Reply With Quote
I bet I could find someone who would.
Money makes the world go round.
Name and number?
All's I know is, as much as I drop going to an NBA game, if anyone is losing money, somebody is ing up, and I aint gonna pay for it.
I bet I could find someone who would.
Money makes the world go round.
Name and number?
There was a guy on Conan O'Brien who sold out ad space in the form of tattoos all over his body ... when I saw him, he was discussing accepting money from someone to have a penis tattoo'd on him.
I don't know his name and number though.
I personally wouldnt do it, but I can find someone that can. And I will take a percentage from them for my finders fee. Its all about the green. The Valero Spurs sounds fine to me. Go for it. make that paper.
I bet I could find someone who would.
Money makes the world go round.
IF IT DONT MAKE MONEY, THEN IT DONT MAKE $EN$E.
It depends on the brand and the team, just look at this soccer River Plate shirt with Bud on it, it looks great:
But there are cases of sponsors making the shirts worse.
How is ads on a jersey going to do that?but it will also bring in some new ones.
I think the NBA should just have one big client. Like Nike or Addias or Budwesier or Pespi, or whoever and have them pay a very large some for an excluse brand agreement where their name would appear on the jesery (not very big), shorts, warm ups, head bands, tshirts, etc.
That would be 100x better than 20 different companies coverings up a jersey.
how is everyone dancing around the fact that THE ASSOCIATION IS NOT IN NEED OF MONEY
They have money but they want more. That's how it be.
I thought they broke up in the late 60's.
Listen, here's the thing. Owners have one problem that players don't have and the unions of all sports will not tolerate. Performance pay. You think the Clippers are selling out ? NO. You can make money if you have a winning team. If your team is losing you can't GIVE a fockin' ticket away.
So, what did the owners do. They went corporate season ticket holders and the ticket prices went through the roof for john doe IF they can even get tickets. The spurs have the best price structure in the NBA and more non-corp cheap seats available than ANY NBA team. Period. IF they start losin'....that ain't gonna last.
Everyone yaps about execs making money when their company is going bust, myself included. So why are athletes exempt here ? If you can get on the CEO making millions when his company is losing revenue, can't you get on the player and cut his salaray when he's losing revenue ?
Last edited by word; 05-27-2005 at 04:42 AM.
If they do it like the English soccer teams it wouldn't look too bad
But they must limit the number to one (and probably the size too).
But if they can avoid it all together it would be even better. I for one think the Spurs Jerseys look pretty nice without any additional on them.
As for the teams name: no! I find the practice ridiculous and frankly unnecessary.
Last edited by Slomo; 05-27-2005 at 05:16 AM.
So you're saying....that doesn't look bad. Okaaaay....If they do it like the English soccer teams it wouldn't look too bad
Imagine the possibilities!
Absolut Vodka - Vin Baker
KFC - Shaq
Two points:
1. I call bull on the NBA losing money. Stern must think we're morons.
2. What do you guys think it's all about anyway? Pride? Offering the civic service of wholesome entertainment? Nope. Nothing but the green. Always has been, always will be. If you can't handle it, stick to amateur/college sports. And even that's debatable.
As an aside, I would hate to see the Texaco Spurs vs. Carl's Jr. Mavericks. Well, I wouldn't mind the Carl's Jr. Mavericks so much. It's kind of funny.
Really? I always took Baker for a Colt .45 man.
NASCAR-ing NBA uniforms?
or scarring NBA uniforms?
NBA? Just like religion, "It's a business".
No I'm saying it doesn't look too bad. Specially compared to something like this:
I also said (further down in my post) that I would prefer the Jersey to remain as they are (specifically the Spurs jerseys).
Maybe you are a moron. Don't just toss me into your camp like that with the big 'we' thing.
Not all of 'em are making money, I assure you of that. Wait...okay...let me explain here.
Let's say you open up a mobile fajita stand. You do your books and find that you're making a whopping $8 a day profit. Are you losing money ? No. Can you find something ELSE to do with your time to make more than $8/day. I would hope so.
There's a term for that in Economics but, as someone said here 'sports' teaches you a whole bunch of stuff about life. Pssst....'Opportunity Cost'.
Their profits or 'money they be makin' has to exceed what they could do with their money or time elsewhere. In other words. It can't be a waste of time, like owning an airline. Of course, sports franchises and airlines are typically things people buy that are trying to get laid in their 60's, not make money. Plus they both have in unions and high labor costs.
Put that fajita stand on the scale of someone who can own an NBA team, then you're there.
I agree with you on the economics issue, but that's not what he said. He said "losing money." There's a difference.
Besides, an NBA franchise is certainly not the world's best investment, but I guarantee you that somebody is turning a nice little profit, or they wouldn't be licensing new expansion teams, now would they? You don't expand a business venture that is losing money.
So NBA Jersey's will soon look like Soccer Jersey's?
Cialis or Viagra?
wow
ad on jerseys would suck.
"money is what makes the world go round"
liberalism forum.
to make a comparison with soccer again, there's only one team in europe that doesn't have an ad on its jerseys. and they get respect for it.
NBA is a business but cmon the adless jerseys is one of the best thing. I have a spurs jersey and believe me i wouldn't buy one with ads on it.
Yeah...I think we're having a problem with semantics here. Confusing the NBA and with specific owners/teams. I'm saying, not all NBA teams are profitable in the sense that if they aren't winning, there's about a 1000 places they could put their money to get a return. Canadian pipelines. Whatever.
Granted, no one has ever sold a team for a loss that I'm aware of. Red McCombs leased the chapparals for 75k/yr before he bought 'em for chump change and named 'em the spurs then the ABA went 'poof' and the NBA took the Spurs in. THAT's good bidness. Those opportunities don't come along that often.
I thought ...of course...I'd make a horse perfessor, that I made it fairly easy to understand 'opportunity cost' and why 'losing money' is not necessarily the same thing as 'no profit' which is what that poster equated 'losing money' with. I equate it with, 'could make mo' money elsewhere'.
The players negotiate % of 'revenue' anyway. Not profit.
Please tell me I don't have to go there.....
That's why we name stadiums after orange juice now. Sports franchises are still 'hobbies' for the rich, for the most part.
And, to edit...if the players want those salaries they're gonna have to wear golden arches or whatever, on their jerseys. The money has to come from somewhere.
What's that 'swoosh' dealy up there on the right shoulder of that jersey ?wow
ad on jerseys would suck.
"money is what makes the world go round"
liberalism forum.
to make a comparison with soccer again, there's only one team in europe that doesn't have an ad on its jerseys. and they get respect for it.
Go Nike !!!
they make the jersey. and its small.
You can call them the H-E-B Spurs as long as I get free tickets to the game!
Seriously, if teams make enough money from Sponsors, then the tickets should be free. After all, we're just watching ads run by scoring points, right?
Right?!?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
