Potential of NBA market in India (split)

[rainmaker]

Why do people in India care about a 28-51 Kings team? Nobody in India cares that the Kings are owned by an Indian. Again I come back to my point, is ESPN showing every weekend the 16th placed Aston Villa team because they are owned by an America? Are you an Aston Villa fan because they are owned by Randy Lerner?

If the Kings become good then thats a different story, if the NBA aspires to be popular in India, then it has to showcase their best players or their best teams (which is usually hand in hand) and that comes by putting on TV Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, Derrick Rose, etc. Thats what will build the brand. Not showcasing a mediocre team in a foreign country.

That's a good point. We get Villa on tv because the GK is American. Outside the top teams, those which are broadcast often have American players. Whether Tottenham, Roma, Everton, Stoke, we get a lot of games with American players. Now, Liverpool is owned by Americans, as is Roma, as are other teams but they aren't broadcast because Americans own the teams. It's never even mentioned.

I do however think Vivek can help open the NBA up to India. Will more Indians become Kings fans? Doubt it, unless as you said it's other circumstances, like taking the league by storm as we did under Adelman with exciting basketball or if we play pre season games in India, which is certainly possible.

But in general, the Vivek/NBA/India aspect is better for the league as a whole than the Kings personally. I'd also say a guy like AK causes more Russians to follow the league than a Russian owning the Nets.

 

[The Hammer]

Why do people in India care about a 28-51 Kings team? Nobody in India cares that the Kings are owned by an Indian. Again I come back to my point, is ESPN showing every weekend the 16th placed Aston Villa team because they are owned by an America? Are you an Aston Villa fan because they are owned by Randy Lerner?

If the Kings become good then thats a different story, if the NBA aspires to be popular in India, then it has to showcase their best players or their best teams (which is usually hand in hand) and that comes by putting on TV Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Carmelo Anthony, Derrick Rose, etc. Thats what will build the brand. Not showcasing a mediocre team in a foreign country.

I declare you are a lost cause to logic.

But because my sense of duty requires me to charge the battlefield of this conversation, even while certain of the futility of being understood, I must go on...

1. The Aston Villa example is asinine by any assessment. Is Randy Lerner a tech guru? Does Randy Lerner have the ownership group Vivek has? Is Randy Lerner the first American owner of a major sport in a league with a business plan for globalization and is therefore uniquely positioned to open up a new market? No, no, and no. Now, back to those lonely facts....

2. Vivek will be actively working to begin broadcasting Kings games in India, the same as he did with a Warrior game as a trial run.

3. The NBA will not be the only entity selling the product. The NBA needs owners with cash and a plan to promote their own brand.

4. So, your idea that " if the NBA aspires to be popular in India, then it has to showcase their best players or their best teams", while it could be seen as making sense, really doesn't, because you're using it as an argument of why the Kings WON'T become popular in India.

It just doesn't work the way you think it works. We don't have to wait until the Kings have one of the best players (although we might in few years) and are one of the best teams in the league before Vivek can begin successfully selling them in India. Serbia and China were different because the fans identified with the players, but you are too past oriented. You have to look at what is possible.

We're not that far away from being a competitive team. And I agree that that will be tremendously helpful in promoting the team in India. But it's not the driving force, it's merely a requirement (and I'd even say a semi-requirement). The driving force is the marketing engine.

 

[The Hammer]

I'm not sure you realize how ignorant this sounds when talking soccer and it's grip world wide as the top sport. It's great Vivek is on the cutting edge when it comes to technology and I do think he'd help open the game up more to India, but you're going completely overboard in your analysis.

I guess it's a good problem to have though. For awhile we had fans on the other side, giving Sac little chance at success or even being around a year from now. But now I think you're far overstating what effect Vivek can have. Get us back to winning and growing the game in India? Of course. But giving him the advantage over Russian oligarchs to the point he'd be a big part in the NBA overtaking soccer globally? Almost zero chance.

He has the advantage when it comes to digital age promotion, as I stated. And I'm talking 30-50 years. I guarantee you something unforseen will happen.

 

[The Hammer]

It comes down to demand. Its simply economics my friend, he may have all of that but it doesn't matter if the Kings aren't a good team. Nobody in India will care about the Sacramento Kings, there simply is no demand in India to watch night after night a mediocre NBA team because its owned by an Indian, I will guarantee you this. But again if Ranadive builds a good product on the court then its a different story, but that has to do with the TEAM being good. The nationality of the owner is completely irrelevant.

I say it helps if the Kings are good. You say it's only if the Kings become good, and only because the Kings will have become good. So we disagree on that.

I don't see anywhere in your posts that you acknowledge selling a product is about creating demand, and also building brand loyalty. Also, we can't rule out the psyche of Indian nationals. For them, Vivek being the owner may make a difference. You have already come to the absolute conclusion that it does not, at all. Damn you're smart.

It will absolutely make a difference when he's in the deal room of SportTVMumbai.

 

[rainmaker]

He has the advantage when it comes to digital age promotion, as I stated. And I'm talking 30-50 years. I guarantee you something unforseen will happen.

How can you guarantee something unforeseen? What does actually have a chance of happening is a UEFA Super League where the top teams break off and form their own league, in the next 10-20 years. That makes your dream of the NBA overtaking soccer even less likely.

Let's see the NBA become the top sport in just a single soccer loving country before pronouncing the NBA will overtake them all. Yet, even with guys like Rubio and the Gasol brothers, the NBA is a distant, and I do mean distant, second to soccer in Spain. Even with Vlade/Peja, the NBA is a distant second to soccer in Serbia. And here you're not even talking about having an Indian player, rather an owner. Technology won't erase history and culture. If anything it'll just make soccer even bigger.

And Vivek didn't make his money by severely limiting who can use his technology. You're acting like soccer and other sports won't use the same technology. There's simply zero evidence the NBA will somehow use technology more effectively than soccer going forward.

 

[hoopster]

I declare you are a lost cause to logic.

But because my sense of duty requires me to charge the battlefield of this conversation, even while certain of the futility of being understood, I must go on...

1. The Aston Villa example is asinine by any assessment. Is Randy Lerner a tech guru? Does Randy Lerner have the ownership group Vivek has? Is Randy Lerner the first American owner of a major sport in a league with a business plan for globalization and is therefore uniquely positioned to open up a new market? No, no, and no. Now, back to those lonely facts....

2. Vivek will be actively working to begin broadcasting Kings games in India, the same as he did with a Warrior game as a trial run.

3. The NBA will not be the only entity selling the product. The NBA needs owners with cash and a plan to promote their own brand.

4. So, your idea that " if the NBA aspires to be popular in India, then it has to showcase their best players or their best teams", while it could be seen as making sense, really doesn't, because you're using it as an argument of why the Kings WON'T become popular in India.

It just doesn't work the way you think it works. We don't have to wait until the Kings have one of the best players (although we might in few years) and are one of the best teams in the league before Vivek can begin successfully selling them in India. Serbia and China were different because the fans identified with the players, but you are too past oriented. You have to look at what is possible.

We're not that far away from being a competitive team. And I agree that that will be tremendously helpful in promoting the team in India. But it's not the driving force, it's merely a requirement (and I'd even say a semi-requirement). The driving force is the marketing engine.

You're arguments just don't make any sense. The only thing that creates demand for the Kings in India is if they are GOOD, or if they have and INDIAN PLAYING BASKETBALL ON THE COURT. The Kings won't be popular in India if they continue to suck, this I will promise you sir. Indians will root for Lebron, Rose, Melo, and Durant because they are the league's best players and most marketable. I can't keep going on with you, its impossible to talk any business sense into you. You can't just trick Indians into loving the Kings because Vivek is Indian, thats not the way it works. And you can't sell a mediocre product no matter how good your marketing is.

The Seattle Mariners are owned by a Japanese businessman, but they weren't popular for several years in Japan because the owner was Japanese, the Mariners became popular in Japan because a guy by the name of Ichiro decided in 2001 decided to go play baseball in Seattle and was pretty damn good in the MLB. People went bonkers over Ichiro because in his first season the Mariners held the best record in the MLB and Ichiro won the MVP & Rookie of the year. None of this success had anything to do with the 80 year old Japanese owner.

 

[rainmaker]

The Seattle Mariners are owned by a Japanese businessman, but they weren't popular for several years in Japan because the owner was Japanese, the Mariners became popular in Japan because a guy by the name of Ichiro decided in 2001 decided to go play baseball in Seattle and was pretty damn good in the MLB. People went bonkers over Ichiro because in his first season the Mariners held the best record in the MLB and Ichiro won the MVP & Rookie of the year. None of this success had anything to do with the 80 year old Japanese owner.

And I doubt a bunch of Heat fans are suddenly Liverpool fans because Lebron is a minority owner. You're right, there's no evidence a country starts rooting for a sports team simply because they share the same nationality as the owner. Americans own Roma, yet I've never seen a Roma shirt on the streets. Americans own Liverpool, yet rarely see a Liverpool shirt. You don't see a bunch of jerseys for American owned foreign teams in Foot Locker or the Sports Authority. There is no presence. Anyone thinking because Vivek buys this team we'll have a bunch of people in India wearing Kings jerseys is sorely mistaken.

There's zero evidence of that happening anywhere.

 

[The Hammer]

How can you guarantee something unforeseen? What does actually have a chance of happening is a UEFA Super League where the top teams break off and form their own league, in the next 10-20 years. That makes your dream of the NBA overtaking soccer even less likely.

Let's see the NBA become the top sport in just a single soccer loving country before pronouncing the NBA will overtake them all. Yet, even with guys like Rubio and the Gasol brothers, the NBA is a distant, and I do mean distant, second to soccer in Spain. Even with Vlade/Peja, the NBA is a distant second to soccer in Serbia. And here you're not even talking about having an Indian player, rather an owner. Technology won't erase history and culture. If anything it'll just make soccer even bigger.

And Vivek didn't make him money by severely limiting who can use his technology. You're acting like soccer and other sports won't use the same technology. There's simply zero evidence the NBA will somehow use technology more effectively than soccer going forward.

Well, it's not my dream that the NBA will overtake soccer globally. It's Vivek's. And you're still talking the present tense. See bolded terms.

I'm mostly just trying to open people up to the possibility that the NBA could be a major global sport on par with soccer within the next century. People citing that it's not the case right now, and therefore won't in the future, is what makes no sense.

And how can I guarantee something unforseen will happen? Well, maybe unforseen isn't the best word, unprecedented maybe. But that's what defines the future. The future, by definition, contains the unprecedented.

The NBA will not become a global sport or flourish in India by having an Indian superstar in the league, or because people will root for a team with an Indian owner (will help some), but because of creative and risk taking business and marketing tactics by team owners who have ties to or advantages in new markets. International players can help, but even then it will only be short term, until their career is over. I hear Kings fever in Serbia has died down quite a bit. Relying on the nationality of players to grow the sport internationally is not a solid business plan.

 

[bajaden]

It comes down to demand. Its simply economics my friend, he may have all of that but it doesn't matter if the Kings aren't a good team. Nobody in India will care about the Sacramento Kings, there simply is no demand in India to watch night after night a mediocre NBA team because its owned by an Indian, I will guarantee you this. But again if Ranadive builds a good product on the court then its a different story, but that has to do with the TEAM being good. The nationality of the owner is completely irrelevant.

I think your still missing the point. There is the big picture, which is Stern and the NBA are very interested in promoting the NBA in India. Forget the particulars. Vivek is from India, is also very media savy and is a Hi tech guy who also wants to promote the sport in India. With of course the Kings, if the deal is approved. Your talking about the present, and not the future. If there is an interest in professional basketball in India, and the NBA has a team thats owned by one of their own, they'll be more inclined to watch that team.

Of course having a good team helps, but when the Kings came here, they weren't very good for long time, and yet the arena was sold out night after night. National loyality will at times trump quality. At least for a while. Do I think having an owner of Indian heritige is the be all end all? No, but it certainly helps in this instance. It just adds one more piece as a reason to keep the Kings here.

 

[The Hammer]

And I doubt a bunch of Heat fans are suddenly Liverpool fans because Lebron is a minority owner. You're right, there's no evidence a country starts rooting for a sports team simply because they share the same nationality as the owner. Americans own Roma, yet I've never seen a Roma shirt on the streets. Americans own Liverpool, yet rarely see a Liverpool shirt. You don't see a bunch of jerseys for American owned foreign teams in Foot Locker or the Sports Authority. There is no presence. Anyone thinking because Vivek buys this team we'll have a bunch of people in India wearing Kings jerseys is sorely mistaken.

There's zero evidence of that happening anywhere.

Trying to use the above examples to represent Vivek's situation is ludicrous. You're just not arguing in good faith anymore.

 

[rainmaker]

Well, it's not my dream that the NBA will overtake soccer globally. It's Vivek's. And you're still talking the present tense. See bolded terms.

I'm mostly just trying to open people up to the possibility that the NBA could be a major global sport on par with soccer within the next century. People citing that it's not the case right now, and therefore won't in the future, is what makes no sense.

Now you're taking things out of context. Your bolded part doesn't matter. Look at the beginning of that paragraph.

Let's see the NBA become the top sport in just a single soccer loving country before pronouncing the NBA will overtake them all.

That's not present tense. And no, the other side of the argument makes perfect sense as in life you have to look at markets, target audiences, history, culture, etc.. Just because you personally think the NBA will overtake soccer doesn't mean it's likely at all. you could also argue Kenya will colonize the moon within 50 years and when someone points out the history surrounding trips to the moon and how unlikely that is, you sitting there and saying it makes no sense, because I guarantee something unforeseen will happen. You have to look at the past and present to weigh the future.

 

[bajaden]

And I doubt a bunch of Heat fans are suddenly Liverpool fans because Lebron is a minority owner. You're right, there's no evidence a country starts rooting for a sports team simply because they share the same nationality as the owner. Americans own Roma, yet I've never seen a Roma shirt on the streets. Americans own Liverpool, yet rarely see a Liverpool shirt. You don't see a bunch of jerseys for American owned foreign teams in Foot Locker or the Sports Authority. There is no presence. Anyone thinking because Vivek buys this team we'll have a bunch of people in India wearing Kings jerseys is sorely mistaken.

There's zero evidence of that happening anywhere.

I sort of disagree. I agree that it won't happen overnight, but if promoted properly, it can happen. First off, I think the sport itself is important. You referenced soccer. Well I agree, if you told me that one of the major soccer teams in europe was american owned, it wouldn't spark one bit of interest with me. I'd rather watch paint dry than watch a soccer game. I know soccer fans hate to hear this, but its just not that popular a sport in the US. Now if I was a US citizen that had moved to India, and I was told an NBA basketball team was just bought by an Indian, and he wanted to broadcast those games over there, I would be very interested, because I love basketball.

So to me, the question is, how much interest is there in India for basketball? For Stern to go over there, and talk about putting an NBA academy there, there must be real interest. If so, then there must be a willing audience there. If the price is right. Look at the attention the Kings and Casspi got when he was drafted by the Kings. Why? Well for one thing, basketball is a big sport in Israel. My point is, you have to start somewhere. If thats the NBA's intention, then I don't see where having an owner of Indian decent, that wants to promote the sport in his native country is going to hurt.

 

[The Hammer]

Now you're taking things out of context. Your bolded part doesn't matter. Look at the beginning of that paragraph.



That's not present tense. And no, the other side of the argument makes perfect sense as in life you have to look at markets, target audiences, history, culture, etc.. Just because you personally think the NBA will overtake soccer doesn't mean it's likely at all. you could also argue Kenya will colonize the moon within 50 years and when someone points out the history surrounding trips to the moon and how unlikely that is, you sitting there and saying it makes no sense, because I guarantee something unforeseen will happen. You have to look at the past and present to weigh the future.

I'm not saying past doesn't have a bearing on the future.

You're still missing the entire point of my argument. That Vivek wants to buy the Kings and make the franchise a global brand. I'm not sure if you agree with hoopster that he can't do that until we get the Indian Lebron James on our team, but that's my main point. To do this he will have to: make the product competitive, and actively spend money and make deals to promote them in India. This is not like Kenya colonizing the moon. And it's not like Lebron being a minority owner of Liverpool. Not at all.

 

[rainmaker]

I'm not saying past doesn't have a bearing on the future.

You're still missing the entire point of my argument. That Vivek wants to buy the Kings and make the franchise a global brand. I'm not sure if you agree with hoopster that he can't do that until we get the Indian Lebron James on our team, but that's my main point. To do this he will have to: make the product competitive, and actively spend money and make deals to promote them in India. This is not like Kenya colonizing the moon. And it's not like Lebron being a minority owner of Liverpool. Not at all.

I don't disagree at all with you saying Vivek wants to make us a global brand or it'll help in India. What I disagree with is you then taking the next leap and declaring because of Vivek and his technological advantage the NBA will somehow overtake over soccer internationally.

That's two different topics.

 

[rainmaker]

I sort of disagree. I agree that it won't happen overnight, but if promoted properly, it can happen. First off, I think the sport itself is important. You referenced soccer. Well I agree, if you told me that one of the major soccer teams in europe was american owned, it wouldn't spark one bit of interest with me. I'd rather watch paint dry than watch a soccer game. I know soccer fans hate to hear this, but its just not that popular a sport in the US. Now if I was a US citizen that had moved to India, and I was told an NBA basketball team was just bought by an Indian, and he wanted to broadcast those games over there, I would be very interested, because I love basketball.

So to me, the question is, how much interest is there in India for basketball? For Stern to go over there, and talk about putting an NBA academy there, there must be real interest. If so, then there must be a willing audience there. If the price is right. Look at the attention the Kings and Casspi got when he was drafted by the Kings. Why? Well for one thing, basketball is a big sport in Israel. My point is, you have to start somewhere. If thats the NBA's intention, then I don't see where having an owner of Indian decent, that wants to promote the sport in his native country is going to hurt.

I;m not arguing against Vivek making the NBA more accessible in India or improving the game globally, not at all. That is expected to happen.

What I disagree with is Hammer's take that because of Vivek and his technology, that the NBA will overtake soccer internationally. Sorry, but Vivek and his technology are not going to make the NBA more popular than soccer in countries like England, Spain, Germany, Holland, Serbia, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, Argentina, Ghana, and numerous others.

BTW, MLS had a higher attendance average than the NBA last year, so it's not like soccer is unpopular here either. And when you say you don't like soccer, it's partly cultural. You probably wouldn't say that if you grew up in Italy and were raised on it. And that's part of why no matter the technology, culture will matter more. No amount of technology will make you tune into a soccer game, just as no amount of technology is going to suddenly make fans in die hard soccer countries turn to the NBA instead.

 

[The Hammer]

I don't disagree at all with you saying Vivek wants to make us a global brand or it'll help in India. What I disagree with is you then taking the next leap and declaring because of Vivek and his technological advantage the NBA will somehow overtake over soccer internationally.

That's two different topics.

I'm actually quoting Vivek himself when I say that, not sure if you were aware. In that aspect of this argument, I'm simply representing his stance. Personally, I think it's an intriguing possibility. Others think there's no chance in hell.

 

[Uncia03]

You're arguments just don't make any sense. The only thing that creates demand for the Kings in India is if they are GOOD, or if they have and INDIAN PLAYING BASKETBALL ON THE COURT. The Kings won't be popular in India if they continue to suck, this I will promise you sir. Indians will root for Lebron, Rose, Melo, and Durant because they are the league's best players and most marketable. I can't keep going on with you, its impossible to talk any business sense into you. You can't just trick Indians into loving the Kings because Vivek is Indian, thats not the way it works. And you can't sell a mediocre product no matter how good your marketing is.

The Seattle Mariners are owned by a Japanese businessman, but they weren't popular for several years in Japan because the owner was Japanese, the Mariners became popular in Japan because a guy by the name of Ichiro decided in 2001 decided to go play baseball in Seattle and was pretty damn good in the MLB. People went bonkers over Ichiro because in his first season the Mariners held the best record in the MLB and Ichiro won the MVP & Rookie of the year. None of this success had anything to do with the 80 year old Japanese owner.

Have you spent much time in India?

I've spent quite a bit of time in India on business, sometimes for 6 weeks at a time.

When surfing the channels they have a lot of sports going on all the time. Cricket is by far the most popular followed by soccer.
They have basketball, but it's very limited. And the only team that I could watch was the New York Knicks as their network has some penetration in the India market.

I can guarantee you that there are more Knicks fans in India than other teams simply because they are the most accessible when flipping through the television.

So here is where having an Indian owner, especially one with Ranadive's vision, comes into play.

Sports fans in India might not follow the Kings because he's of Indian decent. However, if Ranadive uses his connections to broadcast Kings games in India, then he has the potential to make the Kings the most easily accessible NBA team to watch. And when you do that, you create an environment for fan creation.

Don't forget the reason most people are fans of a particular team is due to accessibility. If you have a hometeam that is being broadcasted all the time, you're more likely to become a fan of that team, compared to a team that you might only have the opportunity to see play 2 times a year.

That is what Hammer is trying to get across. You create a huge disparity in accessibility that favors the Sacramento Kings in the India market and you instantly create an environment that will create more fans of the Kings compared to other NBA teams.

 

[Dreadnought]

Have you spent much time in India?

I've spent quite a bit of time in India on business, sometimes for 6 weeks at a time.

When surfing the channels they have a lot of sports going on all the time. Cricket is by far the most popular followed by soccer.
They have basketball, but it's very limited. And the only team that I could watch was the New York Knicks as their network has some penetration in the India market.

I can guarantee you that there are more Knicks fans in India than other teams simply because they are the most accessible when flipping through the television.

So here is where having an Indian owner, especially one with Ranadive's vision, comes into play.

Sports fans in India might not follow the Kings because he's of Indian decent. However, if Ranadive uses his connections to broadcast Kings games in India, then he has the potential to make the Kings the most easily accessible NBA team to watch. And when you do that, you create an environment for fan creation.

Don't forget the reason most people are fans of a particular team is due to accessibility. If you have a hometeam that is being broadcasted all the time, you're more likely to become a fan of that team, compared to a team that you might only have the opportunity to see play 2 times a year.

That is what Hammer is trying to get across. You create a huge disparity in accessibility that favors the Sacramento Kings in the India market and you instantly create an environment that will create more fans of the Kings compared to other NBA teams.

I think you're overestimating the influence and power of Vivek. I wouldn't assume the purchase of a small market NBA team to that extent. I think hoopster was pretty spot on with everything he said.

 

[bajaden]

I;m not arguing against Vivek making the NBA more accessible in India or improving the game globally, not at all. That is expected to happen.

What I disagree with is Hammer's take that because of Vivek and his technology, that the NBA will overtake soccer internationally. Sorry, but Vivek and his technology are not going to make the NBA more popular than soccer in countries like England, Spain, Germany, Holland, Serbia, Russia, Ukraine, Brazil, Argentina, Ghana, and numerous others.

BTW, MLS had a higher attendance average than the NBA last year, so it's not like soccer is unpopular here either. And when you say you don't like soccer, it's partly cultural. You probably wouldn't say that if you grew up in Italy and were raised on it. And that's part of why no matter the technology, culture will matter more. No amount of technology will make you tune into a soccer game, just as no amount of technology is going to suddenly make fans in die hard soccer countries turn to the NBA instead.

My bad, I wasn't aware of that part of the discussion. I guess at some point in time professional basketball might overtake soccer, but probably not in my lifetime. As far as soccer goes personally, I played it quite a bit in school when I was a kid. I grew up in St. Louis, which was the hub of soccer in the united states at that time. Kutis, was a national powerhouse and once represented the US in the olymipics I believe. I loved playing soccer, I just hate watching it. Just a matter of personal taste.

While I'm sure soccer has his fan base in the US, I'll believe its a popular sport when I see the networks offering big bucks for the rights to televise it.

 

[The Hammer]

I think you're overestimating the influence and power of Vivek. I wouldn't assume the purchase of a small market NBA team to that extent. I think hoopster was pretty spot on with everything he said.

Wonder what you think of Vivek's statements that he intends to make the Kings the first global brand in the NBA. Do you think he intends to do that by drafting the Indian Lebron James or Jimmer Fredette? Or do you think it has something to do with the formula he began implementing with the Warriors, broadcasting games in India and doing things like real time digital promotional givaways during games on mobile devices.

 

[whozit]

I think you're overestimating the influence and power of Vivek. I wouldn't assume the purchase of a small market NBA team to that extent. I think hoopster was pretty spot on with everything he said.

As I said, when I quoted The Hammer earlier, 'I don't know.' I do agree that accessibility does make a difference. What about Jacobs and the wireless contracts he has in India? There are intriguing possibilities.

 

[Tetsujin]

I say you have to go to Europe, or South America, or even Asia and see for yourself how immensely popular soccer is. Nothing the NBA does can change that, its culturally ingrained in these countries and thats not changing. When you grow up impoverished in Brazil, you learn to love soccer because you learn to master the ability to kick a tin can against a wall. Its just the easiest sport to play and to learn.

Being from Japan and having gone to college in the studies of East Asia, I can tell you full and well that soccer was anything but ingrained in the culture of that entire region.

 

[rainmaker]

My bad, I wasn't aware of that part of the discussion. I guess at some point in time professional basketball might overtake soccer, but probably not in my lifetime. As far as soccer goes personally, I played it quite a bit in school when I was a kid. I grew up in St. Louis, which was the hub of soccer in the united states at that time. Kutis, was a national powerhouse and once represented the US in the olymipics I believe. I loved playing soccer, I just hate watching it. Just a matter of personal taste.

While I'm sure soccer has his fan base in the US, I'll believe its a popular sport when I see the networks offering big bucks for the rights to televise it.

Well, the English Premier League rights were sold to NBC Sports Network last year, three year deal for 270M. So, it's growing. It's actually the fastest growing sport in America(ratings wise) in the 18-34 age bracket. It might actually catch the NHL within 20 years.

But I generally agree with what you said, preference and where you were raised is a huge part of it. Would you love baseball if you grew up in Moscow? Probably not. And that's why I think some might be underestimating the cultural impact of sports internationally. The NBA is growing and will continue to grow. Vivek will help and the league will make money in India. We might even eventually become a pretty popular team in India. But just as many Americans sit at home and say, screw soccer, I'm not watching that no matter the technology or popularity of it elsewhere, there's many people with that same opinion on basketball living abroad, saying screw the NBA, I don't care if it's accessible or has state of the art technology behind it, I'm not watching it.

 

[rainmaker]

Being from Japan and having gone to college in the studies of East Asia, I can tell you full and well that soccer was anything but ingrained in the culture of that entire region.

In Japan isn't it baseball and sumo, followed by soccer? I know the J-League is considered one of the fastest growing soccer leagues world wide. I do think the NBA has more of a chance to get a stranglehold on countries in Asia as opposed to countries in Europe and South America.

 

[VF21]

I've split this off into its own thread. Interesting how persistent hoopster is to downplay the potential impact of Vivek's ownership on the market for the NBA in India, isn't it? Almost like he's desperate to cancel out one of our bonus points while carefully ignoring the FACT that Stern has wanted globalization in that area for some time and was actually in Mumbai quite recently.

Since hoopster's first post was "I'm a Seattle fan" it seems pretty clear that he has a different agenda than we have.

Just sayin'...

 

[Tetsujin]

In Japan isn't it baseball and sumo, followed by soccer? I know the J-League is considered one of the fastest growing soccer leagues world wide. I do think the NBA has more of a chance to get a stranglehold on countries in Asia as opposed to countries in Europe and South America.

For whatever reason, people really love to play up sumo as a top sport in Japan but, after years of scandal and increased foreign influence in the sport (it's been over a decade since the last Japanese yokozuna), the rose has really sort of fallen off the bloom. Baseball is, above all else, the national sport of Japan with the Koshien national high school tournament being perhaps the most covered story in Japanese media year after year. Professional baseball in Japan is popular. However, most of the teams in NPB are generally clustered around the two largest population centers of the country (Kansai and Kanto) with some of the secondary population centers being given the short shrift. The J-League, in turn, has capitalized upon these "smaller" markets, creating a true nation-wide sports league with its popularity being boosted by rcent strong showings by the national teams in recent Olympics and World Cups. (Japan is, for whatever reason, obsessed with international sports competition, as evidenced by its considerabel coverage of the World Baseball Classic, an event generally ignored or mocked in America)

 

[Sac.1989]

im more interested in our ability to perhaps get into the sri Lankan market where basketball is bigger than in the remaining sub continental countries

 

[KingsFanSince85]

That was because of Vlade and Peja were Serbian, of course people are going to like players from their home country. But Ranadive isn't going to be on the floor shooting threes. Of course the Kings would be popular in India if they had an Indian player.

Show me some statistics or some articles about Prokhorov, I looked it up in Google and nothing came up that indicated Russians were more inclined to like the Nets because of Prokhorov.

What you're not considering is that professional basketball is a completely new thing to people from India, which wasn't/isn't the case in the other examples you mentioned. The popularity of basketball is rising in India, as it is currently the 2nd most popular sport behind cricket. But they don't have a professional league of any kind.

In the case of Prokhorov and other foreign born owners, their countries have had professional leagues for decades and the fans are quite familiar and well versed in the sport. These countries also field consistently strong Olympic teams (You ever heard of an Olympic basketball team from India?) While one of their countryman owning an NBA team might be a somewhat of a big deal, it wouldn't have the same impact because those fans already have loyalties to their local professional teams and/or possibly an NBA team they've been following for years.

In the case of India, since they have no professional league, don't field an Olympic squad, and are just now learning the game, relatively speaking, a new fan is likely to identify with a team to which they have some sort of connection. Since their aren't any Indian born players in the league currently, and there isn't likely to be one for a while, an owner is the next best thing. If you don't believe a large percentage of new fans -- with little to no exposure to the sport previously -- would be drawn to that, you're in denial.

 

[rainmaker]

Since their aren't any Indian born players in the league currently, and there isn't likely to be one for a while, an owner is the next best thing. If you don't believe a large percentage of new fans -- with little to no exposure to the sport previously -- would be drawn to that, you're in denial.

Maybe this kid will buck the trend.

http://www.aolnews.com/2010/11/10/nba-awaits-satnam-from-india-so-big-and-athletic-at-14/

 

[annihilator_33]

My alma mater, New Mexico State, has a 7'5" Indian player named Sim Bhullar currently playing for them. His brother, Tanveer Bhullar, is 7'3" and I believe is a senior in high school this year.

Article on Sim...
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab...lest-player-making-huge-000225569--ncaab.html

YouTube vid on Sim & Tanveer...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1Y04AMkvdg