If owning an NBA team was such a horrible investment in recent years that the league is on the verge of needing to radically alter its financial structure (see Stern, David)
and If owning an NBA team was so onerous it necessitates the teearing up of a lease with a decade left to go (see Simon, Herb)
then Why would a man with intimate knowledge of those financial structures be willing to not only purchase a franchise, but to purchase the most winning-averse franchise in the league, and to spend $50 million more than had ever been spent on an NBA franchise?
If I'm Billy Hunter, when David Stern commences his lecture about how woeful the league's finances are, and how the league needs the players to make sacrifices in order to make ends meet, I'd just raise my hand and ask, "With all due respect, sir, if it's so bad, why did Joe Lacob just spend $450 million to stay in?"
3 comments:
Well the short answer is the Warriors are the few teams in the league that turned a profit last season. I suspect the other 20 franchises didn't do as well.
David Stern is full of ish and needs to be exposed for the liar/cutthroat businessman that he truly is.
The Suns were turning a profit when they sold a few years ago, and they went for $50 mil. less than GSW, and its not as if things have skyrocketed in value in this country in the last 5 years. At the very least, this sale casts some pretty serious doubts on the validity of Stern's remarks re the failing NBA economics.
Post a Comment