Actually the owners (our representatives) have shown that they would lose $640K per team per game if they paid the players on a pro rata basis. The greedy players have offered no math to refute this. In fact the chief agent for the most greedy has stated that the owners should "pay the players out of previous years' profits" thus admitting the owners (our representatives) are right. As they (we) are.
And, BTW, remember the idiotic "collusion" case. With NO EVIDENCE the owners were found to have "colluded" to keep pay reasonable, and are now forced into this fantastic and artificial system.
However, please understand basic economics. In ANY business no one pays higher wages, higher taxes, higher insurance premiums, lawsuit settlements, higher energy costs, or ANY other expense, except the customers. Period. Basic economics.
Fact is if you think RSN fees, ticket prices, or whatever else are too high, remember they used to be (in constant inflation adjusted $$) FAR LESS. When the greedy players made far less. This can happen again. It begins with destroying the player's union.
Let's be clear... they have never shown any proof they'd lose money. None. They have never opened up their books and let the players see it much less you or I. Where are you getting this idea they have?
And even if they did so what. They never paid the athletes hundreds of millions more when they made massive tv deals that paid them more. Sure they offered more money to players but at no where near even half the increase in what they made. And their teams they bought for hundreds of millions are now worth multiple billions. They can easily afford a down year where as many of the non top players can't if they expect to live off their baseball earnings till they die.
They signed a contract with players that specifically doesn't tie their salaries to how much money they make in a given year but one year where they won't make a hundred million they suddenly want to tie their pay to revenue. Without opening the books... you would never do that if you where the employee and just take their word for it.
And actually let's be clear, the RSN fee has gone up because of the owners not the players. The owners of all the teams in all the leagues are the ones who negotiate the tv deals and bid channels against each other to increase their revenue higher and higher. Some of that then gets passed along to the players. But not all of it. In fact most the sports it's limited to 50% or less by contract. Except baseball. They could pass along 10% and still be in the rules if they want.
The players demand more money because they see how much more money the owners are making off them and want more of the owners profits. Even if they where all paid 100k a season we'd still be paying the same RSN fee, just that much more money would be going into the owners pockets.
The owners aren't even close to our representatives. They want to make as much money as possible off of us. They are the ones who determine how much we have to spend to go to a game and watch it on tv. Most leagues force the owners after all the negotiating to pass a lot along to players but be clear the owners are the ones who figure out how to get the money in the first place.
We have no representative except maybe DIRECTV and other providers. But it sure as heck isn't the owners.
I do not believe the owners colluded either. Their system was setup so that if they spent a certain amount over a certain amount for to many years in a row they'd have to share their profits with other owners. The big spenders all happened to hit that mark at the same time so they all decided to take a year off from spending high so they didn't have to share profits with the other owners. Had nothing to do with the players. They have a salary cap for the owners to try and make all the teams spend the same but it's not tied to how much money teams make.
The basic economics argument proves the owners are the greedy ones. They get their money from us and then pay their employees. If they where they getting as much from ya they wouldn't be paying their players as much. Players in no league have ever gone on strike to demand owners get more money from customers via ticket prices or tv deals. They always go after the money after the owners get the money from us. Not before.
I'm not big on unions but for sports leagues it's pretty essential. Otherwise owners would still charge whatever they can and then pay players pennies on the dollar. Sadly the MLB players have a bad rep that has gotten worked by the owners in this negotiation.
If you think the players should be paid less do you also think the owners should make less? They will disagree with that and they are the ones who set the deals for tv and tickets. Why do you think that if they didn't have to pay players as much that the owners would give massive discounts on tickets and tv deals? There is a reason they are billionaires and it's not because they give massive deals to people.
