BuzzerBeater Forums

Of course, here are the numbers:

Taking a look at the numbers behind the NBA labor dispute
http://dberri.wordpress.com/2011/06/30/taking-a-look-at-t...

Compared to the NFL, the NBA owners are making very little money and I think a lot of franchises are losing money. I think the owners have very little choice than ask for a bigger piece of the pie.

but the problem is also that the numbers from the owners are compromised, the nba makes around 4,2 billions and pays 2,2 billions salary so they should be able still to make profit.

And se of the loses are come through missmanegement, Sacramento is bought on credit only with 3 casino as safety, who doesn't make profit too ;) Cuban uses his looses in the company to reduce his tax payments.

To see it realistic, the merchandise income is on the top, and the interest in the games too. So you could expect them to make a lot of money, and hey you ain't even forced to pay the maximum slalary if you ain't making profit.

I think internationally, interest in the NBA maybe at an all time high. But I think TV ratings and interest within the United States is probably down (at least compared to the Magic/Bird and Jordan eras). Not sure what the net on NBA franchises' bottom line is...

the merch sale is projected to be the highest, with the tv you maybe right i am not sure if they again close at this level or if they get over it(but at least it is higher then during the times of the last cba)

At the moment players get 57% in salaries of all the profit NBA clubs make. The clubs want to reduce the percentage to 50%, but the players refuse to reduce their salaries so much, 54% was the lowest the players were willing to agree on. Also, players want, that the clubs share the TV money more evenly. At the moment only 8 clubs out of 30 earn profit. This is something I have understood.

they seem kind of greedy, don't they:)? 7% isn't all that much, compared to what they are making

David Stern, the Commissioner ( the leader ) of the NBA said that all the players are allowed to play in Europe and everywhere else.

At the moment players get 57% in salaries of all the profit NBA clubs make. The clubs want to reduce the percentage to 50%, but the players refuse to reduce their salaries so much, 54% was the lowest the players were willing to agree on. Also, players want, that the clubs share the TV money more evenly. At the moment only 8 clubs out of 30 earn profit. This is something I have understood.

This is not quite true, at least, I don't think so.
The current offer on the table is for the players to get slightly under 40% of BRI (Basketball Related Income).
They'd actually still be making 2 billion after everything's figured out. For the last season, it was 2.2 billion.
One of the main sticking points is the number of years. The NBA wants the new CBA in place for a 10 year span, the players are seeking 5. And the fact that the NBA will get a new TV deal post the (I think) 2015/6 season, which is expected to be a huge increase on what they're currently getting paid for TV rights. The players want a piece of that pie.

Gotta say, I kinda side with ownership. On two points:
1. At the moment the players get all the rewards, with none of the risks or costs. Seems only right that given that model they should have a smaller piece of the pie.
2. The current CBA makes it very, very difficult for smaller franchises to compete. One that makes the playing field a little more equitable would be good (and this is coming from a Lakers fan!).

There's a huge difference between NFL teams and NBA teams. The vast majority of NBA teams lose money. Some due to bad business decisions, but the end-point is that the current CBA just makes it pretty difficult for most teams. All NFL teams make money, they just want to make a helluva lot more!

@Steve - I've read somewhere (ESPN?) that the numbers on where-people-watch-the-NBA is moving away from tickets, and more towards TV. TV numbers are increasing? Anyway, it's expected that the main source of revenue for teams will soon be TV deals, outstripping ticket-sales.
Tried to look for the piece, and failed. Sorry!

Last edited by malice at 7/2/2011 10:41:46 PM

I think at part of the problem is that the players don't trust the owners. So the owners say all these teams are losing money, but are they really?

Take the Los Angeles Dodgers (baseball) for example. Its come out in the McCourt divorce case that their are three entities that own the various parts of the Dodgers organization and infrastructure. The entity that actually owns the team is losing money. However, the entities that own the stadium and the the land/parking are making lots of money. The team pays a huge rent for the stadium and essentially provides the entertainment that make the parking lots valuable. All these entities are owned by the same person - who I'm sure would say that the team is losing money.

I think it's an accepted fact that the NBA is losing money, the point in contention is "how much"...