Hoops

Why aren't more teams offering equity to players?

Sorry. Longley.

Would an import be interested in owning a share of a team in Australia? Maybe in the old days of imports staying and making a life here, eg Davis, Grace, or Loggins. Even if they wanted to, there’d be issues with foreign ownership to complicate things.

Australian players based here wouldn’t earn enough. Even returning Aussies from Europe need to still earn money. Owning part of an NBL team is not a way to earn money.

Only returning longer-term NBA playing Australians are, therefore, in a position to part-own a team. Examples would be... Langley and Bogut. Funnily enough, the only 2 players wealthy enough to pursue this option.

Actually, Gaze May have been able to afford it. But his team folded.

Forgot there wasn’t a salary cap

What???

The Buss family majority own Lakers.

Don't AEG own the La Lakers majority, and have full control of the sydney kings. Surely with such deep pockets, they could buy the kings an NBA coach eg get Brett Brown to sydney kings, or get a really good NBA player playing at the Kings or at least a 20-minuters per game role player but in his prime eg Shane Battier standard type player..... Or get an ageing Vince carter to come down and play a season at the Kings etc.. Or get ana geing Tony Parker to come to Kings or Ginobli. They have big pockets you'd think they'd invest big, and get a player better than where Bogut is at right now.. eg get an import who is playing 20 minutes per game in the NBA...

Michael Jordan owning NBA team, Bogut owning 10% of kings, about sums it up

Bogut in seriously dumb if he thinks buying into the Kings franchise will make him money. Ogden wanted out.

Please educate yourself on players and information before suggestion number and or figures you have no understanding about. 9mill loss? Mate stop making up numbers.

Equity to Childress at 36? Equity to Motum? Nope and he’ll nope

"why doesn't everyone else E.G Adelaide 36ers that the team value maybe 5 to 10million 5% to Childress and 5%to Motum."

hahahahhahaha. You're not too bright, are you?

Is it at all possible that if you keep giving away 10% you might be out of a job after the 6th player?

Exactly. It's worthless.

And if NBL clubs actually had equity and were worth something why would you be giving pieces away here there and everywhere to each signing. Eventually all your shares would be owned by ex-players. lol

Wow if that 9 million figure is true that's dire.

The kings supposedly lost 9 million in the last two years, if they keep going like this does Bogut owe them money.

Because "equity" in an NBL team (except maybe the Cats) is worth Jack Shit.

When LK says he wants $10M for BB, he's not saying its worth $10M as an actual investment.
He's saying that if yu wnat to our an NBL team, you need to be so rich that $10M is pocket-change, and that he thinks $10M is a fair price to own your own team.

Most teams lose money on an operating basis, and require either the community backers, generous sponsors, or owners, to put in money every year.

What does 10% for Bogut mean? Maybe it means he gets a seat on the board of directors (if they have one)??
It won't give him any actual control, it certainly won't pay dividends, and I'd imagine that even if he found a sucker to buy it, he probably can't sell.

Round 14 has come and Round 14 has gone and so far only one team has actually played 14 games (Wollongong). The Crocs and The Blaze have only played 13 games while both Melbourne and Sydney have actually played 17 games.

Wildcats vs Tigers - ? @ CS (?%)
Kings vs Blaze - 4,915 @ SEC (47%)
Hawks vs Crocodiles - 2,902 @ WEC (48%)
36ers vs Taipans - 6,194 @ AA (77%)
Tigers vs Breakers - 3,500 @ SNC (100%)

This time the Wildcats/NBL/Challenge Stadium haven't even given us an 'approx' crowd and having sadly missed last Friday nights replay I'm only guessing and will say that they probably had at least 4,300 at The Jungle? Either way I doubt they had less than 4k there.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, while only 47% of a venue being filled doesn't look great for the NBL, you have to remember the SEC is the league's biggest permanent venue at 10,517 seats and who can deny that a crowd of just under 5,000 isn't a good crowd, especially for the Kings and Blaze?

Well, there it is. A Saturday night in the `Gong and still they can't crack 3,000. I know the Hawks are on a losing streak right now which would be killing crowds but seriously..... IMO there is another reason for the lack of crowds at the WIN Ent Cent and that's the fact that all Hawks home games bar Rd's 2 & 13 have so far been televised by One. Why go when you can stay home in comfort and watch at home, especially when the Hawks are losing.

What can I say about Adelaide's crowd on Saturday night against the Taipans? Brilliant? Great? Wish I had been there myself? All 3 I think. A crowd of 6,194, or 77% of the 8,000 seat (yeah, right.....) Adelaide Arena is a great effort by the people of Adelaide. Unfortunately the crowd once again went home unhappy thanks to the 36ers inability to consistently win at home while most of the crowd were seemingly more pissed with the exit from the car park than losing the game.....

Both times the Breakers have visited Melbourne this season they've drawn a capacity crowd to the State Netball Centre. Still makes me wonder about the wisdom of playing in such a small venue. But what alternatives are there in Melbourne that are indoors? The Glasshouse is no longer an option while Hisense and Rod Laver Arena's are too expensive. Are the Tigers waiting for a roof and an extra 1,500 seats to be put on the 6,000 seat Margaret Court Arena somewhere around 2014? I've heard that rumor before.....

Ok, so there it is. The second round in a row where we haven't got one crowd figure and Adelaide again tops the biggest Aussie crowd of the year while Wollongong continue to struggle to draw more than two cousins and their neighbours dog to a home game.