always be profitable.
please copy and paste my post where i have said that. these are simply more ignorant, unfounded machinations evidencing a complete lack of economic understanding

How could 85 percent of all businesses fail? They need only ask you, and their problems are solved.
actually, they do ask me. even after retirement. my quarter century career was spent as a loan officer and federal contracting officer helping small businesses to survive and thrive
and your data is incomplete. approximately half of small businesses survive for four years. one third of those that do not survive are not gone because they failed but because they were so successful that they cashed out
those businesses with start up capital requirements exceeding $50,000 have a much higher success rate than those who began on a shoe string
but come back to us when you can actually explain why businesses are more profitable when they discontinue their business operations. those feeble attempts are always good for a laugh
 
Did you know that TV contracts are expected to be reduced in coming seasons due to the NBA's horrible ratings? Advertising is down as well. Nobody is watching this league outside of local viewers of local teams. The NBA finals drew embarassing numbers despite a pretty intriguing matchup.The owners are tearing this union to pieces and and loving every minute of it. Billy Hunter looks like an incompetent, self-absorbed swine and likely won't survive this with a meaningful post in the end.

Add to that, the owners don't want any more scenarios like what happened with Lebron and Carmelo, where they can just dictate to the owners where they will play and who they'll take with them. They are determined to take control of their league back.

The owners are in the catbird's seat, and they will win this with ease in the end, because again, they don't have to play when not playing is more profitable than playing.

The owner's will be in this league for a long, long time. All these players are accomplishing is losing a year of their short career, and they'll never get back the money they are losing. Just ask the NHL players, who regret the stand they took a few years ago and lost a season.

That's simply not true. Several games in the Finals series drew record viewership, while the Finals gave ABC its best summer in a decade.

As for everything else, alright, the owners have the upper hand. Tell us something we don't already know.
 
no impasse. we have reached a conclusion. you have been shown absolutely ignorant about anything economic. spouting off crap about businesses that cease operations can become profitable while business entities that engage in business activities will remain unprofitable. all you have posted has been inanity


please copy and paste my post where i have said that. these are simply more ignorant, unfounded machinations evidencing a complete lack of economic understanding


actually, they do ask me. even after retirement. my quarter century career was spent as a loan officer and federal contracting officer helping small businesses to survive and thrive
and your data is incomplete. approximately half of small businesses survive for four years. one third of those that do not survive are not gone because they failed but because they were so successful that they cashed out
those businesses with start up capital requirements exceeding $50,000 have a much higher success rate than those who began on a shoe string
but come back to us when you can actually explain why businesses are more profitable when they discontinue their business operations. those feeble attempts are always good for a laugh

Yeah, you have such a deep understanding of businesses like the NBA, which are virtually excluded from anti-trust laws.

Your union-loving mind wants to believe that these owners are dripping in profits, and they want to get their greedy hands on even more money. Which is exactly why they handed out $100 million contracts to players before, right?

The economics of the league changed, and didn't meet the projected growth of league. Not by a long shot. Therefore, changes must be made to get the thing in line again within an acceptable margin. It's really that simple. This is sink or swim for more than half the NBA teams, which are bleeding money.

You were game-set-matched a long time ago, so break out the liberal rule book, call me stupid and mix in a vocabulary word. Don't forget the race card because I obviously hate blacks since I'm anti-basketball player.
 
Back
Top Bottom