The_Admiral Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I think a city could make a very convincing argument that by providing a multi-million dollar arena for an NBA team to play in they have a financial agreement with the city that goes beyond what the lease terms state.I think any lawyer would make an even more convincing argument that no contractual agreement goes beyond what the terms state, lest contracts be completely elastic and thus meaningless. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I think a city could make a very convincing argument that by providing a multi-million dollar arena for an NBA team to play in they have a financial agreement with the city that goes beyond what the lease terms state.I think any lawyer would make an even more convincing argument that no contractual agreement goes beyond what the terms state, lest contracts be completely elastic and thus meaningless.You could if you can prove that the NBA is a monopoly. Part of your motivation for entering into an agreement with them was because you couldn't do so with anybody else. Basically saying we were forced into this deal to some extent and because of that its an unfair lease. I think the main motivation for any city giving a publically financed arena to NBA team would be to prevent them from moving. That's coercion and the only reason NBA can get because there's nobody else that can offer the kind of product they can. If you can prove that you have a case because its a violation of anti-trust law.If you want to look at it another way, by giving an NBA team this money we are entitled to at least some say in how the NBA operates. That isn't stated in any lease agreement, but for the amount of money these cities have invested in the NBA I think you can argue they are at least entitled to a product, the key word being entitled, meaning that if you don't give the city any NBA basketball the league is in violation of the faith of the agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 This is about to be the NBA's nuclear winter www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfwabel Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I think a city could make a very convincing argument that by providing a multi-million dollar arena for an NBA team to play in they have a financial agreement with the city that goes beyond what the lease terms state.I think any lawyer would make an even more convincing argument that no contractual agreement goes beyond what the terms state, lest contracts be completely elastic and thus meaningless.The city of Memphis might be the ones to challenge their lease with the Grizzlies.From the link: The agreement contains a force majeure clause. A force majeure clause protects a party from liability when extraordinary events occur. In relevant part, the agreement defines ?force majeure? as, ?. . . any delay or failure by any Party to this Operating Agreement in the performance of any non-monetary obligations due to causes beyond its control (other than lack of funds), including but not limited to. . . suspension of NBA league play for all NBA franchises.? The lockout and subsequent cancellation of the first two weeks of the NBA season likely constitute the ?suspension of NBA league play for all NBA franchises.? However, it is unclear whether the failure to obtain revenue by selling tickets and merchandise constitute a ?non-monetary obligation,? as this term is not defined in the agreement. Arguably, a non-monetary obligation is one which does not require the payment of money by Hoops, LP to the City of Memphis. Because the agreement does not require Hoops, LP to earn a certain dollar amount of revenue through ticket and merchandize sales at the FedEx Forum, the present factual scenario likely constitutes a ?non-monetary obligation.? Therefore, Hoops, LP can assert that it is free from any liability under the agreement?s force majeure clause, as a result of the lockout. However, because ?non-monetary obligation? is not defined in the agreement, the City of Memphis can argue that failure to obtain revenue through ticket and merchandise sales does not constitute a ?non-monetary obligation,? and as such Hoops, LP is not protected by the force majeure clause and thus can be found liable under the agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AlJ6BQ9u4p0CqrPIlQPLC9Q5nYcB?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_labor_talks_breakdown_102011Talks ended today with no plans to resume. So how many more days till Stern starts to threaten to remove the Christmas games?Stern will cancel more games within a week from today would be my guess. He was already hinting at it, now he'll follow through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I say it could happen tomorrow. You drop bad news late on a Friday, and he's got the perfect setup for it. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvrdgsfn Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Having Paul Allen there didn't make things easier according to some sources.http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=Armf2tyurtJM9jOKrdhumei8vLYF?slug=aw-wojnarowski_nba_owners_paul_allen_lockout_102111All hell promised to unleash in the conference room of the Sheraton Hotel on the 52nd Street and Seventh Avenue. So bad that the man who wrote the book on collective bargaining guerilla warfare had retreated to the suburbs and left these unruly proceedings to someone who truly despises confrontation. Nevertheless, Portland Trail Blazers billionaire Paul Allen stepped out of the shadows, declared himself as the hardest line of the hardliners and played the part of the improbable boogeyman in these dysfunctional labor talks."Here comes the Grim Reaper"Oh & despite the lockout, Kevin Johnson still says the efforts to get a new arena for the Kings are still on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Two more weeks of the NBA season about to be cancelled and at this point with everything I've heard its more a matter of when the season will be cancelled, not if.I'd give it about a 30% chance that we'll see any NBA basketball this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HedleyLamarr Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Sweet. I get Thanksgiving Day off now!Thanks greedy owners and players! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Two more weeks of the NBA season about to be cancelled and at this point with everything I've heard its more a matter of when the season will be cancelled, not if.I'd give it about a 30% chance that we'll see any NBA basketball this year.No loss. I'm not even sure I want to see these spoiled morons play this year lining the pockets of their equally spoiled and greedy owners (gross simplifications I know but frankly based on every poll I've read so far not uncommon ones which frankly should have the NBA VERY concerned). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 I want to see them play this year because we're in the midst of a really awesome generation of players and I don't want to see a top-notch year of Rose/Durant/Paul/Dwight taken away from us. I mean, whose awe-inspiring play did we miss out on in 2004-05 with the NHL? Ilya Kovalchuk? Let's not kill the momentum of last year. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmoehrin Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Two more weeks of the NBA season about to be cancelled and at this point with everything I've heard its more a matter of when the season will be cancelled, not if.I'd give it about a 30% chance that we'll see any NBA basketball this year.No loss. I'm not even sure I want to see these spoiled morons play this year lining the pockets of their equally spoiled and greedy owners (gross simplifications I know but frankly based on every poll I've read so far not uncommon ones which frankly should have the NBA VERY concerned).I'm looking at how far apart they are and the players may be saying you should contract two teams rather then have us take less money. From what I can tell the primary goal of the NBA with the new CBA is to save the New Orleans Hornets and quite possibly up to another 8 teams. They've already completely rebuilt their revenue sharing model and now maybe just trying to get the players to take enough of a pay cut to make it work.You've already seen guys like LeBron hint at the NBA contracting teams so while this may not be what's actually happening, the thought has to at least be there.That's my theory with what's going on right now. How accurate it may be is totally unknown because again good luck trying to find any actual details about what goes on in these meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Problem with this whole lockout isn't that it's Players v Owners like say the NFL lockout. With the NBA lockout you clearly have 4 groups arguing. On one side you have the Rich owners from big markets (Buss, Cuban, etc...) v small poor market owners (Maloofs, Heisley, etc...). One is happy with the status quo for the most part, the other wants hard caps, better revenue sharing, etc... And then on the players side you have the superstars v everyone else. Players like LeBron who just want their big money contracts and don't care if teams are contracted to do so and then there's the union who the concept would be unacceptable to. That's why this is drawing out so long, the two sides can't even decide what they actually want and would accept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted October 25, 2011 Share Posted October 25, 2011 Don't forget the agents who are pushing to get a soft cap and end max deals www.sportsecyclopedia.com For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESTONES6 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 I think the NBA is the exception when it comes to "greedy owners". Yes, they are greedy and want a return on their investment, but when it comes down to it, the player's contracts are guaranteed. The owners have no guarantee that the players will produce and fill the arena. SAINT IGNATIUS WILDCATS | CLEVELAND BROWNS | CLEVELAND CAVALIERS | CLEVELAND INDIANS | THE OHIO STATE BUCKEYES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 26, 2011 Share Posted October 26, 2011 I think the NBA is the exception when it comes to "greedy owners". Yes, they are greedy and want a return on their investment, but when it comes down to it, the player's contracts are guaranteed. The owners have no guarantee that the players will produce and fill the arena.True. The owners aren't "greedy" from the perspective that they're just doing it to make a buck. It's pretty widely stated that a fair number of them are losing money and the system needs to change. That said they got greedy leading up to this wanting wins so bad they'd fork out millions in absurd contracts undercutting themselves leading into this lockout to the point where they'd rather lose games than make concessions to the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvrdgsfn Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Well they met up again today & Stephen Smith from ESPN thinks a deal will get done in a week.http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7150515/nba-lockout-labor-talks-resume-wednesdayI'll believe it when I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HedleyLamarr Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 He's hopeful a deal gets done because that's the only sport he knows what the hell he's talking about.Howevah! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bosrs1 Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Well they met up again today & Stephen Smith from ESPN thinks a deal will get done in a week.http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/7150515/nba-lockout-labor-talks-resume-wednesdayI'll believe it when I see it.Don't know why he thinks they're close when they're over 100 million apart still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NEW.ERA Posted October 27, 2011 Share Posted October 27, 2011 Bill Simmons is confident they can still salvage most of the season, but a deal must be reached by the weekend. Maybe he won't need to get a return on those Clipper season tickets.Also it's Bill Simmons. JETS|PACK|JAYS|NUFC|BAMA|BOMBERS|RAPS|ORANJE| Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.