PDA

View Full Version : Stern: NBA projects loss of $400 million.



Cry Havoc
02-14-2010, 03:34 AM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/ian_thomsen/02/13/stern.all.star/index.html?eref=sihp

David Stern's smile was meant to take the edge off his knifing statement."This year,'' the NBA commissioner told reporters in Dallas on Saturday, "we are projecting a league-wide loss of about $400 million."

A $400-million loss cannot be expressed as good news, and in the context of Stern's initial negotiations Friday with the players' union, it rang out like the gavel of a judge as he sternly regained control of the proceedings. Over the previous four years, added Stern, the league has been losing at least $200 million annually.

The current collective bargaining agreement is supposed to be paying the players 57 percent, but league sources say they are raking in more than 60 percent thanks to the excessive salaries paid out by the 13 franchises that have surpassed the luxury-tax threshhold this season.

"We have shown the players the facts, and at our current level of revenue devoted to players' salaries, it's too high,'' said Stern. "I can run from that, but I can't hide from that, and I don't think the players can, either. Those are the facts, and that's what we are dealing with. We are fact-based, and so that's the story."

Stern's perspective was meant to offset a news conference held Friday by union chief Billy Hunter, who described the initial 90-minute negotiating session that day as "contentious.''

"I would give yesterday's meetings high marks on the list of theatrical negotiations -- literally out of the handbook of Negotiating 101," said Stern of the union's behavior. "The lawyer [whom Stern would not name] was brought in to threaten us as a tactic to say the union is going to [decertify]; that's going to make you bargain harder. The right adjectives were thrown around, and our proposal was appropriately denounced.

"Our response is you can denounce it, tear it up, you can burn it, you can jump up and down on it, as long as you understand that it reflects the financial realities of where we are. And if you would like to have your own proposal, as long as it comes back and deals with our financial realities, that's OK with us. That's fine with us. In fact, that's what we would like to do."

Hunter had acknowledged the union would respond with its own proposal after hearing Stern suggest that the players accept salary cuts equal to 40 percent of revenues, as well as partially guaranteed contracts no longer than four years and a hard cap. That wish-list was so off-base, said Hunter, that the owners agreed to "tear up" the proposal and start over.

"I don't know what that means,'' Stern responded Saturday. "We are talking semantics, and everyone around here knows that I am not anti-semantic.

"If they don't like it, you know, that's what counters are about. We told them, as far as we are concerned, the proposal was one way to get to the result that we need. There could be a hundred ways, and we welcome their attempt to deal with the ways that we can get through."

Stern has promised to open all of the books and let the players see the red ink for themselves. Both sides can argue all they want, but nothing can change these two starting points: The owners can withstand an anticipated 2011 lockout far longer than the players, and the public will ultimately support a reduction in player salaries.

At the moment, however, the players are coming across as more sober and respectful than management, in light of recent quotes on CBSSports.com attributed to an anonymous team executive who said,"If they don't like the new max contracts, LeBron [James] can play football, where he will make less than the new max. [Dwyane] Wade can be a fashion model or whatever. They won't make squat and no one will remember who they are in a few years."

Stern appeared angry only when addressing those comments, which he called "cowardly."

"If I ever found out who said them, they would be former NBA people, not current,'' said Stern. "And I took pain to tell the players that they should give such credibility as you would expect to give something that cowardly and anonymous as it was, and as offended by this as the players were."

In other words, Stern is going to tighten the message that is coming from his side of the bargaining table.

"We will manage to get to a place where we always get to," he Stern. "There is always a deal, and we plan to make a deal this time, too."

An eventual deal? Definitely. A lockout after next season? Highly likely.

lefty
02-14-2010, 03:49 AM
The NBA needs moneyyyyy


That means more rigged Finals



Ok, Lakers-Cavs this year

leemajors
02-14-2010, 04:00 AM
players have no leg to stand on, and more to lose.

Phonzie20
02-14-2010, 07:12 AM
The NBA needs moneyyyyy


That means more rigged Finals



Ok, Lakers-Cavs this year

lol.

Yet so true.

boutons_deux
02-14-2010, 12:04 PM
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/misc/nytlogo153x23.gif (http://www.nytimes.com/)

February 14, 2010
Analysis

Falk Says N.B.A. and Players Headed for Trouble

By HOWARD BECK (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/howard_beck/index.html?inline=nyt-per)

DALLAS — This is the part where David Falk (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/f/david_falk/index.html?inline=nyt-per) can smirk, say “I told you so” and upbraid everyone who ignored his warnings. But Falk is not in a gloating mood.

A year ago, during a wide-ranging interview (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/sports/basketball/23falk.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=%22david%20falk%22&st=cse) to promote his book, Falk — the N.B.A. (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/n/national_basketball_association/index.html?inline=nyt-org)’s first superagent and a longtime confidant of Michael Jordan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/michael_jordan/index.html?inline=nyt-per)’s — warned that the league was in economic distress, that the owners would be seeking huge concessions from players and that a lockout was possible, perhaps even likely.

Falk predicted then that the N.B.A. would seek a hard salary cap, shorter contracts, a higher minimum age for incoming players, elimination of the midlevel cap exception and an overall reduction in the players’ percentage of revenue.
When the N.B.A. and the players union opened negotiations this weekend in Dallas, every item on Falk’s list was in play, as part of the league’s initial proposal.

Billy Hunter (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/billy_hunter/index.html?inline=nyt-per), the union’s executive director, called the proposal oppressive Friday, after a 90-minute negotiating session that he described as contentious. Predictions of a lockout are common among players and owners.

Falk, who keeps a low profile these days and represents only a handful of players, is watching from a safe distance in dismay and feeling no satisfaction at seeing his prophecy fulfilled.

“No, not at all,” he said in a telephone interview, adding, “I don’t think it takes a great seer to predict what was going to happen.”

Falk, who played an active role during the 1998-99 lockout, the only work stoppage in league history, is intimately familiar with the issues and the personalities. He is friendly with many owners and team executives, and less so with the union leaders, in whom he has little faith.

“I’m frustrated,” Falk said, “because I think that a lockout is an untenable position for both parties, but especially for the players. The players have a much more reduced financial ability to withstand it than the owners.”

The collective bargaining agreement, which was adopted in 2005 and is largely an extension of the 1999 deal, will expire after next season, giving everyone a 16-month window to complete a new deal. It is early still, with more rhetoric and posturing than negotiating.

Still, the signs are troubling, and the sides have rarely seemed so far apart. About half of the league’s 30 franchises are losing money, according to some estimates. Owners want a radical restructuring of the economic system, starting with a hard salary cap to replace the current soft-cap system. The union is in favor of maintaining the status quo.

In his annual All-Star address Saturday, Commissioner David Stern (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/s/david_stern/index.html?inline=nyt-per) said the league was projecting a loss of $400 million this season, after annual losses of about $200 million in the previous four years. Although he declined to confirm the reported details of the league’s proposal, Stern made it clear that he was indeed seeking a reduction in salaries.

“We’ve shown the players the facts, and our current level of revenue devoted to player salaries is too high,” Stern said. “I can run from that, but I can’t hide from that. And I don’t think the players can, either.”

In concert with labor negotiations, the league is also working on a plan for greater revenue sharing — a measure that the union and many agents have been demanding for some time.

“Our goal for our teams, our players, but particularly our fans, is to come up with a model that says that every N.B.A. team can compete,” Stern said.

:lol:lol:lol

The symbolism this weekend was striking.

A year ago, Hunter and Stern sat side by side on a dais during All-Star Weekend and — in deference to the nation’s economic crisis — said they had begun preliminary discussions to avert a labor battle.

The cooperative spirit did not last long. Hunter declined an invitation to Stern’s address Saturday. He and Derek Fisher, the union president, staged their own briefing on Friday to criticize the owners’ proposal.

Hunter said the league withdrew its proposal once it saw the backlash from players. The union is formulating its own proposal.

The early signs of labor strife cast a pall over the league’s three-day party, which culminates with the All-Star Game on Sunday night.

Falk has been a player agent for 36 years, but he shares the view of league officials that the N.B.A.’s economic system is broken. Small-market owners cannot keep pace with their big-market peers. Players with modest skills are making too much money, leading to a decline in the quality of play.
Falk blames the union, which in its zeal to protect the salaries of rank-and-file players, accepted maximum salaries on superstars in 1999. The result is a system that guarantees tens of millions of dollars to modest bench players like Jerome James and Brian Cardinal via the midlevel exception.

“Is that what the fans want to see?” said Falk, whose 1990s client list was dominated by stars, including Jordan, Patrick Ewing (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/e/patrick_ewing/index.html?inline=nyt-per) and Alonzo Mourning (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/alonzo_mourning/index.html?inline=nyt-per). “Will the fans come and watch more basketball if average players make that kind of money? Will they buy more merchandise, more tickets, more Gatorade? The answer is obviously no. The fans want to see the stars.”

In the current picture, Falk sees a reflection of 1982. About a third of the N.B.A.’s owners were losing money then, and the league was threatening to eliminate teams, thus costing the union dozens of jobs. To secure the league’s future, the union accepted the salary cap, ushering in two decades of significant growth.

The cap made the owners and players partners, a concept that Falk said had been lost after 15 years of adversarial negotiations.

“This is not a time to fight,” he said. “This is a time to sit down as partners and create a system that is realistic in today’s economic climate. The times demand concessions.”
To strengthen the partnership, Falk suggested that the union should accept a smaller share of basketball-related revenue in exchange for a larger stake in other areas.

“China, franchise appreciation, broadcast rights, luxury seating,” Falk said. “If you’re going to be partners, there should be no definition of revenues. Revenues should be everything that owners receive.”

The more fully vested they are in the league’s growth, the more incentive players will have to perform at a high level, said Falk, who ultimately reduced the negotiations to a single principle.

“I think the next agreement,” he said, “has got to produce a better game.”

An earlier version of this article erroneously stated that Billy Hunter, the president of the players union, was not invited to Commissioner David Stern’s All-Star address.

greyforest
02-14-2010, 01:34 PM
dear stern, you and all the other corporations already took all of our money

sincerely

the populous

pauls931
02-14-2010, 01:48 PM
I'm smelling a lockout. Owners losing money, players still demanding ludicrous pay, decrease add revenue? The party is over time to come back down to earth. Also too much expansion has diluted the talent in the league leaving only a handful of teams that have a chance to contend.

ElNono
02-14-2010, 01:50 PM
Stern is full of shit and Hunter knows it. I think a lockout is inevitable.

ElNono
02-14-2010, 01:53 PM
As Abbot said, the red ink they're pointing to is temporary expenses due to the recession. When the economy picks up, the owners will be making a killing...
If I'm the union, I would negotitate a temporary 2 year deal then go back to the table then...
Or maybe we'll see a long lockout.

Cane
02-14-2010, 02:21 PM
Yea the current system is in need of major changes. Its simply a shitty product to try and sell tickets while admitting to your fans you're tanking for the lottery or waiting until the 2010 trade sweepstakes to make noteworthy moves. Its also a depressing sight to see so many empty seats during games; even good times like Memphis has no one there which is a relatively big problem.

I agree that too many average players make too much money. And while the fault lies in GMs and owners for signing subpar talent to ridiculous deals; you can't really predict other things like injuries, personality meltdowns, etc and if you don't overcompensate the players are going to exploit the market since thats how the current system usually works.

I don't hate the players but I do hate the game. It needs to be changed since the product is in need of substantial improvements.

Mark in Austin
02-14-2010, 02:52 PM
I posted this in the Spurs forum too:

Stern's hypocrisy is staggering.

He spent the first 10 minutes of the press conference explaining how successful the league was. Then as soon as labor issues come up, the league is suddenly losing $400 million.

And he gives himself the perfect cover claiming they've given the players undisputable facts on revenue, then when asked to prove it he says he won't negotiate in public. Horseshit. The entire last half of the press conference was a public negotiation.

Props to Henry Abbott, the only reporter with enough stones to challenge him on it. He even caught Stern in his own bullshit: He asked if the league is doing as well as you said in your opening remarks, how can it loose $400 million?

Stern's response: teams have had to add more marketing people to help them sell tickets and ticket prices have had to be reduced given the current economic climate. Plus all the new markets the NBA is expanding / opening offices in are capital / investment heavy - each dollar of revenue they get from the new markets costs a lot more in the infrastructure investments needed to grow that market.

Abbott closes the trap: So what you're saying is - assuming the economy recovers and those markets mature - that these increased expenses are temporary. Then why are you proposing such a radical restructuring of the CBA?

Stern: ...... our model is unsustainable. End of press conference.