Perth was the only club not to agree... no surprise there.

You would think if LK owns 94% of the NBL the Wildcats should be matching the extra additional 6% on top of the capital he has put in.

https://bit.ly/LKhoopdreams

He's done a fair bit of good for the league, But I still have a big problem with him owning 2 teams as well as the league.

Great read for basketball supporters, two games on free to air plus the Nbl app, much better than paying for fox.

5:30 on Sat? Seriously?

Did you read the article?

What betting agency did he own?

Wow money makes even more money.

Thats the most Perth thing of all Perth things to not be part of the but back scheme. LK is the saviour of NBL basketball period. Money passion for the game smarts great combo.

Say what you want about the man and owning a few teams in the league but he's invested. He's only going to do things that make it better because he's balls deep in it.

Those criticising Perth's decision to not be part of the buy back, please explain how it all works and what the pro's and con's are for each club.

We will never know LK owned 51% of the NBL, now 94%. It's his baby and it's almost as if Marvin is still in charge rebelling against the ownership. Oh BTW how is the search for his replacement going?

Um they replaced him weeks ago...

Dunno. Havne't read anything, ho is he / she?

Zodiac, LoveBroker and orhers - it wasn't a buyback of the teams. It was of the league entity. Learn to read. Shocking comprehension skills on here.

others*

Cram you are so ungrateful. LK poured $7mil into the league. At least something different has been tried instead of the halfarseness of the past.

Someone tell Grant Kelley the Sixers franchise he bought a few months ago isn't his because LK bought it in a buyback LOL. Man the school system is so poor nowadays no one even knows how to properly. All-time classic Hoops brain fade this one.

read properly*

Still waiting for someone to explain in detail what the buy back was about, and the pros and cons for each club.

The LKG only wants to get into China. That door has already been closed and they already know that. They are trying to go around the backdoor and that won't work either. Chinese expansion is their agenda. It's only a matter of time before everything implodes.
Wellington won't pay a licence fee to join and that's another stumbling block for expansion. Tassie are on the radar too. Golds Coast yet again with half the games meant to be played in China.
Tipping point looming soon.

Anon #645595 it's in the article - he wanted complete control to make decisions himself directly instead of waiting on confirmation from eight separate member shareholder clubs.

Again another person who didn't comprehend the article.

#600 you didn't comprehend my question. I asked what was in it for the clubs, not for LK. I want to know what the specifics of his proposal were so we can weigh up whether it was in the best interests of all the clubs. If you can't answer that, stop talking.

Seems some people think its ok to criticise things without having a clue what they're talking about.

Anon fight!

#620 LK gets complete control to not have to ask for permission to go forward in any deals the league makes. The benefit for the clubs is he goes ahead and forges all sponsorship ties, broadcast deals, links with China & USA etc. Basically what he is doing now. They worry about the club side he worries about the league as a whole. As a club you have enough on your plate in your own backyard to be also worrying about league-wide matters like sponsorship. Most leagues don't have clubs as shareholders, that structure was stupid anyway. Back then Marvin was vetoing everything. Pretty simple.

Right, so you don't know specifics of the finances (and this was a financial decision for the clubs), you just repeat that LK wants control, and then you end your rant with a lie like "Marvin vetoed everything, its so simple" just so you leave no doubt that you don't know what you're talking about.


All 8 clubs are in different financial positions. As LoveBroker touched on before, what might be a good deal for some clubs may not be a good deal for another.

Great article.

In the article it says 725,749 was the total attendance for the 2016-17 season.

Does anyone know what the total crowd was for the first two LK seasons of 2014-15 & 2015-16?

As positive an article as it is, it neglects one crucial fact. Larry is paying out of his own pocket for television coverage. Anything up to $7 million this season alone. The clubs are making nothing from TV revenue - ask the powerbrokers at the AFL or NRL how long they'd last without the mega dollars from their respective TV deals.

While that situation with the NBL and TV remains the norm, the league is at serious risk. Yes, LK has done some awesome things. But he is yet to truly 'save' the NBL. That's why the China thing is such a key for him. If he can convince the Chinese networks to pony up some money in broadcast rights, tied to a potential Chinese entrant in the NBL, then you really might be able to say the sport in this country has been saved. Right now, as good as things have been over the last couple of years, there's still a big question mark as to the long term sustainability.

Even Mike Wrublewski, as passionate about the Kings as he was, ended up walking away from them. It's not beyond the realms to think that LK could do the same.

Answer the question.

So what were the total crowds for the seasons of 2014-15 & 2015-16?

Probably significantly less, considering Townsville and the Hawks were barely existing.

Kestleman came in after the 2014-15 season.

"A little more than two years later, head office has switched from survival mode to an aggressive expansionist stance. The size of the workforce, not including club staff or players, has quadrupled to over 500."

Over 500? That has to be a typo right?

That also drew a WTF from me. The 500 if correct would include a lot of casuals or shared staff from LK's other businesses.