Re: interesting NBA notes

["James A. Hill" <jahill@leasingservice.com>]

Yes it's a shame that ownership who built the team out of their risk capital
and sweat equity should have to sell out to those who will look at ownership
as another Rolex watch.  That will really improve the league.  A few more
Clipper type owners will be better then ownership that works to run a viable
team?  The Blazers?  What a joke.  Dallas is fun and I like Cuban's
involvement but he will do more to screw up the league then make it better.

The league needs more Gaston's.  Lower the salary's, lower the ticket
prices, food etc...  People refer to the yahoos who boo Walker at the Fleet
Center.  When money is the only price of admission these are the folks your
going to get.  The atmosphere is like the movie "Rollerball".  You yourself
offered that if tickets to a development league were $8 you'd go to every
game.  Minor league hockey and baseball in the Boston area are 3 X that per
game.

I'll support local ownership over someone who is buying into the league for
ego.

As far as saying "the players are at fault" I would say lets cap payroll at
$20 mm per team.  Period.  Why choose $50mm over $20mm?  Then let's disallow
guaranteed contracts.  Then let's create revenue sharing between teams and
create a fund that they have to pay into and make the teams pay for their
own stadiums.

A league that operates on the basis of "he who has the most money wins" is a
not a "league", IMO.  If the basis of the league is competition between
teams, your model will not work.

Your reference to Bob Kraft is interesting as he was a true fan for many
years.  A season ticket holder who sat in the stands in one of the most
miserable stadiums in the world.  There is a love for the team that drives
his ownership.  Not a charm on his bracelet.  Someone who wants to run a
class organization.  Not some guy that needs to buy a team to make friends.

I strongly doubt Kraft bought the team for the benefit of his tombstone. His
philanthropic activities are more then enough to cover that.

<Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "j.hironaka" <j.hironaka@unesco.org>
To: "James A. Hill" <jahill@leasingservice.com>; "Celtics"
<celtics@igtc.com>
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2001 6:08 AM
Subject: Re: interesting NBA notes


> At 18:40 12/07/01 -0400, James A. Hill wrote:
> > >Who out there is paying to see Paul Gaston and Rich >Pond make money
and
> > increase "shareholder value". >The Celtics are a national institution.
> > They are like a >public trust.
> >
> >Without the owners there would be no pro sports. National Trust?  You
> >advocate wealthy ownership losing money to field a competitive team.
>
> True, but I also advocate wealthy people buy yaughts, ferraris, vintage
> wines and trophy girlfriends.
>
> We talk of "luxury tax" because that's precisely what owning a team is: a
> luxury. A vanity purchase.
>
> Foremost, it is a luxury. You can bet your life the Patriots football team
> owner Bob Kraft is perfectly aware his tombstone no longer has to read
> "RIP: husband, father and paper products manufacturer". That's the degree
> of historical irrelevance upon death that 99% of millionaires and Fortune
> 500 CEOs can look forward to once they are 6-feet under.
>
> Trouble is you also own part of your city's passion and history....one of
> Boston's most treasured institutions in the case of the Celtics
> organization. Great for the ego, but there is more to it than that.
>
> If you can't afford to maintain a yaught and its crew of Ralph Lauren
> models, then you shouldn't buy it. That's just common New England good
> sense. You'd be out of your league alongside all these millionaire
> neighbors in the yaught club.
>
> So how the heck should we react if Paul Gaston, or anyone else, suggested
> with a straight face that he was entitled to make a profit off his yaught
> investment and the expensive jewelry he bought for his girlfriend?
>
> You'd say he's got his priorities all wrong. (If you were his PR firm,
> you'd say "blame the players for the ticket prices!"). Easy target.
>
> Gaston is going to make his big profit, and hopefully make Dad proud, the
> day he sells the team to an entity that can afford both the luxury AND the
> responsibility of ownership. He tried his best, but in the end he can't
> afford the luxury of ownership. He should take the 400 million or
whatever,
> pay his taxes, and spend the rest all the way to the grave.
>
> But until they sell, he and CEO Rich Pond can really just shut up with any
> sanctimonious BS about the poor, small market owner. In any other
analogous
> free-market context, they would deserve the perfect ridicule of both their
> fellow wealthy peer owners and the common fans.
>
> Joe
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>