Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Darkly)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Chebucto Regional Softball Club

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. It's weird but $10B for the Lakers sounds frankly low?
A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.

It's weird but $10B for the Lakers sounds frankly low?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
3 Posts 2 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • ? Offline
    ? Offline
    Guest
    wrote last edited by
    #1
    It's weird but $10B for the Lakers sounds frankly low? If the Grizzlies are worth 3.5B, the Lakers are 10x easy if you're taking the super-long-term ownership perspective. When the NBA finally sells internet games direct to the public, when they get to set ad prices instead of legacy TV folks, as internet media and entertainment and sponsorship and athletics continue to evolve, the future seems very bright in an increasingly global world as the #2 or 3 global sport behind soccer and maybe cricket/F1. I guess it's one of those things; LeBron is worth way more than he makes relative to other players but due to the structure of income and payments etc. he can't really be paid what he's worth. It makes the league overall stronger, and the wealer teams in the league benefit from income resistribution from the big market workhorses like la, Boston, Miami, etc. Still..$10B? In 2025? Especially given the tax advantages...
    TAGT 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • NBAN NBA shared this topic
    • ? Guest
      It's weird but $10B for the Lakers sounds frankly low? If the Grizzlies are worth 3.5B, the Lakers are 10x easy if you're taking the super-long-term ownership perspective. When the NBA finally sells internet games direct to the public, when they get to set ad prices instead of legacy TV folks, as internet media and entertainment and sponsorship and athletics continue to evolve, the future seems very bright in an increasingly global world as the #2 or 3 global sport behind soccer and maybe cricket/F1. I guess it's one of those things; LeBron is worth way more than he makes relative to other players but due to the structure of income and payments etc. he can't really be paid what he's worth. It makes the league overall stronger, and the wealer teams in the league benefit from income resistribution from the big market workhorses like la, Boston, Miami, etc. Still..$10B? In 2025? Especially given the tax advantages...
      TAGT This user is from outside of this forum
      TAGT This user is from outside of this forum
      TAG
      wrote last edited by
      #2
      The Celtics just sold for $6.1 billion. Both teams have a comparable legacy, though LA is a much bigger (shared) market. At the time of the sale, the Celtics were the defending champions and favorites to win again with a young set of players. The Lakers are a contender, but would need a bit of luck to get there, and LeBron is on the wrong side of ancient. Overall, it seems like a fair price in the context.
      ? 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • TAGT TAG
        The Celtics just sold for $6.1 billion. Both teams have a comparable legacy, though LA is a much bigger (shared) market. At the time of the sale, the Celtics were the defending champions and favorites to win again with a young set of players. The Lakers are a contender, but would need a bit of luck to get there, and LeBron is on the wrong side of ancient. Overall, it seems like a fair price in the context.
        ? Offline
        ? Offline
        Guest
        wrote last edited by
        #3
        Yeah, 6 for Celtics seems low to me too for many of the same reasons for the Lakers. The league doesn't exist as it has or will without those two teams, they are farm more valuable than 2x or 3x the Grizzlies, for example.
        1 Reply Last reply
        0

        Reply
        • Reply as topic
        Log in to reply
        • Oldest to Newest
        • Newest to Oldest
        • Most Votes


        • Login

        • Don't have an account? Register

        • Login or register to search.
        Powered by NodeBB Contributors
        • First post
          Last post
        0
        • Categories
        • Recent
        • Tags
        • Popular
        • World
        • Users
        • Groups