If you have not read NBA Collective Bargaining Agreement – Part One, I suggest you read it first. Much of the discussion in Part Two will build off the information from Part One.
Now that we understand from where the current Collective Bargaining Agreement came, we can begin to discuss the motives of both the owners and players.
A lockout is a tool used by owners in collective bargaining. By locking the players out of the facilities, the owners gain leverage in negotiations. If players are not allowed into team facilities and subsequently games are canceled, the players do not receive pay checks. This tactic theoretically will induce the players to meet the owners’ demands. However, the owners are not the only ones with leverage. By canceling games, the owners are not getting ticket revenue, which is detrimental to their bottom line. The truth is that owners are much more prepared financially to sustain an extended work stoppage than the players. This assertion can be supported simply by seeing to what extravagant lengths Dallas Maverick’s owner, Mark Cuban, is going when celebrating his recent NBA title. Owners are wealthier than players. Owners have other investments which will allow them to “scrape by” in case of a lockout. The players, however, do not have as diverse portfolios as owners. Although several NBA players have lucrative endorsement deals, many players rely simply on their NBA salaries, which in comparison to the owners’ bank accounts are minuscule. Continue reading