Larry Coon podcast:

[bajaden]

This is a podcast from Cowbell kingdom thats worth a listen. It also has a link to Coon's new updated site, for those that like to have their brain twisted. Some interesting points, are that once you reach 74 mil in salary, it essentially becomes a hard cap. In other words, you lose your midlevel and bi-annual exceptions. Revenue sharing is based not only on team revenues, but on your television market. If you exceed a certain number of viewers, you lose all revenue sharing.

As an example, sacramento has around 1.7 million viewers, but in the LA market your up to 5.2 mil or so. Translation: If the Kings were to move to Anahiem, they would lose all revenue sharing. So they would have to make it up through corporate sponsers and TV revenues. Big gamble! Maybe thats why staying in and old arena is now appealing. Who knows? Here's the link:

http://www.cowbellkingdom.com/2012/...t-ep-40-larry-coon-nba-cba-expert/#more-12587

 

[VF21]

... It also has a link to Coon's new updated site, for those that like to have their brain twisted...

Just an FYI ... We also have the link to Coon's site: http://www.kingsfans.com/forums/showthread.php?45712-They-re-here!-2011-CBA-FAQ-now-online!

 

[Trueblood]

Interesting. I wonder if that revenue sharing clause was put in there specifically to discourage a move to Anaheim. I know that there were some owners besides Sterling and Buss that didn't like the idea of abandoning Sacramento.

OTOH, I feel bad for teams like Philadelphia and Washington. They are in markets with a lot of viewers but are in the lower half of the league in revenue brought in due to all the pro sports competition in their respective markets. I wonder if they are above the viewer amount threshold.

 

[bajaden]

Interesting. I wonder if that revenue sharing clause was put in there specifically to discourage a move to Anaheim. I know that there were some owners besides Sterling and Buss that didn't like the idea of abandoning Sacramento.

OTOH, I feel bad for teams like Philadelphia and Washington. They are in markets with a lot of viewers but are in the lower half of the league in revenue brought in due to all the pro sports competition in their respective markets. I wonder if they are above the viewer amount threshold.

Well, I think the point of revenue sharing, is to help teams in the small markets that don't have the advantage the larger markets do in the way of TV revenue's or corporate revenues. Its not for the purpose of helping bad teams that have those revenue's, but don't utilize them properly. In other words, one is a money problem, the other is a talent, or managment problem.

 

[Trueblood]

Well, I think the point of revenue sharing, is to help teams in the small markets that don't have the advantage the larger markets do in the way of TV revenue's or corporate revenues. Its not for the purpose of helping bad teams that have those revenue's, but don't utilize them properly. In other words, one is a money problem, the other is a talent, or managment problem.

Right but teams like Washington or Philadelphia aren't necessarily on the lower end of the spectrum due to bad management but rather the fact that there is so much pro sports competition in the area. They have the viewers but a lot of the viewers want to watch the Flyers, Phillies, Nats, Eagles, Skins and Caps as well as the NBA team. Therefore, their revenue is compromised a bit as according to Forbes, they fall to the lower half of the league and would be in line for a revenue sharing payout but because they're in large markets, they have a lot of viewers and may not qualify. That's why I'm curious as to where the viewer line is drawn.