Kobe Bryant offered $700,000 per game to play in Italy

[GA Russell]

I don't understand how anyone, even Kobe, is worth $700,000 per game for playing basketball in Italy. I don't get the numbers.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/basketball/kobe-bryant-gets-67-million-offer-to-play-in-italy/article2177642/

[Hardbopjazz]

Take it. There's a strike in the NBA with no resolution in site.

Edited September 23, 2011 by Hardbopjazz

[Jim Alfredson]

I don't understand why any athlete should be paid such an exorbitant sum for putting a ball in a net. It's insane.

[porcy62]

I don't understand why any athlete should be paid such an exorbitant sum for putting a ball in a net. It's insane.

Agree, but I think it's all about money, a simple cost-benefit analysis

Edited September 24, 2011 by porcy62

[sidewinder]

It's only Euro bail-out money, I guess.

This continent has totally lost the plot !

Edited September 24, 2011 by sidewinder

[BERIGAN]

Bet he doesn't bother for less than a mere million.

[Quincy]

I don't understand why any athlete should be paid such an exorbitant sum for putting a ball in a net. It's insane.

It's that kind of attitude that's partially responsible for the NBA strike. The owners should hire you to make that statement when they're doing foolish thing like paying big for the likes of Joe Johnson or merely overpaying bench guys by 1/2 a million or so.

[GA Russell]

Quincy, the players on not on strike. They've been locked out.

[Van Basten II]

I don't understand why any athlete should be paid such an exorbitant sum for putting a ball in a net. It's insane.

He's not getting paid this money for putting a ball over the net he's getting paid this kind of money because people want to pay money to see him to put the ball in a net

[Jim Alfredson]

I don't care. I think it's gross and it's one of the reasons I don't watch sports anymore. I think the amount of money these people are paid is obscene.

[Dan Gould]

I am utterly mystified by this attitude.

But then again I am also mystified by populist BS spewed by certain politicians.

[JSngry]

I'm confused....at what point are we supposed to resent Labor for getting as much from Management as the market will bear?

[Big Wheel]

I'm confused....at what point are we supposed to resent Labor for getting as much from Management as the market will bear?

I think Jim's perspective isn't that "labor" per se is to be resented here, but rather the market itself - that regardless of what prices dictate it's simply unseemly to have this kind of situation come about. I sympathize with this framing a little bit (I hate the fact that concert tickets to any big name are usually $100+, even though it's because people are willing to pay through the nose to see these bands), but don't see any feasible way out of it that doesn't make things worse (richer gazillionaire owners and so forth).

Obviously it's also easier to notice when the "labor" is very prominent/concentrated like in sports. Whereas nobody makes a big deal, of course, when Company A sells a new giant widget-making machine to Company B for $100 million and most of the profit from the transaction goes to some hedge fund bigwig who invested in Company A. (Instead of, say, paying Company A's workers more or making widgets much cheaper for consumers to buy.)

Edited September 25, 2011 by Big Wheel

[Jim Alfredson]

I could start quoting stats about tax payers bearing the burden for stadiums and such, but I prefer to just "vote with my wallet" and not watch the shit, buy the shit, or get into the whole "us vs. them" gladiator mentality that it supports. I did that, it was a waste of my time, time better spent doing my own thing, and the developmentally arrested sports figures won't miss me anyway.

[sidewinder]

Hear, hear !

[Aggie87]

I think it's all out of whack as well, dollar-wise. I grumble alot when these guys gets millions of dollars and then decide they are worth more, so don't honor their own contracts that they sign and agree to.

But is it any different than the best (in this comparison that probably means most popular) musicians making multi-million dollars? The Beyonces, Lady Gagas, U2s, Kanyes, Justin Biebers, etc.

I don't think either "earn" their money. Movie stars either, for that matter. But they all work in the entertainment industry, which involves massive amounts of fan money, which translates into unreal salaries.

[Tim McG]

Kobe will make more staying in LA.

He still has three years left on his $83.7 million dollar contract with the Lakers. Then there are the endorsements.

$700,000 is chump change.

Edited September 27, 2011 by GoodSpeak

[BERIGAN]

I think it's all out of whack as well, dollar-wise. I grumble alot when these guys gets millions of dollars and then decide they are worth more, so don't honor their own contracts that they sign and agree to.

But is it any different than the best (in this comparison that probably means most popular) musicians making multi-million dollars? The Beyonces, Lady Gagas, U2s, Kanyes, Justin Biebers, etc.

I don't think either "earn" their money. Movie stars either, for that matter. But they all work in the entertainment industry, which involves massive amounts of fan money, which translates into unreal salaries.

:tup

Or how about the Matt Damon's of the world making tens of millions a year? Do the same people who won't watch pro Basketball/Football/Baseball anymore, not watch or rent movies these days either????

Edited September 25, 2011 by BERIGAN

[Big Wheel]

I think it's all out of whack as well, dollar-wise. I grumble alot when these guys gets millions of dollars and then decide they are worth more, so don't honor their own contracts that they sign and agree to.

Sorry, but that's BS. Breaking contracts by both sides is a standard part of the business of football. NFL contracts are non-guaranteed and the management releases players early all the time while exercising various parts of the contract that allow them to not have to pay the full value of the deal. If an NFL contract were considered an unbreakable commitment, you'd see constant litigation to resolve issues with the terms not being followed to the letter. If the teams don't care enough to sue players, I don't see why I should consider a player who uses leverage with his contract to be breaking some code of honor. Business is business.

[Leeway]

Kobe will make more satying in LA.

He still has three years left on his $83.7 million dollar contract with the Lakers. Then there are the endorsements.

$700,000 is chump change.

Kobe is not going to risk an $83.7 million contract for $700,000 a game. Something happens to him, the Lakers will cut him loose faster than a speeding bullet (or something).

Another point: the numbers are indeed totally insane. But they are only a reflection of the decayed culture in which we live, where sports and celebrity are the obsession of most of the public. Just a guess, but I would not be surprised that people who would not pay an extra $100 a year for their local schools think nothing of paying out $300 for basketball or hockey or football seats on a regular basis. Bread and circuses.

[Quincy]

Kobe is not going to risk an $83.7 million contract for $700,000 a game.

But it's looking like $23 million of that won't be paid this year if the lockout continues. The Italian league offer (and Kobe spent some years in Italy as a kid) is worth almost $7 million for the season.

While this may seem like chump change he maintains a helicopter, probably too much house that he paid too much for, and has what is reported to be an extremely high maintenance wife. Since the rape allegation his endorsements aren't as high as they could be. So I could envision possibly wanting to earn almost $7 million for playing basketball.

[Jim Alfredson]

I think it's all out of whack as well, dollar-wise. I grumble alot when these guys gets millions of dollars and then decide they are worth more, so don't honor their own contracts that they sign and agree to.

But is it any different than the best (in this comparison that probably means most popular) musicians making multi-million dollars? The Beyonces, Lady Gagas, U2s, Kanyes, Justin Biebers, etc.

I don't think either "earn" their money. Movie stars either, for that matter. But they all work in the entertainment industry, which involves massive amounts of fan money, which translates into unreal salaries.

That's a good point. However, I still think the fact that sports teams play in heavily taxpayer subsidized stadiums / arenas is the major difference. If these teams are making so much money, the owners should build the damn stadium on their own dime and pay property/income/whatever taxes like every other business. But instead they convince local officials that it's too expensive for them to do so and they need lavish tax breaks and money from the city, all the while claiming it will help the community. Of course, that's all bullshit (see here if you don't believe me) and as usual the taxpayer is left holding the bag. If the city wises up and doesn't pony up, they pull a Supersonics and go to the next town full of gullible child-like policy makers with visions of uniformed dollar signs dancing in their heads.

You could argue "Well, the mega pop stars play in stadiums, too!" but those structures were not built with musical entertainment as their main focus. Or maybe they were, who knows. It's all fucked up. Regardless, mega pop stars would play somewhere else if privately owned stadiums were too expensive to rent. Or most likely they'd just pass the buck onto you and you can shell out $300 instead of $175 to see a bunch of old farts like Bon Jovi pretend to be viable rockstars or Lady Gag's piss poor imitation of early 1990's Madonna at 120db if that's what floats your boat. It's also important to note that as much as those huge tours bring in, very little of that actually goes to the performer after he/she pays off the label, the promoter, the rental companies, the sound company, the tour bus company and drivers, the union workers, the arena, taxes on merchandise, the back-up musicians, the back-up dancers, etc. etc. etc.

Anyway, I guess we all better enjoy it while it lasts because when the house of cards that is the world economy collapses, those memories of paying $200+ to sit on an ice cold seat in the dead of winter watching the New England Patriots repeatedly ram themselves into [insert "your" team here] for four hours in their fancy helmets and shiny uniforms will all seem pretty quaint.

[Jazzmoose]

I used to think pro sports salaries were insane, but I'm not so sure anymore. Compare it to drug dealing-there are millions of dollars to be made, but if you take an honest look at what happens, the overwhelming majority of those involved in dealing illegal drugs make squat. They all want to make it to the top, but only a very few will. Same thing in pro sports. Those at the top are making not only their own salary, but the salary of all the wannabes that never make it. The worst firefighter in the country still makes a living wage, so there's not as much for the best.

[JSngry]

Agreed on the taxpayer subsidy of stadiums, that's just extorion, plain and simple.

But as far as athelete's (or anybody's) salaries, hey - if the money's there, and you have the leverage to maximize your earnings in terms of what the market will bear,, hey - carpe diem like a big dog. I never have a problem with anybody getting as much of a return on their labors as they can, be it a streetsweeper or a wide reciever. That money's going to end up in somebody's pocket, dig?

I may well be in the minority here, but my primary satisfaction in watching sport is exactly the "at work" part of it. For most spectators, there is the gladiator/spectacle/warrior/whatever aspect, but that's as much marketing/mass-hipnosis as it is anything else. Once the action begins, it's very much about people going to work and doing their job. And when you get down to it, jobs is jobs - you got something you need to get done, and you got things in your way that can keep you from getting it done, so...whatcha's gonna do?

For office workers, it could be dealing with managers who have not a clue, technology that does everyting wrong, and mandated expectations that can never be met. For musicians' it could be some pattern that your fingers and mind just don't want to hook up on, or a clubowner who insists that you start early, play late, and take fewer breaks, or some drummer sitting in who doesn't have a clue. For an athlete, it could be a pticher whose stuff is so nasty that you cna't get a grip on what to look for, or an offensive guarf who seems to have figured out how to make your move the step before you make it, or legs that can't quite seem to get that little summpin=-summpin extra to make that last second push at the tape, it could be anything, becuase life is ultimately just as much, if not more, about confronting challenges and trying to fgure out a way to get either through or arond them as it is revelling in "the good times", whatever that means.

We all need to make that money, dig? And if Kobe works in an area of business where that much money is available for his labor, and if he has the leverage to get it, by golly GET IT.

The rest of us - take lessons and apply the whenever possible at whatever level is possible. It can - and should - be done.

[BruceH]

I don't understand why any athlete should be paid such an exorbitant sum for putting a ball in a net. It's insane.

For much the same reason that an actor is payed $20,000,000 to appear in some crappy film, I imagine.