The Official NBA Collective Bargaining Thread vol Phased in Hard Cap

[Deleted member 38182]

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski As another union source just told Y!, "If the league wants to meet with us Monday, they'll have to get their !+%%@ out to LA."5 minutes ago

WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski Union source says: "This just confirms what we suspected all along: The NBA was never serious about negotiating until guys missed checks."13 minutes ago

tribjazz Brian T. Smith Told NBA played its trump card Tuesday with 50-50 offer and was shocked when union stood its ground. League's reported refusal to meet ...10 minutes ago

 

[cosmiccanon]

[h1]

[h1]Audited Numbers Show NBA Lost Over $1.5B Over Last Five Years[/h1]
Nate Silver, my former colleague at Baseball Prospectus who writes the FiveThirtyEight blog for The New York Times, caused quite a stir yesterday when he reported that the NBA is running a profit, not a loss (see Calling Foul on N.B.A.’s Claims of Financial Distress). It’s an interesting look at the NBA, using aggregate numbers from the Forbes and Financial World valuation numbers from 1998-2010.

As you’re reading this on Forbes, you’ll know that I have used the numbers extensively prior… as a barometer. Leagues often talk down the numbers (see the NBA’s response the Silver piece), but for those who don’t have hard numbers, they are the best journalists can work from, and for the intent of showing trends, can be used to paint a sound picture. For the discussion around profits, Forbes’ use of Operating Income, which is earnings before the deduction of interest, tax, depreciation and amortization, is your launching point in making a case.

Net Income–which is after the deduction of all costs–would give a more definitive picture.

Sources close to the NBA labor negotiations have provided Net Income numbers for the league each year over the last five years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season. Given that the NBA is saying that they are running at a net loss, as opposed to the NFL, which is saying they are seeing profits declining, the NBA is compelled to open their books as part of labor law, and have done so. The following numbers are audited figures. If the projected figures are correct, the NBA will have lost $1.845 billion over the last 6 years, not turned a profit, as reported by Silver.

The following shows the losses, as well as the number of teams that reportedly have run at a loss the last 5 years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season:

• 05-06: 19 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $220 million
• 06-07: 21 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $285 million
• 07-08: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $330 million
• 08-09: 24 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $370 million
• 09-10: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $340 million
• * 10-11 23 clubs ran at a loss, total loss of $300 million

Before one begins to say that this all is skewed toward ownership, looking at the Forbes numbers that detail the 2009-10 season show that while some clubs are running in the red, some, such as the Knicks and Bulls are profiting handsomely.

(See graph on As NBA Enters Lockout, Numbers Show Why System is Broken)

What is going to be required for the NBA to be sustainable is increased revenue-sharing. But, as outlined in Why System is Broken, that will only cure a fraction of the NBA’s problems, albeit significant.

For the NBA to get on any form of solid footing, there is going to have to be significant concessions by both the players and owners. When you see a trend of well over half your clubs running at a loss, there’s a problem that needs addressing.

With local television rights deals driving the economic disparity, the NBA owners are going to need to look at MLB’s revenue-sharing model closely.

In terms of the players, some ability to allow competitive balance has to come into play. Since owner can’t seem to self-regulate like Major League Baseball, then some adjustment of the cap has to be considered – other methods to allow cost certainty.

As is the case with the NFLPA, the NBPA is in a no-win position. Retaining the status quo is unrealistic, and given the numbers shown, there has to be an adjustment to the NBA’s largest cost component: player salaries.

Increased revenue-sharing…. a rollback on player salaries in one form or another. David Stern and Billy Hunter aren’t going to be happy with that answer, but such is reality.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsm...show-nba-lost-over-1-5b-over-last-five-years/

[/h1]
[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif]I stumbled upon this recently, I've been pro-player, but this is starting to sway me. Those who know the in's and out's of this CBA situation, explain(which facts) why this is wrong or right.[/font]

 

[cosmiccanon]

[h1]

[h1]Audited Numbers Show NBA Lost Over $1.5B Over Last Five Years[/h1]
Nate Silver, my former colleague at Baseball Prospectus who writes the FiveThirtyEight blog for The New York Times, caused quite a stir yesterday when he reported that the NBA is running a profit, not a loss (see Calling Foul on N.B.A.’s Claims of Financial Distress). It’s an interesting look at the NBA, using aggregate numbers from the Forbes and Financial World valuation numbers from 1998-2010.

As you’re reading this on Forbes, you’ll know that I have used the numbers extensively prior… as a barometer. Leagues often talk down the numbers (see the NBA’s response the Silver piece), but for those who don’t have hard numbers, they are the best journalists can work from, and for the intent of showing trends, can be used to paint a sound picture. For the discussion around profits, Forbes’ use of Operating Income, which is earnings before the deduction of interest, tax, depreciation and amortization, is your launching point in making a case.

Net Income–which is after the deduction of all costs–would give a more definitive picture.

Sources close to the NBA labor negotiations have provided Net Income numbers for the league each year over the last five years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season. Given that the NBA is saying that they are running at a net loss, as opposed to the NFL, which is saying they are seeing profits declining, the NBA is compelled to open their books as part of labor law, and have done so. The following numbers are audited figures. If the projected figures are correct, the NBA will have lost $1.845 billion over the last 6 years, not turned a profit, as reported by Silver.

The following shows the losses, as well as the number of teams that reportedly have run at a loss the last 5 years, plus projected losses for the 2010-11 season:

• 05-06: 19 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $220 million
• 06-07: 21 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $285 million
• 07-08: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $330 million
• 08-09: 24 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $370 million
• 09-10: 23 clubs ran at a loss, total losses of $340 million
• * 10-11 23 clubs ran at a loss, total loss of $300 million

Before one begins to say that this all is skewed toward ownership, looking at the Forbes numbers that detail the 2009-10 season show that while some clubs are running in the red, some, such as the Knicks and Bulls are profiting handsomely.

(See graph on As NBA Enters Lockout, Numbers Show Why System is Broken)

What is going to be required for the NBA to be sustainable is increased revenue-sharing. But, as outlined in Why System is Broken, that will only cure a fraction of the NBA’s problems, albeit significant.

For the NBA to get on any form of solid footing, there is going to have to be significant concessions by both the players and owners. When you see a trend of well over half your clubs running at a loss, there’s a problem that needs addressing.

With local television rights deals driving the economic disparity, the NBA owners are going to need to look at MLB’s revenue-sharing model closely.

In terms of the players, some ability to allow competitive balance has to come into play. Since owner can’t seem to self-regulate like Major League Baseball, then some adjustment of the cap has to be considered – other methods to allow cost certainty.

As is the case with the NFLPA, the NBPA is in a no-win position. Retaining the status quo is unrealistic, and given the numbers shown, there has to be an adjustment to the NBA’s largest cost component: player salaries.

Increased revenue-sharing…. a rollback on player salaries in one form or another. David Stern and Billy Hunter aren’t going to be happy with that answer, but such is reality.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsm...show-nba-lost-over-1-5b-over-last-five-years/

[/h1]
[font=Georgia, 'Times New Roman', serif]I stumbled upon this recently, I've been pro-player, but this is starting to sway me. Those who know the in's and out's of this CBA situation, explain(which facts) why this is wrong or right.[/font]

 

[fantastic4our]

Key word is "projected" income.

In other words, an educated GUESS.

You really think more than half the teams are not profiting? Then why still run a team that has been failing for five years straight?

The owners claim they're losing so much money, but won't open up the books AND are willing to lose games (losing even MORE money) to make a deal?

Just sounds fishy.

Now, the latest ploy from the League, saying they wouldn't meet unless the union agreed to the 50-50 split? These guys are playing games.

I'm glad the players are sticking together. Have there been any reports of some players wavering on the issue?

 

[fantastic4our]

Key word is "projected" income.

In other words, an educated GUESS.

You really think more than half the teams are not profiting? Then why still run a team that has been failing for five years straight?

The owners claim they're losing so much money, but won't open up the books AND are willing to lose games (losing even MORE money) to make a deal?

Just sounds fishy.

Now, the latest ploy from the League, saying they wouldn't meet unless the union agreed to the 50-50 split? These guys are playing games.

I'm glad the players are sticking together. Have there been any reports of some players wavering on the issue?

 

[pmatic]

I've read tweets from reporters saying some players want to accept the 50-50 split and get the deal done.

 

[pmatic]

I've read tweets from reporters saying some players want to accept the 50-50 split and get the deal done.

 

[n ll k 3]

That's one of the main issues I have w/ some of these owners.

Too many of these dudes don't seem like true fans who are dying to compete.  They just see this as another business venture which is wrong, IMO. 

There's a million ways to make some more money when you have the resources that each one of these owners have.  Why put all these fans through pain and agony if you're not as dedicated to winning as they are?

You shouldn't buy a sports franchise to make money.  You should buy a sports franchise if you're willing to do whatever it takes to make them a winner, "losing" some money in the process and all.

/rant

P.S. That's what makes Mark Cuban such a G and why I'm such a fan of him.

 

[n ll k 3]

That's one of the main issues I have w/ some of these owners.

Too many of these dudes don't seem like true fans who are dying to compete.  They just see this as another business venture which is wrong, IMO. 

There's a million ways to make some more money when you have the resources that each one of these owners have.  Why put all these fans through pain and agony if you're not as dedicated to winning as they are?

You shouldn't buy a sports franchise to make money.  You should buy a sports franchise if you're willing to do whatever it takes to make them a winner, "losing" some money in the process and all.

/rant

P.S. That's what makes Mark Cuban such a G and why I'm such a fan of him.

 

[seymore cake]

Originally Posted by PMatic

I've read tweets from reporters saying some players want to accept the 50-50 split and get the deal done.

Shameful. ({})'s

Mogs have known this was coming for the past 2 years... I would've been putting half of every check away for this entire period just in preparation of the unknown.

 

[seymore cake]

Originally Posted by PMatic

I've read tweets from reporters saying some players want to accept the 50-50 split and get the deal done.

Shameful. ({})'s

Mogs have known this was coming for the past 2 years... I would've been putting half of every check away for this entire period just in preparation of the unknown.

 

[big j 33]

Makes sense for the NBAs middle class and close to minimum players or even rookies. The stars have a safety net and can afford it.

50/50 offer is the owners trying to make the players panic and cause the union to split... I've been impressed at their unity so far.

 

[big j 33]

Makes sense for the NBAs middle class and close to minimum players or even rookies. The stars have a safety net and can afford it.

50/50 offer is the owners trying to make the players panic and cause the union to split... I've been impressed at their unity so far.

 

[dmbrhs]

Originally Posted by Seymore CAKE

Originally Posted by PMatic

I've read tweets from reporters saying some players want to accept the 50-50 split and get the deal done.

Shameful. ({})'s

Mogs have known this was coming for the past 2 years... I would've been putting half of every check away for this entire period just in preparation of the unknown.

Like I said earlier, you're putting a lot of faith in a lot of people to be personally responsible. And those people exist in a culture of excess. The majority of the league can't afford to miss too many game checks. The stars can go toe-to-toe with the owners, the rest of the league can't. This will keep getting worse and worse for the players as it drags on.

 

[dmbrhs]

Originally Posted by Seymore CAKE

Originally Posted by PMatic

I've read tweets from reporters saying some players want to accept the 50-50 split and get the deal done.

Shameful. ({})'s

Mogs have known this was coming for the past 2 years... I would've been putting half of every check away for this entire period just in preparation of the unknown.

Like I said earlier, you're putting a lot of faith in a lot of people to be personally responsible. And those people exist in a culture of excess. The majority of the league can't afford to miss too many game checks. The stars can go toe-to-toe with the owners, the rest of the league can't. This will keep getting worse and worse for the players as it drags on.

 

[pmatic]

N.B.A. and Union to Meet Sunday

Top officials for the N.B.A. and the players union will meet Sunday night in a final, and unexpected, attempt to resolve the lockout before regular-season games are lost, according to a person briefed on the meeting.

The meeting will involve the primary negotiators for each side — Commissioner David Stern and the deputy commissioner Adam Silver for the league, with the union represented by its president, Derek Fisher, and its executive director, Billy Hunter.

Stern said last week that he would be forced to cancel the first two weeks of regular-season games on Monday if the sides did not have a breakthrough at the bargaining table. They have not met since then, with the N.B.A. insisting it will not move beyond the 50-50 split in league revenues that Stern proposed last Tuesday. The union rejected that stance, saying it would not resume talks with any preconditions.

It is not clear whether the league has moved off of its 50-50 proposal, or whether the union has softened its insistence on receiving 53 percent of league revenues in a new collective bargaining agreement. It is also possible that the sides are negotiating other, structural issues in an attempt to move forward. 
Link

@KBergCBS So here's where we are: At their previous % of 43, owners would get $11.3B/six years... at 50 pct, they'd get $13.1B ...

@KBergCBS At 48.5 pct, owners would be $367M/year better off that previous deal, which more than addresses $300M annual loss

@KBergCBS By holding out for 50-50, owners are drawing line in sand over $400M total over six years, half of which they'd lose by canceling 2 weeks.

@KBergCBS Similarly, players are holding out for $400m/six years by insisting on 53 pct. vs. 51.5 ... they'd also lose half of that in 2 wks.

@KBergCBS Also, difference between 53 and 51.5 for players in year 1 is $70 million, which they'd lose in less than a week of canceled games.

@KBergCBS So to sum up, if games are canceled tomorrow, it won't be due to money or common sense. It will be due to ego and stubbornness.

@KBergCBS That is the money part, which makes sense. The psychological aspect of negotiations, sometimes, does not.

@KBergCBS Sometimes, you have to follow through on your threats to make sure the other side knows you're serious.

 

[pmatic]

N.B.A. and Union to Meet Sunday

Top officials for the N.B.A. and the players union will meet Sunday night in a final, and unexpected, attempt to resolve the lockout before regular-season games are lost, according to a person briefed on the meeting.

The meeting will involve the primary negotiators for each side — Commissioner David Stern and the deputy commissioner Adam Silver for the league, with the union represented by its president, Derek Fisher, and its executive director, Billy Hunter.

Stern said last week that he would be forced to cancel the first two weeks of regular-season games on Monday if the sides did not have a breakthrough at the bargaining table. They have not met since then, with the N.B.A. insisting it will not move beyond the 50-50 split in league revenues that Stern proposed last Tuesday. The union rejected that stance, saying it would not resume talks with any preconditions.

It is not clear whether the league has moved off of its 50-50 proposal, or whether the union has softened its insistence on receiving 53 percent of league revenues in a new collective bargaining agreement. It is also possible that the sides are negotiating other, structural issues in an attempt to move forward. 
Link

@KBergCBS So here's where we are: At their previous % of 43, owners would get $11.3B/six years... at 50 pct, they'd get $13.1B ...

@KBergCBS At 48.5 pct, owners would be $367M/year better off that previous deal, which more than addresses $300M annual loss

@KBergCBS By holding out for 50-50, owners are drawing line in sand over $400M total over six years, half of which they'd lose by canceling 2 weeks.

@KBergCBS Similarly, players are holding out for $400m/six years by insisting on 53 pct. vs. 51.5 ... they'd also lose half of that in 2 wks.

@KBergCBS Also, difference between 53 and 51.5 for players in year 1 is $70 million, which they'd lose in less than a week of canceled games.

@KBergCBS So to sum up, if games are canceled tomorrow, it won't be due to money or common sense. It will be due to ego and stubbornness.

@KBergCBS That is the money part, which makes sense. The psychological aspect of negotiations, sometimes, does not.

@KBergCBS Sometimes, you have to follow through on your threats to make sure the other side knows you're serious.

 

[big j 33]

Scooped by PMatic..
Hope for the best tonight..

Between NBA lockout and Breaking Bad finale.. this is an anxious Sunday.

 

[big j 33]

Scooped by PMatic..
Hope for the best tonight..

Between NBA lockout and Breaking Bad finale.. this is an anxious Sunday.

 

[ballinsam23]

theres no shot this *$++ gets done today. we're missing games. hopefully no more than 20....

 

[ballinsam23]

theres no shot this *$++ gets done today. we're missing games. hopefully no more than 20....

 

[Kimchi Papi]

I think the business model the NBA, specifically the teams have been following is definitely broken. With the economy tanking, no one is going to NBA games during the entire 82 game season, nor are corporations buying the corporate boxes/suites. Revenue streams are gone too.

The problem is the management in teams for proly half the league need help from themselves. Look at the Grizzlies. Is Zach Randolf really worth $71 mil over 4 years? Is Rudy Gay really worth $80 mil over 5 years especially since they won & went deep into the playoffs last season without him?

Both of these dudes are role players at best yet they were given these monster contracts under the guise they were paid "market value". We could name countless examples of contracts like these that teams are paying out.

With decisions like these, I can see why teams aren't making money.

 

[Kimchi Papi]

I think the business model the NBA, specifically the teams have been following is definitely broken. With the economy tanking, no one is going to NBA games during the entire 82 game season, nor are corporations buying the corporate boxes/suites. Revenue streams are gone too.

The problem is the management in teams for proly half the league need help from themselves. Look at the Grizzlies. Is Zach Randolf really worth $71 mil over 4 years? Is Rudy Gay really worth $80 mil over 5 years especially since they won & went deep into the playoffs last season without him?

Both of these dudes are role players at best yet they were given these monster contracts under the guise they were paid "market value". We could name countless examples of contracts like these that teams are paying out.

With decisions like these, I can see why teams aren't making money.

 

[pmatic]

Zach Randolph and Rudy Gay may not be superstars but they sure as hell are not role players either.

 

[pmatic]

Zach Randolph and Rudy Gay may not be superstars but they sure as hell are not role players either.