League Circles wrote:coldfish wrote:Leslie Forman wrote:Assuming absolutely nothing changes with ownership, I would not be surprised if, in 10 years, both NY and both LA teams were ahead of the Bulls on these valuation lists.
Its worse than that. If you look, Forbes is still giving Chicago a lot of "goodwill" for being in Chicago and the Jordan years. The revenue is tanking. If that becomes a regular thing over an extended period of time and their revenue keeps falling, they could drop way down in valuation.
Right now, Boston, GS, Houston, LAC, Dallas and Brooklyn could catch them based on market size and team performance. I could see them dropping to 9th almost purely based on poor management.
This year is really huge for them. If this rebuild fails and they have to hit the reset button again, it could be another 3-4 years of the fanbase waiting for a playoff team. By then, there won't be much of a fanbase. Chicago won't support a loser forever. JR was able to buy the Bulls for a song and a dance in 1985 because the city really didn't support the team.
"The revenue is tanking"
(checks revenue, sees that other than the lockout year of 11/12, Chicago Bulls revenue has gone up every single year on record - at least since 2001).
The Bulls are not competing, as a business with the other 29 teams. They're competing with all other investments available on the market, especially all other entertainment industry investments.
The goal is not to have revenue growth rates that exceed other teams (that frankly teams like the Bulls are dragging along) any more than a team's on court goal should be to play with more "pace".
You being intentionally obtuse just to be a contrarian.
The Bulls revenue is tanking versus the competition. They were ranked 9th last year and I believe that is their lowest ever ranking. For their market, they may be the worst performing corporation in terms of revenue and profit growth, which is how investors evaluate companies. The goal of any management is to not get overtaken by all of his competition and its absurd to insinuate anything differently.
If this was a publicly traded company, the CEO would have been fired because companies are evaluated based on their market segments.