New Jazz jerseys

I'd also suggest that teams frequently changing jerseys and seeking new and elaborate designs are trying to distract attention from a subpar roster or gloss over a rebuilding/re-tooling phase as being a new era, emphasised by new jerseys.

It's possible, but I think they do it to sell more jerseys, especially to people who have already bought them.

Because they need to recoup the losses from nobody going to see the games due to the team sucking!

I'd also suggest that teams frequently changing jerseys and seeking new and elaborate designs are trying to distract attention from a subpar roster or gloss over a rebuilding/re-tooling phase as being a new era, emphasised by new jerseys.

It's possible, but I think they do it to sell more jerseys, especially to people who have already bought them.

Oh no doubt, it's a money-making move for sure.

And because they overpaid the people who wear them.

Actually, aren't non-luxury box single game ticket sales a small small part of a teams revenue? Jersey and merchandise sales probably bring in a lot more revenue. I seem to remember that at least in baseball ticket sales basically are for the cost of operating the stadium/arena for each game. And baseball sells 2x the number of tickets for 2x the number of games.

That's why that one team is selling gobs of $8 tickets against the Cavs and $2200 as the cheapest against the Heat.

Aren't jersey sales handled by the league and the revenue are divided amongst the teams? Or is that TV revenue?

The unimpressed look on Millsap's face is awesome.

Aren't jersey sales handled by the league and the revenue are divided amongst the teams? Or is that TV revenue?

The cable revenues are evenly shared among the 26 NBA teams, with the four former ABA teams getting a smaller share, as that was negotiated by the league as a whole. But I believe teams retain a very significant share of their own local TV deals. Jerseys and merchandising MIGHT actually be shared like the cable revenues since the NBA licensing is also handled by the league I overlooked that. But I do think teams get a percentage reflective of their actual sales.

Only certain teams qualify for the revenue sharing though, the number each season is usually less than ten and I believe it has a limit, just like only teams under the luxury tax get any of that revenue. So the standard for what revenues have to be shared through the league and not dispersed over the actual deals would probably be pretty small anyway.

I think it's a case where teams don't change those things to necessarily cover up what happens on the court, as what happens on the court would be much more of a driver of those jerseys, TV appearances, etc. It is a blatant attempt to spark some extra interest to boost sales though.

Only certain teams qualify for the revenue sharing though, the number each season is usually less than ten and I believe it has a limit, just like only teams under the luxury tax get any of that revenue.

I remember something like that and there's a limit of how low you can be under the cap to be even considered for revenue sharing. I also recall some (big market) teams in the past complaining how they have to share almost equal revenues with the small market teams and I think that's how the league made the sharing percentage based on sales.

I really dig this retro look teams are going for with all these jersey and logo changes. You may call it plain, but I think 'minimalistic' is a more suitable term.

Well, at least we know that the long period of bad taste (cartoonish and ghettoish look of the 90's/early 00's) is finally over.