I wonder if they had any expenses.
Could a bad deal mean an end to the Jazz in Utah?
- Thread starter freakazoid
- Start date
I wonder if they had any expenses.
I can't imagine they would have any. At all. None. Clearly, that was what I was inferring, also.
Sorry, I thought you were inferring that you didn't believe the Jazz had actually lost money in any year in the last 25.
Holy ****. If you want to forget the rest of my post, fine. I'm skeptical the Jazz had >$20 million in operating costs last season (beyond player salaries). But I don't really know. My point is if the Jazz do everything wrong (spend more money than ever on a crappy product) and come out about even in a microscopic market, then they'll be fine with their 7% minimum BRI gains.
Those poor Millers.
Depends on how much they really lost. I don’t know the answer to that but do know $20 million doesn't go very far with non-player payroll (wasn't Sloan making $5 million?), marketing, travel expenses, etc. I think 7% only amounts to 9-10 million a year (if my math is correct) but if they control payroll they should be good. Like it or not, personnel mistakes will be made. They are made in every sports league by every team. Teams try to stay competitive so calculated risks are taken, without the benefit of hindsight, that sometimes don’t work out. It’s not always as easy to correct them as you think. And there are still fans who think the Jazz don’t spend enough on payroll.
I don’t know why you have a problem with the Millers and don’t really care. I am grateful for the part the Millers played in providing a lot of great Jazz memories over the years. I don’t think the Jazz would still be in Salt Lake without them. If you want to ignore that then that’s fine, but I don’t begrudge them their wealth or a reasonable return from their business enterprises. They create jobs, contribute to the economy, and seem to genuinely care about their community. But I get it, all rich people are bad.
margodydek
Well-Known Member
Margo's giving you a standing ovation in heaven.
Larry H. Miller is not his benefactors. And I didn't say I hated them, even though Greg is a chode. I do have a problem with the large segment of our state that seem to actually SYMPATHIZE with the ultra-rich, but that's another issue.
The Jazz are fine. I question the resolve of everyone in that family not named Larry and the Jazz are worth more as an asset on the market than as an actual producer of money. That's the only question I have, and it's been there since LHM went. It's only gotten louder with the fabric of the Jazz slowly rotting away since that time. Owning a team is more than writing the checks, and I've seen nothing to indicate that Greg understands that (even though Gail is the owner, technically).
The Jazz are fine. I question the resolve of everyone in that family not named Larry and the Jazz are worth more as an asset on the market than as an actual producer of money. That's the only question I have, and it's been there since LHM went. It's only gotten louder with the fabric of the Jazz slowly rotting away since that time. Owning a team is more than writing the checks, and I've seen nothing to indicate that Greg understands that (even though Gail is the owner, technically).
Gyp Rosetti
Banned
I don't ask this to argue with you because I'm not a Utahr man myself but what has Greg done to make you think that he feels it's just about cutting a check.
He acts that way. The path the franchise has taken reflects that pretty well. I don't expect him to be a basketball freak, but it's a little unnerving to know that he's not one, and that he's not done a thing to earn his status. Even if he wanted to be as involved as LHM was, who's to say anyone would respect him or that he'd have the people skills to make it a positive? I know a few people (cue Best Buy jokes) that have worked under him and I've not heard a positive thing said about him (mostly that when he's not cold, he's vindictive). It's a lot of conjecture I'm operating off of, but it's close to all I have (besides him berating fans of 'his' own team), and it corresponds startlingly with the unraveling of the franchise.
Until I see a damn thing to indicate otherwise, I'll hold to my opinion. Hell, him getting rid of his Smash Mouth at church look would help.
freakazoid
Well-Known Member
Repped.
I'll go ahead and double up what Numberica says. There is no way the LHM group is loosing money, UNLESS they don't count what they owe themselves in advertizing. i.e., they have a lot of commercials and ads and promotional posters for different parts of the LHM group, which end up free since they'd just be paying themselves money. Even then, it's a huge stretch. I'd like to see the real numbers on that before I believe Greg.
In the article, and out of the article after it was printed, people have said they don't see the franchise closing up shop, and neither do I. I feel like this is a ploy to get the fans on the NBA's side.
stopped reading
Stifle Tower
Punch Bowl Re-Filler
Larry H. once said the Jazz operated in the black EVERY year he had the team. Now that may not have included the last 3-4 when the Jazz exceeded the tax threshold. But factor in the profits they made up to that point PLUS the appreciation of the franchise PLUS the vlaue of the ESA, which was privately financed by Larry H, IINM. The Millers have made a fortune up to this point on the team. They could have dumped salaries had they needed; there were ample opportunities. Now maybe they're looking at what happens if the model remains the same going forward. But the Jazz have been highly profitable to this point. If the Millers sell, it's probably due to continuied weakness in the general economy whihc has impacted their other businesses.
margodydek
Well-Known Member
It pains me that I even have to take the time to respond to this. No one said the LHM group is losing money. The Jazz are losing money.
Knowing LHM you are probably right that the Jazz were profitable when he had the team. Who knows what ‘in the black’ means though. I don’t, and I don’t think you do either. It could be $1 or it could be $10 million. So I’m not sure how you state definitively that the Millers have made a fortune up to this point or that the Jazz have been highly profitable. There has been appreciation on the franchise but they have owned the team since 1986. Who knows how much money they might have made if they had invested elsewhere. There is value in the ESA but the building wasn’t free. It had to be financed, so there was interest expense on top of actual construction costs. And in today’s economy it might not be worth what they paid for it. I’m not trying to argue, I just don’t know how you can be so certain.
vslice02
Well-Known Member
I'm not buying the "But the team, the source said, has lost money almost every year since moving to Utah from New Orleans in 1979" line for a minute. Maybe the source is trying to draw up sympathy and business for the Millers, or maybe he wants the Jazz to be sold, but whatever the reasoning I don't believe it because I read at the time that the team definitely yielded profits in 06-07 and 07-08.
Could be some fuzzy math with that one, because LHM borrowed $60-something million to help finance the Delta Center and the article mentions the additional "$20 million bond for their arena" so perhaps the "source" is including those annual payments into the annual profits.
Regardless, this drawn-out labor negotiations only further cement the fact the new CBA will be more favorable to the organization. It may not contain the ideal revenue sharing of local tv money, but it will be more friendly to the Jazz than the previous one and when you combine that with the fact they won't be breaking the bank cap-wise (as they've done the past 2 seasons) I really don't understand the pessimistic outlook on the future of the Jazz.
Could be some fuzzy math with that one, because LHM borrowed $60-something million to help finance the Delta Center and the article mentions the additional "$20 million bond for their arena" so perhaps the "source" is including those annual payments into the annual profits.
Regardless, this drawn-out labor negotiations only further cement the fact the new CBA will be more favorable to the organization. It may not contain the ideal revenue sharing of local tv money, but it will be more friendly to the Jazz than the previous one and when you combine that with the fact they won't be breaking the bank cap-wise (as they've done the past 2 seasons) I really don't understand the pessimistic outlook on the future of the Jazz.
gomretat
Well-Known Member
Whether the Jazz are loosing money or if the article was written for sympathy is not the point folks. LeBron and Melo made moves last year that seemingly started a trend. It created a scenario where KOC traded Dwill. The Hornets and Magic have listened to comments by CP and Howard that could easily lead to trading those guys. If the star players continue to act on the idea that they want to congregate on teams, the rest of the league becomes irrelevant very fast. That is a whole bunch of the battle going on. If I were the Millers -even if LHM were still with us - and the system did not make that kind of movement a lot more difficult, I would put the Jazz for sale in a New York minute. There is no future for teams like the Jazz if 8 -10 teams end up with the best players in the league.