What's new
By:
Filters

Lockout!!!

Sirkickyass said:
I strongly suspect the other thing they're doing is counting depreciation of some fixed assets. For example, many NBA teams have an ownership stake in the building they play in. I wouldn't be shocked at all if they're counting the amount that the physical building decreases in value each year as an operating loss while not counting in other revenues the building creates (concerts, Disney events, rodeos, Monster Trucks, etc etc).
Click to expand...

word is that they DO count that stuff in their P&L statements, but it's not currently figured into the BRI calculation in terms of how to split revenues. the owners are trying to add that in so that the players share in those costs, the players don't think they should have to because they're essentially just employees.

this according to several recent tweets by larry coon.
 
zman1527 said:
So, these mega-millionaire businessmen made bad investments and now they want the employees to bail them out of their loans. If I was a player I would say tough luck boyz, renegotiate your loan or sell it at a loss. Don't look to me bail out your millionaire ***.
Click to expand...

there are several problems with your logic. i can argue the players' side of this argument, too, but the way you get there has some logical flaws.

the owners have created a business that allows guys to get filthy stinkin' rich for playing basketball, but under the current system, THEY take all the financial risks. the players right now are GUARANTEED 57% of BRI minus certain costs, or around $2 billion... no risk involved there. they show up, they get a paycheck.

the owners, on the other hand, assume all the risks of running the business, which is why many of them lose money and a few of them lose boatloads of money. some are billionaire playboys who are fine losing the money because their team is just a high-priced toy they like to entertain themselves with. but others are serious businessmen who accept tons of risk and loss just to be kingmakers for a bunch of spoiled kids. so the players are just as much at fault here... they're failing to compromise so that they can make $2.1 billion instead of $1.9 billion at the expense of owners who have invested in creating a machine that makes them uber-rich. and if you think creating an NBA where players can make that kind of money is easy, talk to someone who has played ball in europe.

like i said, that's just one side of the argument, and i can articulate and sympathize with both sides...i just think you're oversimplifying.
 
But just imagine that--if, say, the top 10 negotiators/lawyers/analysts on both sides agreed to take no salary until the lockout was over, I'm guessing it would not last long at all.
Click to expand...

that actually happened in the NFL. their union leader agreed to lower his salary to $1 during the lockout as a show of solidarity and shared urgency. shane battier asked billy hunter if he planned to do the same and hunter apparently squirmed and dodged the question.
 
While I understand both positions on this (players and owners), in the end, it's Millionaires fighting Billionaires. If the season get's cancelled as a result of this, it will probably take me long, long time to come around to caring for the Jazz again.
 
I get no sense from Hunter that he understands the people he's hired to represent have virtually no leverage. Even worse, I think he's all too aware of his legacy. He should be trying to skillfully play a losing hand. He looks like a guy who thinks he can bluff Ace high into winning the pot.
 
Well stated, Nerd. Since they are the "talent" that makes the league go, I am ok with a contract that gives the players a certain percentage of profits. HOWEVER, do you think that they would be ok with paying a certain percentage of the losses?

How about they are treated like every other employee in the private sector: you sign a contract for X million dollars, you perform you get paid what your contract says. If you feel that that is not fair compensation for your efforts, you are free to seek a better deal in another league or industry. In this country, people (owners) are still free to invest money in a risky venture with the expectation of making money (at least for now). Preferably A LOT of money. It is a risk, and if they make poor business descisions, the league folds and EVERYONE is out of a job.

Remember this situation impacts not only players and owners, but also the vendors, security folks, janitors, cooks, AND the restaurants, hotels, and other businesses that rely on the NBA games to make money.
 
Great! Just great! Now I can't have my nachos, large coke and pretzel for $18.95.
 
These guys make millions a year, and it's not enough?!!?

If I were one of them, I'd be so happy to be getting anywhere near what they are already getting, not holding out for more.
 
sepanol said:
so when will it be clear , how long will the lockout last?
Click to expand...

The expert on PTI (a news show on ESPN) said he'd give 70% odds that there will be no 2011-2012 season... so........ no basketball until October of 2012
 
I say we slowly upload old playoff games for the Jazz until the lockout ends in a feeble attempt to keep us entertained.
 
zman1527 said:
So, these mega-millionaire businessmen made bad investments and now they want the employees to bail them out of their loans. If I was a player I would say tough luck boyz, renegotiate your loan or sell it at a loss. Don't look to me bail out your millionaire ***.
Click to expand...

The only major "bad investment" the League made was agreeing to the last CBA. While individual teams may look at bad contracts like AK, Eddy Curry, and Gilbert Arenas as "bad contracts," the reality is that the players are going to get 57% of the revenue, no more and no less. The league would have lost $300 million last year REGARDLESS of the amount of individual contracts. The league swallowed losses for the last few years, they are not looking for a bail out. They do have the right to negotiate and adjust the CBA (as do the players) to terms that better meet their needs.

The players are essentially asking the league to take a loss on their behalf to keep their salaries high. How many employees in the US can ask for that without getting fired on the spot?
 
LunaticWolf said:
I say we slowly upload old playoff games for the Jazz until the lockout ends in a feeble attempt to keep us entertained.
Click to expand...

I watched game 7 against the Rockets a few days ago. I guess I'll have to search for all my other games on VHS in order to keep myself sane for the next year or so.

And no basketball until October 2012? That only gives us 2 months of basketball until the world ends! :( (add a few tears to that sad face)
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
The only major "bad investment" the League made was agreeing to the last CBA. While individual teams may look at bad contracts like AK, Eddy Curry, and Gilbert Arenas as "bad contracts," the reality is that the players are going to get 57% of the revenue, no more and no less. The league would have lost $300 million last year REGARDLESS of the amount of individual contracts. The league swallowed losses for the last few years, they are not looking for a bail out. They do have the right to negotiate and adjust the CBA (as do the players) to terms that better meet their needs.
Click to expand...

Are you sure it's true? Does it mean that players get bonuses somehow on top of their contract salaries? Link?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top