Monday, August 15th, 2011 at 9:25 am  |  59 responses

Does Billy Hunter Have His Own Agenda?


Billy Hunter recently predicted that the NBA would lose an entire season next year, and according to at least one former player, he may not always have the players’ best interests in mind. From the Portland Tribune: “Hunter has been the executive director of the Players Association since 1996. He has been through one lockout before, in 1998-99, when the season was shortened to 50 regular-season games. Over the past two months, I’ve spoken with several former players who have a good sense of what Hunter is all about as the head of the players union. They say he is charismatic and knowledgeable. One called him enough of a ‘wild card’ that he comes off as a bit scary to the league, a good thing for the players. I wonder, though, if Hunter is acting in the best interest of the majority of players, who can’t afford to lose a full season – a major percentage of the average career. ‘He has his own agenda,’ one former player tells me. ‘He’s about Billy. He doesn’t have the overall well-being of all the players in mind.’”

  • Add a Comment
  • Share
  • RSS

Tags: , ,

← Older Comments
  • http://thetroyblog.com Teddy-the-Bear

    I disagree with everything you outlined above, and you are lying. @ Allenp.

  • http://www.triplejunearthed.com/dacre Dacre

    snap.

  • http://gmail.com z

    i really wish allenp was in politics, cmon man just give us one rant about the ineptitude of our politicians. and by extension, the dysfunctionality of our whole politco-economic system

  • http://gmail.com z

    also, as far as the seed…i gotta preface what im about to tell you by saying that i appreciate your blind love for kobe alot. It provides a good counterweight to the kobe haters (jtaylor) and lebron lovers (the philo). but on this particular subject, you’re outta your element. Leave the grown up talk to the grown ups (allenp)

  • CubicleWorker

    How does everybody just jock ride Allenp all day???? One quote alone from his supposedly H.A.M. reply proves he’s had no idea what he’s been talking about for the past two months….
    **Furthermore, you have 30 owners dividing up 43 percent of all income except for that income that does not go into the pot, while you have 342 players dividing up 57 percent of all income. By ANY objective measure, the owners have the better end of the deal even though they have the smaller percentage**
    Allenp, understand the difference between INCOME and REVENUE. Revenue is the aggregate sum of money received by a business before paying expenses. Income is what’s left over after expenses have been paid, you either get Net Income (a profit) or a Net Loss (a loss).
    Ok so now let’s revisit your argument, you have 342 players sharing 57% of all REVENUE.
    Furthermore you have 43% of the remaining revenue going to;
    *all the office staff
    *marketing expenses
    *CEO salaries
    *The presidents
    *gm’s
    *Everyday workers for the teams (concession workers, guys who change the ice from hockey games into hardwood for basketball games, people who swipe your ticket etc etc etc)
    *promotions
    *equipment
    *the teams private jets (which im sure as f$&^ the players enjoy)
    *pilots for that jet
    *flight staff
    *coaches
    *assistant coaches
    *training staff
    *cheerleaders
    *security guards
    *David Stern
    *all NBA executive staff
    *all lower level NBA staff
    THEN, after ALL EXPENSES have been paid, if there is money left over, the owners get their share of NET INCOME/NET LOSS…. The NBA is claiming 22 teams are not making money after all of these expenses are paid. You can see now how amazing the players have it, 342 players are literally sharing 57% of all revenue, while thousands upon thousands are sharing the remaining 43% and the owners only MAKE money if there is anything left over. Apparently last year all of those expenses added up to $300Million more than total revenue… now you can see why there is such a major need for CBA reform.

  • CubicleWorker

    nbk, I actually work at the world’s largest professional services firm ($26B annual revenue) so yes in fact, the product is the employees. We are salaried and there is a bonus structure. If you want to relate the two, hypothetically if I was given a contract for $1 million over the next 5 years, but stopped showing up after a year and stopped maintaining my professional development don’t you think it would be unreasonable to be obligated to pay me for my “services” for the next four years, especially if the business was not profitable? I understand there are other factors, but think about it how unreasonable it would be to argue that I demand the right to keep getting paid at the same rate if I stopped performing at the level they assumed they were paying me to perform at.

  • CubicleWorker

    Seriously, the only reason I’m going into so much effort here is because Allenp is the biggest “pro-player” voice on this site and if he understood what was actually being negotiated he couldn’t logically maintain the position he has so strongly argued about.

  • CubicleWorker

    And nbk, to give smoe validity to your statement, yes salaries probably add up to more than 57% of revenue in my company, however the business also generates multi-billions in profit every year. If the business was losing money, they’d have to restructure the pay scale in order to become profitable… that’s what the CBA negotiations are about.. Also, Stern wants to freeze NBA players salaries at $2B/annually. If the company you worked for said “look, we’re not making money, we want to keep your salary at the same level for the next 5 years so we can make the business more profitable and be able to supply you with a pay check for years” you’d have two choices
    1) accept
    2) work elsewhere… that’s essentially what the players are threatening to do, except at a fraction of their usual earnings.

  • CubicleWorker

    And nbk, to give smoe validity to your statement, yes salaries probably add up to more than 57% of revenue in my company, however the business also generates multi-billions in profit every year. If the business was losing money, they’d have to restructure the pay scale in order to become profitable… that’s what the CBA negotiations are about.. Also, Stern wants to freeze NBA players salaries at $2B/annually. If the company you worked for said “look, we’re not making money, we want to keep your salary at the same level for the next 5 years so we can make the business more profitable and be able to supply you with a pay check for years” you’d have two choices
    1) accept
    2) work elsewhere… that’s essentially what the players are threatening to do, except at a fraction of their usual earnings.

← Older Comments
Advertisement