Cythim
2
- Messages
- 3,919
- Reaction score
- 0
Right.
A woman who is correct and you have no rebuttal.
I don't need a rebuttal when you come at me with stupid.
Right.
A woman who is correct and you have no rebuttal.
Check this out, considering the players' share of the revenue as cost to the owners is simplifying it like a woman.
Now there's a language filter on this board? Ehh.. takes alot of the fun out of it. Thought this board was more open.
I don't need a rebuttal when you come at me with stupid.
That's right. Dance around it.
Owners are greedy. They want to line their pockets. But the number they have to share to the players has no bearing on the prices to the fans.
Awesome retarded stuff here. That happens all the time in business. Cost goes up, prices stay the same.
Any successful business owner passes the rise in cost right down to his consumer.
It's simple business practice. If it costs me more to supply the product, I'm passing that cost down the line, I'm not eating that cost.
I understand that part of the price hiking is testing the water to see if we'll bite. No question about it. In the end, if the owners take a deal that cuts into their profit, they'll get it back plus some by raising prices on us.
You are the ones dancing around it. You fail to acknowledge that prices are going to continue to rise no matter what. Owners are milking every bit of revenue they can and will continue to do so.
You guys supporting these players do not see the big picture.
So why don't you go into work tomorrow and ask to speak to the owner about getting 50% of his profits.
I'm sure you'll be fired on the spot.
So what if they do, they own the damn team for Christ sakes.
These players get paid enough in this league. It's ridiculous for them to want 50% of the owners revenue.
That is an asinine comment. The sports world works completely different and most leagues pay at least 50% of revenue to the players.
If the argument is that prices will always rise, well then I agree. Of course they will. But costs always rise too. It's a direct correlation.
But I believe the owners want to make X and had to opt out of the old CBA to get it. If they don't get it in the new CBA, a price increase is in store for the fans. You can't tell me these are greedy people and then won't pass the buck to the fans should they fail. Doesn't make sense to me.
No, it isn't. The players aren't just employees, they are the product on the field as well.
They do? Post an article here that proves it. I don't think they do.
Okay, there's one you got me there. Anymore?