NBA’s Construct Promotes Pat Riley’s Vision

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. RemoteHeatFan says:

    Albert, just wanna say, I missed your well thought out and written posts. The one thing that is missing in all of this discussion is the definition of BRI. BRI imo, is a slanted formula that benefits the owners, not the players. I suspect that there is a 10-20% haircut off of the real revenue the league generates to determine BRI. That is money that is not split with the players.

    In other news, I do like how the Memphis mayor was considering suing. What is often not mentioned is that these teams play in publicly financed arenas. I suspect that the next arena that is built (Sac?) will have some clause in there protecting the city from loss of revenue.

    • Albert says:

      As you suggest, BRI does not encapsulate all league-generated revenues. I discuss the concept briefly in this post. While the players were earning 57% of BRI in the past collective bargaining agreement, they were earning closer to 50% of actual revenues. I suppose that one could argue in response, however, that BRI does not include sponsorship dollars either.

      More than half of the approximate $6 billion cumulative cost to build all 28 arenas (excluding renovations, and the as yet unfinished billion-dollar Nets new home) has come from public funds. Of the 28, 12 are privately-owned. The rest are leased. The terms of these leases vary widely. In the twelve years the Heat has played in American Airlines Arena, a $213 million venue sitting on $38 million of county land, the team hasn’t paid anything for its use. In fact, the county has paid $64 million in operating subsidies to the Heat. The contract has no protection for the county in the event of a lockout.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.