Lockout!!!

[GVC]

I have no idea what difference the hard cap makes either but it must make some difference and a pretty ****ing big one if Hunter's asking for 65%.

My original major issue, before you menstruated, was with Numberica's assumption that the owners are being douches here. We don't have a ****ing clue where the truth lies. I tend to believe the owners were losing money. Numberica seems to sit on the other side of the fence. Neither is wrong. But you were with your tone. If I ever see you now, I'm gonna slap you in the face with my ****.

No you won't. I'll cut the little ****er right off if you try. And I just called you a clown...pretty vanilla 'round these parts. Stop being such a sensitive little flower.

edit: I also called you a ****ing moron. My bad. No hard feelings?

 

[Siro]

Guys guys. You're missing out on the opportunity to turn this asinine debate into a political one. I can easily see how one side represents the Republicans and the other Democrats. I suggest you proceed along those lines.

 

[GVC]

We don't have a ****ing clue where the truth lies. I tend to believe the owners were losing money.

We know how other leagues operate, we have some knowledge of the TV deals the NBA has relative to other leagues, and we know what the owners demanded. Given that information, plus David Stern not denying that the players have compromised, it seems to me the owners are not negotiating in good faith, choosing instead to play a game of chicken with the players. It's their right to do so, and I have no problem with it, but if I have to lay blame to one side or the other if the season is cancelled, it's going to be the owners (as of today).

 

[GVC]

Guys guys. You're missing out on the opportunity to turn this asinine debate into a political one. I can easily see how one side represents the Republicans and the other Democrats. I suggest you proceed along those lines.

The owners AND the players are worthless fascists? NHL, here I come.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

We know how other leagues operate, we have some knowledge of the TV deals the NBA has relative to other leagues, and we know what the owners demanded. Given that information, plus David Stern not denying that the players have compromised, it seems to me the owners are not negotiating in good faith, choosing instead to play a game of chicken with the players. It's there right to do so, and I have no problem with it, but it seems as though the owners will be more to blame if there is no season (to me, anyway).

I don't disagree. But **** it, at least Kobe, Duncan, and Nowitzki will be a year older.

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

No you won't. I'll cut the little ****er right off if you try. And I just called you a clown...pretty vanilla 'round these parts. Stop being such a sensitive little flower.

edit: I also called you a ****ing moron. My bad. No hard feelings?

Dude, you know how I roll. **** it.

 

[GVC]

Dude, you know how I roll. **** it.

So we'll be sharing ***** in a more friendly manner if ever we cross paths?

 

[Gyp Rosetti]

So we'll be sharing ***** in a more friendly manner if ever we cross paths?

**** yeah.

 

[freakazoid]

Ah, get a ****ing room already.

 

[DutchJazzer]

1. "THEY". Who is, who isn't? Don't cite me vague, info-war Stern press-releases.
2. What constitutes "loss"? How much of the loss is legally cooked books? Don't cite me vague, info-war Stern press-releases.
3. BILLIONAIRES. Do people know what that means?
4. Players will be losing money, and a MUCH larger source-of-income than the owners will be.
5. Owners won't negotiate in good faith if the report is true.

not losing money is what made them BILLIONaires. if they though like you about losing money that it dont matter cus there is till some money left. they wont be billionairs they would have been poor like you.
also note that nba players are NOT losing money. they are not investing anything. most nba player dont know crap about finances. they burn through there money. some worse then others eg sprewell and barkley to a lesser degree

 

[sepanol]

so i guess the news is no good, we returned back to where we were in the beginning?-i mean the lockout talks-, no light at the end of the tunnel?

 

[margodydek]

Margo's stance:

I would have liked the owners to budge just a little from their stance as I think they could salvage the season if they did, but having said that, I think it was definitely time that the players make a big concession. People can argue what the true average salary is for the players, but no matter how you slice it, the players have been getting their 57% every year. The NBPA is like a successful guy who works on Wall Street, but still lives with his parents scot-free. Well the NBPA's dad isn't the brightest tool in the shed and got fired from his job due to incompetence. So for the sake of all: Dad (owners), son (NBPA), and mom (fans), I think the son should chip in for the time being until Dad get's his !@#$ together, once that happens, then they can reasses their situation.

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

They're losing money. The players aren't. What's the issue here?

even if they are losing money year-to-year (which is debatable), the values of the teams have skyrocketed. Miller bought the Jazz for $25 million. Forbes now values the team at $350 million. you call that losing money?

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

They're losing money. The players aren't. What's the issue here?

the Warriors were sold last year for $450 million. the Warriors! that was $315 million more than Cohan paid for the team in 1995. "losing money", eh?

Larry Ellison, the CEO of Oracle, reportedly made a bid higher than $450 million that was rejected for whatever reason. do you find it odd that these genius billionaires are fighting with each other for the chance to lose money?

 

[//r00t 4 Jazz]

Hey GVC I'm not trying to argue with you and just asking a question here and you may have answered it already with your lil' spat with Solmo and I missed it.... but. Did I read you correctly when you said the NBA owners had one of the best CBA's in pro sports, if I'm not mistaken it is one of the worst in that 57% of all revenue goes to the players, that is all no real issues just that questions.

Hey Rusty I'm definitely not a financial wiz or even of average understanding but I believe a company (in this case teams) can increase in worth but still be losing money (by playing players more then they bring in).

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

Hey Rusty I'm definitely not a financial wiz or even of average understanding but I believe a company (in this case teams) can increase in worth but still be losing money (by playing players more then they bring in).

sure. see my first post. the year-to-year finances of these franchises are just one piece in the puzzle of whether they are "losing money" or not.

 

[MattMan]

even if they are losing money year-to-year (which is debatable), the values of the teams have skyrocketed. Miller bought the Jazz for $25 million. Forbes now values the team at $350 million. you call that losing money?

Wait.....are you actually comparing the cost of something back in 1979 to now? Ever heard of inflation? The average cost of a car in 1979 was $4000, compared to $29,000 today. I know the percentages are in the favor of the Jazz, but player salaries and overhead are way up since '79 even when factoring in inflation.

When 24+ teams are losing money, it doesn't matter how much they sell for, cause you're not buying or selling them to make or lose money.

 

[One Brow]

Larry Ellison, the CEO of Oracle, reportedly made a bid higher than $450 million that was rejected for whatever reason. do you find it odd that these genius billionaires are fighting with each other for the chance to lose money?

Since when do people buy sports teams with the idea of making money (besides Doinald Sterling)?

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

Wait.....are you actually comparing the cost of something back in 1979 to now? Ever heard of inflation? The average cost of a car in 1979 was $4000, compared to $29,000 today. I know the percentages are in the favor of the Jazz, but player salaries and overhead are way up since '79 even when factoring in inflation.

okay, Miller bought the Jazz in 1986 for $47 million (in 2011 dollars, per some online inflation calculator i found). the team is now valued at $350 million. that is still a 700% return on his initial investment. the losses due to "overhead" would really have to be something to cancel out that much gain.

When 24+ teams are losing money, it doesn't matter how much they sell for, cause you're not buying or selling them to make or lose money.

Cohan made $315 million when he sold the Warriors. are you sure that the investors currently lining up to buy NBA franchises aren't doing so to make tons of money when they eventually sell?

and, if so many smart, rich people are trying to buy these teams, doesn't it make you wonder if the numbers coming from Stern ("24+ teams are losing money") are really accurate?

 

[r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t]

Since when do people buy sports teams with the idea of making money (besides Doinald Sterling)?

Cohan turned $100-something million into $450 million in just 15 years while owning the Warriors.