With $4 Billion in Hand, NFL Owners Stick It to Workers

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2011 9:39 PM GMT
    http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/03/29/with-4-billion-in-hand-nfl-owners-stick-it-to-workers/

    The NFL doesn't really care about workers, players, or football.. Their whole organization centers on money and that's the whole purpose of their existence. They really could care less if unemployment rises.

    These viscious attacks on workers going on in this country right now is going to bite owners in the ass and destroy what's left of our economy. If they think there is a downturn in the economy now, they haven't seen anything yet once workers and players are forced to really cut back in their spending. Greedy corporate America is foolishly destroying the hand that gives them their weath.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2011 9:54 PM GMT
    jockgymboy saidhttp://blog.aflcio.org/2011/03/29/with-4-billion-in-hand-nfl-owners-stick-it-to-workers/

    The NFL doesn't really care about workers, players, or football.. Their whole organization centers on money and that's the whole purpose of their existence. They really could care less if unemployment rises.

    These viscious attacks on workers going on in this country right now is going to bite owners in the ass and destroy what's left of our economy. If they think there is a downturn in the economy now, they haven't seen anything yet once workers and players are forced to really cut back in their spending.


    For clarification, the $4 billion refers to the TV rights (though given the source - like AFLCIO - really?), it'd be nice if it were at least references. It stands solely for the fees they get not including any of the costs so it's a bit misleading as a header. I have problems feeling for either the owners or the highly paid workers in this case. There is however a fundamental difference between what is happening here and what is happening at the state levels with workers. In this case, workers can compete for a defined amount of resources in private profits. If they overreach, the league goes down. On the other hand, for public sector workers, they negotiate with politicians who negotiate on behalf of all taxpayers - and given the number of taxpayers and the contributions of union members in both time and money to campaigns it has been far easier to cave to demands than fight hard since it's not even their own money.

    Heh - more here: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/606091-nfl-lockout-for-dummies-explaining-the-nfl-labor-dispute-in-laymans-terms "NFL Lockout for Dummies: Explaining the NFL Labor Dispute in Layman's Terms":

    The main dispute over the newly proposed bargaining agreement centers around the amount of money that the owners want to take as “credit” from the revenue pool. In the previous agreement, the owners took $1 billion from the pool of approximately $9 billion, but now they are trying to increase that number to $2.4 billion, citing “the economic realities of the era” as reasoning.

    This would effectively cut the players' share of the revenue by 18 percent, and thus is causing extreme discontent among the players. However, many players understand how the increased funding of the owners would lead to an increased annual revenue thanks to new and improved stadiums.
    Over the last few years the values of most franchises have increased exponentially, so it appears as though the owners are making good use of this money. Though this is a positive to the new agreement, it still won’t be enough to convince the players association to sign on.

    A second topic of major concern has been the split of the overall revenue. The players have been fighting for a 50-50 split with the owners, who have steadfastly refused this offer. The offer currently on the table is a 51-49 split for the owners, which has been refused by the NFL Player's Association. If an agreement isn’t signed by the start of the NFL season, we could be looking at the first locked out season in the history of the league.

    If a lockout were to occur, there would be major impact felt within the league and also within the country as a whole. The owners would easily withstand the lockout as they all have enough money to wait around for the players to agree.

    The main casualties would be at the lower levels of the league, with ticket sellers, personnel assistants and community relation workers being among the first to go. But this will work its way up the pipeline, as NFL coaches may need to take 50 percent pay cuts.
  • safety43_mma1...

    Posts: 4251

    Mar 30, 2011 1:23 AM GMT
    it is the greedy owners that fuck up football period. they r like me me me and all they do is sit in their sky boc and brag about money and that they r so great. LAST I CHECKED IT IS THE PLAYERS THAT MAKE FOOTBALL GREAT NOT THE FAT OWENERS IN THE BOX.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2011 1:34 AM GMT
    safety43 saidit is the greedy owners that fuck up football period. they r like me me me and all they do is sit in their sky boc and brag about money and that they r so great. LAST I CHECKED IT IS THE PLAYERS THAT MAKE FOOTBALL GREAT NOT THE FAT OWENERS IN THE BOX.


    The owners forget who makes all this money flow to them. Without the players, they wouldn't make a cent and it's not like you can just go out on the street and get guys to play professional football. lol If you don't have good players, nobody would even go to the games. So they better be satisfied with their billions and let them play the game. Sure the players make a lot of money, too, but their careers are really short. After they can't play anymore, the owners continue to rake in their billions.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2011 2:58 AM GMT
    jockgymboy said
    safety43 saidit is the greedy owners that fuck up football period. they r like me me me and all they do is sit in their sky boc and brag about money and that they r so great. LAST I CHECKED IT IS THE PLAYERS THAT MAKE FOOTBALL GREAT NOT THE FAT OWENERS IN THE BOX.


    The owners forget who makes all this money flow to them. Without the players, they wouldn't make a cent and it's not like you can just go out on the street and get guys to play professional football. lol If you don't have good players, nobody would even go to the games. So they better be satisfied with their billions and let them play the game. Sure the players make a lot of money, too, but their careers are really short. After they can't play anymore, the owners continue to rake in their billions.


    Er, no - well collectively barely. If memory serves, the cost of a franchise ranges from a few hundred million to over a billion dollars. Your average franchise makes about 30-40M (according to Forbes). That's a horrible return (3-10%/year - might as well stick it in a dividend fund if it's financial returns they're after). Of course, I suspect many owners don't do it for the annual income but still. For the risk involved (ie potential for big losses), it's difficult to see how the owners are really taking advantage here.

    Then there's always the question of how much are the players worth? Players are already paid a lot more than they were say a decade ago - and they make a good living doing it. They should make as much as they can negotiate. And my guess it'll be a lot - and that's why I don't feel sorry for any of them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2011 4:34 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    jockgymboy said
    safety43 saidit is the greedy owners that fuck up football period. they r like me me me and all they do is sit in their sky boc and brag about money and that they r so great. LAST I CHECKED IT IS THE PLAYERS THAT MAKE FOOTBALL GREAT NOT THE FAT OWENERS IN THE BOX.


    The owners forget who makes all this money flow to them. Without the players, they wouldn't make a cent and it's not like you can just go out on the street and get guys to play professional football. lol If you don't have good players, nobody would even go to the games. So they better be satisfied with their billions and let them play the game. Sure the players make a lot of money, too, but their careers are really short. After they can't play anymore, the owners continue to rake in their billions.


    Er, no - well collectively barely. If memory serves, the cost of a franchise ranges from a few hundred million to over a billion dollars. Your average franchise makes about 30-40M (according to Forbes). That's a horrible return (3-10%/year - might as well stick it in a dividend fund if it's financial returns they're after). Of course, I suspect many owners don't do it for the annual income but still. For the risk involved (ie potential for big losses), it's difficult to see how the owners are really taking advantage here.

    Then there's always the question of how much are the players worth? Players are already paid a lot more than they were say a decade ago - and they make a good living doing it. They should make as much as they can negotiate. And my guess it'll be a lot - and that's why I don't feel sorry for any of them.




    You obviously didn't read the article.
    The greedy owners aren't only sticking it to the players.
    They're sticking it to "concession stand sellers, groundskeepers, and office staff."
    They don't give a shit about any of the workers.
    All they care about is maximizing their profits.
    They're fucking despicable.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 30, 2011 4:48 AM GMT
    rickrick91 saidYou obviously didn't read the article.
    The greedy owners aren't only sticking it to the players.
    They're sticking it to "concession stand sellers, groundskeepers, and office staff."
    They don't give a shit about any of the workers.
    All they care about is maximizing their profits.
    They're fucking despicable.


    I was responding more to the comments made on this thread though I did read the "article" from the AFL-CIO. Even at their "maximized" amounts, it's really not a great return. I have no idea if you save money or if you have a pension but in all probability it makes more money as a percent than they do on the money they invest into their teams and properties. But that's the thing about teams and ownership - it's not just about the money or else they would be making a lot more money. That, was my point.