First two weeks of 2011-12 NBA regular season OFFICIALLY CANCELED

[QUOTE=AMISTILLILL]...and what band of roaming clairvoyant gypsies is advising you that anything the league has told you is anything but truthful? I get the whole 'remain skeptical' vibe but there is no way an organization with this many employees manages to falsify documentation concerning revenue without word leaking out in some capacity. Not only that but they stand to lose FAR too much if such a scandal were to leak. For what..? A few extra hundred million a season? The owners aren't nickel and diming scammers. That's pocket change to some of these ownership groups.

There is no logical reason to try and discredit the league at this point, particularly since they've been shown to give much more negotiation-wise than the players at this juncture. If you want to doubt the claims that more teams are losing money, go wild.[/QUOTE]

Every other independent source (NYT, Forbes, etc) have all said the numbers they have seen suggest that the NBA is not losing what it says it is. Not one single independent source has come out and backed the NBA's claims. The only thing backing the NBA's claim is David Stern saying "trust me, trust me". Ok sure :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Every other independent source (NYT, Forbes, etc) have all said the numbers they have seen suggest that the NBA is not losing what it says it is. Not one single independent source has come out and backed the NBA's claims. The only thing backing the NBA's claim is David Stern saying "trust me, trust me". Ok sure :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Again, the league hasn't done a thing to make people discredit their claims. When you say 'every other independent source' you're citing the only one that has done any sort of investigation. No other independent sources have even tried... hardly a wealth of information to derive doubt from. The rest of the speculation getting regurgitated through the media is from 'a source' that nobody actually knows or can verify.

Not to mention some of the reports these sources are relying on aren't even based on current financial information. By the way, the source you're citing is the same Forbes article. New York Times just cited that, they didn't do their own. So that's one source.

[QUOTE=AMISTILLILL]...and what band of roaming clairvoyant gypsies is advising you that anything the league has told you is anything but truthful? I get the whole 'remain skeptical' vibe but there is no way an organization with this many employees manages to falsify documentation concerning revenue without word leaking out in some capacity. Not only that but they stand to lose FAR too much if such a scandal were to leak. For what..? A few extra hundred million a season? The owners aren't nickel and diming scammers. That's pocket change to some of these ownership groups.

There is no logical reason to try and discredit the league at this point, particularly since they've been shown to give much more negotiation-wise than the players at this juncture. If you want to doubt the claims that more teams are losing money, go wild.[/QUOTE]


Yea, I tend to agree with this...especially now. Assuming these people are not illogical....both sides know very well the long lasting damage a work stoppage has on the bottom line (BRI) both now and the future. There is absolutely no way the owners would take the risk of alienating their fan base again for issues that aren't real. I think its clear now that the owners feel there are genuine systemic problems with the NBA. Whether they are justified or not is another story.

Same with the players. They know the damage they are doing to the NBA by not conceding more to get a deal done. They clearly feel that they can't in good faith accept the current deal on the table.

Now that we know the BRI split is really not the issue, I really don't see how this gets resolved. One side will have to cave. Simple as that. Aside from all the big market owners coming together and agreeing to huge revenue sharing to make up the difference for smaller market owners....I just don't see the owners giving in all that much. If you believe them (and its hard not to at this point)...then a majority of the teams actually benefit from not having a season. The operating expenses are simply too high to turn a yearly profit. The only thing impacted would be the value of the franchise....and that is the key...the owners have time to recoup those losses for a decade plus amount of time. So they have much more time than the players.

Most players simply won't be in the league more than a few more years so losing out on an entire year of salary is devastating. Which is exactly why I'm more on the owners side. They have a great negotiating position with a ton of leverage....couple that with the world recession and its easy to see why the owners want real changes.

The players simply don't have a great negotiating position and have little to no leverage. So its harder to understand them taking such a hard line. They keep saying "we just want to play"....well, if that is true, make a few more concessions and play. Simple as that.

I'll believe the owners when they open their books. Otherwise, I'll listen to financial experts and my own common sense with the NBA coming off it's highest rated season in over a decade.

Why would anyone take the word of a billionaire in a business deal? They didn't make billions by telling the truth. :oldlol:

[QUOTE=bdreason]I'll believe the owners when they open their books. Otherwise, I'll listen to financial experts and my own common sense with the NBA coming off it's highest rated season in over a decade.

Why would anyone take the word of a billionaire in a business deal? They didn't make billions by telling the truth. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

...so, distrust the billionaire... but take a periodical that panders to billionaires and the elite as a credible source? Air tight logic.

Also, don't trust the group of billionaires in the business deal but... do trust the group of millionaires. Got it.

[QUOTE=AMISTILLILL]Again, the league hasn't done a thing to make people discredit their claims. When you say 'every other independent source' you're citing the only one that has done any sort of investigation. No other independent sources have even tried... hardly a wealth of information to derive doubt from. The rest of the speculation getting regurgitated through the media is from 'a source' that nobody actually knows or can verify.

Not to mention some of the reports these sources are relying on aren't even based on current financial information. By the way, the source you're citing is the same Forbes article. New York Times just cited that, they didn't do their own. So that's one source.[/QUOTE]

Most of the owners losses are fictitious. They use money from their teams to pay the arenas and call it a loss, meanwhile half the time they own the arenas, or if they don't, they get the city to pay for them.

Another thing they do for instance is when they buy a team for say $400 million, they will spread the payments over 7 years and pay interest on those payments. They count that interest as a loss, and this is perfectly legal according to GAAP. However, why in the hell should the players be responsible for the interest an owner pays to buy his team? That should be his own loss, and not passed onto the players. No one told him to buy a team. Why should players pay for his interest?

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Most of the owners losses are fictitious. They use money from their teams to pay the arenas and call it a loss, meanwhile half the time they own the arenas, or if they don't, they get the city to pay for them.

Another thing they do for instance is when they buy a team for say $400 million, they will spread the payments over 7 years and pay interest on those payments. They count that interest as a loss, and this is perfectly legal according to GAAP. However, why in the hell should the players be responsible for the interest an owner pays to buy his team? That should be his own loss, and not passed onto the players. No one told him to buy a team. Why should players pay for his interest?[/QUOTE]

You've seen their book of dirty tricks and ways to claim fictitious losses? You are in a very select group if you have.

[QUOTE=bdreason]I'll believe the owners when they open their books. Otherwise, I'll listen to financial experts and my own common sense with the NBA coming off it's highest rated season in over a decade.

Why would anyone take the word of a billionaire in a business deal? They didn't make billions by telling the truth. :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

They'll never open the books to the public. If they did, it would be shown that owning a team is just a slush fund for them, and used to move money around between their other businesses, or pay their cronies huge salaries, or as a tax write off.

For instance why does Jerry Buss pay his daughter Jennie Buss $4 million to run the Lakers? In most companies that have to answer to shareholders, this type of cronyism would never be allowed.

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]They'll never open the books to the public. If they did, it would be shown that owning a team is just a slush fund for them, and used to move money around between their other businesses, or pay their cronies huge salaries, or as a tax write off.

For instance why does Jerry Buss pay his daughter Jennie Buss $4 million to run the Lakers? In most companies that have to answer to shareholders, this type of cronyism would never be allowed.[/QUOTE]

The more you post the more I keep getting this mental image:
[IMG]http://rightvoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/tinfoil-hat.jpg[/IMG]

[QUOTE=AMISTILLILL]You've seen their book of dirty tricks and ways to claim fictitious losses? You are in a very select group if you have.[/QUOTE]

Go look up the Blazers lease agreement with the Rose Center. Then look up who owns the Blazers and who owns the Rose Center. The answer to both is Paul Allen. He pays the Rose Center money from the Blazers in order to use the arena.

[QUOTE=AMISTILLILL]The more you post the more I keep getting this mental image:
[IMG]http://rightvoices.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/tinfoil-hat.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]

Because any semblance of truth is always met with the tin foil hat claim.


Prove any of the things I said are wrong.

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Go look up the Blazers lease agreement with the Rose Center. Then look up who owns the Blazers and who owns the Rose Center. The answer to both is Paul Allen. He pays the Rose Center money from the Blazers in order to use the arena.[/QUOTE]

Was Tower 7 a controlled demo too?

Not everything that seems convenient or out of place is some sort of nefarious act perpetrated by sketchy corporations. What you posted literally means nothing to me.

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Go look up the Blazers lease agreement with the Rose Center. Then look up who owns the Blazers and who owns the Rose Center. The answer to both is Paul Allen. He pays the Rose Center money from the Blazers in order to use the arena.[/QUOTE]

So what. That is like getting mad at Dwight Howard for wearing Adidas apparel and then getting paid for it. And what allows him to get paid for wearing clothes and to profit from commercials..etc. The NBA. No NBA and those deals in the U.S. wouldn't exist.

Nobody is saying that this is fair to the players. But business and life aren't fair. Is it fair that an insurance salesman has to kick up a percentage of his sales to his boss? Maybe...maybe not....but the only way that insurance salesman can function most of the time is within the "vehicle" that his boss has created.

The facts are that the owners have more power and leverage at this point. Maybe that changes in the near future...but right now the owners position strengthens each game that is missed and the players position is weakened. It would simply be idiotic negotiating practices to not use that leverage to get the best deal possible.

[QUOTE=AMISTILLILL]Was Tower 7 a controlled demo too?

Not everything that seems convenient or out of place is some sort of nefarious act perpetrated by sketchy corporations. What you posted literally means nothing to me.[/QUOTE]

Are you really out of ammo now, and want to go off topic?

[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Because any semblance of truth is always met with the tin foil hat claim.


Prove any of the things I said are wrong.[/QUOTE]

Dude... are you serious? Prove anything you've stated is RIGHT. The burden of proof is on your hands, not mine. You're conjecturing that a multi-billion dollar organization is doing all kinds of seedy shenanigans behind closed doors but have zero empirical evidence to backup these kinds of lofty claims. I'm simply stating information that's been proliferated through the media by the heads of said organization who, to the best of our knowledge, have done nothing to lead us to believe they're secretly trying to screw everyone.

Do you write ESPN and a myriad of sports columnists to 'prove things' too? No, because they report news and information grounded in legitimacy and fact, no paranoia and speculation.