casey wrote:shrink wrote:I think the NBA is about providing an entertainment experience from which an owner can make money. You can do that without being a winner.
Can you name the team that was #1 in operating revenue last year?
The Lakers were #2 .. #1 was the Chicago Bulls.
POR wasn't a winner last year, but they were #1 in increasing their team's valuation 21%.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/2008/32/nba ... ncome.html
I think most owner's aren't in it to make money. There are a lot of better ways to invest your money if that's your goal. And regardless, when you look at that list the better teams are generally at the top. There's the occasional bad team that makes money and good team that loses money, but the pattern of winning and making money is pretty apparent.
I've only known one professional sports owner, and while I agree that he isn't in it to make money, he didn't want to lose money either. He did it as a public service for the community and as a fun toy for himself, and I imagine others do it for prestige. I agree that they probably don't get into it to make money, but I don't know .. some sports franchises have had rapid growth in their value.
I have to admit, I don't see the corelation between success and money. DAL and DEN are both successful teams, and they both lost more than any team. The Knicks and Bulls are in the top five although they were lottery teams. Lakers are #2, BOS #8, but CLE, ORL, and NOH are all kind of in the middle.