Unions are a thing of a past and the NBPA needs to go a friggin clue.

[jabol130]

To all Spurs fans who side with the players on the lockout issues. No offense but think about your stance for a minute. Bottom line is the owners are exactly that - the owners and employers. They should be able to run their businesses the way they want. If they believe the current model doesn't allow them to be profitable in the long term they should be able to make necessary changes including cutting any costs they see as appropriate. You, as a fan that hopes his small market team and the league it plays in can remain compe ive should support them. Peter Holt may want to make money off his team but he is also working to ensure the Spurs can remain in San Antonio. The fact that we don't have a season right now is because of the players union. Unions are a thing of the past and were intended to prevent labor discrimination in its true form, a form that no NBA player of recent or past times for that matter has ever experienced. So, players like Chris Paul who don't understand these principles and fans who support them - please go get a clue and let the rest of us have a damned pro basketball season.

[ElNono]

For starters, the NBA isn't a regular business. Actually, it's very far from a regular business. It includes monopoly, collusion, etc.

With that out of the way, I'd like you to show me the numbers you ran that make you think the union's offer is unreasonable. I also would like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion that we don't have a season right now because of the union, despite the fact this is a owner's lockout.

Thanks.

[spurs10]

For starters, the NBA isn't a regular business. Actually, it's very far from a regular business. It includes monopoly, collusion, etc.

With that out of the way, I'd like you to show me the numbers you ran that make you think the union's offer is unreasonable. I also would like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion that we don't have a season right now because of the union, despite the fact this is a owner's lockout.

Thanks.

The union's offer is more than reasonable and the NBA knows this. They won't make a deal no matter how much the union gives. They are only concerned about one thing, destroying and breaking this union. It's Hunter they're after, not a deal, not money. They are purposely making the deal unacceptable. I could be wrong, but don't think so.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I would argue that the rights, immunities to liability and such afforded an individual by filing a corporate charter are a thing of the past.

[Giuseppe]

Left to their own devices people won't do what is right & proper.

Unions are a sure hedge against people doing what isn't right & proper.

[DrSteffo]

Bottom line is the owners are exactly that - the owners and employers. They should be able to run their businesses the way they want.

Medieval style or modern polish style?

[SpursIndonesia]

Sometime i hope people get a clue first and enlighten themselves before nudging others to get clues as well. Perhaps that will save them from some embarassment in the first place.

[benefactor]

You would think that you would bring the goods when you only post 41 times in seven years. Not so much. You can go back to not posting again. Thanks.

[hater]

Ohio vote shows unions still a political force
http://www.businessweek.com/ap/finan.../D9QT8G0O0.htm

[Mr. Body]

To all Spurs fans who side with the players on the lockout issues. No offense but think about your stance for a minute. Bottom line is the owners are exactly that - the owners and employers. They should be able to run their businesses the way they want.

No they shouldn't, dumbass. Thaty's why we have laws against child labor, laws for safety concerns, laws about family medical leaves, and other provisions that support the workers that owners would never have offered on their own.

[I. Hustle]

I think I started to side with the owners when Hunter said that the union came up with a plan that allows the owners to break even. A lot of those players have their own businesses and I doubt they would keep those businesses going if all they ever did was break even.

[hater]

just think of this as a microcosm of the real estate market. The players are houses that are way, way, way overvalued and the owners were the stupid s that bought them, thinking they would make them money.

What is happening in the housing market? the house prices are dropping and the owners are taking the losses. This is what needs to happen in the NBA, let the ing stupid owners take the losses and let salaries drop as time goes. If an owner can't afford to keep a team, forfeit it, sell it, shut it down.

But no, the owners want a bailout at the expense of the players. that. the owners.

[Giuseppe]

No they shouldn't, dumbass. Thaty's why we have laws against child labor, laws for safety concerns, laws about family medical leaves, and other provisions that support the workers that owners would never have offered on their own.

Precisely my prior point:::

[[[Left to their own devices people won't do what is right & proper.

Unions are a sure hedge against people doing what isn't right & proper.]]]

People, especially Americans inherently believe their fellow man will do what is right & proper without an en y mandating that they do so.

Uh, uh.

[hater]

To reiterate, if an owner says
"well I cannot afford to keep my team as of right now"

then ing sell it, you don't deserver to be an owner. Get the Out. Stop asking for a bailout

[TimmehC]

Without the NBPA, the owners are opened up to anti-trust lawsuits, and could be held liable for billions in damages. Also, with no union, there is no CBA, which means that the large market teams would dominate the league 10x more than they already do.

The owners do not want to break the union, they just want it to be weaker.

[cheguevara]

Lets take Hollywood for a second, which is a much larger industry than the NBA. Do you think a production company would split fifty percent of its revenue with the actors? no.

comparing a pro sports league to hollywood

just go full monty and compare NBA to NARUTO

[ElNono]

How is this an owners lockout?

Really? Why do you think it's called a lockout and not a strike?

Here, I'll let Adam Silver tell you who locked out the players:

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The owners have made the players multiple offers. The players rejected. If the players continue its nothing but a veiled strike.

And the players have made offers to the owners which they have rejected. you can spin it however you want but the players are more than willing to go to work and earn their lawfully signed contracts.

[vy65]

How is this an owners lockout? If I'm the boss and youre the employee, I make you an offer. If you reject the offer then you are holding out for more money. Lets take Hollywood for a second, which is a much larger industry than the NBA. Do you think a production company would split fifty percent of its revenue with the actors? no. Then you might say, well, the people spend their money to see Brad Pitt or Will Smith, and if those guys weren't in that movie then it wouldn't be as successful. That's true to a certain extent but keep in mind that it is Hollywood that uses it's media machine to build these actors up to make you go and see them. Just as it is in the NBA, there are only a few big names that carry the entire industry. The rest of the workers in the union are just getting over like fat rats. This is what the owners are fighting against. They front all the money, take all the risk, and are expected to take less than 50%. And, they have to guarantee contracts no matter what.

That business model would be fine if every player had the star power of a Kobe Bryant, but that's far from the reality. So here is how Hollywood deals with its employees. You have these actors out there that are so greedy that they expect twenty million up front and twenty percent of the gross ticket sales. As long as they can bank on that actor they give him what he wants, but the moment he doesn't produce results they throw his ass out in the cold and build up another nobody to force feed the public. The NBA doesn't have that liberty, although they should, but these owners grant these star players 6 year deals, then every player that thinks hes as good as the next player wants the same deals. The owners are at fault for allowing it to get out of control, and now they have finally come to their senses and want to reel it in. They players have their nerves to compare this to slavery. Slaves didnt get paid, yet these players are overpaid. The owners front the dough and take all the risk. They have a right to earn a profit, a substantial one at that.

Hollywood doesn't have an exemption from the anti-trust laws. Your analogy is bad.

I agree with your ultimate point however.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Hollywood doesn't have an exemption from the anti-trust laws. Your analogy is bad.

I agree with your ultimate point however.

That and movies sign guaranteed above the line multi-film contracts to actors all the time.

[jabol130]

For starters, the NBA isn't a regular business. Actually, it's very far from a regular business. It includes monopoly, collusion, etc.

With that out of the way, I'd like you to show me the numbers you ran that make you think the union's offer is unreasonable. I also would like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion that we don't have a season right now because of the union, despite the fact this is a owner's lockout.

Thanks.

I didn't and don't intend to run any numbers on anyone's offers (whatever that means). I'm simply trying to make a point that if NBA players were not organized in a union we would be playing regular season games right now. If my employer, facing losses in tough economic times decided to for example cut the amount he pays for my medical insurance I'm not able to tell him "no". I will either accept his terms or try to find another employer with a satisfactory medical coverage. I also understand that the NBA is not a regular business. The NBA owners are also organized in a sort of a union. The difference is that I believe the owners union works in favor of the fan because it fosters a compe ive environment in the league. The players union looks out for the players best interest and in effect ends up hurting the fan.

[ElNono]

I didn't and don't intend to run any numbers on anyone's offers (whatever that means).

Figures.

I'm simply trying to make a point that if NBA players were not organized in a union we would be playing regular season games right now.

If the NBA players wouldn't be unionized, and there would be no collective bargaining, then the NBA in it's current form would very likely not exist.
In a regular-business, free-market league small market teams would very likely not be compe ive, and owners would arguably have to pay much, much more in salaries. While it's likely they would be able to pay less for marginal talent, the costs of actual franchise players would be much, much higher. You can look at pre-1998 CBA to see what the salaries were back then for a good example.

In a nuts , it's actually a benefit for owners as much as players that there's a union in this case. Simply because this isn't a regular business.

The difference is that I believe the owners union works in favor of the fan because it fosters a compe ive environment in the league. The players union looks out for the players best interest and in effect ends up hurting the fan.

Owners care about the $$$ and that's not different than the players. If they cared about the fans, we would be playing games right now while a new deal is being negotiated.

[all_heart]

Lots of good points made here, but I think Lakaluva is right on ... can't believe I'm agreeing w/him...

Know matter what I think something should protect the owners from lemon players.. guys that play their asses off for a contract then turn to later.. ala Jerome James.

[vy65]

Without the NBPA, the owners are opened up to anti-trust lawsuits, and could be held liable for billions in damages. Also, with no union, there is no CBA, which means that the large market teams would dominate the league 10x more than they already do.

The owners do not want to break the union, they just want it to be weaker.

Lolwut

[ElNono]

Know matter what I think something should protect the owners from lemon players.. guys that play their asses off for a contract then turn to later.. ala Jerome James.

I agree with something like this. You don't need to turn the system upside-down or a hard cap for that though.