Why a 50 / 50 Split? and another thought...

[greenpride32]

This is all true.  It seems that some owners have figured out that they're bidding against themselves.

no other league is going to pay stars much more than $5 million, I think...

except that they get more then that.  Deron Williams gets 5 million euros a year, a furnished luxury apartment, a luxury car with driver and security, and numerous other expensive perks.  His salary might even be take home ala after taxes as is common place in much of Europe for the star players.

And let's be real here, Deron Williams isn't exactly a Kobe Bryant or a Lebron James.  Heck, he isn't even a Kevin Garnett or a Paul Pierce.

Uh D-Will is a legitmate star in this league.  He is more valuable at this point in his career than an aged KG or Paul Pierce.  He's in the upper 3-5% of the league that could still get decent money outside of the NBA (but it would still be less than NBA money).  Why do you think all the players from around the globe come to the NBA to play; because that's where the money is.

[Moranis]

This is all true.  It seems that some owners have figured out that they're bidding against themselves.

no other league is going to pay stars much more than $5 million, I think...

except that they get more then that.  Deron Williams gets 5 million euros a year, a furnished luxury apartment, a luxury car with driver and security, and numerous other expensive perks.  His salary might even be take home ala after taxes as is common place in much of Europe for the star players.

And let's be real here, Deron Williams isn't exactly a Kobe Bryant or a Lebron James.  Heck, he isn't even a Kevin Garnett or a Paul Pierce.

Uh D-Will is a legitmate star in this league.  He is more valuable at this point in his career than an aged KG or Paul Pierce.  He's in the upper 3-5% of the league that could still get decent money outside of the NBA (but it would still be less than NBA money).  Why do you think all the players from around the globe come to the NBA to play; because that's where the money is.

But is that where the money is because it is the NBA or because all the stars play there? 

What if all those stars played in Europe?  Wouldn't the money follow?  I mean the football (soccer) leagues in Europe have a ton of money so it isn't like there isn't money in Europe for athletes (F1, tennis, boxing, and golf also have a lot of money to throw around in Europe).

[ScoobyDoo]

I'm not breaking out any violins because Kobe or any other athlete works ten hours a day year round.

I know teachers who make under $30,000.00 a year that put in 12-14 hour days 9 months a year and spend a lot of time during the summer also working on their craft and actually being at the school setting up for the next year.

I know sales managers who work 80+ hours a week traveling all over the world 365 days a year, making a couple hundred thousand a year.

a job is a job is a job...having played a lot of sports I can tell you I would love getting paid bank to workout every day "as my job" than almost a 100 other things I could think of to do.

They are supremely talented and they have all worked very hard to get where they are. But no harder than many, many other people.

But I am all for Kobe, KG, Bron, making $20 million+. Whatever, I love it, let the market bear what it will, that's the beauty of our system.

What I disagree with is that the owners, who have such an inordinately disproportionate amount of "financial risk" in this equation, would even have to consider a 50/50 split.

Why?

What's the risk to the player? They get injured? So what, we all could get injured and unlike most of us, their contracts are guaranteed. Where's the risk for them?

They work hard year round, they show up, they play, they get paid major bank. What other risk to they have? Zero

What risk do the owners incur? 100% of all possible risk, including the possible negative actions of their players - think Detroit, J. O'neal, Ron Artest... - probably changed security costs, insurance premiums and possible legal fees and fines defending the player.

The owners have all the risk, why on earth would they split 50 / 50?

The players are money machines, bring fans but have no risk whatsoever?

53 / 47 split should be considered a dream deal by the players in a normal world.

50/50, where do I sign?

Question:
What owner would split their profits 50/50 with the employees?

Answer: None, because most, if not all would be operating at a loss if they did.

Lastly, I don't buy that we wouldn't have a good league without some of the stars.

New, stars, based on the talent grade would emerge. If you took away the top 15 stars, guys like DeAndre Jordan as a defensive center, LeMarcus Aldridge, JR Smith and other "sub-superstar" level guys would become the new Kobes and Kg's.         

[nickagneta]

Scooby, the players are a union. You can't get rid of some of them without getting rid of all of them.

If you jettison the NBA players from their jobs and then hire the next 450 best players in the world that would be willing to play, who is coming out to the games? Who in America is going to pay for second rate talent knowing that the best talent is available?

Certainly not the paying public spending thousands a year on a season ticket.

Certainly not the kids spending $25 for an NBA hat or $120 on an NBA jersey.

Certainly not the networks who televise the NBA and pay the owners a billion a year for the television rights.

So the owners would have to start all over with lesser pay to players, lesser money coming in from NBA Properties, and lesser money coming in from television and local broadcasting rights and yet would still have similar overhead except for player salaries.

Sure they would have better than a 50/50 split but they also would be out of business in less than 5 years.

They NEED the players as much as the players need them. A 50/50 split is a fair starting point given the nature of the product they are selling, which happens to INCLUDE the players themselves.

[TheReaLPuba]

I'm not breaking out any violins because Kobe or any other athlete works ten hours a day year round.

I know teachers who make under $30,000.00 a year that put in 12-14 hour days 9 months a year and spend a lot of time during the summer also working on their craft and actually being at the school setting up for the next year.

I know sales managers who work 80+ hours a week traveling all over the world 365 days a year, making a couple hundred thousand a year.

a job is a job is a job...having played a lot of sports I can tell you I would love getting paid bank to workout every day "as my job" than almost a 100 other things I could think of to do.

They are supremely talented and they have all worked very hard to get where they are. But no harder than many, many other people.

But I am all for Kobe, KG, Bron, making $20 million+. Whatever, I love it, let the market bear what it will, that's the beauty of our system.

What I disagree with is that the owners, who have such an inordinately disproportionate amount of "financial risk" in this equation, would even have to consider a 50/50 split.

Why?

What's the risk to the player? They get injured? So what, we all could get injured and unlike most of us, their contracts are guaranteed. Where's the risk for them?

They work hard year round, they show up, they play, they get paid major bank. What other risk to they have? Zero

What risk do the owners incur? 100% of all possible risk, including the possible negative actions of their players - think Detroit, J. O'neal, Ron Artest... - probably changed security costs, insurance premiums and possible legal fees and fines defending the player.

The owners have all the risk, why on earth would they split 50 / 50?

The players are money machines, bring fans but have no risk whatsoever?

53 / 47 split should be considered a dream deal by the players in a normal world.

50/50, where do I sign?

Question:
What owner would split their profits 50/50 with the employees?

Answer: None, because most, if not all would be operating at a loss if they did.

Lastly, I don't buy that we wouldn't have a good league without some of the stars.

New, stars, based on the talent grade would emerge. If you took away the top 15 stars, guys like DeAndre Jordan as a defensive center, LeMarcus Aldridge, JR Smith and other "sub-superstar" level guys would become the new Kobes and Kg's.         

You have a very simplistic view on life.

Either that or you are extremely naive.

People rarely get paid accordingly to what they deserve or how they benefit society.

The reason why NBA players make so much money is because that's what their market dictates.

They bring in billion dollars worth of revenue.

Without the worlds best players 10's of thousands of people would lose their jobs and local businesses would suffer and inevitably close down.

These guys may just be playing a "game" but the effects from it are priceless.

[SamuelAdams]

The reason why NBA players make so much money is because that's what their market dictates.

They bring in billion dollars worth of revenue.

That is the issue isn't it?   The market dictate is changing.

[nickagneta]

The reason why NBA players make so much money is because that's what their market dictates.

They bring in billion dollars worth of revenue.

 The market dictate is changing.

Yes the league is becoming more popular, television ratings are soaring, NBA Property sales are through the roof. And now the owners want a much larger portion of that pie because they have P and L's saying they are losing money and because they have horribly managed their teams fiscally.

They want protection from themselves. Nothing more, nothing less.

My guess is those people aren't coming back to the game because of anything the owners did but because of what Kobe, Pierce, Lebron, Howard, Paul, Williams, Rose, Duncan, Wall, gasol, Durant, Westbrook, Rondo, Nowitski, Melo, Amare, and others have done.

If Stern had done a better job at getting a better national television deal the last time around, this lockout might not have been happening. The current national television contract is awful.

The owners expect, as does everyone else, with the popularity returning to the game, a huge increase in the national television deal in 2016. Why do you think they are after a 10 year CBA deal rather than the much shorter ones they have been finalizing?

[action781]

Yeah, they just show up for 48 minutes of work a few times a week...

Are you serious?  I don't even know where to begin.  Kobe Bryant puts in a 10 hour work day in the OFFSEASON.  Ray Allen puts in similar himself during the offseason and regular season.  And these players have been working their butts off during off and on seasons their entire lives for the opportunity to make this pay day.

It's like... do some specialist doctors and lawyers really deserve 6-7 figure pay checks for working 40 hour weeks?  You aren't paying for what they do, you're paying for all the hours and hours and hours of work they've put in their entire lives to accumulate the special knowledge they have in their field.

I know you're saying they are playing a "fun game".  But they things they do aren't horsing around with buddies.  It's 100% all the time.  There is hardly anything fun about lifting weights and doing conditioning exercises for 2+ hours a day, for almost every day of your life.  Having basketballs repeatedly fed to you while you shoot hundreds of repetitive jumpshots over a couple hours isn't fun.  Still continuing to show up to the gym on sprained ankles, swollen fingers, sore backs, etc. isn't fun.  

Sure, I think I'd still like to be a pro basketball player.  But, I think you're severely underestimating what a "job" being a pro basketball player (or any athlete) is.

Absurd. This is absolutely absurd. You think Kobe deserves 20 MILLION dollars a year to PLAY basketball? There is hardly anything fun about lifting weights and conditioning? Thats your opinion man, basically he is getting paid 20 mil a year to get in the best shape he possibly can while playing a sport he has an absolute passion for. Thats disgusting. Teachers make 24,000 a year to shape and mold our future society. You're telling me a BASKETBALL PLAYER deserves 20 million dollars a year? Get real.

10 million people don't watch a teacher teach, but they do watch Kobe and the Lakers in the playoffs.  35,000 don't pay $100 a ticket to watch the garbage man pick up trash, but the people in L.A. pay that 41 times a year to watch the Lakers.  I find these analogies funny.  Keep them up.

Agreed.  And pearljammer, I am a teacher myself.  I understand how hard teachers work and how underpaid teachers are.  But I never said that Kobe "deserves" his $20 million per year nor did I say whether he was over or underpaid.

All I said is that anyone underestimates the "job" of an NBA player who thinks they just horse around and show up to play 48 min of basketball a few times a week with a fun practice sprinkled in here and there.

Personally, I find teaching pretty fun and have an absolute passion for it.  I'd argue I might have more fun at my job than Kobe does during the rigors of his daily job.  I feel like I just hang out all day while I work.  So, I guess you could say that I'm overpaid too?  (Playing devil's advocate here of course, but I feel there is a point to try to get out of this)

Also, yeah, I'm a teacher and put in a good amount of studying and work to get to the position I'm currently in.  But, I still feel like pro athletes have worked far harder for far longer.  You can't be a pro athlete if you haven't put in 1,000 hours of work per year for ages 10 - 18 unless you are a truly unique person (e.g. Hakeem).  No common person can say they have put that much time and effort into preparing for their career.  Was it fun for the NBA players though?  Sure, maybe some of it was.  But good for them.  They knew what they wanted, set their mind and hearts to it, and achieved it.  I feel like I did the same with my career and am perfectly happy with it.

[ScoobyDoo]

I don't disagree the players bring in lots of fans. And I don't think it's naive to think that he who bears the Lion's share of the financial risk should reap the greater part of the reward.

It was a hypothetical re getting rid of some players. I am aware there is a player's union.

My thought on that is that if some of the bigger stars decided to play overseas, other "sub-superstars" would rise to become the new superstars, based on the newly lowered talent grade. 

I also think the players (outside of some obviously terrible contracts) are worth what they are paid, particularly LeBron, KG, Pierce Kobe, Wade, Durant, etc..

I just think the owners should get a higher percentage of the split based on their higher financial risk factor.

[Moranis]

I don't disagree the players bring in lots of fans. And I don't think it's naive to think that he who bears the Lion's share of the financial risk should reap the greater part of the reward.

It was a hypothetical re getting rid of some players. I am aware there is a player's union.

My thought on that is that if some of the bigger stars decided to play overseas, other "sub-superstars" would rise to become the new superstars, based on the newly lowered talent grade. 

I also think the players (outside of some obviously terrible contracts) are worth what they are paid, particularly LeBron, KG, Pierce Kobe, Wade, Durant, etc..

I just think the owners should get a higher percentage of the split based on their higher financial risk factor.

Many service business (especially where there is very little product cost) have payroll costs in excess of 50%.  The sports leagues are not unique in that. 

[Interceptor]

Many service business (especially where there is very little product cost) have payroll costs in excess of 50%.  The sports leagues are not unique in that.

Took the words right out of my mouth, TP.

[Chris]

I don't disagree the players bring in lots of fans. And I don't think it's naive to think that he who bears the Lion's share of the financial risk should reap the greater part of the reward.

It was a hypothetical re getting rid of some players. I am aware there is a player's union.

My thought on that is that if some of the bigger stars decided to play overseas, other "sub-superstars" would rise to become the new superstars, based on the newly lowered talent grade. 

I also think the players (outside of some obviously terrible contracts) are worth what they are paid, particularly LeBron, KG, Pierce Kobe, Wade, Durant, etc..

I just think the owners should get a higher percentage of the split based on their higher financial risk factor.

Many service business (especially where there is very little product cost) have payroll costs in excess of 50%.  The sports leagues are not unique in that. 

Do they have the same overhead as the NBA?  What is their actual income?  It is not a simple formula for this stuff

Also, lets remember, the players are only a portion of the payroll.  If the NBA is playing 50% of BRI towards players, they still need to pay another percentage to coaches, executives, ticket staff, marketing staff, referees, down to those who work concessions at the games. 

So, a decent part of that 50% that would be going towards the owners would still be going towards payroll.

[Moranis]

I don't disagree the players bring in lots of fans. And I don't think it's naive to think that he who bears the Lion's share of the financial risk should reap the greater part of the reward.

It was a hypothetical re getting rid of some players. I am aware there is a player's union.

My thought on that is that if some of the bigger stars decided to play overseas, other "sub-superstars" would rise to become the new superstars, based on the newly lowered talent grade.  

I also think the players (outside of some obviously terrible contracts) are worth what they are paid, particularly LeBron, KG, Pierce Kobe, Wade, Durant, etc..

I just think the owners should get a higher percentage of the split based on their higher financial risk factor.

Many service business (especially where there is very little product cost) have payroll costs in excess of 50%.  The sports leagues are not unique in that.  

Do they have the same overhead as the NBA?  What is their actual income?  It is not a simple formula for this stuff

Also, lets remember, the players are only a portion of the payroll.  If the NBA is playing 50% of BRI towards players, they still need to pay another percentage to coaches, executives, ticket staff, marketing staff, referees, down to those who work concessions at the games.  

So, a decent part of that 50% that would be going towards the owners would still be going towards payroll.

The movie and television industries are a pretty good comparison and in those realms.  I put three big budget films below with their approximate breakdown.  The more special effects the lower the percentage of hard costs to employee costs, but it is still near 50% (see SpiderMan 2).  The smaller and independent films are almost all employee costs (screenplay, director, actors, crew, producers, etc.).

Take the movie Unbreakable

    Story rights and Screenplay: $5,000,000
    Producers: $1,878,260
    Director (M. Night Shyamalan & Assistant): $5,081,749
    Cast: $ 31,903,987
        Bruce Willis: $20,000,000
        Samuel L. Jackson: $7,000,000
        Robin Wright Penn: $2,500,000
        Rest of Cast, Casting, Stunts, & Travel: $5,568,388
    Production costs: $26,214,709
        Visual effects: $1,000,000
        Music: $2,253,456

Total: $73,243,106



How about an even greater big budget Sci Fi movie.

Terminator 3

    Story rights (Carolco and Gale Anne Hurd): $19.5 million
    Screenplay: $5.2 million
        John D. Brancato & Michael Ferris: $1 million
    Director (Jonathan Mostow): $5 million
    Producers: $10 million
    Cast: $35 million
        Arnold Schwarzenegger: $29.25 million + 20% gross profits
        Arnold's perks: $1.5 million
        Rest of principal cast: $3.85 million
        Extras: $450,000
    Production costs: $58 million
    Post-production costs: $4 million
    Visual effects: $20 million
    Music: $2 million
    Other costs: $33.6 million

Total: $187.3 million


How about Spider Man 2

    Story rights: $20 million
    Screenplay: $10 million
    Producers: $15 million
    Director (Sam Raimi): $10 million
    Cast: $30 million
        Tobey Maguire: $17 million
        Kirsten Dunst: $7 million
        Alfred Molina: $3 million
        Rest of cast: $3 million
    Production costs: $45 million
    Visual effects: $65 million
    Music: $5 million
        Composer (Danny Elfman): $2 million.

Total: $200 million

[TheReaLPuba]

I don't disagree the players bring in lots of fans. And I don't think it's naive to think that he who bears the Lion's share of the financial risk should reap the greater part of the reward.

It was a hypothetical re getting rid of some players. I am aware there is a player's union.

My thought on that is that if some of the bigger stars decided to play overseas, other "sub-superstars" would rise to become the new superstars, based on the newly lowered talent grade. 

I also think the players (outside of some obviously terrible contracts) are worth what they are paid, particularly LeBron, KG, Pierce Kobe, Wade, Durant, etc..

I just think the owners should get a higher percentage of the split based on their higher financial risk factor.

Many service business (especially where there is very little product cost) have payroll costs in excess of 50%.  The sports leagues are not unique in that. 

Do they have the same overhead as the NBA?  What is their actual income?  It is not a simple formula for this stuff

Also, lets remember, the players are only a portion of the payroll.  If the NBA is playing 50% of BRI towards players, they still need to pay another percentage to coaches, executives, ticket staff, marketing staff, referees, down to those who work concessions at the . 

So, a decent part of that 50% that would be going towards the owners would still be going towards payroll.

No one said being an Owner is easy.

But without the NBA players there would be little to no interest in the games.

There wouldn't be a need for any of the other employees.

Players should be getting 55 to 60% of the BRI.

They basically market themselves while they play.

Basketball is an extremely unique sport in that you can see everyone on the floor.

They're not covered by pads, helmets, or masks.

I honestly believe the Owners are over-spending in other areas.

[D Dub]

I just think the owners should get a higher percentage of the split based on their higher financial risk factor.

higher financial risk??? 
c'mon now, you don't make ends meet buying an NBA team. 

It's a trophy purchase for the ultra rich, a hobby for dudes who's 9-5 is making cash hand over fist...