We need a primer from one of you NBA money experts on the rules about teams keeping or sharing revenue. Yao is already a huge draw. How much of the money he generates for the Rockets do we get to keep? It's an important question, to the extent that we could use the money to defray the luxury tax if we want to resign Posey, Mobley, Griffin, etc.
I think that's a great question, and -- if I were the one to ask it -- I would expect someone like you to answer it. You don't know? My guess is the Rockets coffers will improve only from the draw at the Summit and from merchandising Yao. I think all other revenue streams are fixed for several years.
I don't know if it is that "fixed". If I am not wrong, Bulls had paid Jordan ~30 millions for two years. David Stern had to help to pay part of it, because a lot of money that Jordan made went to NBA instead of Bulls.
I have to think this is absolutely got to be true to some extent. Local marketing $$ because of Yao have to skyrocket. But the cap doesn't change. And Carroll Dawson seems like he is in this to win, not necessarily make a boatload of money. I would think we would be able to pay into the luxary tax and still have him take home a bundle, esp in a couple of years.
I strongly doubt the NBA paid any of that Jordan contract. Can you imagine the uproar if they did? It would be stupid for the NBA to even consider helping on a player contract for any team. Now Krause probably made so much money over the years before and after that it was a drop in the bucket to him.
If I find out the Rockets are making a sh*t load of money because of Yao and then won't re-sign a big free agent because they don't wanna pay luxury tax... BTW...I'm an Oakland A's fan. I'd probably get used to it pretty quick.
Umm...Alexander's the one spotting the cash, not Dawson. I'm certain Les tries to make a buck or two. Don't get me wrong, I'm not dogging Les. Alexander is a great owner who always puts forth the money to place a winning team in Houston, unlike Drayton McLane. A lot of it has to do with the economics of the NBA versus MLB. Baseball went FA crazy in terms of spending and now it seems they're running out of cash or simply wising up after watching teams like the Rangers and the Mets. Still the NBA's financial situation is a lot stronger than baseball's and you've got to give Stern credit. As far as additional revenue Ming makes outside of Houston, I have no idea
I don't know, but I would bet that Jordan's Bulls made a killing at the gates in Chicago, had the most profitable merchandising machine and a rich contract for televising games with WGN. I doubt the Rockets make nearly as much on broadcasting with their new deals (how long do they run?), and they still have pretty bad turn-out at games in Houston. They definitely have some potential on the merchandising, but it seems to me to be the sort of thing that will take a number of years to mature. But, I think the whole operation will get a kick in the pants when the new arena opens and they get new uniforms. They will sell a lot more tickets (for more money) and sell a lot more merchandise. Plus, they control concessions, other bookings, etc. I just thought of another revenue stream: sponserships. The Yanjing (sp?) Beer thing paid them a nice chunk of change. I'm sure these things go along way to padding the bottom line. In short, given the sacrifice Houston has made in giving the Rockets this shiny new arena, I expect some generosity from Les in fielding a competitive team for this city, especially given his recent luck.
I don't know much about the rules. But I believe it goes against the general spirit of the NBA parity principle. If a superstar can make enough money for his team so that in turn, the team can use that money to sign other superstar free agents, then that will mess up the whole parity concept. Don't you think?
Could Ming increase the cap for the entire NBA by some amount just from the amount of money that he will bring in? Let's say that the Asian market generates an extra 100 million over the next 5 seasons in merchandising/tv/etc - that would allow for the cap to be raised right? I barely know anything about the whole nba financial structure/cap/etc.
Yeah, only the underprivileged would want equality. I'm not saying that the parity principle is good for the Rockets or anybody. I'm just saying that if the NBA allowed what you were thinking, it would contradict the principle. BTW, I think the principle is good to some extent. It is meant to prevent the big markets like LA and NY to dominate the league all the time.
