Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

How did we lose this much money


Chuckie

Recommended Posts

A story on the grantland.com website says the Hornets lost about $12 million last season, despite a $22 million revenue-sharing payment from the NBA.

Grantland writer Zach Lowe obtained a confidential NBA memo describing league-wide finances for the 2013-14 season. According to that story, the Hornets basketball operation ran at a $34 million loss, which was partially negated by the $22 million revenue-sharing payment – largest the NBA redirected under new rules attached to the collective-bargaining agreement.

Might need to temper my expectations on who we sign in free agency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the NBA 's fiscal year just ended a couple days ago I doubt these numbers are for this year plus Forbes reported the Hornets making a 7 million profit last year. It has also been reported that the new revenue sharing & expected TV deal will make it possible for every team to brake even at minimum ( unless you go crazy like the nets)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the NBA 's fiscal year just ended a couple days ago I doubt these numbers are for this year plus Forbes reported the Hornets making a 7 million profit last year. It has also been reported that the new revenue sharing & expected TV deal will make it possible for every team to brake even at minimum ( unless you go crazy like the nets)

The bobcats have always had these kinda problems I believe. Attendance is usually low and if you can't sell tickets you can't make money. I think changing into the hornets will help boost ticket sales and overall profit. The Bobcats are normally a bad team and it's hard to make money with a team that is consistently bad from year to year.

Sent from my iPhone using CarolinaHuddle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to sell a bad product when the brand stinks. I know people will argue that the Bobcats were terrible, and winning is all that matters. Still, you could ask somebody who was born and raised in Little Italy and they would you that Pizza Hut pizza is garbage because it's a pile of deep frozen frozen mess.

 

Still, millions of people love it and think it's the BEST! Why? Because it's branded well. It's got a good name, good logo, good brand... folks identify with it and want it. A good brand can make up for a weak product. A weak product, can't save a bad brand though.

 

The Bobcats brand was complete poo. Let's be honest with ourselves. Nobody is saying that if we slap on a Hornets uniform and add Hugo, we'll start to win but from a branding perspective and needing a solid brand to find a following, it makes total sense. MJ would have been a fool to keep the Bobcats brand, when the Hornets brand was available. Even if a handful of fans out there, may still be upset that they are no longer called the 'cats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thought that only cost about 3.5 million.

 

Thats only the fee to the NBA to change the name, but I would assume there are a lot of other costs involved with the re-branding effort.  Designing new logos, jerseys, court, arena, producing new merchandise (while writing off all the old bobcat stuff), marketing the name change.

 

Plus you have a team with very little local support (coming off 2-3 very bad seasons), that just increased payroll significantly with the Jefferson signing and the Tyrus Thomas amnesty (that dude is still getting checks though he doesnt count towards our cap number).

 

Next season should see a lot of this investment pay off though, the team on the court should keep improving and capitalize on the local interest from the name change.  A winning team and interested fans means a lot more leverage for a better local TV deal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Really?  Back to this again? How many times have I said that I’d prefer to trade back from #1? Too many to count, but as I’ve pointed out, that’s going to be much easier said than done, as once we signal we want to trade back, teams will know we don’t want any of the QBs and they’d target the 2nd pick in a trade instead. All of my “T-Mac at #1” talk has been discussed under two circumstances… the first being that no QB or DE pop before the draft, and that we can’t trade back. But again, I know you don’t like to actually read that stuff when I say it, as I’ve said it numerous times.
    • Thanks for posting this. While this was far from a great performance, this critique shows what some of us noticed last week. Bryce played "a little better". There is some talent there. But, as you pointed out we really don't have a great pass blocking line for dropping back each down when we are behind. BY has got some bad habits and physical limitations. At times his teammates let him down. The play calling isn't always the best. I hope he can learn from last week and show us some improvement in the Saints game.
    • Oh, and yes, I’d take a WR first in this upcoming draft, but again, that’s not in a vacuum I wouldn’t have taken him over the QBs this past year or likely the ones next year either. It’s all relative to who is available in a specific draft, and I don’t think any of the QB’s are worth the risk at #1 this year. Also the fact that you’ve said you would take T-Mac #2 but scoff at him going #1 is just in itself, super weird.  How you can justify a player at #2 but not #1 solely because of their position and with complete disregard to the other players available, is absolutely crazy town talk
×
×
  • Create New...