PDA

View Full Version : PSD fan's take: What is a fair split of revenue for both sides?



beasted86
10-18-2011, 05:41 PM
I'm sure owners & players respectively want whatever they can squeeze from the other side, but just want to hear what fans view as fair from an outside perspective.

The 4 major team sport leagues:

NFL players receive 47% of $9.0 Billion
MLB players receive 51% of $7.1 Billion
NBA players receive ____ of $4.1 Billion
NHL players receive 57% of $3.0 Billion


With this in mind, what is a fair split? Poll is based off of where they last left negotiations-- players at 53%, owners at 47%.

DoMeFavors
10-18-2011, 05:42 PM
Players get 51 %

daleja424
10-18-2011, 05:44 PM
keep in mind that in the nfl that is 47% of total revenue.

Based on that the players currently make only about 50% (2.1 billion of 4.2 billion). This number is different then this 57% of BRI number.

So in reality...last year the players were compensated right on par with the other leagues.

Hawkeye15
10-18-2011, 05:45 PM
45% for both players and owners. 10% for users of the PSD NBA Forum.

beasted86
10-18-2011, 05:47 PM
keep in mind that in the nfl that is 47% of total revenue.

Based on that the players currently make only about 50% (2.1 billion of 4.2 billion). This number is different then this 57% of BRI number.

So in reality...last year the players were compensated right on par with the other leagues.

I know this, and originally was going to include that fact in the poll, but decided to simplify my original post to try and get more responses.

But, yes, as far as I know, the NFL & NHL split total revenue, no expenses pre-deducted. I believe the MLB deducts expenses, but I'm not 100% sure.

beasted86
10-18-2011, 05:50 PM
45% for both players and owners. 10% for users of the PSD NBA Forum.

10% of $4 Billion? where do I sign up? :D

Celticsfan2007
10-18-2011, 05:55 PM
52% for the players is where I expect the sides to come to agreement.

Lets hope today can be that day!

Celticsfan2007
10-18-2011, 05:56 PM
45% for both players and owners. 10% for users of the PSD NBA Forum.

I'm In!

gotoHcarolina52
10-18-2011, 05:58 PM
Take the average of the other leagues and call it a day.

(47% + 51% + 57%)/3 = 51.66%

So give the players 52% and let's get this show on the road.

Kevj77
10-18-2011, 06:01 PM
keep in mind that in the nfl that is 47% of total revenue.

Based on that the players currently make only about 50% (2.1 billion of 4.2 billion). This number is different then this 57% of BRI number.

So in reality...last year the players were compensated right on par with the other leagues.I think this is important. It already is close to a 50/50 split after deductions.

daleja424
10-18-2011, 06:03 PM
I think this is important. It already is close to a 50/50 split after deductions.

Yup...and that is what people fail to realize. They say, oh 50-50 is fair...without realizing that the players are already really at 50-50...

beasted86
10-18-2011, 06:08 PM
Yup...and that is what people fail to realize. They say, oh 50-50 is fair...without realizing that the players are already really at 50-50...

Billy Hunter in an interview said the NBA deducts $600M off the top, but Stern and other NBA executives smartly never reveal that to anyone in their interviews.

kozelkid
10-18-2011, 06:15 PM
Whatever the owners want and can reasonably attain.

I'm not one who believes in pure capitalism, but in this case it's hardly even attainable given that no one would want to watch scabs which is why bolded is key for me.

beasted86
10-18-2011, 06:20 PM
Whatever the owners want and can reasonably attain.

I'm not one who believes in pure capitalism, but in this case it's hardly even attainable given that no one would want to watch scabs which is why bolded is key for me.

How is whatever the owners want fair for both sides?

Sadds The Gr8
10-18-2011, 06:21 PM
I agree with The Hawk

Tony_Starks
10-18-2011, 07:07 PM
Billy Hunter in an interview said the NBA deducts $600M off the top, but Stern and other NBA executives smartly never reveal that to anyone in their interviews.



Thats a big huge deal that people fail to realize. They said what they are basically doing is taking a $100 dollar bill, taking 20 bucks out of it, and saying "we'll split the rest of it with you 50/50."

Im no mathematician but it sure doesn't sound right to me......

Badluck33
10-18-2011, 07:25 PM
Thats a big huge deal that people fail to realize. They said what they are basically doing is taking a $100 dollar bill, taking 20 bucks out of it, and saying "we'll split the rest of it with you 50/50."

Im no mathematician but it sure doesn't sound right to me......

Sounds right to me. Unless the players are going to be paying some bills too...

hard_candy
10-18-2011, 07:38 PM
Whatever KG can browbeat the owners into taking. :cool:

btw, dwight and drose together? Freaky.

beasted86
10-18-2011, 07:52 PM
Sounds right to me. Unless the players are going to be paying some bills too...

There's nothing wrong with it, but people seem to take it out of account when they are discussing what is a fair percentage. It's not imaginary money.

daleja424
10-18-2011, 07:52 PM
Sounds right to me. Unless the players are going to be paying some bills too...

not saying it is right or wrong... just pointing out that it is happening... and not many people are talking about it...so a lot of people don't know about it. They hear Stern say 50-50 and assume it is actually 50-50... which it is not.

hard_candy
10-18-2011, 07:54 PM
The players or a rep should point out the duplicity, if true.

daleja424
10-18-2011, 07:56 PM
The players or a rep should point out the duplicity, if true.

They have pointed it out... but they havent screamed it to the masses...so most people are unaware that BRI and total revenue are different. BRI means revenue minus a huge chunk that comes off the top.

gotoHcarolina52
10-18-2011, 07:57 PM
Frankly, I don't give a damn which whinny bunch gets the bigger share of the golden pie. I just want to see some basketball.

3mikee_
10-18-2011, 07:58 PM
Players should get paid more. 50/50 doesn't make sense to me.

hard_candy
10-18-2011, 08:04 PM
They have pointed it out... but they havent screamed it to the masses...so most people are unaware that BRI and total revenue are different. BRI means revenue minus a huge chunk that comes off the top.

Well, they should. Nasty looks in a conference room just reek of insecurity and are counter productive. Also, if Stern and the owners have fudged the numbers once, it's likely not the first time. I now believe the players can make a strong public case, but seem unable or unwilling to do so.

Cosmic_Canon
10-18-2011, 08:12 PM
Billy Hunter in an interview said the NBA deducts $600M off the top, but Stern and other NBA executives smartly never reveal that to anyone in their interviews.

I doubt that, maybe Billy is trying to spin things like Stern. It's well known(if you read that is), that the owners take 300M off the top, so you might of misheard what Hunter said.

daleja424
10-18-2011, 08:15 PM
I doubt that, maybe Billy is trying to spin things like Stern. It's well known(if you read that is), that the owners take 300M off the top, so you might of misheard what Hunter said.

Point is they take off the top though... so 50-50 isnt actually 50-50.

Wade>You
10-18-2011, 08:24 PM
Billy Hunter in an interview said the NBA deducts $600M off the top, but Stern and other NBA executives smartly never reveal that to anyone in their interviews.I didn't even realize that. Just another example of how the Owners are winning the publicity war.

Bramaca
10-18-2011, 08:29 PM
They have pointed it out... but they havent screamed it to the masses...so most people are unaware that BRI and total revenue are different. BRI means revenue minus a huge chunk that comes off the top.

Do you have links to the revenue that is taken off of BRI? This isn't a challenge but rather a question because what is listed as the BRI for the season and what places like Forbes list as revenue are different by a couple hundred million.

The only explanation I have found is that Forbes includes 100% of naming rights, luxury suites, and signage while BRI is calculated with;

40% of proceeds from arena signage
40% of proceeds from luxury suites
45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights

If this is the difference in the calculations then the NBAPA and Forbes are doing creative accounting of their own to make revenue seem higher. If you have access to something different then that or what the owners are apparently deducting I would love to see it.

daleja424
10-18-2011, 08:34 PM
Do you have links to the revenue that is taken off of BRI? This isn't a challenge but rather a question because what is listed as the BRI for the season and what places like Forbes list as revenue are different by a couple hundred million.

The only explanation I have found is that Forbes includes 100% of naming rights, luxury suites, and signage while BRI is calculated with;

40% of proceeds from arena signage
40% of proceeds from luxury suites
45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights

If this is the difference in the calculations then the NBAPA and Forbes are doing creative accounting of their own to make revenue seem higher. If you have access to something different then that or what the owners are apparently deducting I would love to see it.

Mutliple interviews with Stern and Hunter. The NBA's revenue last year was 4.1-4.2 billion... BRI was determined to be closer to 3.8 billion. The NBA gets about 300 million off the top...Stern has even admitted as much.

Bramaca
10-18-2011, 08:48 PM
Mutliple interviews with Stern and Hunter. The NBA's revenue last year was 4.1-4.2 billion... BRI was determined to be closer to 3.8 billion. The NBA gets about 300 million off the top...Stern has even admitted as much.

I would love to see a link because I have read damn near everything to do with the lockout and regarding to BRI and have not come accross anything about BRI being reduced other then from the players side and that without an explanation of what exactly they are taking off.

Also, there seems to be some confusion in here as to what is being taken off. You are saying 300 million, somebody else is saying 600 million. I'm just wondering which one it is or if it is even one of them.

Dade County
10-18-2011, 08:54 PM
45% for both players and owners. 10% for users of the PSD NBA Forum.

Where is the vote button for this:confused: I like this right here!

I really don't care about the split, I am more interested in the competitive balance of the league.

I just don't no how the owners are going to pull this off.

daleja424
10-18-2011, 09:30 PM
I would love to see a link because I have read damn near everything to do with the lockout and regarding to BRI and have not come accross anything about BRI being reduced other then from the players side and that without an explanation of what exactly they are taking off.

Also, there seems to be some confusion in here as to what is being taken off. You are saying 300 million, somebody else is saying 600 million. I'm just wondering which one it is or if it is even one of them.

I asked Chris Sheridan for clarification and he sent me this:

http://i55.tinypic.com/24nlog7.jpg

beasted86
10-18-2011, 09:47 PM
I doubt that, maybe Billy is trying to spin things like Stern. It's well known(if you read that is), that the owners take 300M off the top, so you might of misheard what Hunter said.

I'll be glad to provide my source, please provide yours as after a quick Google search I can't find anything about $300M.

Billy Hunter audio interview: http://newyork.cbslocal.com/?podcast_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.podtrac.com%2Fpts%2F redirect.mp3%2Fnyc.podcast.play.it%2Fmedia%2Fd0%2F d0%2Fd0%2FdY%2FdY%2FdA%2FdH%2FYYAH_3.MP3%3Fauthtok %3D5561591863670292679_whhwrxHYgFJdzhE56C4k0yBON8&podcast_name=Billy+Hunter&podcast_artist=Mike+Francesa&station_id=62&tag=pages&dcid=CBS.NY

@ 2:51 mark:

"The players got, well, we actually got 57% after a $600 million deduction"



The NBA made $4.6 Billion last season.
The previous CBA had the players making 57%, the owners making 43% of the BRI That, however, was after $600 Million was taken off the top that went to the league (owners).
http://www.knicks101.com/2011/10/13/nba-lockout-nbpa-executive-director-billy-hunter-on-wfan-with-mike-francesa-today

joeybatts
10-18-2011, 09:57 PM
I think the players going down 5% to 52% is more than fair,and will almost cover the claimed 300 mil lost revenue the owners lost,and the people fans should be mad at for depriving us of nba. Also,David Sterns needs to go,his time is out!

beasted86
10-18-2011, 09:59 PM
There's a reason I gave the disclaimer on my source. Stern & Hunter alike stretched a lot of truths in their interviews and at times didn't clear up things that should have been cleared up.

It's entirely possible Hunter was exaggerating the numbers though, but the primary point is there is a lot of total revenue deducted before the split... other leagues that they may use as an example.. namely, the NFL of players only making 46.5-48% is without any deductions.

MrfadeawayJB
10-18-2011, 10:20 PM
i agree with the hawk

+1

Bramaca
10-19-2011, 12:20 AM
I asked Chris Sheridan for clarification and he sent me this:

http://i55.tinypic.com/24nlog7.jpg

So Chris Sheridan says it is 4.2 billion, Hunter says that it is 4.6, Forbes estimates (guesses) it is a little over 4 billion. Meanwhile the NBA says that BRI is 3.817 billion.

The only indisputable fact in there is that BRI equals 3.817 billion and there isn't a single article that I can find that disputes that. BRI includes the following;


Regular season gate receipts
Broadcast rights
Exhibition game proceeds
Playoff gate receipts
Novelty, program and concession sales (at the arena and in team-identified stores within proximity of an NBA arena)
Parking
Proceeds from team sponsorships
Proceeds from team promotions
Arena club revenues
Proceeds from summer camps
Proceeds from non-NBA basketball tournaments
Proceeds from mascot and dance team appearances
Proceeds from beverage sale rights
40% of proceeds from arena signage
40% of proceeds from luxury suites
45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights
Proceeds from other premium seat licenses
Proceeds received by NBA Properties, including international television, sponsorships, revenues from NBA Entertainment, the All-Star Game, the McDonald's Championship and other NBA special events.
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q13

All of that equals the 3.817 billion and no more. This has been audited and agreed upon by the NBAPA and their accountants. So what is not in the above items that Forbes, Sheridan, and Hunter are saying that revenue is that much more? That is the question I have been asking but all I have been provided with is people saying numbers without any indication what the source of this mysterious income of anywhere from 200 to 800 million is coming from.

With a search of literally hundreds of different articles on the subject the only reasoning I have found for the extra income is they are calculating 40% of proceeds from arena signage, 40% of proceeds from luxury suites, and 45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights as 100% in each area. This was found in an article from Forbes. If this is the case then as I said earlier that is some creative accounting by the NBAPA.

There is a reason why NBA teams only get a % of those revenues. Companies paying for signage and arena naming rights are paying for that to be in the arena for everything, not just NBA games. Same goes for luxury suites, they get that for every event at the arena and not just NBA games. If anything the players may be getting a favorable % in these areas.

If somebody else has an article describing what the extra revenue is, beyond people just saying it is there, I would like to see it because everything with any reasoning behind it that I have found indicates that BRI is based on gross revenue. Until the time that is provided I will have to call complete ******** on the extra revenue that the players aren't getting a cut of.

daleja424
10-19-2011, 07:15 AM
So Chris Sheridan says it is 4.2 billion, Hunter says that it is 4.6, Forbes estimates (guesses) it is a little over 4 billion. Meanwhile the NBA says that BRI is 3.817 billion.

The only indisputable fact in there is that BRI equals 3.817 billion and there isn't a single article that I can find that disputes that. BRI includes the following;


http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#Q13

All of that equals the 3.817 billion and no more. This has been audited and agreed upon by the NBAPA and their accountants. So what is not in the above items that Forbes, Sheridan, and Hunter are saying that revenue is that much more? That is the question I have been asking but all I have been provided with is people saying numbers without any indication what the source of this mysterious income of anywhere from 200 to 800 million is coming from.

With a search of literally hundreds of different articles on the subject the only reasoning I have found for the extra income is they are calculating 40% of proceeds from arena signage, 40% of proceeds from luxury suites, and 45% - 50% of proceeds from arena naming rights as 100% in each area. This was found in an article from Forbes. If this is the case then as I said earlier that is some creative accounting by the NBAPA.

There is a reason why NBA teams only get a % of those revenues. Companies paying for signage and arena naming rights are paying for that to be in the arena for everything, not just NBA games. Same goes for luxury suites, they get that for every event at the arena and not just NBA games. If anything the players may be getting a favorable % in these areas.

If somebody else has an article describing what the extra revenue is, beyond people just saying it is there, I would like to see it because everything with any reasoning behind it that I have found indicates that BRI is based on gross revenue. Until the time that is provided I will have to call complete ******** on the extra revenue that the players aren't getting a cut of.

I understand completely why BRI is calculated the way it is... with only certain percentages of certain categories counting as BRI. The point is that the NFL doesn't do that. The NFL cuts up total revenue, not some calculated BRI. What does that mean? It means that the NFL's players cut looks smaller, but it reality it isn't. In reality that NFL cut is something like 55% if they wanted to calculate it similarly to the NBA. It is comparing apples and pears (similar, but not the same)... and people deserve to know that.

Bramaca
10-19-2011, 07:40 AM
I understand completely why BRI is calculated the way it is... with only certain percentages of certain categories counting as BRI. The point is that the NFL doesn't do that. The NFL cuts up total revenue, not some calculated BRI. What does that mean? It means that the NFL's players cut looks smaller, but it reality it isn't. In reality that NFL cut is something like 55% if they wanted to calculate it similarly to the NBA. It is comparing apples and pears (similar, but not the same)... and people deserve to know that.

I agree, people need to know that however much million being taken off the top by the owners is a completely crap argument. The players are getting a % of what they create and to argue that they deserve a cut of revenue that has nothing to do with them is a joke. The money that people keep saying the NBA takes off the top is actually not NBA revenue and is also why the players aren't making a big deal about it because they know they have no right to it.

There are many reasons why the NFL can pay around 55% of their income to players and NBA players don't deserve the that same %. The NFL is a poor example.

daleja424
10-19-2011, 09:23 AM
duplicate post

daleja424
10-19-2011, 09:24 AM
I agree, people need to know that however much million being taken off the top by the owners is a completely crap argument. The players are getting a % of what they create and to argue that they deserve a cut of revenue that has nothing to do with them is a joke. The money that people keep saying the NBA takes off the top is actually not NBA revenue and is also why the players aren't making a big deal about it because they know they have no right to it.

There are many reasons why the NFL can pay around 55% of their income to players and NBA players don't deserve the that same %. The NFL is a poor example.

How are you really this dense? Honestly?

For the 4th time... I am not trying to prove that players deserve a cut of that other money...AT ALL. I am simply pointing out that the NBA takes a portion off the top (Whether that is right or wrong is up to you) that other leagues do not take. It is important to know that if you are going to compare the player %s of various leagues like the OP asks us to.

It is not helpful to know what other leagues pay their players if each league has a different way of deciding how big the pie should be in the first place...

LakersIn5
10-19-2011, 10:07 AM
60% for the players

ManningToTyree
10-19-2011, 10:18 AM
45% for both players and owners. 10% for users of the PSD NBA Forum.

perfect solution.

mdm692
10-19-2011, 12:32 PM
47-50 For players. Owners/teams pay for all of their luxuries, charter buses, hotel rooms 5 star dinners, trainers, dr's, medical staff, all the players have to do is play and train

todu82
10-19-2011, 01:46 PM
50 percent for both sides.

sixer04fan
10-19-2011, 02:10 PM
45% for both players and owners. 10% for users of the PSD NBA Forum.

:clap:

Shmontaine
10-19-2011, 02:15 PM
i don't think anyone here can truly know what's fair... we aren't privy to all the ins and outs of the talks... i know this, i feel for neither side, and i would simply ask that they get it done... i believe the owners are steadfast in their determination to get a system that works for them, fair or not... as soon as the players realize their massive overpaying days are over, and sign whatever is in front of them, the sooner we have ball... everyone will still be rich...

smith&wesson
10-19-2011, 02:23 PM
50/50

Bramaca
10-19-2011, 08:35 PM
How are you really this dense? Honestly?

For the 4th time... I am not trying to prove that players deserve a cut of that other money...AT ALL. I am simply pointing out that the NBA takes a portion off the top (Whether that is right or wrong is up to you) that other leagues do not take. It is important to know that if you are going to compare the player %s of various leagues like the OP asks us to.

It is not helpful to know what other leagues pay their players if each league has a different way of deciding how big the pie should be in the first place...

How are you this dense?

That is not income for the NBA only some creative accounting by one side. Which is why there is nothing more then a random comment here or there because the players association knows there is nothing to it. Not money taken off the top and ZERO reason to bring it up.

If you want to compare the leagues consider a couple other things such as how much the arena is used in comparison to an NFL stadium outside of team use. Arenas are used almost daily for major events while I don't think stadiums are used as much outside of football. So including that income for a comparison of nba and nfl teams may be having the reverse effect of what you are intending. It might be that comparing BRI to the nfl's revenue is actually the correct way of comparing.

The extreme amount of revenue that the NFL makes also allows them to pay a higher % to the players since variable expenses won't be that much different then an nba team. There are so many things to take into account and you are taking none of them.

Longhornfan1234
10-19-2011, 08:46 PM
I am all for professional basketball dying. There are too many good athletes wasted in a sport that doesn't have enough good players to make it legitimate. It would be nice if the few good players in the NBA would've tried another sport. I think people that like basketball are dumb and maybe they can follow it to Europe. We could trade em straight up for Cricket. Or maybe Rounders.