who will cave first? owners or players

[Jeff]

My guess is that the players have more to lose (a season of salaries) while the owners will figure that losing a season won't really cost them that much in net income (and if they really are losing money, they'll embrace the cancelled season from a financial perspective).

I don't really side with the owners (except on the point that the system is broke) but I think in the end the clearest path to resolution is for the players to give up a lot.

Just my semi-detached point of view.

[Chris]

The players will absolutely "cave" first.

This is for two reasons. 

1.  While we can debate how much money the owners are losing, I personally find the evidence pretty compelling that they are not MAKING money, and certainly not on a level that is comensurate with the amount of money they are investing, and the amount of revenue brought in by the league.  The current business model is not working, and they have the ability to correct that through collective bargaining.  They are all too good businessmen to not come out of this with a more favorable system, and it really does not make any sense for them to give in too early.

2. The owners are in this for the long haul, and can look at any losses over the next year (or more) as an investment in their own financial future, while players have a very finite amount of time, and any lost money this season, will likely not be recouped by individuals.  Even the ones who stick around a long time might be looking at 10-15 years max, while the majority of players are lucky to get 5-6 years in the league.  So, each year lost is huge for the players.  Sure, some of them can make some money in Europe, but as long as they are not willing to sign there longterm without an out, the European teams are not going to be willing to pay anything close to what they can make in the NBA, even under the current, low-ball offer by the owners. 

For the players to stay strong, they would really be doing it for future players in the league, and when you are losing money every day, it is much harder to stay strong for future players, when you, yourself are paying for it.

[Employee8]

The players, absolutely.

They lack an unified front and are the benefactors of a broken system.  They're making crazy amount of millions because the system allows them to and regardless of how much money the owners are "losing", they still deserve a fair business model.  Everyone in this argument is very well off so it's easy to decry them both as selfish who are arguing over millions.  I think the owners are trying to make it more fair for themselves and that is at the players' expense.

The NBA isn't the owner's life.  They have other means to live off of.  The players don't have anything else other than the game.  It's pretty clear cut to me.

[Marcus13]

Players.  Some of those guys aren't living paycheck-to-paycheck...they're living in debt

[Moranis]

I think the owners crack first.  It just seems to me that the long term damage to the league as a whole will cause way more money lost then one season of player salaries. 

[Chris]

I think the owners crack first.  It just seems to me that the long term damage to the league as a whole will cause way more money lost then one season of player salaries. 

The problem is, its not 1 season of player salaries.  This is a system going forward.  If the owners are not able to "fix" things now, then the losses could build dramatically, particularly as technology continues to move people away from the arenas.

I really think a big part of the owners stance (although I don't think they want to admit it publically, because it could become a self-fulfilling profecy) is that they are genuinely afraid that the current economics of the country, as well as HD tv giving fans more reason to just stay home and watch the games for free, is creating a perfect storm to hit the league much harder in the next few years.

They are trying to create a system that protects them from that.  The players are locked in to make a ton of money no matter what the new deal is, but the owners have the potential to lose a lot of money if they don't do a good deal. 

Also, I don't think the fear of longterm damage is also something that they are working in to their negotiations.  And if a season is lost, the owners offers are just going to get lower and lower, to make up for the lost revenues both this season, and going forward.

[slamtheking]

The players.

The owners have another income that is presumably very profitable hence their ability to buy/own an NBA franchise.  The owners losing money in the league would presumably be in even better financial shape without having to cover their NBA losses. 

Players without any advertising/product endorsements, outside businesses or back-up jobs (like Home Depot for Delonte    )  will be feeling the financial pinch with no NBA check rolling in. 

Maybe it's just my interpretation of NBA player anecdote but there seems to more financial lunkheads like Antoine than business-savvy people collecting those salaries.

[wdleehi]

The players.


It will not be the stars, but the rest of the guys who don't have the endorsement deals and offers overseas. 

[Moranis]

The players.


It will not be the stars, but the rest of the guys who don't have the endorsement deals and offers overseas.  

Reggie Williams just signed a 1.5 million dollar one year contract in Spain (he was a restricted free agent so he signed for the full year, there is a million dollar buy out if he wants to go back to the NBA this year).  

Kyle Singler a 2nd round pick just signed in Spain as well.  He has an out clause should the lock out end.  No terms were disclosed for him.

I think you are underestimating the market for mid-tier players in Europe.

[Moranis]

I think the owners crack first.  It just seems to me that the long term damage to the league as a whole will cause way more money lost then one season of player salaries. 

The problem is, its not 1 season of player salaries.  This is a system going forward.  If the owners are not able to "fix" things now, then the losses could build dramatically, particularly as technology continues to move people away from the arenas.

I really think a big part of the owners stance (although I don't think they want to admit it publically, because it could become a self-fulfilling profecy) is that they are genuinely afraid that the current economics of the country, as well as HD tv giving fans more reason to just stay home and watch the games for free, is creating a perfect storm to hit the league much harder in the next few years.

They are trying to create a system that protects them from that.  The players are locked in to make a ton of money no matter what the new deal is, but the owners have the potential to lose a lot of money if they don't do a good deal. 

Also, I don't think the fear of longterm damage is also something that they are working in to their negotiations.  And if a season is lost, the owners offers are just going to get lower and lower, to make up for the lost revenues both this season, and going forward.

I get all that, but if the fans don't come back then what does it matter. 

The problem with the league now is the owners can't agree.  They need to figure out their own revenue sharing model before they can agree with the players.  The players are hunkered down.  They keep signing in Europe (not just stars).  Heck Luke Walton just became an assistant coach at the University of Memphis.  The players have plenty of job options.  The owners do not.

The owners will crack first.  That doesn't mean the players won't go lower, as they will, but I predict the CBA will be much closer to the players current offer then the owners current offer.  I could be wrong, but that is just how I see it.

[Chris]

I think the owners crack first.  It just seems to me that the long term damage to the league as a whole will cause way more money lost then one season of player salaries. 

The problem is, its not 1 season of player salaries.  This is a system going forward.  If the owners are not able to "fix" things now, then the losses could build dramatically, particularly as technology continues to move people away from the arenas.

I really think a big part of the owners stance (although I don't think they want to admit it publically, because it could become a self-fulfilling profecy) is that they are genuinely afraid that the current economics of the country, as well as HD tv giving fans more reason to just stay home and watch the games for free, is creating a perfect storm to hit the league much harder in the next few years.

They are trying to create a system that protects them from that.  The players are locked in to make a ton of money no matter what the new deal is, but the owners have the potential to lose a lot of money if they don't do a good deal. 

Also, I don't think the fear of longterm damage is also something that they are working in to their negotiations.  And if a season is lost, the owners offers are just going to get lower and lower, to make up for the lost revenues both this season, and going forward.

I get all that, but if the fans don't come back then what does it matter. 

The problem with the league now is the owners can't agree.  They need to figure out their own revenue sharing model before they can agree with the players.  The players are hunkered down.  They keep signing in Europe (not just stars).  Heck Luke Walton just became an assistant coach at the University of Memphis.  The players have plenty of job options.  The owners do not.

The owners will crack first.  That doesn't mean the players won't go lower, as they will, but I predict the CBA will be much closer to the players current offer then the owners current offer.  I could be wrong, but that is just how I see it.

See, I think its the other way around.  I agree that the owners need to agree on revenue sharing, but I think they need to first establish a deal with the players to know what they are working with.


I think Sam Amick hit the nail on the head with this article:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/sam_amick/08/22/nba.labor.talks/

[LooseCannon]

The owners have another income that is presumably very profitable hence their ability to buy/own an NBA franchise.  The owners losing money in the league would presumably be in even better financial shape without having to cover their NBA losses. 

I suspect that part of this is brought about by some of those other businesses no longer being as profitable in a down economy, so that owners are not able to absorb some operating losses while making bigger capital gains on the value of the franchise.

[Chris]

The owners have another income that is presumably very profitable hence their ability to buy/own an NBA franchise.  The owners losing money in the league would presumably be in even better financial shape without having to cover their NBA losses. 

I suspect that part of this is brought about by some of those other businesses no longer being as profitable in a down economy, so that owners are not able to absorb some operating losses while making bigger capital gains on the value of the franchise.

I don't think that's it at all.  I think the vast majority of the owners can handle their finances here just fine.  I just think they are all great businessmen, and they look at this as a crucial business decision, and (despite Malcolm Gladwell's claims), they run these teams like the business that it is. 

[Assassin70]

Players are going to have to take a major loss to have a season this year.

Players really lost in the NFL too and all teams were actually making money in that league.

NBA players need to take it on the chin...and get it over with so we can have a season on time.

[wdleehi]

The players.


It will not be the stars, but the rest of the guys who don't have the endorsement deals and offers overseas.  

Reggie Williams just signed a 1.5 million dollar one year contract in Spain (he was a restricted free agent so he signed for the full year, there is a million dollar buy out if he wants to go back to the NBA this year).  

Kyle Singler a 2nd round pick just signed in Spain as well.  He has an out clause should the lock out end.  No terms were disclosed for him.

I think you are underestimating the market for mid-tier players in Europe.

Only so many slots for NBA players.  The guys that jump first or have a really big names are going to get the chance.