Lockout

[billinder33]

Also worth noting that the GSW ticket prices have been amongst the bottom 3rd of the league in a top 5 population market for the better part of the Cohan regime. The attendance figures of the Cohan regime were largely based on blue light special ticket prices for a grab table quality product for 15 of 17 years. I think the commitment and value of the GSW fanbase is frequently overestimated by fans and analysts in overlooking the ticket price issues. Our famous passion and loyalty has yet to be truly tested by a market appropriate ticket price.

Rather than the most passionate fans in the NBA, we may just have those with the appropriately lowest expectations.

Bottom line, people went to games, lined Cohan's pockets, enabled him to be what he was, then complained about it day after day after day, never looking inward to see where the REAL problem was.

Unlike the oil cartels or your local health care monopoly, this was one area where people actually could have voted with their purchasing dollars to punish a crappy business owned by a horrible human being. They didn't.

[Sleepy51]

Actually this line of discussion sounds a lot like a personal attacks and is not a good way yo keep an intersting and heretofor respectful conversation going. I'm pretty sure there was a way to make the point about fan consumption without making it about any particular individuals in such a hostile way. Maybe it reada different than you intended, but the tone of that post you directed at floppy definitely comes across as personal jabs.

[billinder33]

Actually that sounds a lot like a personal attack and is not a good way yo keep an intersting and heretofor respectfulnconversation going. I'm pretty sure there was a way to make the point about fan consumption without making it about any particular individuals in such a hostile way. Maybe it reada different than you intended, but the tone of that post definitely comes across as personal jabs.

It's only a personal attack against Cohan, and a call for people to look at themselves to see how they are contributing to degradation in quality.

You can easily apply this same concept to global warming, deforestation, over fishing of the seas, or whatever your pet cause may be.

[Sleepy51]

The hostile comments in that post were not soley directed at cohan. Maybe that's what you meant to say, but what you actually said got personal. It was not so offensive that I feel compelled to moderate your behavior here, so I am just oicing my displeasure as a member of the forum and participant in what has been a very good discussion that your post directed at Floppy was a wrong turn and was a disservice to the discussion. I hope that won't be a theme in your posting here.

That is all.

[billinder33]

The hostile comments in that post were not soley directed at cohan. Maybe that's what you meant to say, but what you actually said got personal. It was not so offensive that I feel compelled to moderate your behavior here, but as a member of the forum who WAS enjoying the discussion, I want to be clear that your post directed at Floppy was a wrong turn and was a disservice to the discussion. I hope that won't be a theme in your posting here.

I hope Lacob makes it no longer a theme.


That is all!

[floppymoose]

billinders attacks are just an attempt at distraction anyway. They have no bearing on the whether the owners position in the cba negotiations is a reasonable one, which is what I'm critiquing.

[Twinkie defense]

And anyway the players ARE going to give up a slice of their pie. So you are wrong on both counts.

Huh? Where did I say otherwise? I really don't know what the players are going to do.

Sorry, I must have mixed what you think will happen with what you want to happen.

It is interesting to look back on the Warriors sale now... people really low-balled the sale price. In retrospect I think the record sale price had to do first with the team's profitability. Some of the other teams have been a tough sell. Let's say owners are only worried about their "total return," aka high sale prices. High sales prices are threatened when people realize they could be incurring $20 mil operating deficits each year. When the last CBA came into existence, the widespread belief was that the luxury tax would be a big deterrent to spending... but it has just jacked up player and roster salaries. The calculus has changed.

[turk3d]

Here's something some of you might find interesting. It's the court document filed by some of the players against the NFL just a few days ago:

http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/11/07/111898P.pdf

Some background:

This appeal arises from an action filed by nine professional football players and
one prospective football player (“the Players”) against the National Football League
and its thirty-two separately-owned clubs, more commonly known as football teams
(collectively, “the NFL” or “the League”). On March 11, 2011, a collective
bargaining agreement between the League and a union representing professional
football players expired. The League had made known that if a new agreement was
not reached before the expiration date, then it would implement a lockout of players,
during which the athletes would not be paid or permitted to use club facilities. The
League viewed a lockout as a legitimate tactic under the labor laws to bring economic
pressure to bear on the players as part of the bargaining process. See Am. Ship Bldg.
Co. v. NLRB, 380 U.S. 300, 301-02, 318 (1965).-3-

The players, aware of the League’s strategy, opted to terminate the union’s
status as their collective bargaining agent as of 4:00 p.m. on March 11, just before the
agreement expired. Later that day, the Players filed an action in the district court
alleging that the lockout planned by the League would constitute a group boycott and
price-fixing agreement that would violate § 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. The
complaint explained that “the players in the NFL have determined that it is not in their
interest to remain unionized if the existence of such a union would serve to allow the
NFL to impose anticompetitive restrictions with impunity.” The plaintiffs also alleged
other violations of the antitrust laws and state common law.

The League proceeded with its planned lockout on March 12, 2011. The
Players moved for a preliminary injunction in the district court, urging the court to
enjoin the lockout as an unlawful group boycott that was causing irreparable harm to
the Players. The district court granted a preliminary injunction, and the League
appealed. We conclude that the injunction did not conform to the provisions of the
Norris-LaGuardia Act, 29 U.S.C. § 101 et seq., and we therefore vacate the district
court’s order

[Sleepy51]

There is more incorrect information being passed along in this thread.

The salary CAP was set at 57% of BRI which came to $58MM. Teams are not REQUIRED to spend the full amount of the salary cap. The salary cap is a "soft" MAXIMUM, not a MINIMUM. The CBA set the salary cap at 57% of BRI. The league minimum salary was set per the CBA 75% of the salary cap. Teams were required to spend $43.5MM last year on player salaries. That 43% MINIMUM salary requirement = 42% of BRI. Teams are not required to pay players more than half of revenues. They are REQUIRED to pay players 42% of revenues per the terms of the CBA.

[floppymoose]

And while they aren't required to pay 57%, they get a refund if they go *over* 57% Part of player salary goes into escrow (I've heard the number is 8%), and if the owners paid out more than 57% at the end of the year, they get the difference out of that escrowed money. The players get the rest. Thus a player may not get all of his contract money in any given year.

[Twinkie defense]

From AP: "The NBA announced Jordan paid $275 million for the team Johnson paid a $300 million expansion fee to obtain in 2004. But much of Jordan’s price included the assumption of debt." I saw elsewhere that it was something paltry like $20 mil cash that Jordan paid for the Bobcats. A $300 mil expansion fee that turned into a $275 mil sale price that was really $20 mil cash and an assumption of debt - ouch! Not to mention the operating expenses that the prior owner had incurred.

Forget making it up on the sale, it was all Bob Johnson could do to stop the bleeding and get out from under that franchise - no doubt future potential owners will be thinking about this when they bid on franchises outside of NY, LA, SF, Chicago...

[Twinkie defense]

There is more incorrect information being passed along in this thread.

The salary CAP was set at 57% of BRI which came to $58MM. Teams are not REQUIRED to spend the full amount of the salary cap. The salary cap is a "soft" MAXIMUM, not a MINIMUM. The CBA set the salary cap at 57% of BRI. The league minimum salary was set per the CBA 75% of the salary cap. Teams were required to spend $43.5MM last year on player salaries. That 43% MINIMUM salary requirement = 42% of BRI. Teams are not required to pay players more than half of revenues. They are REQUIRED to pay players 42% of revenues per the terms of the CBA.

Collectively, the players are guaranteed to receive at least 57% of revenues in salaries & benefits. If it's ever less, the league cuts a check to the Players Association after the season for distribution to the players.

NBA Salary Cap FAQ

[Twinkie defense]

BTW Turk, courts have already ruled that the NFL's lockout can continue. But at the end of the day this is something the players and the League are going to have to negotiate together. If it ends up settled by the courts, it will drag on forever and probably the result we end up with will be one that neither players, the League, or fans will like.

[billinder33]

billinders attacks are just an attempt at distraction anyway. They have no bearing on the whether the owners position in the cba negotiations is a reasonable one, which is what I'm critiquing.

I picked you specifically because:

a) You are the one asserting that their is a correlation between decision making and profitability. An assertion I proved to be false.
b) I remember you posting after returning from seeing a game live on a couple of occasions this season. aka: rewarding bad decision making.

Do you not see the hypocrisy here, even a little bit?




I don't want to pound this to death, and I was going to leave it alone until you brought up "billinders attacks" which I already mentioned several times it's not a personal attack. Not sure what else you need.

[Twinkie defense]

League cuts $160 mil check to players

The escrow funds -- representing eight percent of each NBA player's salary -- are held back each season to ensure that the players' share of basketball-related income does not exceed the contractually agreed-upon percentage, currently 57 percent. This year, for the first time since the system was introduced in the collective bargaining agreement that came out of the 1998-99 lockout, the cut to players will fall short, sources with the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association confirmed.

When a final audit is completed later this month, the players will have been paid less than 57 percent of BRI and will be due the entire $160 million. It's the first time the players will have the full escrow returned, a union spokesman said.

[billinder33]

There is more incorrect information being passed along in this thread.

The salary CAP was set at 57% of BRI which came to $58MM. Teams are not REQUIRED to spend the full amount of the salary cap. The salary cap is a "soft" MAXIMUM, not a MINIMUM. The CBA set the salary cap at 57% of BRI. The league minimum salary was set per the CBA 75% of the salary cap. Teams were required to spend $43.5MM last year on player salaries. That 43% MINIMUM salary requirement = 42% of BRI. Teams are not required to pay players more than half of revenues. They are REQUIRED to pay players 42% of revenues per the terms of the CBA.

Average of the salaries on hoopshype is currently $53mil, and 7 tears under the $43.5mil minimum, so I', guessing that this is up-to-date and this seasons contract expirations have been dropped and not replaced because you have teams like Denver and Sac currently ringing in at under $30 mil, so in all likelihood, the real number probably still works out to 57% annually. It's not absolute, but it is (was) the de facto number.

[billinder33]

League cuts $160 mil check to players

The escrow funds -- representing eight percent of each NBA player's salary -- are held back each season to ensure that the players' share of basketball-related income does not exceed the contractually agreed-upon percentage, currently 57 percent. This year, for the first time since the system was introduced in the collective bargaining agreement that came out of the 1998-99 lockout, the cut to players will fall short, sources with the NBA and the National Basketball Players Association confirmed.

When a final audit is completed later this month, the players will have been paid less than 57 percent of BRI and will be due the entire $160 million. It's the first time the players will have the full escrow returned, a union spokesman said.

I stand corrected.

[billinder33]

BTW Turk, courts have already ruled that the NFL's lockout can continue. But at the end of the day this is something the players and the League are going to have to negotiate together. If it ends up settled by the courts, it will drag on forever and probably the result we end up with will be one that neither players, the League, or fans will like.

Why would a labor dispute be settled in the courts and if it was, what aspect of the dispute would be settled?

Unless there's something I don't know about (possible), the owners can go out and hire scabs and have a season if they want. Whether people will actually attend is another matter. I'm sure the NFL will still draw, people love their teams pretty much regardless. NBA? wouldn't work.... much more a player-driven league.

[Twinkie defense]

Oh there are many labor-related laws on the books. Thankfully the NBA and the Players' Union have not made a move into the courts yet. Where they could possibly get into it - where the NFL and people formerly known as the players union are now - is around antitrust. The NBA has some limited antitrust exemptions which allow them to negotiate as a single entity with the players union. Normally in business, where you have multiple, independently-owned businesses collectively deciding things like how much money new hires make, or how much total salary is paid out to employees, that would be called collusion.

And as far as what could be settled - mainly it is a ploy by the union to exert pressure on the League for a better deal for players. And the end result *could* be the end of antitrust exemptions, such that (for example) the Knicks and Lakers could spend $300 mil on their rosters and sign guys right out of high school and college instead of selecting them through a draft (which could cease to exist), teams folding, players playing for $30k a year - or LeBron making $100 mil a year, etc. Basically, your nuclear, Tea Party option.

[turk3d]

Basically this whole thing could be easily settled (by both the NFL and the NBA) if they were just to bring in arbitrators but that would require that both sides were to act in "good faith". You almost need a 3rd party in order to get to the bottom of this and see who's BSing and who's telling the truth. Cut to the chase and just fix whatever is wrong. That would benefit all parties concerned and save everyone a boatload of money and restore fan confidence in the league. An arbitrator would dig into this and get to the bottom of it. It would be even better to bring in a mediator than to just continue on the current path.