Nearly half of all NBA Teams LOST money last season.....

[Denny Crane]

Serious question: are the Packers the only publicly owned team in US Pro Sports?

http://www.barrons.com/articles/SB1045870898333098143

 

[blue9]

I personally believe that the NBA is on a collision course with massive disaster. The money is so large the players now have the power to control the league. The CBA as drawn up gives players that power to hijack a whole franchise (See LeBron and his yearly opt out), and does nothing to really promote parody...

Actually, the league is ripe for parody!

 

[Denny Crane]

Figures lie and liars figure?

If you buy a team for $250M and sell it for $2B and lose $10M/season, you made out like a bandit.

And, read the last sentence below. The article is from 2016.

https://www.bizjournals.com/memphis/blog/2016/01/forbes-tags-grizzlies-worth-at-780-million.html

Since current owner Robert Pera acquired the team in 2012, the Grizzlies have seen their value continue to grow. And the current value is more than double the $377 million Pera paid for the team. The Grizzlies also produced $147 million in revenue during the previous season.

Revenue sharing, which was part of the NBA’s current collective bargaining agreement, has put nearly every NBA team on the road to profitability. The only team that lost money in the last year was the Brooklyn Nets, which was also the only NBA in that column last year as well.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Cry me a fucking river. Some billionaires billion dollar "investment" loses 1% of its total value?

Suck my dick.

 

[Trackjack]

Serious question: are the Packers the only publicly owned team in US Pro Sports?

Yes they are

 

[Trackjack]

Owners are there worst enemy there the ones sign the CBA and later cry about losing money. There the ones that agree to pay high salaries and again cry about losing money. So I am not crying about owners losing money.

 

[e_blazer]

I'm sure that losing money wasn't an objective for the Blazers, but I think that it was an understood consequence of their massive spending last summer. I suspect that they look at it as an investment that they hope pays off in a year or two.

 

[tester551]

It is my understanding that if the players receive the full 10% escrow funds back that the leagues BRI (basketball related income) was essentially lower than expected. If they receive less than 10% escrow it means the BRI was higher than expected and the players received money from there instead of the escrow money.

You have this backwards.

A percentage of the player's salary goes into escrow (holdings) until the end of the year. If the BRI is lower than expected, the owners take back a portion of the escrow funds to meet the 50/50 split agreed to in the CBA - while the remaining is distributed to the players. If the BRI is higher than expected, then the players get all the escrow money & the owners pay additional to the players.

 

[trailblazer18]

You have this backwards.

A percentage of the player's salary goes into escrow (holdings) until the end of the year. If the BRI is lower than expected, the owners take back a portion of the escrow funds to meet the 50/50 split agreed to in the CBA - while the remaining is distributed to the players. If the BRI is higher than expected, then the players get all the escrow money & the owners pay additional to the players.

Thanks for the correction. I re-read the document a few times and still wasn't fully clear. Thanks for the clarification. From what I know the players got all 10% back from last season, so the league is making money then.