Philippines Senior National Team Thread Vol. V

[tomcat]

They can always FU the evil empire and bail.

If they do well, there’s no point going back to the PH and play ball.

It’s like how most OFWs see no point returning to the Philippines to work because the money they’ll make is peanuts.

The top 10 richest in the Philippines are:

1. Sy siblings ($16.6 billion)

2. Manuel Villar ($6.7 billion)

3. Enrique Razon, Jr. ($5.8 billion)

4. Lance Gokongwei and siblings ($4 billion)

5. Jaime Zobel de Ayala ($3.3 billion)

6. Dennis Anthony and Maria Grace Uy ($2.8 billion)

7. Tony Tan Caktiong ($2.7 billion)

8. Andrew Tan ($2.6 billion)

9. Ramon Ang ($2.3 billion)

10. Ty siblings ($2.2 billion)

[sajubeads]

Do you think Bolick has a chance to play in B-League? His contract will expire at the end of this year.. I think B-League teams already know his game, He's always in the radar anyway...

Big chance that he will play in Japan next year especially that he has an expiring contract this year...For one, he is friends with Kiefer who guided him and trains with him during his college days...Second, Bollick namannhas higher goals just like his batchmates, he won't settle in the Paliha ni Alfrancis...Having 1.5 million salary monthly is not bad either...

[Dotch]

The top 10 richest in the Philippines are:

1. Sy siblings ($16.6 billion)

2. Manuel Villar ($6.7 billion)

3. Enrique Razon, Jr. ($5.8 billion)

4. Lance Gokongwei and siblings ($4 billion)

5. Jaime Zobel de Ayala ($3.3 billion)

6. Dennis Anthony and Maria Grace Uy ($2.8 billion)

7. Tony Tan Caktiong ($2.7 billion)

8. Andrew Tan ($2.6 billion)

9. Ramon Ang ($2.3 billion)

10. Ty siblings ($2.2 billion)

Enrique Razon ( #3) is part owner of NorthPort, right? Razon has lapped Ramon Ang's (#9) billions. So why he is acting like the SMC boss' cum bucket in the PBA?

[Dotch]

The top 10 richest in the Philippines are:

1. Sy siblings ($16.6 billion)

2. Manuel Villar ($6.7 billion)

3. Enrique Razon, Jr. ($5.8 billion)

4. Lance Gokongwei and siblings ($4 billion)

5. Jaime Zobel de Ayala ($3.3 billion)

6. Dennis Anthony and Maria Grace Uy ($2.8 billion)

7. Tony Tan Caktiong ($2.7 billion)

8. Andrew Tan ($2.6 billion)

9. Ramon Ang ($2.3 billion)

10. Ty siblings ($2.2 billion)

Based on this list, the PHL's richests (minus Razon and Ang) can afford an alternate PRO league if they want to

1. SM Darth Malls
2. Camella Constructicons
3. Robinson's Phythons
4. Globe 5G Zombies
5. Converge DarkWebs
6. Jollibee Killer Bees
7. Megaworld Emperadors
8. MetroBank Blood Diamonds

Add to that

9. Lucio Tan's Asia Brewery CheapBeerMen
10 Bob Ongpin's Alphaland Oligarchs

[Inkwell]

Based on this list, the PHL's richests (minus Razon and Ang) can afford an alternate PRO league if they want to

1. SM Darth Malls
2. Camella Constructicons
3. Robinson's Phythons
4. Globe 5G Zombies
5. Converge DarkWebs
6. Jollibee Killer Bees
7. Megaworld Emperadors
8. MetroBank Blood Diamonds

Add to that

9. Lucio Tan's Asia Brewery CheapBeerMen
10 Bob Ongpin's Alphaland Oligarchs

LOL good list

I will never understand how one ownership group can own 4 teams. Why would you even want to own 4 teams? They don't all make money. They really don't even have big fanbases because they don't have a region/city they are apart of, and they are named after corporations people don't care about.

The PBA will forever not make sense, but I do like watching the games that are not blowouts.

[ja.he]

LOL good list

I will never understand how one ownership group can own 4 teams. Why would you even want to own 4 teams? They don't all make money. They really don't even have big fanbases because they don't have a region/city they are apart of, and they are named after corporations people don't care about.

The PBA will forever not make sense, but I do like watching the games that are not blowouts.

That's why SBL in Taiwan is slowly dying - because they are named after private businesses that Taiwanese people don't care about. When P.League+ entered into the picture, you'll see how Taiwanese crowd love it and support their cities fighting. Result? jampacked arenas for that four P.League+ teams plus the media mileage.

I believe that last year might be the last year for the SBL as they are about to be dislodged by the T1 League - another regional-based league.

[IPC]

LOL good list

I will never understand how one ownership group can own 4 teams. Why would you even want to own 4 teams? They don't all make money. They really don't even have big fanbases because they don't have a region/city they are apart of, and they are named after corporations people don't care about.

The PBA will forever not make sense, but I do like watching the games that are not blowouts.

Problem is, who is rich enough to own a team and keep it in the region. Whether it's fan-owned or owned by one person, somebody has to keep the team running and keep it in the region.

However, I do think that corporations and companies ideally should be limited to sponsorships.

[IPC]

Lol it just prove that in these bubble setting eventually gunebras age will become a disadvantave bench mob of aging dillinger devance chan wouldnt be much help as years go by and suddenly japeth who as luckily been healthy the majority of the last decade compare to his gilas early pba stint is starting to feel the effects of mileage..

We'll see I believe with these japan brouhaha and pandemic times i think its time to pba to step up and be more cooperative to sbp..

I really hope so. True PBA support for Gilas (meaning enough time to prepare for the main tournament, all the best players for the system ready and able) will revitalize the league in terms of fan support.

[ja.he]

Problem is, who is rich enough to own a team and keep it in the region. Whether it's fan-owned or owned by one person, somebody has to keep the team running and keep it in the region.

However, I do think that corporations and companies ideally should be limited to sponsorships.

In the NBA, it is not the place that is controlling in the franchise but the monicker itself. For instance, New York Nets became the New Jersey Nets. Now, they are the Brooklyn Nets. You see, the franchise is not the place but the monicker itself.

Another example, Minneapolis Lakers became the Los Angeles Lakers. St. Louis Hawks became the Atlanta Hawks. New Orleans Jazz became the Utah Jazz. San Diego Clippers became the Los Angeles Clippers.

When some owners are buying shares of ownership in an NBA team, they are not buying the place but the monicker itself. Monicker = Franchise.

That's the reason why teams in the NBA teams retain the tradition and history of their franchise - because the franchise, in itself, is a separate entity that is distinct to the owners or company owning such team.

[IPC]

In the NBA, it is not the place that is controlling in the franchise but the monicker itself. For instance, New York Nets became the New Jersey Nets. Now, they are the Brooklyn Nets. You see, the franchise is not the place but the monicker itself.

Another example, Minneapolis Lakers became the Los Angeles Lakers. St. Louis Hawks became the Atlanta Hawks. New Orleans Jazz became the Utah Jazz. San Diego Clippers became the Los Angeles Clippers.

When some owners are buying shares of ownership in an NBA team, they are not buying the place but the monicker itself. Monicker = Franchise.

That's the reason why teams in the NBA teams retain the tradition and history of their franchise - because the franchise, in itself, is a separate entity that is distinct to the owners or company owning such team.

I'm basing my thinking on European teams. As much as possible, the teams stay in one place (although there are exceptions, such as English football team Wimbledon FC, which moved to Milton Keynes).

But, yeah. Even in Europe, the team name is the franchise, not the city.

[ja.he]

I'm basing my thinking on European teams. As much as possible, the teams stay in one place (although there are exceptions, such as English football team Wimbledon FC, which moved to Milton Keynes).

But, yeah. Even in Europe, the team name is the franchise, not the city.

That is one advantage if you represent a specific place - you relocate or change ownership without disturbing the franchise.

In PBA, once an existing team is sold to another, the franchise will lose as well together with its fanbase. For instance, Shell, Sta. Lucia , Red Bull and Pop Cola/Sunkist were remarkable franchises with remarkable franchise players and fanbases. I believe that teams like Terrafirma, Blackwater and Northport are nothing in comparison with the franchises I mentioned earlier. The problem, though, is that their team names are so intertwined with their franchises that once they leave the PBA, the franchise will be dissolved as well leaving their fanbases into oblivion.

[Inkwell]

Problem is, who is rich enough to own a team and keep it in the region. Whether it's fan-owned or owned by one person, somebody has to keep the team running and keep it in the region.

However, I do think that corporations and companies ideally should be limited to sponsorships.

I agree with your point, but isn't the PBA making money? I know they lost money last year because of the pandemic, but before that were they making money?

Or is it just a losing money hobby for the rich owners?

I know they don't make much from the in person attendance as the games were usually very lightly attended before the pandemic. Are they making money from the TV deals they have?

It just seems weird to keep a league going that isn't making money. Why?

[Dotch]

In the NBA, it is not the place that is controlling in the franchise but the monicker itself. For instance, New York Nets became the New Jersey Nets. Now, they are the Brooklyn Nets. You see, the franchise is not the place but the monicker itself.

Another example, Minneapolis Lakers became the Los Angeles Lakers. St. Louis Hawks became the Atlanta Hawks. New Orleans Jazz became the Utah Jazz. San Diego Clippers became the Los Angeles Clippers.

When some owners are buying shares of ownership in an NBA team, they are not buying the place but the monicker itself. Monicker = Franchise.

That's the reason why teams in the NBA teams retain the tradition and history of their franchise - because the franchise, in itself, is a separate entity that is distinct to the owners or company owning such team.

You mean the BRAND NAMEs right?! Some brand name are more valuable than others and will always be affixed to its host citiy. LA Lakers, Boston Celtics, NY Knicks, Chicago Bulls, Dallas Cowboys, GB Packers... that if you relocate them, they will not make sense. Some are not, Clippers should have just changed their name after Balmer bought them from Sterling, and as to not associate the team with that loser owner.

Sonics branding and HISTORY remained in Seattle even when the original franchise was bought by the current OKC team. The original Charlotte Hornets is now the New Orleans Pelicans, but NBA and the Pels team owner decided it makes sense to start from scratch, and the NBA returned the Hornets and its history back to Charlotte. Michael Jordan quickly changed his team's name from BobCats to Hornets and annexed its history as well, So now, Zo, LJ, Mugsy and Dell Curry are part of MJ's franchise.

[zairex]

I agree with your point, but isn't the PBA making money? I know they lost money last year because of the pandemic, but before that were they making money?

Or is it just a losing money hobby for the rich owners?

I know they don't make much from the in person attendance as the games were usually very lightly attended before the pandemic. Are they making money from the TV deals they have?

It just seems weird to keep a league going that isn't making money. Why?

From my observation, I don't think PBA is making money. You need atleast 85M to operate a ballclub in PBA. I think PBA teams are not getting that back. Its more of marketing than profit making venture. Thats why it is easily for teams to bail out if their main business goes down because PBA doesn't make a profit for ball clubs.

https://sports.inquirer.net/351108/the-business-of-basketball

[ja.he]

You mean the BRAND NAMEs right?! Some brand name are more valuable than others and will always be affixed to its host citiy. LA Lakers, Boston Celtics, NY Knicks, Chicago Bulls, Dallas Cowboys, GB Packers... that if you relocate them, they will not make sense. Some are not, Clippers should have just changed their name after Balmer bought them from Sterling, and as to not associate the team with that loser owner.

Sonics branding and HISTORY remained in Seattle even when the original franchise was bought by the current OKC team. The original Charlotte Hornets is now the New Orleans Pelicans, but NBA and the Pels team owner decided it makes sense to start from scratch, and the NBA returned the Hornets and its history back to Charlotte. Michael Jordan quickly changed his team's name from BobCats to Hornets and annexed its history as well, So now, Zo, LJ, Mugsy and Dell Curry are part of MJ's franchise.

Yeah, you are right. I was actually looking for that word. Anyway, all of those you have mentioned in the second paragraph were reduced into written agreements or incorporated when the previous owner sold their franchise to the subsequent buyer.

- Seattle retained the Sonics branding but the Sonics' history is shared by both Seattle and the present-day OKC Thunder.

- The Hornets brand deal between Charlotte and New Orleans was in accordance to the agreement. Basically, there was a contract. Parang MOA I believe.

I never heard something like that in the PBA. Maybe the Barako Bull I, Air21- Barako Bull and Shopinas-Air21 branding but ,still, these franchises don't share common history. In fact, they f*cked up their respective franchises.