What's new
By:

Get to know an NBA owner!

Joe Bagadonuts said:
Unlike you, I base my assertions on the actual activity behavior of people
Click to expand...
What actual activity behavior? Care to back up this statement with something? Anything? A ridiculous illustration of confirmation bias.

Like I said, several countries have higher net migration rates. A few of those countries also score higher in income distribution, social mobility, happiness, health and life expectancy (again, so far as you trust these measures, some of which are, admittedly, highly subjective). Strangely enough, Canada is one of the countries that has the US beat on ALL of the listed stats, although as I've stated they lag behind the US in GDP per capita by about 10% (I'd guess this gap narrows with the continuing economic troubles in the US...Canada hasn't been hit nearly as hard).

There is little basis to say that the US is currently a country of unprecedented opportunity. If you care to explain why you've stated as much, I'm open to changing my mind.
 
GVC said:
What actual activity behavior? Care to back up this statement with something? Anything? A ridiculous illustration of confirmation bias.

Like I said, several countries have higher net migration rates. A few of those countries also score higher in income distribution, social mobility, happiness, health and life expectancy (again, so far as you trust these measures, some of which are, admittedly, highly subjective). Strangely enough, Canada is one of the countries that has the US beat on ALL of the listed stats, although as I've stated they lag behind the US in GDP per capita by about 10% (I'd guess this gap narrows with the continuing economic troubles in the US...Canada hasn't been hit nearly as hard).

There is little basis to say that the US is currently a country of unprecedented opportunity. If you care to explain why you've stated as much, I'm open to changing my mind.
Click to expand...
I don't think it is even a mild stretch to call America a land of opportunity. The reason I added the word unprecedented is because I believe the level of opportunity that has existed in America is unparalleled by any nation in the history of the world. Apparently you either think that era is over, or that it only existed in my mind. I'm not going to write a doctoral thesis on it for you and if you don't see it the same way we'll have to agree to disagree. Go to Norway if you'd like. We have some Norwegian friends down the block who would be thrilled to rent their Oslo house to you if they're able to extend their work visas so that they can remain in America as long as possible.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
I don't think it is even a mild stretch to call America a land of opportunity. The reason I added the word unprecedented is because I believe the level of opportunity that has existed in America is unparalleled by any nation in the history of the world.
Click to expand...
1. I never said the United States wasn't a land of opportunity. It is.

2. There are many countries where opportunity is just as available (or more available) as in the United States. As such, the level of opportunity currently available in the United States is not unprecedented.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Note: In Forbes 2011 ranking of best countries for business, the United States came in 10th, behind (among others) Canada, Hong Kong, Singapore and...Norway.
 
GVC said:
1. I never said the United States wasn't a land of opportunity. It is.

2. There are many countries where opportunity is just as available (or more available) as in the United States. As such, the level of opportunity currently available in the United States is not unprecedented.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Note: In Forbes 2011 ranking of best countries for business, the United States came in 10th, behind (among others) Canada, Hong Kong, Singapore and...Norway.
Click to expand...
I can see why my use of the word unprecedented was confusing to you. I probably should have said it differently.
 
Maybe we could just agree that the US is a land of great opportunity, but not unprecedented opportunity, and move on...
 
r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t said:
I'm not anti- (or pro-) owners, or players. I do think the knee-jerk public support of the owners is ridiculous. These guys are a joke. Six of the ten profiled in this thread essentially inherited their wealth. Kroenke married his. Prokhorov and DeVos are scammers, and McClendon probably is too.

I guess my "take" would be that this is simply a case of ownership using leverage to extract money from the players, thus improving their bottom-line a bit. What can the players do? The owners see the opportunity to make another buck, and they're taking it. Like Hot Rod used to say, it is "like shooting fish in a barrel".
Click to expand...

Fair enough, my support for the owners has nothing to do with believing them to be deserving of more money or any of that sort of thing, The way I see it, the more concessions the owners can get, the better position and more leverage the FO will have in making and changing our team. That's all. I couldn't care less about their fortunes and what not.
 
billyshelby said:
If the majority of owners were making good money, they would have already caved. No business owner is going to sacrifice the profits of doing business for the losses of not doing business unless there aren't profits to doing business...
Click to expand...

Re-read the profiles in this thread. All of these guys doing substantial business outside of their teams. In fact, for most of them their teams are just a sideshow... like a pimple on the arse of their business empires. What difference is it to them if they are "making good money" or even breaking even? The whole thing has to make money. They are running this money grab to improve their bottom-line. Why? Because they can, and they can afford it.
 
r_u_s_t_b_u_c_k_e_t said:
Re-read the profiles in this thread. All of these guys doing substantial business outside of their teams. In fact, for most of them their teams are just a sideshow... like a pimple on the arse of their business empires. What difference is it to them if they are "making good money" or even breaking even? The whole thing has to make money. They are running this money grab to improve their bottom-line. Why? Because they can, and they can afford it.
Click to expand...

So you start by explaining that the cost of owning an NBA team is nothing to these guys and they don't need to make money off the team by actually playing games, which means that they can sit out the season because the whole thing has to make money, which is why they are running this "money grab," all because they can afford to do it like that.

I don't follow.
 
Gameface said:
So you start by explaining that the cost of owning an NBA team is nothing to these guys and they don't need to make money off the team by actually playing games, which means that they can sit out the season because the whole thing has to make money, which is why they are running this "money grab," all because they can afford to do it like that.

I don't follow.
Click to expand...

Sorry, when I wrote "the whole thing", I meant all of their businesses combined. The chance to lockout (squeeze) the players doesn't come along very often. They are taking advantage of it, and using the public for leverage with their sob stories about losing money.
 
The new owner of the Philadelphia 76ers is Joshua Harris. Mister Harris made his $1.45 billion fortune as a partner at Apollo Global Management. The previous owner of the 76ers was Ed Snider. Mister Snider paid $130 million to become owner of the team in 1996. He sold the team to Mister Harris just days ago for $280 million, more than doubling his original investment. His $150 million profit, while owning the team for just 15 years, is particularly amazing considering that the NBA is "losing money", according to commissioner David Stern.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top