ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • BillS
    Angry Old Poster
    • Mar 2004
    • 21654

    #91
    Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

    Originally posted by freddielewis14
    Okay, so you're saying in 2017 that Simon owns the Pacers as a civic duty??
    Certainly I think that is still part of it. Otherwise why - if what you say is true - would there be a "keep in Indy" stipulation in the supposed sale offer? The CIB penalty is a fraction of the expected sale price, no more than paying to remove an HOA lien on a house. If they just want their money so they can laugh all the way to the bank, why not sell it to someone in Seattle up front?
    BillS

    A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
    Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

    Comment

    • Sollozzo
      Member
      • Jan 2004
      • 27435

      #92
      Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

      If the Simons haven't been making profit on a relatively successful franchise like the Pacers with a spectacular arena and millions of taxpayer handouts, then the NBA really is a complete failure of a business model.
      Last edited by Sollozzo; 05-01-2017, 04:17 PM.

      Comment

      • BillS
        Angry Old Poster
        • Mar 2004
        • 21654

        #93
        Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

        Originally posted by Sollozzo
        If the Simons haven't been making profit on a relatively successful franchise like the Pacers with a spectacular arena and millions of taxpayer handouts, then the NBA really is a complete failure of a business model.
        To a certain extent it is a complete failure of a business model. Remember, the Pacers don't sell out except for marquee games against the players marketed by the NBA, the local television contract money for the Pacers themselves is almost nothing compared to a larger market, until very recently the Pacers had to pay a not insignificant percentage of their national TV money to the Silnas, the local viewership capacity limits the amount of money sponsors are willing to pay, and the market will not bear ticket prices in Indiana the way it will in Chicago or even Cleveland. It is quite easy to believe that - prior to the last CBA and the huge increase in national TV revenue - that the Pacers were running on a negative profit margin of 5-7% which is the $10M per year of their previously claimed losses. Even now a huge chunk of their revenue that has them operating in the black is their share of the LT money. Is it any wonder they are reluctant to give that up without a near guarantee that it would be replaced with increased local TV, ticket sale, and sponsorship revenues from a fantastic player or team?


        ETA: the league as a whole makes money, and some owners make huge amounts year over year, but the model is very much dependent on cities (and owners) that are willing to contribute to the bottom line through losses and/or subsidies.
        BillS

        A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.
        Or throw in a first-round pick and flip it for a max-level point guard...

        Comment

        • Cubs231721
          Member
          • Aug 2006
          • 3812

          #94
          Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

          Originally posted by BillS
          To a certain extent it is a complete failure of a business model. Remember, the Pacers don't sell out except for marquee games against the players marketed by the NBA, the local television contract money for the Pacers themselves is almost nothing compared to a larger market, until very recently the Pacers had to pay a not insignificant percentage of their national TV money to the Silnas, the local viewership capacity limits the amount of money sponsors are willing to pay, and the market will not bear ticket prices in Indiana the way it will in Chicago or even Cleveland. It is quite easy to believe that - prior to the last CBA and the huge increase in national TV revenue - that the Pacers were running on a negative profit margin of 5-7% which is the $10M per year of their previously claimed losses. Even now a huge chunk of their revenue that has them operating in the black is their share of the LT money. Is it any wonder they are reluctant to give that up without a near guarantee that it would be replaced with increased local TV, ticket sale, and sponsorship revenues from a fantastic player or team?


          ETA: the league as a whole makes money, and some owners make huge amounts year over year, but the model is very much dependent on cities (and owners) that are willing to contribute to the bottom line through losses and/or subsidies.
          I agree with a large percentage of this, but I did want to point out something that's important. It's revenue sharing that is the biggest key to small markets in recent years, not payments for not being in luxury tax. Luxury tax gives non-taxpaying teams somewhere in the 1-3 million range in an average season (plus of course not having increased luxury tax payments).

          Revenue sharing is different from market to market, but it's been reported that the smallest markets often get 15-25 million per year, and the Pacers are often seen as one of the biggest beneficiaries of revenue sharing. And revenue sharing doesn't go away if a team spends in the luxury tax (although it may affect the revenue sharing model in some way as it has many variables).

          Comment

          • freddielewis14
            ---------
            • Jun 2008
            • 8799

            #95
            Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

            Originally posted by BillS
            Certainly I think that is still part of it. Otherwise why - if what you say is true - would there be a "keep in Indy" stipulation in the supposed sale offer? The CIB penalty is a fraction of the expected sale price, no more than paying to remove an HOA lien on a house. If they just want their money so they can laugh all the way to the bank, why not sell it to someone in Seattle up front?
            This isn't me making the Simons out to be greedy, so this "laugh all the way to the bank" hyperbole isn't necessary. I never made this only about the Simons. The NBA has 30 owners and they are all happy being owners and aren't overpaying their players, that was this is all about.

            A good reason why Simon would now want to stipulate that the Pacers stay in Indy would be because of his personal dealings here. His headquarters is one of the main buildings downtown. If a city built on sports loss the Pacers it would hurt his pocketbook. He is invested in the city and state many other ways. The relationship has been lucrative for Hoosiers and Simon.

            Comment

            • freddielewis14
              ---------
              • Jun 2008
              • 8799

              #96
              Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

              Originally posted by BillS
              To a certain extent it is a complete failure of a business model. Remember, the Pacers don't sell out except for marquee games against the players marketed by the NBA, the local television contract money for the Pacers themselves is almost nothing compared to a larger market, until very recently the Pacers had to pay a not insignificant percentage of their national TV money to the Silnas, the local viewership capacity limits the amount of money sponsors are willing to pay, and the market will not bear ticket prices in Indiana the way it will in Chicago or even Cleveland. It is quite easy to believe that - prior to the last CBA and the huge increase in national TV revenue - that the Pacers were running on a negative profit margin of 5-7% which is the $10M per year of their previously claimed losses. Even now a huge chunk of their revenue that has them operating in the black is their share of the LT money. Is it any wonder they are reluctant to give that up without a near guarantee that it would be replaced with increased local TV, ticket sale, and sponsorship revenues from a fantastic player or team?


              ETA: the league as a whole makes money, and some owners make huge amounts year over year, but the model is very much dependent on cities (and owners) that are willing to contribute to the bottom line through losses and/or subsidies.
              This is all false. Even if you believe the loss CLAIMS (that averaged 4 million over 9 0f 10 years) that's 36 million. Indy has agreed to 45 million in cash during that time and the Pacers have had wildly successful playoff runs since that claim, meaning more money.

              There are also more advertising deals. From the Hickory jerseys, to new patches, to the sponsorships brought in by PG.

              The NBA biz model is fine. I don't understand how anyone argue differently. There is no shortage of millionaires that want to own NBA franchises! You think brilliant businessmen are lining up to lose money??

              Comment

              • freddielewis14
                ---------
                • Jun 2008
                • 8799

                #97
                Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

                Owning a sports team (even minor leagues) is about the best thing a SMART businessman can do. Every power player from politicians to other money and move makers want to be at the citie's sports events. To ignore the type of benefits that comes along with owning a team and pretend that it's just some sort of financial civic sacrifice is beyond ridiculous.

                Comment

                • freddielewis14
                  ---------
                  • Jun 2008
                  • 8799

                  #98
                  Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

                  Originally posted by Cubs231721
                  I agree with a large percentage of this, but I did want to point out something that's important. It's revenue sharing that is the biggest key to small markets in recent years, not payments for not being in luxury tax. Luxury tax gives non-taxpaying teams somewhere in the 1-3 million range in an average season (plus of course not having increased luxury tax payments).

                  Revenue sharing is different from market to market, but it's been reported that the smallest markets often get 15-25 million per year, and the Pacers are often seen as one of the biggest beneficiaries of revenue sharing. And revenue sharing doesn't go away if a team spends in the luxury tax (although it may affect the revenue sharing model in some way as it has many variables).
                  Pacers claimed about 10 years ago they lost around 4 mill a year on average for 9 out of 10 years following BLF construction even with revenue sharing.

                  My thing is if they did (which they didn't) small price to pay, especially now that all teams are raking it in.

                  But lets not forget that awful ABA deal with St Louis costs the team 4-5 mill a year.
                  Last edited by freddielewis14; 05-01-2017, 06:32 PM.

                  Comment

                  • Cubs231721
                    Member
                    • Aug 2006
                    • 3812

                    #99
                    Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

                    Originally posted by freddielewis14
                    Pacers claimed about 10 years ago they lost around 4 mill a year on average for 9 out of 10 years following BLF construction even with revenue sharing.

                    My thing is if they did (which they didn't) small price to pay, especially now that all teams are raking it in.

                    But lets not forget that awful ABA deal with St Louis costs the team 4-5 mill a year.
                    Revenue sharing was greatly expanded in 2011, so any comparisons from before then have to keep that in mind.

                    The St. Louis deal is slowly getting phased out as per the settlement agreement a couple of years ago, so it's hard to tell how much it's currently affecting the club.

                    Comment

                    • CableKC
                      Member
                      • Mar 2005
                      • 36687

                      Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

                      I wonder if Marc Stein will simply join YahooNBA now
                      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

                      Comment

                      • ilive4sports
                        Member
                        • Oct 2005
                        • 8679

                        Re: ESPN's Marc Stein out at ESPN

                        Originally posted by CableKC
                        I wonder if Marc Stein will simply join YahooNBA now
                        Yahoo is gonna need new writers. Woj is jumping to ESPN after the draft/before free agency

                        Comment

                        Working...