View Single Post
Old 05-29-2011, 04:02 AM   #84
boltaneer
17
 
boltaneer's Avatar
 
ATTA BABY!

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: America's Finest City
Posts: 4,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkporter View Post
Two things:
1) My point was more that the league has such a sweet setup because of the ability to operate as a cartel, that any owner can make money regardless of their ability. Even if they put out a bad product, and fans don't go to their games, they still get most of their money from revenue sharing.
I do agree that the owners do have a sweet setup but...

IF what the owners is saying is true, that some teams are losing money, then yes, fans not filling the seats of the stadium would hurt the owners quite a bit more.

I found a good explanation on how the revenue sharing works. (I did not know the home team keeps only 60% of the gate.)

http://football.calsci.com/SalaryCap.html

Another thing that really bugs me are PSLs. I cannot believe fans would pay large amounts of money just for the right to have season tickets. And that's a lot of money going into owners pockets. Could you imagine having to pay a large fee to your cable company before you become a customer just for the right to watch TV? People would revolt against that so fast, you couldn't believe it.

Supposedly the owners offered to open their books to a third party right before the union decided to turn down the extension and decertify. I really wish the union would have accepted that offer and continued negotiations. Not that the numbers would have become public (I'm sure they wouldn't have) but I'm sure we would have found out in general whether the owners were telling the truth or not.

I wonder now if the owners will even offer that again if they win the June 3rd court ruling, they'll have all the leverage at that point.
boltaneer is offline   Reply With Quote