PDA

View Full Version : Lakers TWC deal is $5 billion over 25 years



kblo247
11-30-2011, 05:48 PM
But, um, how much are the Lakers all by themselves getting from Time Warner Cable for its new regional sports networks?

$5 billion.

I'd add a "Cha-ching!" sound effect, but no one is fitting $5 billion in any cash register.

That $5 billion is over 25 years or it'll be merely $4 billion over 20 years if the future option isn't exercised. It has been widely and wrongly reported as less.

Let's pause and appreciate how much money one club, starting next season, will get per year all to itself just from local TV: $200 million ...

http://www.ocregister.com/sports/lakers-329235-billion-new.html

That is a big number. It really sucks that revenue sharing is going to let teams get two handouts from it. Still though this makes LA a player financially and helps the Buss family move from the millionaire to billionaire club finally, which is huge since the Lakers are their team and business, not a side hobby or secondary project like some other owners

beliges
11-30-2011, 05:50 PM
The owners put up all the money and they deserve the profits from that investment. Good for them. Business is good.

Cal827
11-30-2011, 05:51 PM
Thanks for taking the brunt of the funding for the small market teams like Cleveland, Charlotte and Milwaukee :D

shep33
11-30-2011, 05:55 PM
Report: Lakers’ New TV Deal Worth Up to $5 Billion


The jaw-dropping number initially reported for the LA Lakers new TV deal with Time Warner Cable was $3 billion (a figure disputed by the cable giant), but according to the OC Register, team owner Dr. Jerry Buss and co. could be in line for up to $5 billion from the deal: “That $5 billion is over 25 years – or it’ll be merely $4 billion over 20 years if the future option isn’t exercised. It has been widely and wrongly reported as less. Let’s pause and appreciate how much money one club, starting next season, will get per year all to itself just from local TV: $200 million … when Forbes values the entire Milwaukee Bucks franchise at $258 million. It leads to a very good question: whether the NBA’s new supposedly prohibitive luxury-tax penalties to start in 2013 are really going to stop the Lakers from continuing to throw money at their problems – because they’ve solved a lot of them very well that way without having this new billionaire boys’ club. Well, there is a little thing called revenue sharing that has largely been forgotten while the players and owners have been arm-wrestling. The terms haven’t been hammered out by the owners yet, but it is understood the large-market handouts are increasing … exponentially. And those new penalties are plenty severe – particularly the extra dollar charged if a club is a taxpayer four out of five years. The Lakers’ 2010-11 $20 million tax bill would swell to $45 million under the new rules. Add the extra dollar as a regular taxpayer, and to field the sort of team the Lakers just did, you’re looking at writing a $65 million check – for a lot of nothing in return when you get swept in the second round. If you can win a championship and maintain the cachet that the Lakers’ brand holds, though, maybe it can be worth it. That’s a call the Lakers will have to make – or more accurately, hope they get to make – in the future.”


http://www.slamonline.com/online/nba/2011/11/report-lakers%E2%80%99-new-tv-deal-could-be-worth-up-to-5-billion/

kblo247
11-30-2011, 05:55 PM
Lakers: Carrying the NBA brand since the days of Mikan

They need to put that slogan outside Staples. I wonder just how much the league gets a cut of.

Still thought the fact is the Lakers are set to make at least $280 million in revenue as Buss has said the low he makes from Kobe is $80 million. Not bad when you factor in they still will be bringing in other money

shep33
11-30-2011, 06:01 PM
haha beat me to it Kblo, good work man. Pretty crazy deal, like the Lakers or not, they're great for the NBA. They're somewhat like the Steelers of the NFL, fans across the country, and often a very successful franchise.

kblo247
11-30-2011, 06:05 PM
haha beat me to it Kblo, good work man. Pretty crazy deal, like the Lakers or not, they're great for the NBA. They're somewhat like the Steelers of the NFL, fans across the country, and often a very successful franchise.

I was going to say Yankees, but that works. After all the nba isn't a free market like the MLB or the Lakers would really use that deal to make a super team and make the cash right back lol

smith&wesson
11-30-2011, 06:09 PM
thats one market thats not losing any money thats for sure.

shep33
11-30-2011, 06:10 PM
I was going to say Yankees, but that works. After all the nba isn't a free market like the MLB or the Lakers would really use that deal to make a super team and make the cash right back lol

I didn't want to use the Yankees, just because I hate them lol. But yeah, I agree with you, Lakers are good for the league in general, and yeah if we had baseball's system it'd be a complete joke haha.

justinnum1
11-30-2011, 06:11 PM
Small market owners are happy to hear this.

Anilyzer
11-30-2011, 06:11 PM
Revenue sharing sucks.

I feel like the league is essentially "selling" bits of the Lakers to prospective investors: "Buy Atlanta or Milwaukee for $400M, because you'll be able to get a share of the Lakers' revenues."

Then they make a ton off the sale, the new owners lose money because they have no market and know nothing about running an NBA team, and then they end up locking out the league and demanding MORE revenue sharing, NO free agency and salaries for the players that are far below open market value.

It's just weird. you can't sell a franchise based on projected revenue sharing, and then go out and create a lockout in order to get more revenue sharing and luxury taxes. :facepalm:

C-Style
11-30-2011, 06:12 PM
Wow

Hellcrooner
11-30-2011, 06:15 PM
oh, but we will have problems with the new luxury tax.....


mua ha aha haahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahhahaha

ChiSoxJuan
11-30-2011, 06:28 PM
I'm glad I don't have TWC. If my cable provider jacks the price up because of this forget it. I'll just go to Apple TV & pay for what I want.

Wade>You
11-30-2011, 06:30 PM
Congratulations to Jerry Buss for reaping the rewards of his hard work as an NBA owner!

If only the crappy owners would take notes from him so we wouldn't have any more lockouts.

kblo247
11-30-2011, 06:36 PM
Congratulations to Jerry Buss for reaping the rewards of his hard work as an NBA owner!

If only the crappy owners would take notes from him so we wouldn't have any more lockouts.

The thing is how many of those owners treat their team as their primary business and income source? I would wager that if many of them did, the league would actually be better off and most would try to win and make better decisions in terms of marketing their brand.

Lakers + Giants
11-30-2011, 06:58 PM
So because of revenue sharing how much of this will lakers see? Please tell me at least 20%. Don't tell me it's shared evenly between ALL teams. :mad:

Bruno
11-30-2011, 07:43 PM
I'd rather see contraction than socialist measures used to keep teams that can't compete on the free market from going under. ...at least we get a season.

C-Style
11-30-2011, 08:16 PM
Only national TV deals TNT ABC and ESPN and the countless international NBA TV deals count towards the BRI. Team TV deals are not included in the BRI.

Other than the revenue sharing the owners come up with this is 100% Laker money. The actual irony is even with this monster deal they still get 1/30th of the National TV money.

MTar786
11-30-2011, 08:50 PM
i guess we'll be spending over the cap regardless of the penalites :)

Bruno
11-30-2011, 09:07 PM
Only national TV deals TNT ABC and ESPN and the countless international NBA TV deals count towards the BRI. Team TV deals are not included in the BRI.

Other than the revenue sharing the owners come up with this is 100% Laker money. The actual irony is even with this monster deal they still get 1/30th of the National TV money.

ah, my mistake.

beliges
11-30-2011, 09:19 PM
i guess we'll be spending over the cap regardless of the penalites :)

Paying Kobe 30+ mil for the remainder of his contract pretty much ensures the Buss family that they will be spending over the cap but its alright because if anyone in the league deserves that much money it would surely be Kobe for what he has done for the Lakers franchise.

LA_Raiders
11-30-2011, 09:23 PM
Wow, I hope this deal creates more jobs...

Wade>You
11-30-2011, 09:23 PM
The thing is how many of those owners treat their team as their primary business and income source? I would wager that if many of them did, the league would actually be better off and most would try to win and make better decisions in terms of marketing their brand.You're absolutely right. Instead, guys like Dan Gilbert only use the NBA to build rapport with their city to land themselves deals, like the Casino he's building in Cleveland.


I'd rather see contraction than socialist measures used to keep teams that can't compete on the free market from going under. ...at least we get a season.It also doesn't help that David Stern puts franchises in cities that the MLB or NFL wouldn't touch.

LA_Raiders
11-30-2011, 09:24 PM
i guess we'll be spending over the cap regardless of the penalites :)

Just Win Baby!!!

ChiSoxJuan
11-30-2011, 09:46 PM
I wonder if this is why the revenue sharing portion of the CBA remained open at the time of the handshake. I figure since the Lakers are getting $200M/yr from TWC now the NBA should get 1/2 of that to share with the rest of the league. Seems only fair since the Lakers product requires an opponent.

kblo247
11-30-2011, 11:00 PM
I wonder if this is why the revenue sharing portion of the CBA remained open at the time of the handshake. I figure since the Lakers are getting $200M/yr from TWC now the NBA should get 1/2 of that to share with the rest of the league. Seems only fair since the Lakers product requires an opponent.

Do the Lakers get the gate in your scenario for when they pack Charlotte, Atlanta, Minnesota, Memphis, New Orleans, and other teams like that arena who normally don't ever come close to selling out regularly?

The fact is they are the draw and have been the draw of the league consistently. Even if teams suck and can't bring fans in, they come to your town and pack the building. You don't see them saying give me my 3/4 split that I earned at the gate and you could never see without me coming to your town.

Buss earned his money because he built his brand. He put a consistent product on the floor. He milked his stars and did what he had to keep them instead of being rash. Yeah Kobe and Magic had trade me spats, but he got them through it with changes that were proper for winning. My point is that Buss has no other business. He maks his living off the Lakers and built them just like the other owners built their primary businesses. His commitment to his product, marketing strategy, and the consistency of the franchise (being in alf the Finals possible) means he earned every dollar, not Jordan, the wolves, or some of these other owners.

Half is a joke of a cut, maybe 10-20% (which would still be more than other teams kick in mostly) but any more just tells those other teams to suck and make mistakes once again, while the Lakers cover that tab, which is wrong.

ChiSoxJuan
11-30-2011, 11:11 PM
You are comparing the Lakers in the NBA to the NYY's of MLB. Would you like to know how many 100's of millions the Yanks pour into revenue sharing in MLB every year? Your defense of 10-20% for the Lakers is ludicrous. Next you'll be telling me that the NBA is "special" & that the Lakers should pony up at least 1/2 as much as the Yanks do.

Kevj77
11-30-2011, 11:26 PM
You are comparing the Lakers in the NBA to the NYY's of MLB. Would you like to know how many 100's of millions the Yanks pour into revenue sharing in MLB every year? Your defense of 10-20% for the Lakers is ludicrous. Next you'll be telling me that the NBA is "special" & that the Lakers should pony up at least 1/2 as much as the Yanks do.Why should it be bigger than 10-20%? That is 20-40 million dollars a year. Did those teams earn that television contract? The Lakers did and it isn't completely about market otherwise the Clippers would have a 200 million dollar per year TV deal. They share the same market and arena.

BKLYNpigeon
12-01-2011, 01:32 AM
that deal is way too long. in 25 years 1 billion dollars wont valued be as much.

TopsyTurvy
12-01-2011, 01:59 AM
Anyone pointing at the luxury as a non-issue has no concept of receiving a return on investment and everything it entails. I would argue that the financial security of the franchise makes the luxury tax line all the more harsh to step over as the team has proven to be successful, marketable, and a leading brand of the league with only minor forays into a far less expensive tax. Not to mention that the cost of the tax is prohibitive considering the wages you are already paying your players.

The Lakers ownership is nothing like those of the Yankees or the buyer group for Manchester City who can throw payroll dollars around as if they meant nothing.

The deal is great news for the Lakers but even better news for the league.

John Walls Era
12-01-2011, 02:30 AM
That is a big number. It really sucks that revenue sharing is going to let teams get two handouts from it. Still though this makes LA a player financially and helps the Buss family move from the millionaire to billionaire club finally, which is huge since the Lakers are their team and business, not a side hobby or secondary project like some other owners

You won't see me being happy for them.

C-Style
12-01-2011, 01:58 PM
Lakers will make a $170 million+ profit this year. To put that in perspective. Forbes said the Knicks made league-leading $64. Million profit in 09-10. Lakers will be make more than double

lakers4sho
12-01-2011, 02:04 PM
Lakers will make $170 million+ annually. To put that in perspective. Forbes said the knicks made league-leading $64. Million profit in 09-10. Lakers will be make more more than double

How did you come up with 170 million?

C-Style
12-01-2011, 02:13 PM
How did you come up with 170 million?

Its in a article..just go to psd's laker news articles.

They went from making 45-60 mill a yr to 150-170 o more

C-Style
12-01-2011, 02:17 PM
Lakers can spent $80 million on top of their $90 million player salary and still be the league-leading profiting team.

C-Style
12-01-2011, 10:08 PM
Some teams can't even afford to have a 80 mill team salary

Bramaca
12-01-2011, 11:49 PM
Only national TV deals TNT ABC and ESPN and the countless international NBA TV deals count towards the BRI. Team TV deals are not included in the BRI.

Other than the revenue sharing the owners come up with this is 100% Laker money. The actual irony is even with this monster deal they still get 1/30th of the National TV money.

All tv deals are included in BRI (national, local, and international). I think you are confused about what BRI is, local broadcast rights are part of bri just like ticket sales, concessions, etc. that each team brings in.

Everyone on here is talking about how much this will benefit the small market teams because of revenue sharing. Another factor to take into consideration is how it affects those teams by increasing the cap and luxury tax. If its roughly $150 million more per year then their current deal which is what it looks like then that means that increases the average revenue per team by 5 million per season. That would probably result in an increase of around 2.2 million for the salary cap and an increase of about 2.7 to the luxury tax.

Basically it will increase what each team has to spend on salaries. If the revenue sharing that the small market teams get is greater then 3 million per team (from this deal, not overall) then it might help them out. If it is 3 million or less then they will be no better off or even worse off because of this tv deal.

tbone2171
12-02-2011, 12:15 PM
Ah...Lakers forum??