1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

I think meddlesome sports owners are a good example of why capitalism and private property are bad.

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by HamJam, May 19, 2016.

  1. HamJam

    HamJam Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,580
    Likes Received:
    503
    So, like most of you probably are as well, I am none too pleased with the owner of our beloved Rockets because of the news that he is likely to hire Mike D'antoni as our new coach, allegedly overriding Morey's interest in bringing back JVG.

    And this seems to me to be a great example of one of the main issues I have with capitalism and private ownership of society's resources, infrastructure and assets. And instead of polluting the GARM with such a rant, I am rightfully depositing it here in the beloved cesspool we like to call the D&D.

    But truly, look at all the franchises ran into the ground by incompetent owners. People who are seemingly inept fools and inherited the team, or people who made their money in other fields, and then take over a sports team, and lack the sports knowledge to run the team, or even to know they lack it, or to know how to select someone who has it.

    Whether we are talking about Buss in LA, Vivek in Sacremento, Jerry Jones in Dallas, Dolan in NY, Sterling in LA, Prokhorov in Brooklyn -- none of these people were able to take control of these organizations due to their resume or merit. They took control because there is a document with their name on it that gives them something called "ownership" of the team, and if people don't respect that document, eventually police will come in and violently enforce it.

    Capitalism is supposed to be a meritocracy, but do we have the people with the most merit running these organizations? Sometimes, sure. But only by the grace of chance causing the owner to be smart enough to intelligently delegate the role properly. That's little better than having to hope the monarchs first born son is capable in order to avoid a generation of ill suited governance.

    And it isn't just sports teams. Those of you who have spent any time in the work force have likely worked at a company either owned or ran by an idiot. Someone who gets in the way and hassles people, but doesn't truly lead. Who, indeed, just acts as a burden for the natural leaders and best workers at the company. And by virtue of what does this person that no one would otherwise follow get to be the leader? By virtue of a piece of paper with a name on it and police that will come in and beat you over the head if you don't honor that piece of paper.

    Real leaders at companies don't need that piece of paper to be a leader. People will follow them because they see that it is in their benefit to do so. So, since leadership based on private property is no assurance of merit, and merit based leadership doesn't require private property as its basis, why do we let these pieces of papers with names on it and the thugs that enforce them rule our lives? Why do we let them control our workplaces? Our sports teams? Our country?
     
  2. El_Conquistador

    El_Conquistador King of the D&D, The Legend, #1 Ranking
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Messages:
    14,126
    Likes Received:
    5,132
    [Educational Post]
    Tell me, friend what are your leadership credentials that make you so wise as to the finer aspects of leadership?
     
  3. HamJam

    HamJam Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,580
    Likes Received:
    503
    I've led things, I've been led. Lot's of experiences. It was great. Everyone loved it. I loved the leaders. The led loved me. Very great.

    But, please, tell me comrade what are your credentials to be able to judge my credentials on the case of my wisdom vis a vis leadership?
     
  4. BigDog63

    BigDog63 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,163
    Likes Received:
    1,538
    A sports team isn't society's resource, it is the owner's.

    And were it not for capitalism...sports teams like the Rockets wouldn't exist at all.

    So, the argument is flawed, no matter which way you look at it.

    There is a very simple solution to inept ownership. Stop watching their games.

    Having the merits to buy the team doesn't guarantee the merits to running it successfully. Usually not, in fact, as none of the owners got their wealth through sports management.

    But, again, capitalism offers the solution. Stop buying their product, and ownership will change.
    Which is why people work at those companies. For their own benefit. If they could work somewhere else, they would, and should. Again, problem solved.

    I don't. So, the question then is...why do you? If you don't like your job, quite and get another. If you don't like your team's ownership...stop buying their product. The solution is readily apparent, yet you fail to grasp it.
     
    1 person likes this.
  5. Sweet Lou 4 2

    Sweet Lou 4 2 Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2007
    Messages:
    37,663
    Likes Received:
    18,876
    I have seen many successful companies destroyed by leaders and poor decision making that was done to maximize profits but failed to understand what had made the company successful.

    This is not a function of capitalism but one of ego and human fallacy.
     
  6. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,533
    Likes Received:
    17,100
    Unless of course the team is owned by the city. I think there are some NFL teams that are like that.

    But citizens do pay for the stadiums and venues where the teams' games are located. Les doesn't own Toyota center. Minute Maid park is paid for in part by the hotel/rental car taxes etc.

    The owner is powerless to have a team unless citizens help fund a location to play the games.

    Your solution is drastic and unrealistic. Your solution punishes the GM, managers, players, people who produce and deliver concessions, the folks that sell the concessions, Houston's local television and cable markets, the people who do maintenance at the stadiums, the folks who run the parking, etc.

    Furthermore you provide incentive for local sports networks and cable stations to not want to broadcast the games when there is always the option that all the fans will abandon the team because of an owner's stupid mistake.

    It will hurt the team further down the road than just for the duration of the bad coach's stay.
     
  7. Haymitch

    Haymitch Custom Title
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2005
    Messages:
    27,803
    Likes Received:
    22,819
    Every human has the right to a local sports team that does exactly what he/she wants. Obama better address this immediately.
     
  8. Buck Turgidson

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2002
    Messages:
    83,911
    Likes Received:
    81,937
    I'm pretty sure the only pro sports team in the big 4 leagues that is publicly owned is Green Bay.
     
  9. Commodore

    Commodore Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Messages:
    30,594
    Likes Received:
    14,046
    capitalism and private property are about freedom and free exchange

    meritocracies may exist within that environment, but not always
     
  10. Space Ghost

    Space Ghost Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 1999
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    6,050
    I agree. We should let the government regulate how private companies maximize their profits and how they spend this money.
     
  11. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,726
    Likes Received:
    3,367
    Well I have seen estimates that the Rockets franchise is worth 1.5 billion. Approximately 500 million of which is due to the attractive lease on the Toyota Center which we the tax payers have paid for.

    As to whether a city or the fans could own a team. See the Green Bay Packers.

    The Packers are certainly a major sports franchise which competes with the billionaire owners of other major sports franchises.
     
  12. Commodore

    Commodore Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2007
    Messages:
    30,594
    Likes Received:
    14,046
    that would run counter to notions of freedom and free markets

    and pro sports are so heavily subsidized/regulated, they can hardly be held up as an example of capitalism
     
  13. BigDog63

    BigDog63 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,163
    Likes Received:
    1,538
    Personally, I think this should be a more common model. Green Bay is the one example I know of, and a good thing too, or Green Bay would likely have lost its team a long time ago.

    Yes, and no. Generally, these stadiums and venues are paid for with revenue streams set up to tax everyone BUT the citizens there (hotels, rental cars, etc). Which violates the most fundamental principle of our country...the very reason we broke off from England---no taxation without representation. The people being taxed are excluded from being able to vote on said tax.


    Is it? Other than refusing to fund the efforts of an owner one despises, what other, or more effective, recourse is there? Fans have complained, vociferously, about ownership as long as there have been sports teams. Yet the problem remains. Clearly, no other solution works.

    Yes, this is true. although after the ownership changes, or the ownership changes its actions...and it absolutely would, all this business returns. So, again, what better option is there?
    .

    That option has always existed. Fans are just too stubborn to exercise it. Even for a few minutes. Then they complain, like here, that the ownership doesn't pay attention to them. Duh...why should they, if everyone keeps going?

    If you really think this is true, then be content with the status quo.
     
  14. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,494
    Likes Received:
    35,872
    Capitalism,like, well ANY -ism, or basically anything in life. tends to reward luck and randomness as much as it rewards skill.

    The problem is that those who are the beneficiaries of it (who are undoubteldy skillful much of the time) tend to over-attribute their success to their own skill, rather than luck, and frequently tend to overreach when taking on situations where they aren't as lucky.

    That's why expert forecasting, for example, is probably some of the very worst forecasting there is in terms of accuracy.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. BigDog63

    BigDog63 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2011
    Messages:
    3,163
    Likes Received:
    1,538
    Pretty sure that was exactly SpaceGhosts point.

    Actually, those are examples OF capitalism in action. Seeking those subsidies...is that not ownership trying to maximize its profits?

    Which does open up another avenue of protest.
    1). Don't vote for the subsidies. Houston did these before, because they hated the owner, and the owner took the team and left.
    2). Let the local politiicans know that THEY will be voted out of office if they don't fix it. Not sure the politicians can really do much after the fact (owner can just tell them bugger off), but still an option.

    But, still, by far the best way for fans to protest is don't go. You don't think an empty stadium, even for just the beginning of the game, wouldn't get the owner's attention? And that of the media? But fans have attempted this, and it never works out. We apparently will eat whatever crap the owner gives us, and do so quite willingly. So, who is the idiot in this scenario...the ownership, or the consumers?
     
  16. robbie380

    robbie380 ლ(▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿ ̿ლ)
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2002
    Messages:
    23,158
    Likes Received:
    9,437
    The NBA isn't very "capitalist" if you look at the structure.

    America isn't very "capitalist" either.
     
  17. bobrek

    bobrek Politics belong in the D & D

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 1999
    Messages:
    36,288
    Likes Received:
    26,638
    And the fans/owners of the Packers have no say so in the every day running of the club. Also, their 'stock' in the team is essentially worthless.
     
  18. bobrek

    bobrek Politics belong in the D & D

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 1999
    Messages:
    36,288
    Likes Received:
    26,638
    I am fairly certain, with the vast number of times I have rented a car and/or stayed in a hotel while I have been in Houston, I have paid more towards the Astros, Rockets and Texans stadium than most citizens of Harris county and most of the posters on this board.
     
  19. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,494
    Likes Received:
    35,872
    That's because "capitalism" itself (much like socialism) is a term that means whatever people want it to mean.

    Usually it means a regulatory system most favorable to my preferred group of winners.
     
  20. robbie380

    robbie380 ლ(▀̿Ĺ̯▀̿ ̿ლ)
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2002
    Messages:
    23,158
    Likes Received:
    9,437
    D'Antonism will soon be coming to the Toyota Center
     

Share This Page