In This Thread Every Post Must Contain A Lockout Update

you've reminded me of a relevant point regarding all this.....

the players are taking part of the operating income from the franchise, but the owners are taking a part of that operating income as well as any built-up appreciation in the franchise's value (which the players typically have a significant role in helping to create). the mavs franchise for example, has doubled in value since cuban bought it from perot

 

sam_amick Sam Amick
So NBA Commish David Stern says there's rampant misinformation going from agents to players, and I'd say that's true in some instances.

sam_amick Sam Amick
Example: player repped by agent in decert group was told recently that NBA lost $100-140 million last year, not the $300 mil claimed

sam_amick Sam Amick
So if you're a player who a) believes that # on financials and b) knows you've given $280 mil in concessions, of course you'll push back.

 

Etan Thomas does not know the difference between profit and revenue.

 

The players do not share in any of the financial risk.

 

I have no clue as I haven't gone over it. My point was every player that seems to have gone over it concludes that it's worse (at least the ones commenting on it). But the owners claim they are losing $300M a year and the players have already conceded more than that if they truly have gone to 50% of BRI. The owners have won enough to cover their "losses". They are just going for the grand slam now.

 

point was made to expose the owners crying about losses - perot's equity value in the mavs has increased substantially since 2000.

but in any case, employees of many private and public companies do often receive a share in company equity despite not having taken any financial risk themselves

 

It is not guaranteed it is optioned, as in the studios have an option to pick up if they decide to do another movie.

What you are arguing is not germaine to this converstion - it is not apples to apples....

And the point about employees getting stock...that is true, but they take less $$$$ and get stock instead.

Maybe the players would like to do that?

LOL.

DD

 

some are optioned and some are guaranteed. the example i gave for depp, was guaranteed as far as i understand. but getting to your point or concern about the owners/teams being stuck with long guaranteed bad contracts, what about the flipside when players improve substantially during their contract period and then become grossly underpaid relative to their market values? the same can apply to rookies who come in on mandated rookie contracts and should be making $10M by their third year but only get $4M. i'm just saying that these guaranteed contracts are not entirely the noose around the owners that they've made them out to be thru the media outlets. there are plenty of examples of players getting stuck with contracts way out of their favor as well..

 

Comparison of offers:

 

NBA NBA
Have questions about the NBA's CBA proposal? Send them in to @NBA. David Stern & Adam Silver will be answering starting at 7pm/et.

 

No, but comparing Etan Thomas to an "average" actor is not fair either.

Etan Thomas may be an average NBA player, but he is not an average basketball player in general. By definition, he is one of the top 360 basketball players in the nation (maybe the world).

I bet the highest-paid 360 actors in Hollywood make quite a bit of money.

 

while crash may have a couple of fair points, this is one of the problems the players face from a PR perspective in situations like this. people like crash are going to hate them no matter what and not care what points they make because the players make millions and they don't. and yet they will side with the owners, who on average are probably worth 100x what even most multi-year veterans are, because they view the owners as "the team they root for" and the players as just passing through.

i'm sure if crash had a highly valued skill and could command millions, he would probably just accept whatever conditions were put upon his employment with nary a peep of how he would like them to be better.

sinking the league that just had record revenue? apparently fans have been willing to turn over more and more of their money to the nba based on what it was been doing under the old rules. again, owner profitability isn't a system issue, it's a BRI split issue. you should want record revenue and a good BRI split, not parity.

exactly. plenty of actors are getting per movie in the neighborhood of the highest paid nba players. and the ones who share in the gross of the movie can make tons more.

 

None the less, Perot has lost money every single year.

Yep they sure do. I have recieved my share of profit sharing and company stock options. None of that changes the fact that the players are whinning me, me, me poor millionair me.

At no time were the primary shareholders, CEO's, etc... going to make less money than me and rightly so. The owners of the NBA deserve to make a profit and not just break even or lose money. The owners have a right to put a team capable of competing with out having to lose millions every year and the players are just being greedy by trying to prevent that.

 

by comparison Etan is certainly in the lower 20% of NBA players. If he was in the lower 20% of actors he would have a part time job at Wendy's.

 

This statement is as false as it gets. I don't care if Anthony Parker makes 20 million a year. What I will not side with is the whining by the players that the owners who have all the financial risk does not deserve to make a generous profit as well.

I also don't want to hear about how unfair their working conditions are when they have not good, not great but completely unbelievably great working conditions. And I certainly do not want them comparing their working conditions to the average person by asking questions that start with "how would you like it if"? That is an insult to you and me because none of us have as good of working conditions as them.

When an owner or business pays someone in as much money as the NBA players get the owners have a right to expect some flexibility.

 

They don't say anything about how luxury taxes will be levied, which happens to be one of the main issues they are fighting over.

 

Agreed. I'd like some clarity from the league on how exactly the luxury tax will be determined starting in Year 3. It's pretty much set at $70.307M for the first two years.

 

I'll probably take that bet depending on what you consider quite a bit of money.

 

Two questions.

- Can the players defend their position in any way to the media without you considering it whining?

- Do you consider Sterns comments to be whining when he speaks on the owners position?

FYI, no business deserves to make a profit just because they are in business.

 

So, where are the updates?