cuyankees wrote:Kampuchea wrote:cuyankees wrote:Adding 75% more OpEx in long term commitments to a biz is a huge decision, a seller would never do that if it's actively shopping.
I understand the idea of not engaging in long-term commitments in a business which you are attempting to sell, however, in this case, those are acquiring assets which directly and immediately will improve the value of the franchise.
In fact, it may be something discussed actively between a buyer and seller during negotiation.
It becomes more an issue for the debatable type of contracts. For example, we would not likely be maxing out Kemba or throwing money at Hardaway in the midst of a sale. Durant is not that situation, it is a no-brainer asset to the team.
Your "sky is falling" proclamation holds little basis in reality, and I believe you simply made that post to create a reaction on the forum.
Wait, so NYK have had 20 years of terrible management, few stars but most valuable tem by a long shot. What does that tell you about the correlation btwn valuation and stars?
KD & KI are $350 mn 5 year commitment, you really think that NYK would add nearly 10% in value (4bn) just from those 2? That's to pretty much break even.
If 2 decades are proof that stars don't matter in NYK valuation, really don't what else will?
I think people think those extra playoff games and jersey sales would increase the already highest in the nba franchise valuation.
The reality is the new owners may not want luxury tax liability, maybe have a different outlook as far as direction, might prefer other players.
I don’t think his post was to get a reaction, he’s right.
But Dolan won’t sell. NBA teams have grown about 200% in value in the last decade and the growth isn’t stopping.