Basketball Lockout

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from deanocelt. Show deanocelt's posts

    Basketball Lockout

    Could someone please provide info? I understand that this is not a strike; it is a lockout. I am not a labor relations expert. I assume that the owners are hurting with the downturn in the economy. The owners have to pay huge salaries and take all of the risk. While some of the teams earn reasonable or even large profits, many or most teams, especially those in smaller markets, struggle to remain profitable. Meanwhile, the player make huge salaries and get endorsements, but have limited risk. Therefore, the owners are forced to lock out the players. This is the way I perceive things, but I have not done extesive stody into the subject. I am, however, somewhat P.O.d and ready to bring my fanship to the college ranks. Am I way off in my perception? Who has the better gripe here? Do we have a resident expert? Please set me straight - I need info and would like to hear other's opinions.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from ConnectingRod. Show ConnectingRod's posts

    Re: Basketball Lockout

    In Response to Basketball Lockout:
    Could someone please provide info? I understand that this is not a strike; it is a lockout. I am not a labor relations expert. I assume that the owners are hurting with the downturn in the economy. The owners have to pay huge salaries and take all of the risk. While some of the teams earn reasonable or even large profits, many or most teams, especially those in smaller markets, struggle to remain profitable. Meanwhile, the player make huge salaries and get endorsements, but have limited risk. Therefore, the owners are forced to lock out the players. This is the way I perceive things, but I have not done extesive stody into the subject. I am, however, somewhat P.O.d and ready to bring my fanship to the college ranks. Am I way off in my perception? Who has the better gripe here? Do we have a resident expert? Please set me straight - I need info and would like to hear other's opinions.
    Posted by deanocelt


    In the end the owners will have the final say. You really think the players can make a league of their own? LOL
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from debrit. Show debrit's posts

    Re: Basketball Lockout

    In Response to Re: Basketball Lockout:
    In Response to Basketball Lockout : In the end the owners will have the final say. You really think the players can make a league of their own? LOL
    Posted by ConnectingRod


    The league is losing 300-400 millions a year in the last 5 years.How long can they continue this trend? The revenue is divided 57% for the players,43% for the owners.Not a bad deal for the players.By the way the only team making money is the LA Clippers.Very low payroll.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Number6Fan. Show Number6Fan's posts

    Re: Basketball Lockout

    When they negotiated the last CBA, the League thought it had made a good deal.  In retrospect, when it realized the owners were dumber than it thought they would be, the League changed its mind, and exercised an opt-out clause.  The 57-43% split is not in itself an awful thing -- when they have a semi-hard salary cap that is based on revenue, and a rookie pay scale that ostensibly sets limits on wages.  No one is putting a gun to ownership's head and forcing it to pay the players what the contracts it willingly negotiated call for.  But they don't share revenue in any meaningful way; the poorer cities can't afford to be bludgeoned into building ever glitzier arenas at their own expense -- with ever expanding blocs of corporate boxes that an average fan will never see -- offering expensive designer cocktail service and gourmet food (see Seattle);  L.A. can negotiate billion-dollar TV contracts; Boston can sign less lucrative but still friendly TV deals with Comcast; Milwaukee can . . . what?  The League is broken -- like the stock market, everybody wins only if the market keeps rising -- and its easier to blame the players, who are not necessarily sympathetic figures, than to look for systemic problems.  No one knows what the true profit/loss figures are (it's like the film industry), but if you're willing to miss a season to prove a point (like firing the air traffic controllers), you've pretty much got everyone over a barrell.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from painter. Show painter's posts

    Re: Basketball Lockout

    In Response to Re: Basketball Lockout:
    When they negotiated the last CBA, the League .... No one knows what the true profit/loss figures are (it's like the film industry), but if you're willing to miss a season to prove a point (like firing the air traffic controllers), you've pretty much got everyone over a barrell.
    Posted by Number6Fan

    Well said.  However, scapegoating is the American way and those with more PR dollars are at an advantage.  If the owners can do without income for a year the assumption is that they're avoiding losses, but is it a safe assumption or one that they want us to infer?  A corporation can lose money on paper while still paying its CEO exorbitant amounts many times including a bonus (for what - losing money?).  I'm finding it hard to feel for the owners who overpaid for their franchises and for their players, all willingly.  Good business people would have seen the inherent problems and would have acted unilaterally to correct the inequities.  But no, in the NBA they just try to bail out the poor (or poorly run) teams to keep up an illusion of success.  I say retract and dump th esmall market teams that never should have been given teams in the first place.  The Jazz, Hornets, Thunder, and Grizzlies (Lakers' JV) can't generate the TV $ and can't sustain their payrolls, so end the misery sooner rather than later and hold the dispersal draft (in Las Vegas, the real cernter of NBA money, just ask Antoine) next week.  Maybe drop T'Wolves and force the Lakers to go home. Just kidding, of course, but fewer teams can only help the league to sustain itself with better business and more talent on the remaining teams.  

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ortiz123. Show Ortiz123's posts

    Re: Basketball Lockout

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/ball_dont_lie/post/A-tutorial-on-how-NBA-owners-legally-cook-the-bo?urn=nba-wp5834

     BStraight LineDepreciati       
      2008 2009 2010 2011 
    costCost10000000 10000000 10000000 10000000 
    minussalvage10000 10000 10000 10000 
    equalsdeprec cost9990000 9990000 9990000 9990000 
    divideuseful yrs5 5 5 5Total Depreciation
    equals annual dep exp1998000 1998000 1998000 19980007992000
     dep rate0.2%0.2 0.2 0.2 

    As NBA Players Association head man Billy Hunter contended to ESPN.com's Larry Coon recently, "If you decide you don't count interest and depreciation, you already lop off 250 [million] of the 370 million dollars." And that's quite a bit. That's not just because Joe Johnson(notes) signed a terrible contract.

     

    Let's start with looking at a listed $25 million "Loss on player's contracts," in the Nets paperwork, which is actually nothing of the sort.The first thing to do is toss out that $25 million loss, says www.rodneyfort.com/Rods_Sports_Economics/Welcome.html">Rodney Fort, a sports economist at the University of Michigan. That's not a real loss. That's house money. The Nets didn't have to write any checks for $25 million. What that $25 million represents is the amount by which Nets owners reduced their tax obligation under something called a roster depreciation allowance, or RDA.

    Bear with me now. The RDA dates back to 1959, and was maybe Bill Veeck's biggest hustle in a long lifetime of hustles. Veeck argued to the IRS that professional athletes, once they've been paid for, "waste away" like livestock. Therefore a sports team's roster, like a farmer's cattle or an office copy machine or a new Volvo, is a depreciable asset.The underlying logic is specious at best. As Fort points out, a team's roster at any given moment isn't actually depreciating. While some players are fading with age, others are developing and improving. But the Nets don't have to pay more taxes when a player becomes more valuable. And in any case, the cost of depreciation is borne by the athletes themselves, when they pass their primes and lose their personal earning power."I did a depreciation of say business equipment of 10 milllion, with a usefull life of 5 years and as you can see a business can write off the depreciation of equipment for the usefull life of the equipment...Im not saying this is exactly how the NBA does it, but it gives an idea of what the players are arguing, that not all the teams are "losing money". Using a straight line depreciation method, the teams  can depreciated an average  $$ every year... Im not sure about the interest they are talking about. It may be interest they borrowed money on to purchase the franchise or the interest on the contracts they pay the players. But either way it gets written off  as well. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ConnectingRod. Show ConnectingRod's posts

    Re: Basketball Lockout

    There might be no NBA season this year. Too bad, there is one Laker fan here who's expecting a Lakers versus Lakers finals in June 2012. LOL 
     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share