Mr. WEO Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 They were valued at only $405 million 3 months ago--lowest in the league. They are the worst team in the league this year. Sale conditional on the new owners keeping them in Milwaukee. Bought by a pair of NY hedge fund chiefs. http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10790404/milwaukee-bucks-announce-sale-team Holy cow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 the governor in wisconsin should help, sharp guy, hopefully this is a blueprint for the bills sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 the governor in wisconsin should help, sharp guy, hopefully this is a blueprint for the bills sale. Should help with what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Should help with what? did you read the link , the article??? he was quoted as saying he would help the team flourish.. i interpreted that as helping the team to be economically viable.. isnt that a positive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Grid Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 the governor in wisconsin should help, sharp guy, hopefully this is a blueprint for the bills sale. Hahahahahahaha. You clearly haven't met the guy. I'll help the Bills stay in Buffalo as much as he'll help the Bucks. Seriously though the only thing Pols can really do to help teams is deliver new stadiums or sweetheart deals that voters don't generally want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Hahahahahahaha. You clearly haven't met the guy. I'll help the Bills stay in Buffalo as much as he'll help the Bucks. Seriously though the only thing Pols can really do to help teams is deliver new stadiums or sweetheart deals that voters don't generally want. dude... calm down.. for crissakes , i just read the article, seemed like the governor was being positive.. speak for yourself regarding new stadiums and who wants them.. i love the idea of seeing tax dollars put into something like stadiums .. at least you see a tangible result.. unlike all the pi$$ing away the govt does with our tax dollars.. if they dont spend it on improvimng the ralph for example, are you going to see new schools and new highways instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NDBUFFCUSEFAN Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 The NBA is getting ready to sign a new TV deal that has been described as World Cup/Olympic sized. I can why any team selling now would charge a premium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Grid Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 dude... calm down.. for crissakes , i just read the article, seemed like the governor was being positive.. speak for yourself regarding new stadiums and who wants them.. i love the idea of seeing tax dollars put into something like stadiums .. at least you see a tangible result.. unlike all the pi$$ing away the govt does with our tax dollars.. if they dont spend it on improvimng the ralph for example, are you going to see new schools and new highways instead? I'm calm as can be...I just happen to know the box of rocks you were talking about. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing my tax dollars go to my favorite team, but that's easy to say as I love the Bills but don't live in NY. I wouldn't want 1 cent of my DC tax money spent on the Redskins, but I'd gladly ok a major spend on a new soccer stadium to further develop the DC waterfront / SW. Judging by the lack of teams pulling the trigger on moves these days, it would seem like most voters might not be willing to pay for their teams with tax dollars. I asked the question in another thread about whether people of Buffalo would be willing to pony up to keep the team, and I'll be interested to see the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) I'm calm as can be...I just happen to know the box of rocks you were talking about. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing my tax dollars go to my favorite team, but that's easy to say as I love the Bills but don't live in NY. I wouldn't want 1 cent of my DC tax money spent on the Redskins, but I'd gladly ok a major spend on a new soccer stadium to further develop the DC waterfront / SW. Judging by the lack of teams pulling the trigger on moves these days, it would seem like most voters might not be willing to pay for their teams with tax dollars. I asked the question in another thread about whether people of Buffalo would be willing to pony up to keep the team, and I'll be interested to see the results. and i agreed with you.. "box of rocks"?? dont get that..but if you want to make this about scott walker,go to the political board.. Edited April 16, 2014 by dwight in philly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Grid Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 and i agreed with you.. "box of rocks"?? dont get that..but if you want to make this about scott walker,go to the political board.. Not trying to make a political statement at all...can't afford the warning points. I just couldn't let his being classified as "sharp" go by...just like the way I'd speak up if someone said Tim Graham was biased in favor of the Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalftimeAdjustment Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 In my opinion it's going to take a sweetheart deal to keep the Bills. In my opinion, voters are not going to want it. However in NYS many of the politicians are insulated from voters so it could still happen. I no longer live in the area so I can't really have an opinion on the "right amount" of tax incentives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted April 16, 2014 Share Posted April 16, 2014 Not trying to make a political statement at all...can't afford the warning points. I just couldn't let his being classified as "sharp" go by...just like the way I'd speak up if someone said Tim Graham was biased in favor of the Bills. Yeah he clearly isn't as sharp as the others in your area that have figured things out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 (edited) Yeah he clearly isn't as sharp as the others in your area that have figured things out. Not trying to make a political statement at all...can't afford the warning points. I just couldn't let his being classified as "sharp" go by...just like the way I'd speak up if someone said Tim Graham was biased in favor of the Bills. is it your duty to point out if a political figure is "sharp" or not? Edited April 17, 2014 by dwight in philly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalothruMyVeins Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 (edited) The Milwaukee Bucks... More like the Milwaukee 550 million Bucks....Tssssss tssssss HOME RUN Edited April 17, 2014 by BuffalothruMyVeins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 did you read the link , the article??? he was quoted as saying he would help the team flourish.. i interpreted that as helping the team to be economically viable.. isnt that a positive? When I read it (and I did so quickly at work) I was thinking it was grandstanding - my thought was "He thinks he's going to be in the war room on draft day?!" I don't follow the NBA and I have no idea what the team's finances are like. It sounds like they might be struggling if that's what he was referring to. And if that's the case and he means throwing tax breaks and public money at the franchise, you're right, that would certainly help the team be economically viable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffalothruMyVeins Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 MORE LIKE THE MILWAUKEE 550 MILLION BUCKS! God I'm killin 'em... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Grid Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 is it your duty to point out if a political figure is "sharp" or not? Is it yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwight in philly Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Is it yours? actually .. NO.. i just expressed an opinion about a topic that i found reason to comment on.. after all, this is a message board where one offers their opinions.. i happened to express my opinion based on a link that was posted , scott walker was quoted in that link, you seemed to feel as you said "I just couldn't let his being classified as "sharp" go by...just like the way I'd speak up if someone said Tim Graham was biased in favor of the Bills.".. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted April 17, 2014 Share Posted April 17, 2014 Is it yours? I know you are, but what .... never mind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 17, 2014 Author Share Posted April 17, 2014 Wow, this wasn't really an article about a throw away comment by a politician (that's the topic of a different thread..), although Walker has tends to evoke a typical response to folks of a certain political bent. The NBA is getting ready to sign a new TV deal that has been described as World Cup/Olympic sized. I can why any team selling now would charge a premium. TV deals in the NBA are far different than those in the NFL--much more fractured and, unlike the NFL, teams are allowed to make their own deals with local affiliates or cable operators (the LAkers have a 3-4 billion dollar deal with TWC). Also, the real battle that may change future TV contracts is Fox vs. TNT. The Bucks haven't much of a TV deal. The NBA's revenue sharing is nothing like that of the NFL, which mainly comes from a lumped and evenly devided TV contract pile. In the NBA, perrenial money losers (like the Bucks) get a handout from the league based on the previous season's league financial performance. Even with that, teams still lose money. The Bucks play in the oldest and arguably the worst arena in the NBA. There is little chance that taxpayers will put in much of anything for a new place. All of this, to me, makes dropping 550 million on a perennially bad team in a bad market a bad choice---unless you have money to burn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts