Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
50/50 is the agreement. Escrow is just a tool. When revenues are predictable within a certain range, escrow levels can be set such that they can subsequently return a portion of escrow and land at 50/50
When the top line revenue is far out of line with projections, there is a potential scenario where fixing escrow can’t arrive at a 50/50 outcome
It’s really not that complicated, but likely beyond the understanding of a lot of players. No offence
|
And the agreement is that the league has to pay the players, regardless of whether there is a game played this year their salaries less 20% escrow. Next year the binding contract says they have to pay the players their contract less a 18 or 14% escrow with the escrow sliding down after that.
I suspect that binding contract is almost certainly beyond the understanding of most of the owners no offence to the owners. The one part that I think the players do understand that you cited is that there is a scenario where fixing escrow does not fix the 50/50 problem and the CBA runs out and the players get more than 50 percent of HRR over the term of the CBA. I do not think the players have a problem with that potential scenario and they carefully read the binding July addendum to the CBA to make sure their interests were protected. Unfortunately it appears the owners did not.