phoostal Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 I was wondering how the sale of the Thrashers affects the Hawks. ASG just picked up a $110 million does this help with the Hawks or just goes in their pockets? I have always wanted ASG gone, but I wonder if they will now be more focused on building a winner when it comes to the Hawks. Now that they have sold the hockey team that was losing tons of money will this enable them to up their payroll for the Hawks and make the necessary moves necessary to get this team to the next level. This includes front office on down. Give these guys longer deals and stay out of their way and let them go to work (if you don't have the guys in the front office you want then go out and get those guys now). Give them the payroll they need and lets get some work done. If they aren't planning doing this please sell the Hawks as soon as possible. P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRUEINTELLECTPLAYA Posted May 31, 2011 Report Share Posted May 31, 2011 (edited) $110 MILLION will go in there pockets. They will claim that it is needed to offset the money they will claim they are losing on the Hawks. On the other hand, just think if they really cared and decided to put 10 percent of that into the Hawks and go over the luxury cap by $10 million or so if that is possible in the CBA.Heck if they just simply used the MLE for the correct players and made a uneven trade to take on a little more salary we would be in good shape. We can do both with the MLE and trade exception that lets you foster uneven drafts. The truth is that sale does not necessarily effect the Hawks in any way. The ball is in the ASG corner. I think they would be better off taking that $110 million trying to sale the Hawks for what they can and escaping with about $350 million and calling it a day Edited May 31, 2011 by TRUEINTELLECTPLAYA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchman Posted June 1, 2011 Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 I was wondering how the sale of the Thrashers affects the Hawks. ASG just picked up a $110 million does this help with the Hawks or just goes in their pockets? I have always wanted ASG gone, but I wonder if they will now be more focused on building a winner when it comes to the Hawks. Now that they have sold the hockey team that was losing tons of money will this enable them to up their payroll for the Hawks and make the necessary moves necessary to get this team to the next level. This includes front office on down. Give these guys longer deals and stay out of their way and let them go to work (if you don't have the guys in the front office you want then go out and get those guys now). Give them the payroll they need and lets get some work done. If they aren't planning doing this please sell the Hawks as soon as possible. P Since any focus at all would be more than the Hawks have ever received from the ASG, perhaps so. However, I don't think the Hawks will ever see one penny of that $110 million, nor do I think the ASG will allow the team to go into Luxury Tax territory. We, like the Thrashers fans are screwed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member niremetal Posted June 1, 2011 Premium Member Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 Pretty much the only time money ever enters or leaves the owners' personal bank accounts (figuratively speaking) is when they buy the team and sell the team. They are businessmen, and that is where they make or lose money. So it's a given that the cash is going in their pockets. That's what happens when owners buy and sell teams. I know people around here would love to think that the money will somehow end up increasing the Hawks' payroll, but that's not the way things work in pro sports. Teams' finances are strictly separated from each other's and also from the owners' finances. This won't affect the Hawks one way or another in a financial sense. I do think it will allow the group to focus more of its time and energy on the Hawks. Unfortunately, with this bunch, that's not a good thing. I'm in the camp of people who think ownership already meddles too much in basketball decisions, which has led to some very stupid basketball decisions. In the end, I think the effect will be neutral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dejay Posted June 1, 2011 Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 Those guys are already crying now about having the 7th highest payroll while in the back of their minds knowing that they would be rid of the hockey team soon. The check they just cashed in today will be used to offset their 'losses' from the pending NBA lockout. Would anyone be surprised to read an announcement like that in the AJC after the new CBA comes out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lascar78 Posted June 1, 2011 Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 This sale will pay for Joe's next contract. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachx Posted June 1, 2011 Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 (edited) This sale will pay for Joe's next contract. LOL, that is sad. Almost....................JJ contract is still $12-14 mill more then they got for the NHL franchise. Edited June 1, 2011 by coachx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecampster Posted June 1, 2011 Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 Pretty much the only time money ever enters or leaves the owners' personal bank accounts (figuratively speaking) is when they buy the team and sell the team. They are businessmen, and that is where they make or lose money. So it's a given that the cash is going in their pockets. That's what happens when owners buy and sell teams. I know people around here would love to think that the money will somehow end up increasing the Hawks' payroll, but that's not the way things work in pro sports. Teams' finances are strictly separated from each other's and also from the owners' finances. This won't affect the Hawks one way or another in a financial sense. I do think it will allow the group to focus more of its time and energy on the Hawks. Unfortunately, with this bunch, that's not a good thing. I'm in the camp of people who think ownership already meddles too much in basketball decisions, which has led to some very stupid basketball decisions. In the end, I think the effect will be neutral. Very true. Lost on the typical fan is the idea of "losses against budget". If the owners put a 10% profit expectancy into the budget that pays themselves a salary (IE 1 billion dollar team that's 100 million in salary) and the team loses $20 million against budget, the owners claim a loss. When in reality, there was 100 million personal investment return minus that $20 million). Budgeting is a funny thing. If you expect to lose 20 million but break even you don't call it a 20 million dollar profit against budget, you call it breaking even. But if you expect to profit 20 million and just break even, you spin it as losing 20 million against budget. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Sothron Posted June 1, 2011 Premium Member Report Share Posted June 1, 2011 If anyone thinks these cheap bastards will use that money on the Hawks then I have wonderful real estate in the swamps to sell to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now