Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

Ratner on the Nets: “I think we’re going to do well as a business”

635 Views 21 Replies 6 Participants Last post by  NBASCOUT2005
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
I'm not sure why you're focusing so much attention on Principal Owner Bruce Ratner of the NETS and the business side of owning the NETS other than to have something to blog about.

Reality is that the team is owned by many investors (including some of its' former owners), with Bruce Ratner's company at the top of the pyramid (with a little over 20%).

Despite reports that Bruce Ratner's Forest City Enterprises is currently hemorhaging money in connection with the delayed project to acquire, relocate and re-develop a portion of Brooklyn with the NETS as the centerpiece, I do believe it'll happen by 2010 at the latest.

If all goes well, the entire venture should be profitable to all concerned, including investors in the NJN.

While the NJN are losing money, like many NBA teams, their financial fortunes can be turned around with this move.

Moreover, the financial difficulties of the project, nor the money-losing status of the NETS, does not portend bad times for the team.

In fact, the NETS have good management and a fine talent base intact to succeed for many years to come. They may even garner a title or two should they acquire a legitimate PF/C via trade, FA or through the draft.

All said, the idea of running all aspects of the relocation project and the NETS team as a business is appealing. Why? Because if the business is well run, it can sustain itself.

To operate well, any business has to be able to turn a profit. In order to do this you need sound management making judicious decisions building a quality organization. That alone'll ensure a quality product on the floor for NETS fans.

That's all NETS fans really want! A winning product on the floor that can contend for a title. You can't ask for more of ownership and management.

The current makeup of the team is also very exciting and entertaining. (I would not trade VC and RJ for the "I feel like a robot" KG).

Finally, the financial controls that fiscal sanity requires in a well run enterprise, should help the NETS avert the "brain-dead" mistakes the 19-47 NYK are making with James Dolan at the helm.

A self-sustaining business is a healthy one. One that relies on the income, profit and revenue of another (parasitism) to stay alive will only bring itself to ruin.

Rejoice, NETS fans, your future is secure.
See less See more
Good God Almighty, you're boring.
With all due respect, your compendiums are thorough, but run on endlessly. Often your blogs do so as well. If that's not the definition of boring, I don't know what is?

How's this:

:starwars:

Hypercritical, you are! -- Yoda
We are the principal owners of the Nets basketball team. It’s been a real experience for me personally, I must say. I now go to the games. I’m probably the best fan. There are 41 games. I try to go to all of them unless I’m out of town.
Wonder if its true, but I like that his optimism on the new arena. Nothing is set in stone yet but he talks as if groundbreaking will start tomorrow. The best thing for the Nets is the move to brooklyn, if they move we will have a lot of cash coming in and Ratner wont flinch about spending some of it on the summer to keep the fans coming in.
You know, Owner Bruce Ratner seems like a caring, concerned and interested fan. That's good for the others.

Ratner didn't flinch about going after FAs last summer - despite the current financial situation. I'm doubtful he'll be un-supportive to other good moves by Rod & Ed.

Remember, though, the willingness to throw money at a problem, doesn't necessarily make it go away. Put another way, it's not how much you spend, but how wisely!

Note that the NETS payroll is comparable to almost all of the teams in the upper echelon of the standings. It is comparable to SAS and more than DET.

The last thing I want to see is another owner in NJN like James Dolan or Paul Allen. As it stands, the NETS are losing $20-30mil/yr. With owners like Dolan and Allen, they could 'lose their pants' and still not have a winning ball club.
NBASCOUT2005 said:
I'm not sure why you're focusing so much attention on Principal Owner Bruce Ratner of the NETS and the business side of owning the NETS other than to have something to blog about.

Reality is that the team is owned by many investors (including some of its' former owners), with Bruce Ratner's company at the top of the pyramid (with a little over 20%).

Despite reports that Bruce Ratner's Forest City Enterprises is currently hemorhaging money in connection with the delayed project to acquire, relocate and re-develop a portion of Brooklyn with the NETS as the centerpiece, I do believe it'll happen by 2010 at the latest.

If all goes well, the entire venture should be profitable to all concerned, including investors in the NJN.

While the NJN are losing money, like many NBA teams, their financial fortunes can be turned around with this move.

Moreover, the financial difficulties of the project, nor the money-losing status of the NETS, does not portend bad times for the team.

In fact, the NETS have good management and a fine talent base intact to succeed for many years to come. They may even garner a title or two should they acquire a legitimate PF/C via trade, FA or through the draft.

All said, the idea of running all aspects of the relocation project and the NETS team as a business is appealing. Why? Because if the business is well run, it can sustain itself.

To operate well, any business has to be able to turn a profit. In order to do this you need sound management making judicious decisions building a quality organization. That alone'll ensure a quality product on the floor for NETS fans.

That's all NETS fans really want! A winning product on the floor that can contend for a title. You can't ask for more of ownership and management.

The current makeup of the team is also very exciting and entertaining. (I would not trade VC and RJ for the "I feel like a robot" KG).

Finally, the financial controls that fiscal sanity requires in a well run enterprise, should help the NETS avert the "brain-dead" mistakes the 19-47 NYK are making with James Dolan at the helm.

A self-sustaining business is a healthy one. One that relies on the income, profit and revenue of another (parasitism) to stay alive will only bring itself to ruin.

Rejoice, NETS fans, your future is secure.
Uh... Whats your point? You're all over the place, it was boring, and frankly, I had to strain to finish reading it.
kdub said:
Uh... Whats your point? You're all over the place, it was boring, and frankly, I had to strain to finish reading it.
"Gotcha."
NBASCOUT2005 said:
"Gotcha."
?....
To opened minded visitors of this thread:

I've seen a few threads begun by NetIncome on this board regarding ownership and its financial situation (quoting a public pleading acknowledging that Forest City Enterprises was hemorhaging money on the NETS acquisition and relocation/construction project).

Often, citing the hemorhage of money, can move along projects bogged down in red tape and endless delay. That's the reason it was disclosed.

It is not to be construed from that disclosure that the NETS ownership can't and won't support the team to be the best it can be; to put a winning product on the floor for fans that can contend for a title.

As I've said before, it's not how much you spend, but how wisely!!!
NBASCOUT2005 said:
To opened minded visitors of this thread:

I've seen a few threads begun by NetIncome on this board regarding ownership and its financial situation (quoting a public pleading acknowledging that Forest City Enterprises was hemorhaging money on the NETS acquisition and relocation/construction project).

Often, citing the hemorhage of money, can move along projects bogged down in red tape and endless delay. That's the reason it was disclosed.

It is not to be construed from that disclosure that the NETS ownership can't and won't support the team to be the best it can be; to put a winning product on the floor for fans that can contend for a title.

As I've said before, it's not how much you spend, but how wisely!!!
tell isiah thomas and dolan that.
FullMetalAlchemist said:
tell isiah thomas and dolan that.
Fat chance it'll do any good! Their agendas have nothing to do with fiscal sanity!
NBASCOUT2005 said:
To opened minded visitors of this thread:

I've seen a few threads begun by NetIncome on this board regarding ownership and its financial situation (quoting a public pleading acknowledging that Forest City Enterprises was hemorhaging money on the NETS acquisition and relocation/construction project).

Often, citing the hemorhage of money, can move along projects bogged down in red tape and endless delay. That's the reason it was disclosed.


It is not to be construed from that disclosure that the NETS ownership can't and won't support the team to be the best it can be; to put a winning product on the floor for fans that can contend for a title.

As I've said before, it's not how much you spend, but how wisely!!!
Perhaps, but at the same time, get fans worried, and give the NBA something to think about the current ownership group, and the long history of the team losing money.

-Petey
No, frankly, there are so many teams losing money in the NBA right now that it's not cause for concern. Fans only care about a winning product.

In fact, operating at a loss is the norm in the NBA today. The vast majority of teams operate at a significant deficit.

The ownership group is very solid. Commissioner Stern and the other owners wouldn't have approved it hadn't it been. It is also diversified over a wide base of owners.

Ratner's Forest City Enterprises owns no more than 20% of the team. In fact, some former owners still retain 20% of the team, though they can't be forced to ante up more for its operations.

It's nice to see Rapper Jay-Z* with a piece of the team. Shoot, if there're any complaints, they should bring them to him!

*Can NetIncome do a piece on Rapper Jay-Z?
NBASCOUT2005 said:
No, frankly, there are so many teams losing money in the NBA right now that it's not cause for concern. Fans only care about a winning product.

In fact, operating at a loss is the norm in the NBA today. The vast majority of teams operate at a significant deficit.

The ownership group is very solid. Commissioner Stern and the other owners wouldn't have approved it hadn't it been. It is also diversified over a wide base of owners.

Ratner's Forest City Enterprises owns no more than 20% of the team. In fact, some former owners still retain 20% of the team, though they can't be forced to ante up more for its operations.

It's nice to see Rapper Jay-Z with a piece of the team. Shoot, if they're any complaints, they should bring them to him!
Right. Except not every losing team in the NBA is 2 season removed from cost cutting so extremely that it basically was the 1st time in NBA history a pick was basically sold, and then followed up with more cost cutting this year just at the trade deadline.

-Petey
It's kinda funny ... Whad'ya want Ratner to say: We're gonna operate as a 'money pit' ... a black hole ... that sucks the life out of you?
NBASCOUT2005 said:
It's kinda funny ... Whad'ya want Ratner to say: We're gonna operate as a 'money pit' ... a black hole ... that sucks the life out of you?
He can say what he wants.

But if an owner says the team is losing money (to the numbers the Nets do year, after year, after year,) under several different management groups, then acts on it by cutting costs, that should be a concern.

-Petey
That kind of talk is 'chicken little' talk. Ratner knew what he was getting into when he bought the team. Ownership is diversified and not concentrated in one owner. No one has more than 20%. It doesn't affect this owner.

You know how much POR is losing? Most every NBA team is hemorhaging money! Big money! Even well-heeled Billionaire Paul Allen is talking about moving or going out of business.

The economics of the NBA is that it's been a money pit for ownership for a long time. The teams are luxuries only super-rich owners with deep pockets that want to bleed can afford.

Unless there's a plan to run a team like a business and hold it accountable, then they make no business or financial sense.

In the case of the NETS, fans should be thankful that they'll be part of a greater real-estate development and aren't owned strictly for their own sake. Look what's happened to Cablevision and Dolan. You'd think Cablevision owns the Knicks. On the contrary it now looks like the Knickerbockers own Cablevision!!!

Soon the revenue pouring into union coffers will be so great that NBA playes will be playing for $1mil per rebound and $500K a point. Of course, that still won't be enough to compensate them and there will no doubt be sit-downs, work-stoppages and boycotts. The new CBA will provide that players can only step on a court if the player's personal sec'y, publicist and biographer approve.
See less See more
NBASCOUT2005 said:
That kind of talk is 'chicken little' talk. Ratner knew what he was getting into when he bought the team. Ownership is diversified and not concentrated in one owner. No one has more than 20%. It doesn't affect this owner.

You know how much POR is losing? Most every NBA team is hemorhaging money! Big money! Even well-heeled Billionaire Paul Allen is talking about moving or going out of business.

The economics of the NBA is that it's been a money pit for ownership for a long time. The teams are luxuries only super-rich owners with deep pockets that want to bleed can afford.

Unless there's a plan to run a team like a business and hold it accountable, then they make no business or financial sense.

In the case of the NETS, fans should be thankful that they'll be part of a greater real-estate development and aren't owned strictly for their own sake. Look what's happened to Cablevision and Dolan. You'd think Cablevision owns the Knicks. On the contrary it now looks like the Knickerbockers own Cablevision!!!

Soon the revenue pouring into union coffers will be so great that NBA playes will be playing for $1mil per rebound and $500K a point. Of course, that still won't be enough to compensate them and there will no doubt be sit-downs, work-stoppages and boycotts. The new CBA will provide that players can only step on a court if the player's personal sec'y, publicist and biographer approve.
Good example.

Why not go read some of the threads on the topic in the Blazer forums.

It's not all rosey over there either. It's human nature to worry.

-Petey
Business is boring. Since when are basketball fans interested in anything more than basketball? I can't help but wonder why NetIncome focuses premature and inordinate attention on the business side?

It used to be that fans only concerned themselves with the performance of their favorite team on the court. It's a sad commentary on the state of the NBA that now a lot of fans derive more pleasure watching the in-court antics of players, contract negotiations and the business model of their franchise.

It seems that being armchair owners and GMs (RealGM is a site) is infinitely more pleasureable than being simple hoops' fans anymore. The sad part is that most of the stuff in the press about the business end in misunderstood, misinterpreted, misconstrued and leads to unnecessary speculation.

The biggest role fans are put in now is to be the mob agitating ownership to keep bad players, up the scale and spend more on bad teams. Throwing money at it won't solve the dilemma of how to spend within a budget more wisely.

With the Knicks owning Cablevision, can it be a matter of time before each sports club owns a media company? At that point, the Players' Union will own the entire entertainment industry (by means of guaranteed contracts to players that don't perform) and the only programming left on TV will be big men throwing balls down through hoops!

All that worry on the POR board is about losing the sports addiction to hoops that developed in POR. The venerable Trailblazer franchise likely will not be moved, but Paul Allen wants leverage with public officials to share in the losses incurred up there because of the declining fortunes of the club and the bad CBA.

In any event, the situation is far more serious up there. That said, I just think that Owner Paul Allen is fed up and he's not going to waste anymore of his Microsoft legacy on a bunch of ne'er-do-wells.
See less See more
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top