pb-ceo wrote:Novocaine wrote:pb-ceo wrote: so they are on the rise, as the chart clearly shows, and that was before a gargantuan jump in the salary cap and an escalation in revenue and costs.
This doesn't make any sense. Ticket prices aren't indexed to any escalation in revenue and costs - the escalation in revenue only means ticket prices are a smaller share of the income. There is no escalation in costs for the NBA except in players salaries. But those are fixed percentage of income, so if income goes down, so will salaries. The CBA provisions function like an automatic stabilizer for the NBA. And there's nothing wrong with escalating revenue and costs, that's what happens when a business scales up.pb-ceo wrote:it's something to note the the nba is cyclical. there have been down periods. it would be a grave mistake to extrapolate what is happening today out into the future too far. things can change fast. today money is free flowing and easy. interest rates are rock bottom. asset prices are sky high. advertising revenue and sports rights revenue is off the charts. this can all change. right now the nba is riding a global boom in demand. that demand will be operative as long as the product continues to be entertaining, and the US and global economy continues to move forward.
the future is uncertain. Let me offer the perspective of someone who has been watching business and economics for a long time. what is going on in the NBA is unsustainable and has implications for any business (think espn) dependent on the boom in sports revenue, but especially the NBA.
Stringing together a bunch of clichés isn't enough to support a bombastic assertion like the NBA is unsustainable.
Do you think you truly understand the economics of the NBA? From what The CBA, as currently constructed, means the NBA has different mechanisms than most other businesses and from what you've written I don't think you're aware of that. If there's an economic downturn, the NBA will be more resilient than most businesses because such a large percentage of their operating costs are variable in function of the revenue. Next year, will all these gigantic contracts kicking in, the NBA will still only be spending roughly 50% of their basketball related income in players salaries, just like this past season or five years ago or ten years ago.
i tried to make it simple for you but you will never get it. you don't' understand supply demand or boom bust cycles, basic economics. I can't dumb it down for one board member any more. your neediness require too much of my valuable energy. I never said the NBA is unsustainable. you don't read carefully. I said what is going on NOW in the nba is unsustainable.
You tried to fool everybody by going back 10 years, which included a great recession) and ignored what has been going on in recent years. that's a common ploy used to lie with statistics, and to confuse and misdirect. your own chart shows ticket prices on the rise and that's before this gargantuan increase in the cap. what do you think owners are going to do now, reduce ticket prices? by your logic they will. because revenue is higher.
Keep believing that the NBA as an economic model is some glorious free enterprise nirvana that is going to spit out increasing amounts of cash for all constituents till kingdom come. I also have a bridge to sell you.
The problem I see with your argument is that the ebbs and flows of economics don't really account for the TV money/sponsorship deals. You even say in your first post that the NBA's changed forever; so what did you mean by that? That the NBA will increase ticket prices? Well wait, you said the NBA runs in a cycle; so are you trying to claim that ticket prices will increase whether revenue goes up or not? Cause the revenue ebbing and flowing would be the "cycle" right? At least, that's the only way your argument would make any sense.
And again, you don't seem to account for all the TV money/sponsorship the NBA gets. Barring a total crisis (like "Malace at the Palace" or even another Donaghy), you think that dries up overnight? Or would that be cyclical too?
