- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: NBA looking to change Luxury Tax
Posted on 2/27/23 at 12:05 pm to TigerinATL
Posted on 2/27/23 at 12:05 pm to TigerinATL
quote:It would help, but not sure how much.
Currently the 1st tier is $0-$4.99 million. Raise that first tier to say $10 million and maybe lower the rate from 1.5x to 1.25x and you'll have teams like the Pels and Grizzlies feeling a lot more comfortable going into it
Say, you're at $4mil over, 1.5x vs 1.25x is a difference of $1mil total. So yes, it IS a difference. But as someone pointed out, the big issue is missing out on the revenue share going back to you for not going into the tax, which is something like $17 mil a year lately.
So, rough match obviously, you're looking at "losing" $23mil total, but under your proposal, you lose $22mil. So a savings and a difference, no question. But enough to entice teams like the Pels and Grizzlies to dip into the tax? Not sure.
Don't get me wrong, I get where you gotta save at some point. Like the Warriors a few years ago, they added someone like Oubre and the total cost was something like $74mil for 1 season of Oubre. And also if you're a losing team not going anywhere, yea you're just wasting money by going into the tax. But generally speaking, if you're not going to spend up a little on your team, then why do you own the team?
This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 2/27/23 at 12:52 pm to shel311
quote:
It would help, but not sure how much.
Say, you're at $4mil over, 1.5x vs 1.25x is a difference of $1mil total. So yes, it IS a difference. But as someone pointed out, the big issue is missing out on the revenue share going back to you for not going into the tax, which is something like $17 mil a year lately.
So, rough match obviously, you're looking at "losing" $23mil total, but under your proposal, you lose $22mil. So a savings and a difference, no question. But enough to entice teams like the Pels and Grizzlies to dip into the tax? Not sure.
Don't get me wrong, I get where you gotta save at some point. Like the Warriors a few years ago, they added someone like Oubre and the total cost was something like $74mil for 1 season of Oubre. And also if you're a losing team not going anywhere, yea you're just wasting money by going into the tax. But generally speaking, if you're not going to spend up a little on your team, then why do you own the team?
Easy just make the first tier still award 100% of the revenue stream, second tier 50%, 3rd tier zilch.
It essentially plays the same role as today for the giga tax teams and allows the small market a more competitive structure.
This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 12:53 pm
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News