[外電] Report:Ciltics owner willing to lose entire season

看板Celtics作者peitinglee (冰魚)時間13年前 (2011/07/02 14:50)推噓5(5推 0噓 7→)

留言12則, 10人參與討論串1/1

新聞出處(必填):Ciltics Bilog http://www.celticstown.com/2011/07/01/report-celtics-owner-wyc-grousbeck-willing-to-lose-entire-season/ 作者:JayKing 原文&大致翻譯： The NBA formally began a lockout at 12:01 a.m., and Celtics owner Wyc Grousbeck is reportedly a driving force behind the NBA’s insistence on a hard cap. According to Yahoo! Sports’ Adrian Wojnarowski, Grousbeck calls the lockout “an investment.” He is willing to lose the entire season if it means re-working the Collective Bargaining Agreement in the owners’ favor. NBA在今天早上12:01正式封館，傳聞賽隊老闆之一Wyc Grousbeck是NBA堅決執行 Hard Cap的原動力之一。根據Yahoo! Sports’ Adrian Wojnarowski，Grousbeck把封館稱作一種"投資"。如果新版的CBA(Collective Bargaining Agreement集體權益協定)可以再重新修訂把優勢偏向於資方，整季的比賽都無法進行他也相當樂意。 Grousbeck’s willingness to lose the whole season—if true—is an unforgivable sin to Celtics fans. The Celtics have one championship run left in them, maybe. A lost season would mean the end of the Big Three era, or at least end the Big Three’s run as contenders. Hell, a lost season might even call the Grim Reaper to polish off Kevin Garnett or Ray Allen’s career. Grousbeck, worth a reported $360 million in 2005, owner of the now-worth-$452 million Celtics, one of the owners who still makes money, is willing to risk losing the greatest Boston Celtics era since Larry Bird, all to save a few million more dollars. Grousbeck對於整季封館(若成真的話)的樂見其成對於賽迷是種不可原諒的罪惡。賽隊也許會因此失去冠軍的機會。整季的封館也代表了三巨頭時代正式結束，或至少是無法再成為冠軍的有力競爭者。我們也可將整季封館看作死神的鐮刀加速的致"KG和RAY籃球生涯" 於死地。賽隊在2005年價值$360 million，而現在增值到了$452 million，是為數不多持續賺錢的球隊。但Grousbeck卻寧可封館自毀暨Larry Bird後最偉大的王朝也要省少少的一兩百萬。 The owners claim to have lost money this past season, and bushels of it, but as Tommy Craggs cautions on Deadspin, those claims don’t explain everything. In many cases, NBA owners don’t just own NBA franchises; they also own companies or real estate in the surrounding area. Craggs calls these “ interconnected wealth-generating mechanisms.” Even when the team itself loses money, the owners can still benefit financially from owning them. NBA teams create a boon for an owner’s local businesses, so a franchise’s real value can’t be known without also taking into effect its value on the owner’ s other assets 賽對持有者宣稱過去的這些球季損失了大量的錢，但根據Tommy Craggs在Deaspin的警語中，他們所宣稱的些話根本不能解釋任何事情。常見的情況中，NBA球隊的老闆也會有著其他的產業和公司而不是只專注於NBA球隊。Craggs稱這些是"聚及財富的結合機機組"。即使球隊本身虧錢，老闆仍因為養這些球隊而對於自己其他產業有正面效益。而在球隊主場的地區範圍內更是對老板的其他產業帶來財富，所以整體來看NBA球隊對於整個企業組織是增值的。 Additionally, Craggs noted how creative bookkeeping can make a $7 million profit look like a $28 million loss. He secured the New Jersey Nets’ financial statements from 2004, when the Nets claimed a huge loss but really made money. “There are certain baked-in advantages to owning a team,” wrote Craggs. “ You have both the relevant labor law and the tax code firmly on your side. You are making money you didn’t exactly earn from the moment you sign the paperwork, and you are making more money for your other businesses — your shopping mall across the street from the arena, your legal practice, your broadcast holdings — and then, come tax time, you are allowed by law, and even encouraged, to pretend you are not making any money at all. Remember this the next time David Stern says the NBA’s economic system is broken. ‘ The bottom line about the bottom line,’ says Fort [Ronnie Fort, a sports economist at the University of Michigan], ‘is that even if it looks like they ’re losing money, it doesn’t mean they’re losing money.’” The owners want to pay for their own mistakes by taking money from the players ’ pockets. The union said the owners’ most recent offer—which guaranteed the players $2 billion annually over a 10-year agreement—amounts to a 12% pay cut for the players. Meanwhile, the owners are unwilling to develop an effective revenue sharing plan. The Los Angeles Lakers just signed a 20-year television deal with Time Warner Cable that some value at $3 billion. But unlike the NFL, which equally shares its television revenue, the NBA allows teams to keep the money from their regional television deals. Spread that $3 billion around (and Boston’s regional television deal, and Chicago’s, and other big-market deals) and the owners would likely have many fewer complaints about losses. 上面這一大段是在解釋老闆們用的手段其實隱藏了真實的利益，而只把虧損的地方拿來說嘴。也解釋了Craggs警語的一些相關內容，有興趣可以自己看太長了我不逐句翻了XD The Celtics make money. They play in a big market. They are owned by two local millionaires who supposedly care more about winning than making millions. Yet at least one of those owners reportedly would not mind seeing the Big Three era collapse under the weight of an NBA lockout. If the report is true, Grousbeck’s nothing but a fraud. 賽爾提克是支賺錢的球隊，主場是個大市場，老板是兩個億萬富翁。他們理當更在乎贏得總冠軍而非在乎球隊的盈餘。現在至少超過一個以上的老闆不在乎三巨頭時代被封館壓垮破碎。如果這些傳言屬實，Grousbeck就只是個小卵蛋的惡棍而已。怎辦，老闆不支持了T_T -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 220.135.175.82

→

peitinglee

07/02 14:54, , 1^F

07/02 14:54, 1^F

推

liugayo

07/02 16:01, , 2^F

07/02 16:01, 2^F

推

cscd928

07/02 16:08, , 3^F

07/02 16:08, 3^F