Reply With Quote
Seems to be the 4 billion dollar question?
So are these assholes meeting again this week or what?
Seems to be the 4 billion dollar question?
I still we should start taking bets.
What will come first: CBA deal, or Mayan Apocalypse?
Bottom line, right here:
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...he-nba-lockout
Sounds like some of those players at the negotiating table should've payed a little more attention in Economics class.Why don’t the players settle?
Perhaps because they have done so well in the past, it’s hard for the players to accept that the owners are dead set on hammering them this time. They feel, correctly, that they have been making all the concessions. Imagine trying to redo your “chores deal” with your spouse, with one side giving in on every negotiating point. As human beings, we are programmed to reject one-sided deals, even when surrender might be the rational choice.
How far apart are the two sides?
The split on BRI (Basketball Related Income) is supposedly the biggest point of contention. Players want 52.5 percent (down from 57 in the previous contract). Owners are “adamant” on 50 percent and started with an initial lowball offer of 37.
Take the NBA’s 2009-10 BRI estimate of $3.6 billion; 2.5 percent of that is $90 million. Let’s say the life of the contract is 6 years. The total value of that over six years, with reinvestment, is around $500 million.
Is it economically worthwhile for the players to hold out for $500 million?
No. Total NBA salaries last year were over $1.5 billion, about three times the amount they are fighting over. Canceling a third of the current season would wipe out the gain of winning the extra 2.5 percent of BRI over the life of the new collective bargaining agreement. Canceling the whole season over 2.5 percent of BRI is insane for the players.
Of course there are other issues relating to the salary cap, like the length of contracts, but the BRI split seems to be the sticking point.
Not saying that makes what the owners are doing is right, but ethics is apparently out the window. If the lockout extends through December (which is not far off at this point), players will have pretty much lost everything they are currently bargaining for. It's like they are holding the game hostage on principle alone. The problem is...nobody cares.
Last edited by Dex; 10-31-2011 at 07:49 PM.
Nope. If you let ownership rape you in this CBA, they're just going to rape you even harder next CBA. It is economically irrational to give up points of negotiation for no reason.
Sounds like someone needs to read more game theory.
Isn't it going to happen anyways? Owners have already indicated that they were waiting for it to come to this. Sure, they are losing NBA income, too, but they obviously weren't counting on that in the first place since most of them (supposedly) aren't making a profit as it is. The players, meanwhile, need that income.
Owners can bigstack the players until they get what they want, and they've already said that the more money that gets lost in revenue, the worse their offers are going to get, so I don't see them suddenly changing their stance and giving any concessions to the players (like, say, going up to 51-52%).
It's not about the players winning at this point; it's about how badly they are going to let themselves lose. What does it do for future negotiations if the players lose the battle, AND lose the war?
The players are going to fold one way or another. There is no winning for them, sooner they realize this the sooner we have basketball.
This, unfortunately, is about right. Basically the same thing David Aldridge is saying, 'it's going to get worse from here.' I think the more wealthy players have decided, like the owners, to sacrifice this season all together. The damage will be stupid and insurmountable....billions. Rich people don't like to capitulate....apparently. Makes me want to spend a few thousand bucks on tickets.....
This actually is a fairly gross oversimplification that doesn't take into account the fact that BRI has been growing at a steady rate of about $100 million a year, makes the calculation over the 2009-10 BRI when the 2010-11 BRI is already known ($3.817 billion), and uses 6 years as the deal term when the owners have been pretty adamant that it be a 10 year deal with perhaps an out at year 7.Take the NBA’s 2009-10 BRI estimate of $3.6 billion; 2.5 percent of that is $90 million. Let’s say the life of the contract is 6 years. The total value of that over six years, with reinvestment, is around $500 million.
Even if we were to take the deal at 6 year, the actual player's losses going from 57% to the proverbial 50% after indexing for BRI increases and on a 6 year deal is a little north of $2 billion. Sure, that 57% isn't coming back, but basically the players already assumed losses for $1.5 billion. Does standing firm for another $500 million makes sense? Well, they already loss that much money, might as well try to save a bit of what they can.
What are the odds they actually win that battle, though?
The worst case (and seemingly more likely) scenario is that the players take the losses that accompany missing one month to an entire season worth of games, and still end up caving to the 50% anyways (or worse). Then they just end up with a boatload of lost cash AND egg on their face.
The chances they win that battle are slim, no doubt. But make no mistake, they already lost a boatload of cash AND have an egg on their face.
Just looking at the previous CBA vs what's been agreed to by the players at this point (even with a 52.5%) is a fairly major swing towards the owners.
Players already lost $2 billions that are not coming back. Maybe they'll just have the owners eat $2 billion too to show them how that feels. Is it stupid? Maybe. What I'd like to see if the final resolution from the NLRB, as I feel that's the player's last hope to gain any kind of minimal leverage.
BTW, this is a good read on the NLRB topic, and I think part of the reason why we had some frantic negotiations last week:
http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/s...decision-nears
I said that before anyone, El ^. I even tweeted Larry Coon about it and he flat out denied it. The timing was too su ious to believe otherwise.
I just want the resolution out so that's one less thing to deal with. At least whatever speculation there is that players are waiting for the ruling would go away.
Asked Woj if there was any expectation of more talks...his responses:
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
So far, there's been no new bargaining session scheduled between the owners and players.
37 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply
WojYahooNBA Adrian Wojnarowski
The NBA and NBPA are discussing possibility of returning federal mediator George Cohen to labor talks this week, sources tell Y! Sports.
40 minutes ago
Why they aren't continuing to talk is beyond me. Like Nono said, I really hope this NLRB ruling comes out soon so we at least have that out of the way one way or another.
Well the way Hunter ended talks it won't be the owners making phone calls to the NBPA. Until the players are ready to concede a little more there won't be anything to talk about. At best the players concede(and might as well do it soon) at worst the season is lost. I don't see the Owners changing their stance whatsoever.
Derek Fisher defends loyalty in letter
In his latest letter to fellow players, union president Derek Fisher strongly denied a published report over the weekend that union president Billy Hunter and other members of the union's executive board have questioned Fisher about his relationship with NBA commissioner David Stern and deputy commissioner Adam Silver. In Monday night's letter, which was obtained by ESPN.com, Fisher responded to the Saturday report from FoxSports.com columnist Jason Whitlock by telling union members: "Usually I wouldn't even dignify absurd media reports with a comment. But before these reports go any further, let me say on the record to each of you, my loyalty has and always will be with the players. "Anyone that questions that or doubts that does not know me, my history and what I stand for. And quite frankly, how dare anyone call that into question? The Players Association is united and any reports to the contrary are false. There have been no side agreements, no side negotiations or anything close. We are united in serving you and presenting the best options and getting everyone back to work."
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/71...loyalty-absurd
"how dare they question me" after what he did to Utah. I don't know who's worse, Mourning or Fisher.
I wonder if the lack of a ruling by the NLRB is indicative of their lack of concern about this battle of the wealthy. It would be great to know, but a ruling that doesn't favor the players would be catastrophic to them right now. Maybe the NLRB is holding out as a favor to the players.
what a load of bs
Now this whole quarrel is sailing into pathetic waters for the players. They're literally just delaying the inevitable now. They're still rich, so they need to swallow their pride, and keep on getting paid absurd amounts to play a game.
Fisher:::he smacked Kobe upside the sucker and got him straightened out--Game 7, '10 Finals.
Hey, nephew,,,
just like that.
Heat's owner got fined $500K for his comments on twitter. Big market owners should regroup and end this whole negotiation being dictate by Stern and small market owners. It's time for them to let people know that they aren't the ones responsible of that mess.
At that stage of the lockout, players should rather wait a couple of weeks to see what the NLRB says instead of accepting a crappy new CBA. From what I've read, players have a strong case against owners at the NLRB.
^Exactly. There is no harm in waiting. The November 15th paycheck & December 1st paycheck are gone.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
