RealGM

Last year's list only had three teams -- the New York Knicks, the Los Angeles Lakers and the Chicago Bulls worth more than $1 billion, but this year, Forbes says those three teams are worth at least $2 billion.

The magazine says the Lakers top the league at a $2.6B valuation, followed by the Knicks ($2.5B) and the Bulls ($2B).
Read more at
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/12204869/forbes-reports-11-nba-teams-now-worth-1b

It is interesting the Bulls are at 2 billion even though they probably have much lesser TV contracts than the Knicks and Lakers. I think the Bulls will be worth more if they get new TV contracts and make a deep run in the playoffs. That plus good financial management for the last few years(no repeater tax issues) is a good indicator there will be a lot of talent retained with additions.

Waits for the FO is so cheap lines

Bulls are the financial champions. But we have known this for years.

Obligatory "Rein$dorf is cheap" comments to follow.

DASMACKDOWN wrote:Bulls are the financial champions. But we have known this for years.

Sold out games with the Dynamic Duo (Dickey Simpkins and Rusty Lue). They were Yao and T-Mac before Yao and Tmac.

My point is with Reinsdorf's son taking over, there is going to be a new way of looking at things. But, when your investment keeps going up, they can take more risks.

I wonder though how much of having high-profile names like Derrick, Pau makes an impact on the value. Is that why the Lakers and Knicks signed Kobe, Melo to insane contracts?

Rein$dorf is cheap

Mech Engineer wrote:My point is with Reinsdorf's son taking over, there is going to be a new way of looking at things. But, when your investment keeps going up, they can take more risks.

I wonder though how much of having high-profile names like Derrick, Pau makes an impact on the value. Is that why the Lakers and Knicks signed Kobe, Melo to insane contracts?

Its first about the geography/demographics/population of the city.

That is by FAR the singlemost driver of valuation.

Big names do matter; but only to create buzz and ensure that there are people buying tickets for the next season and the season beyond.

Here is an example: Take OKC and Durant. Sure, Durant + Westbrook are big names and there are lots of titles/NBA Finals waiting in their careers. Say that drives up the valuation of the Thunder to a large number. What happens after Durant retires? The valuation would plummet then.

Thats not the case though because its the population base that supports that team that is MORE important than any other factor.

Mech Engineer wrote:My point is with Reinsdorf's son taking over, there is going to be a new way of looking at things. But, when your investment keeps going up, they can take more risks.

I wonder though how much of having high-profile names like Derrick, Pau makes an impact on the value. Is that why the Lakers and Knicks signed Kobe, Melo to insane contracts?

Its first about the geography/demographics/population of the city.

That is by FAR the singlemost driver of valuation.

Big names do matter; but only to create buzz and ensure that there are people buying tickets for the next season and the season beyond.

Here is an example: Take OKC and Durant. Sure, Durant + Westbrook are big names and there are lots of titles/NBA Finals waiting in their careers. Say that drives up the valuation of the Thunder to a large number. What happens after Durant retires? The valuation would plummet then.

Thats not the case though because its the population base that supports that team that is MORE important than any other factor.

Mech Engineer wrote:My point is with Reinsdorf's son taking over, there is going to be a new way of looking at things. But, when your investment keeps going up, they can take more risks.

I wonder though how much of having high-profile names like Derrick, Pau makes an impact on the value. Is that why the Lakers and Knicks signed Kobe, Melo to insane contracts?

Its first about the geography/demographics/population of the city.

That is by FAR the singlemost driver of valuation.

Big names do matter; but only to create buzz and ensure that there are people buying tickets for the next season and the season beyond.

Here is an example: Take OKC and Durant. Sure, Durant + Westbrook are big names and there are lots of titles/NBA Finals waiting in their careers. Say that drives up the valuation of the Thunder to a large number. What happens after Durant retires? The valuation would plummet then.

Thats not the case though because its the population base that supports that team that is MORE important than any other factor.

This would probably be a good time to sell for Reinsdorf. Franchise values are a complete bubble right now.

Well its easy to be rich when you're so c-

BeatDaHeat420 wrote:Waits for the FO is so cheap lines

I'll see my way out.

musiqsoulchild wrote:

Mech Engineer wrote:My point is with Reinsdorf's son taking over, there is going to be a new way of looking at things. But, when your investment keeps going up, they can take more risks.

I wonder though how much of having high-profile names like Derrick, Pau makes an impact on the value. Is that why the Lakers and Knicks signed Kobe, Melo to insane contracts?

Its first about the geography/demographics/population of the city.

That is by FAR the singlemost driver of valuation.

Big names do matter; but only to create buzz and ensure that there are people buying tickets for the next season and the season beyond.

Here is an example: Take OKC and Durant. Sure, Durant + Westbrook are big names and there are lots of titles/NBA Finals waiting in their careers. Say that drives up the valuation of the Thunder to a large number. What happens after Durant retires? The valuation would plummet then.

Thats not the case though because its the population base that supports that team that is MORE important than any other factor.

I understand it is mostly the population /geography /history etc... But, the Lakers and Knicks probably will lose a little bit of their value if they run a bunch of no-names like the 76ers for 5-6 years.

The Bulls cannot go back to the Skiles era no big name types on the roster for half a decade, IMO. OKC can have Lebron but probably will not value upwards a lot more.

The impact of a big name is worth more for the Bulls than OKC regardless of the basketball results. Also, the Bulls are consistent in going after big names. Off-course, they need talent but they like big name talent.

Say, hypothetically if Affalo(a lesser name but better basketball fit) and Melo(a bigger name but not such a good basketball fit) were available, would the Bulls go after Affalo first? They would always go after Melo first.

Boy the Bulls could use Korver and Asik right now.

Chicago-Bull-E wrote:Boy the Bulls could use Korver right now.

Fixed

TimRobbins wrote:This would probably be a good time to sell for Reinsdorf. Franchise values are a complete bubble right now.

No way...not unless you can predict that in 25 years Chicago would go the way of Detroit as an economy/city.

As long as Chicago is a super-city, people will have good paying jobs and disposable income to support their evenings out. A tiny percentage of those evenings out spent on Bulls/United Center is all that is needed.

Its a HIGHLY SUSTAINABLE model. Especially with the insane international expansion that the NBA has accomplished.

Thanks MJ!

Glad to see his team raising in value because all these NBA teams, combined, were probably not worth 2 billion back in the 80's....

And the Bulls would sell for more than 2 billion if put up for sale. Ballmer paid that for the lowly Clippers.
Imagine owning a team with the fan support and attendance this one has

SpinninHouse wrote:Obligatory "Rein$dorf is cheap" comments to follow.

Cheap$dorf

Did I do it right?

musiqsoulchild wrote:

TimRobbins wrote:This would probably be a good time to sell for Reinsdorf. Franchise values are a complete bubble right now.

No way...not unless you can predict that in 25 years Chicago would go the way of Detroit as an economy/city.

As long as Chicago is a super-city, people will have good paying jobs and disposable income to support their evenings out. A tiny percentage of those evenings out spent on Bulls/United Center is all that is needed.

Its a HIGHLY SUSTAINABLE model. Especially with the insane international expansion that the NBA has accomplished.

I doubt it. The valuation model isn't based on profits. You're never going to get exponential profit growth in this league, since the players will ask for an increase in BRI if that happens.

Current valuations are a bubble, driven by the stock and bond bubbles. If I owned a team, I would be selling now.