Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NBA to Lose $400M

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NBA to Lose $400M

    An article that should be posted by FIBA Euro Basket.

    Stern: NBA projects $400 million in losses

    By BRIAN MAHONEY, AP Basketball Writer 7 hours, 56 minutes ago


    DALLAS (AP)—David Stern said Saturday the NBA is projecting league-wide losses of about $400 million this season and has lost hundreds of millions in each previous year of the current collective bargaining agreement.

    The commissioner said it has shown the players’ association those numbers in hopes of demonstrating why the league feels it needs “significant changes” in the next deal.

    The NBA’s first proposal for a deal to replace the one that expires on July 1, 2011, was thrown out Friday after what players association director Billy Hunter called a “contentious” 90-minute meeting. Hunter said the proposal called for harsh changes that would affect every NBA player.
    NBA commissioner David Stern talks with reporters about labor negotiations, during the NBA basketball All-Star Weekend on Saturday, Feb. 13, 2010, in Dallas.
    NBA commissioner David Stern t…
    AP - Feb 13, 7:58 pm EST
    NBA commissioner David Stern s…
    AP - Feb 13, 7:49 pm EST

    * 1 of 2
    * NBA Gallery

    “The right adjectives were thrown around, and our proposal appropriately denounced. Our response is, ‘You can denounce it, tear it up, you can burn it, you can jump up and down on it, as long as you understand that it reflects the financial realities of where we are,”’ Stern said during his annual All-Star press conference.

    “And if you would like to have your own proposal, as long as it comes back and deals with our financial realities, that’s OK with us. That’s fine with us. In fact, that’s what we would like to do.”

    Stern criticized the union’s behavior at the session, saying it earned “high marks on the list of theatrical negotiations.” He revealed that the players’ side brought in a lawyer who threatened that the union would be decertified, making negotiating more difficult.

    He also had sharp words for his own side, denouncing anonymous comments made by team executives that served to inflame the bargaining process.

    “If you know me, and you know our owners, that’s not what we do. That’s not us. And the players were upset with those quotes, which I find cowardly, if they were actually said,” Stern said. “And if I ever found out who said them, they would be dealt with; they would be former, former NBA people, not current. And we assured the stars of that.”

    Stern refused to details specifics of the league’s proposal. A person who had seen it told The Associated Press on Thursday that it called for first-round picks to have their salaries cut by about one-third, would reduce the minimum salary by as much as 20 percent, and would guarantee contracts for only half their value.

    Also, the total value of a maximum salary would drop sharply, as would the total years players could sign for, and the players would see a reduction in their share of the basketball-related income, of which they currently receive 57 percent.

    Stern defended sending the proposal shortly before the All-Star break, saying the plan all along was to start the process early. Hunter said the league would like to get a deal done before this July, but the union won’t be in any rush to send its own.

    “I never have told Billy how he should negotiate or how he wants to negotiate, any more than I tell his lawyer what words he uses to threaten us,” Stern said. “That’s their choice. We have been, you know, myself, I have only been at this since 1966. I started when I was in a crib.”

    The sides met twice last summer and exchanged financial documents. Stern made it clear that the league has shown the players all the facts they need to understand the difficulties owners are facing, losses he estimated at “at least” $200 million a year for the first four years of the current deal.

    “Our response to the players was: We don’t want to play any guessing games about that, all of the data which supports that will be made available to you,” Stern said. “Certified financial returns, whatever you need, so that we can have a robust and open dialogue about how we are going to develop together a sustainable business model.”

    Hunter has argued that the league can fix its problems with expanded revenue sharing among teams. Stern said there will be a revenue sharing plan, but that needs to be implemented in conjunction with a new deal.

    The recent economic downturn has been seen as a reason for the league’s financial woes, but Stern denied that things will improve just because the economy does.

    “Based upon the last several years, we have seen that the—we have shown the players the facts, and at our current level of revenue devoted to players salaries, it’s too high,” Stern said. “I can run from that, but I can’t hide from that, and I don’t think the players can, either. Those are the facts, and that’s what we are dealing with.”

    But he said the differences won’t prevent a new agreement, saying, “we will manage to get to a place where we always get to. There is always a deal and we plan to make a deal this time, too.”

    Stern also predicted the Charlotte Bobcats would be sold in about two months.
    If there is no basketball in heaven, i am NOT going.

    SMALLBALL, bitches..

  • #2
    This is bad. If this continue we may see a lot of teams going to bankrupt. The ebst solution is to trim the player's salary. A lot players today in the NBA are overpaid and does not deserve a big salary.
    Command me Confessor

    Comment


    • #3
      I know players won't like it, but a hard cap may be the only answer. It's what the NHL went to. The only thing is, I wouldn't necessarily cut minimum salaries. Cut maximum deals, reduce contract length, cut any salaries that are significantly above the minimum but leave minimum salaries as is.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by BBallfanJ View Post
        I know players won't like it, but a hard cap may be the only answer. It's what the NHL went to. The only thing is, I wouldn't necessarily cut minimum salaries. Cut maximum deals, reduce contract length, cut any salaries that are significantly above the minimum but leave minimum salaries as is.
        Thing is ownership should take responsibility as well. Who's to blame of overpaid contract of nonexistent players? (The Larry Hughes, Erick Dampier and such)

        A hard cap could solve the problem though the players won't agree to it. And partially-guaranteed deals as well won't dwell to well with the union and the players (i believe NFL has this sort of deals)
        If there is no basketball in heaven, i am NOT going.

        SMALLBALL, bitches..

        Comment


        • #5
          This is gonna put the pressure on the players when negotiating the CBA.
          Pistons: 2021-22 Let the Motorcade begin!!

          Bronze medal 2013 Eurobasket prediction Game.

          Comment


          • #6
            Now on account of projected figures in which is a logical forecast; the projected figures could be attained; at a loss of 400M USD or the worst is where loses could exceed the figure. But if losses attained which are significantly lower than the projected forecast; then it is a better scenario and a slight sigh of relief.

            Comment


            • #7
              Players cant just act like brats . They have to realize they will not always get what they want. If they push it so hard, they'll be at the short end of it. When the league closes, the team owners can pursue other businesses, and there will be a huge surplus of pro ballers. They have to deal with the facts, and that is the league they're in is in a tight financial bind.
              Philippine Basketball Review

              Cebu Travel Blog

              Team Building Services in Cebu

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by thadzonline View Post
                Players cant just act like brats . They have to realize they will not always get what they want. If they push it so hard, they'll be at the short end of it. When the league closes, the team owners can pursue other businesses, and there will be a huge surplus of pro ballers. They have to deal with the facts, and that is the league they're in is in a tight financial bind.
                True. But what the owners are demanding are downright unfair for some players (especially on lower contracts). They should find a middle ground--- can't fault the players alone but ownership/management as well.
                If there is no basketball in heaven, i am NOT going.

                SMALLBALL, bitches..

                Comment


                • #9
                  Interesting take by a blogger from another site. He says:

                  NBA Players' Collective Bargaining Issue: Whose Side Are You On?
                  By Borat38 | View all Posts
                  Posted Sunday, February 14, 2010 09:23 AM 1 comment
                  After 3 heated meetings, NBA owners seem to have backed down from what NBA union VP Adonal Foyle (of the Orlando Magic) called "ludicrous". The issues of contention between players and owners boil down to the ff:

                  1) Salary cap: small-market team owners and David Stern want a hard salary cap like that in the NHL, which would forbid the paying of salaries above a specific amount that each team is eligible to pay, regardless of any circumstances. This is to level the playing field for small and middle-income bracket teams to sign top-level talent that would otherwise all be monopolized by billionaire owners like Paul Allen and Mark Cuban. The aim here is to avoid having the same 4 or 5 teams contending for the title year after year because they can afford to retain their veteran stars. The current soft cap is nothing more than a loophole for the super-rich owners to get around this.
                  Players' position: players want to retain status quo, and retain exceptions like the Larry Bird Exception, mid-level exception, rookie exception, etc--all of which allow a team to circumvent the luxury tax if a certain player/s fall under any of the above criteria (eg., free agents who are veteran stars, first-round draft picks, free agents with extendable contracts. Hell, that about covers everyone in uniform except for the temps signed to 10-day contracts)

                  2) Basketball-Related Income (BRI): Owners want to slash the players' share of Basketball-Related Income from the current 57% (which has been rising year by year ever since 2005) to just under 50%. If you think NBA players get their share of BRI solely from TV and gate receipts, look again: it includes such things as arena parking fees, broadcast rights, arena signage, NBA merchandise sold anywhere in the world, beverages and snack sales, and mascot and cheerleaders' appearances outside NBA games. (Yup, the mascots and the skimpily-clad cheerleaders dance, the players get a cut of their income as well.)
                  Players' position: subject to negotiation, but they immediately opposed the sub-50% revenue sharing in the league's position paper.

                  3) Guaranteed contracts: Owners want to limit their exposure to such purse-draining max-level guaranteed contracts (like those paid out to Allan Houston and Jason Williams--the Nets center, not White Chocolate--who continued to be paid in full even after getting jailed for shooting his driver) when a player's career ends for whatever reason. Owners want only 50% of a guaranteed contract to be fully guaranteed. That means if you get career-ending injury, get jailed or die, you or your family get half of what was promised you.
                  Players' position: they want the 100% guarantee in place, bar none.

                  4) Long-term contracts and maximum salaries: Owners want long-term contracts to be shortened from the current 7 yrs to around 3 or 4 yrs. Contracts like the $100 mil that louchbag Juwan Howard received last decade will become all but non-existent. Also, owners want to slash their star player's salary by about a third, with the savings to be distributed towards the many exceptions stated above. Simply put: No more Vince Carter-type contracts. If a veteran wants max contract money, he has to shape up or he's out in 3 yrs. For those in the mid-range pay scale, they would be eligible for max money in 3 yrs under the Larry Bird exception if they play well.
                  Players' position: Players want to retain the present 7 yrs, with all the current perks retained. Star players like Kobe also disagree with the proposed cut in their max salaries so that their teammates' paychecks can be a bit larger, creating a more equitable middle class payroll.


                  The current collective bargaining agreement that the players' association has with the NBA expires on July 1, 2011. Without an agreement by the end of the 2010-11 season, there could be a lockout like what we saw in 1999. LeBron, Kobe, Wade, Carmelo, KG and other union officers stomped their way to the last 90-minute meeting. NBPA union president Derek Fisher had this to say about the league's proposal: “I think what we made clear today is that where they are is not relevant to where we are. We’re not going to begin where they say begin,” Fisher said. “I think that was the purpose of going in today, to make sure they understood that their proposal was not the beginning of the conversation.”
                  In short, without the dollar numbers in their favor, the players won't even talk. Well what in effin' tarnation is a bargaining session for if you aren't allowing one side to start at a base figure that they feel is fair?

                  My opinion: Retention of 8-figure/year contracts even when a player cannot play anymore? Paying people like Jermaine O'Neal ($23M/yr) veteran exception-scale salaries? $23.2 mil a year for T-Mac even though he isn't playing despite being able to do so? An $86-M payroll (NBA's 3rd highest) for the Knicks, not counting luxury tax costs? A majority share for players in Basketball-Related Income even without them putting in a single cent in investment, while owners take all the risk from an economic downturn? What would this all lead to? More T-Macs, more prima donna bitches like Vince Carter and Allen Iverson. FYI: the average salary cap (specifically differs from team to team) has increased from $43.9 million in the 2004-05 season to $60.9 million this season. And the players want more. More, more, more. Goddamn it, waive the entire league's rosters if that's what it comes down to!! We the fans demand better than this. If we're outraged by Wall St. salaries, this one should be no less of an insult to the hardworking Joe who puts in 8 hrs/day and cuts down his lunch hour just to be able to earn enough to buy these arrogant pricks' jerseys and shoes. This early in the negotiations, the players' union has already brought in a lawyer who raised the dirty word that used to be linked with Michael Jordan: decertification. Let's see: that's like an employee saying to his employer, "Boss, you're fired." Well and good! Let there be no NBA season in 2010-11 if that's what it takes to pound some sense into these lazy, greedy, overpaid leeches' heads. Let's see how these bastards run a league of their own making.

                  **Opinions please, come one come all
                  http://spaces.covers.com/blog/Borat3...ou-On.html?t=0
                  If there is no basketball in heaven, i am NOT going.

                  SMALLBALL, bitches..

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Often established stars and weighted middle tier players have the privilege of leveraging or demanding contract terms covering duration or the monetary amount; a part of the negotiation as brokered by their respective agents.

                    The opposite difference are those players who are on the D-League or Undrafted players who would sign even with the New Jersey Nets for let's say the minimum amount or 10-day contracts.

                    Hard-cap or a percentage fluctuation of salary caps; they are still worth a lot of money, more than any blue collar work.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X

                    Debug Information