ESPN Just released

[WaterMan]

detlef ... do you believe the busboys in your restraunt could quit and set up their own restraunt and run it as well as you do yours?

 

I don't think a 65 yr old fat man who has never broken a sweat in his life could do what Randy Moss does on the field.

[detlef]

detlef ... do you believe the busboys in your restraunt could quit and set up their own restraunt and run it as well as you do yours?

That is stupid on so many levels...

 

So, I take we're now back to the "players don't have what it takes to run the league" argument?

 

Now, let's compare NFL players to busboys. I grant you, there are some, likely even plenty, NFL players who lack the mental capacity to run this show and are damned lucky they have the physical tools to make it in the NFL. Mind you, I think you'd find that most guys who can survive in the league aren't as stupid as you think. I'm guessing there's some serious mind games that get played on the field and the guys who can't keep up that way are the ones with the short careers. None the less, all of them are making way more money than they could doing most anything else. So, there are certainly plenty who could have simply gotten a degree (or did) and gone into some "normal" career just like everyone else but for some odd reason chose to play football for crazy jack. Many of these same players are spending the off-season finishing their degrees, getting advanced degrees, exploring business opportunities... I'm rather certain there's enough of these guys to form a group capable of putting together some sort of collectively owned league.

 

Now, let's compare that to busboys. Do you think there's anyone bussing tables despite the fact that he could go find another better paying and more interesting job? No, busboys are the bottom rung of the very same ladder I'm on the top of for a reason. Of course, these kids might be bright, but that's the thing, they're all kids. If there was a remote comparison, it would be saying that all the rookies in the NFL could get together and start their own league. And, no, I don't think that would work.

 

Now, I repeat, this is not my baby. I can think of plenty of very sticky elements involved with this whole set up. Hell, one might be that they don't even want to. However, one of them is not that these guys are too stupid to pull it off.

Edited May 23, 2008 by detlef

[Grits and Shins]

That is stupid on so many levels...

 

So, I take we're now back to the "players don't have what it takes to run the league" argument?

 

Now, let's compare NFL players to busboys. I grant you, there are some, likely even plenty, NFL players who lack the mental capacity to run this show and are damned lucky they have the physical tools to make it in the NFL. Mind you, I think you'd find that most guys who can survive in the league aren't as stupid as you think. I'm guessing there's some serious mind games that get played on the field and the guys who can't keep up that way are the ones with the short careers. None the less, all of them are making way more money than they could doing most anything else. So, there are certainly plenty who could have simply gotten a degree (or did) and gone into some "normal" career just like everyone else but for some odd reason chose to play football for crazy jack. Many of these same players are spending the off-season finishing their degrees, getting advanced degrees, exploring business opportunities... I'm rather certain there's enough of these guys to form a group capable of putting together some sort of collectively owned league.

 

Now, let's compare that to busboys. Do you think there's anyone bussing tables despite the fact that he could go find another better paying and more interesting job? No, busboys are the bottom rung of the very same ladder I'm on the top of for a reason. Of course, these kids might be bright, but that's the thing, they're all kids. If there was a remote comparison, it would be saying that all the rookies in the NFL could get together and start their own league. And, no, I don't think that would work.

 

Now, I repeat, this is not my baby. I can think of plenty of very sticky elements involved with this whole set up. Hell, one might be that they don't even want to. However, one of them is not that these guys are too stupid to pull it off.

 

Where did I say busboys were stupid? No, I asked if you thought they could set up shop and do what you do as well as you do it. You are telling me that you don't have 1 or 2 busboys that could set up come kind of collectively owned restraunt?

 

I don't think the problem with players being owners is that the players are stupid (although I suspect the stupid are represented very well in the NFL) but that they are not business savy enough to make it work. I also suspect that there are too many egos that would get in the way.

[WaterMan]

Where did I say busboys were stupid? No, I asked if you thought they could set up shop and do what you do as well as you do it. You are telling me that you don't have 1 or 2 busboys that could set up come kind of collectively owned restraunt?

 

I don't think the problem with players being owners is that the players are stupid (although I suspect the stupid are represented very well in the NFL) but that they are not business savy enough to make it work. I also suspect that there are too many egos that would get in the way.

 

So the owners aren't also stupid(born into the money) and egotistical? Weak.

[detlef]

Where did I say busboys were stupid? No, I asked if you thought they could set up shop and do what you do as well as you do it. You are telling me that you don't have 1 or 2 busboys that could set up come kind of collectively owned restraunt?

 

I don't think the problem with players being owners is that the players are stupid (although I suspect the stupid are represented very well in the NFL) but that they are not business savy enough to make it work. I also suspect that there are too many egos that would get in the way.

Where did I say you said they were? And I am absolutely telling you that I don't have 1 or 2 busboys that could take my place over and run it.

 

Now, when you ask someone a question, do you have your response to their answer already written? It sure seems that way. I'm going to try this one last time.

 

How do you know the players are not savvy enough? Like I said, the only thing you know about these guys is that they're good at football. You know nothing about them outside of that. And it is absolutely logical to think that some have simply chosen to play ball as opposed to be a lawyer or businessman, or what-have-you for no other reason than the fact that it's more fun to play football and it pays way more money. So, this guy who can do whatever he wants says, well, I love to play this game and have the chance to make a bloody fortune doing so. I'll go ahead and be a lawyer later. I'm not speculating that this is true in some cases, I know for a fact that there are certain players that this is true for. And they don't need to be the best players. In fact, that can be sort of a nice niche for 2nd tier talent the way long snappers manage to hang on. Good enough to be a back up QB and smart enough to be one of the team's player representatives. Once again, are you envisioning that the entire team would assemble in a big hall and hash out every detail? That's not the way the players union works, why would it be the way they run the league.

 

Now, back to the busboys. See, unlike the players, it's very freaking obvious that these guys aren't ready to run a restaurant because if they were any better at the specific job skills needed to do so, they wouldn't be at the bottom rung of the exact ladder they need to be on top of to run a restaurant. Once again, unlike players, these guys are doing this job because it's more fun and better paying than something else. These guys are doing this job for one of a number of reasons. 1) It's the first job they've ever had. 2) They barely speak any English. 3) They've been in the labor pool for many years but somehow lack the capacity to move up above the bottom rung. So, unlike the players, one can say with almost complete certainty that they're simply not qualified to do so. You don't need to have some predisposed notions, you can simply look at the facts. The facts being, if these guys had what it took to do something besides clear dirty dishes off tables, they would. I should say, BTW, that I've stories of busboys basically doing what you said, though I can't confirm them. In these cases, however, and allegedly, the "busboys" were really grown immigrants who were doing the job because it was all they could get when they arrived and needed to learn the language. Again, not saying that this really applies because that's a pretty fringe case but none the less, perhaps it was worth mentioning.

[WaterMan]

Now, when you ask someone a question, do you have your response to their answer already written? It sure seems that way.

 

Of course.

 

Usually the more grumpy they are, the further ahead in the argument they go ahead and write out.

[Big Country]

So the owners aren't also stupid(born into the money) and egotistical? Weak.

 

Mark Cuban wasn't born into money. He built his company up, sold it for a handsome price and used the proceeds to buy a team. While he does view his team as a business, he, like many people with that kind of wealth, I think almost views it as a toy, much like a luxury yacht or a mansion.

 

ETA: Yes, I realize I am using an NBA owner as an example, but I believe the argument holds across all of the major sports.

Edited May 23, 2008 by Big Country

[detlef]

Mark Cuban wasn't born into money. He built his company up, sold it for a handsome price and used the proceeds to buy a team. While he does view his team as a business, he, like many people with that kind of wealth, I think almost views it as a toy, much like a luxury yacht or a mansion.

 

ETA: Yes, I realize I am using an NBA owner as an example, but I believe the argument holds across all of the major sports.

Well, perhaps the fair thing to say is that, just like all players aren't too stupid to handle this sort of thing, all owners aren't self made guys who've clawed their way to the top with their brains.

[Big Country]

Well, perhaps the fair thing to say is that, just like all players aren't too stupid to handle this sort of thing, all owners aren't self made guys who've clawed their way to the top with their brains.

 

Very fair. I do think there are many players very capable of owning a team. THere certainly are many ex-players very capable of running them, not just as coaches but also in the front office. IIRC, Jordan is part owner of the Bobcats NBA franchise.

 

I just do not see how a new league could be formed where the owners are the current players. I could see a group of players forming their own league and trying to go from there, but it would be those players and their investors that are the "new ownership", not the players themselves, and certainly not a rotating group based on who is in, who is out.

 

IMO, the players certainly deserve a cut of the TV/radio contracts, merchandise sales (both a group pool for all players and a higher cut for individual sales, ie all players receive an equal portion of X% of merchandise royalties, but for any individual item, ie spamshirts with a players name on it, that individual player directly gets X%.), but the NFL itself and the teams themselves deserve a cut as well.

 

Idealistically, I would love to see the money pool divided up between current players, retired players, the league and the team (owner if you will, hopefully with a cut trickling into the front office)

[detlef]

Very fair. I do think there are many players very capable of owning a team. THere certainly are many ex-players very capable of running them, not just as coaches but also in the front office. IIRC, Jordan is part owner of the Bobcats NBA franchise.

Well, he's not proving to be a poster child for how well former players can convert to executives.

 

Oh, and BC, I think you and I are pretty much in agreement on this whole player-owned league thing. and this is officially the last thing I'm going to say on the players owning the league thing. Once again, I can think of several reasons why it wouldn't work.

 

However, if anyone wants to continue to argue that players "lack the savvy" to run a business like this, I'd be glad to continue to point out why that's just a silly argument.

Edited May 23, 2008 by detlef

[Big Country]

Well, he's not proving to be a poster child for how well former players can convert to executives.

 

Oh, and BC, I think you and I are pretty much in agreement on this whole player-owned league thing. and this is officially the last thing I'm going to say on the players owning the league thing. Once again, I can think of several reasons why it wouldn't work.

 

Yes, Jordan has not proven to be a very savvy executive yet, but he may turn that around, or another player may get a group together and be very succesful.

 

I think it is a more realistic scenario for a group of former players to form a buying group and purchase an existing franchise, but that would do little to change the way the league is structured currently.

[Seahawks21]

If the busboy had the money and equipment needed to run a restaurant, and could hire the correct people to advise him as to the direction of the restaurant, wouldn't he personally be better off owning a restaurant than just being a freaking busboy??

Edited May 23, 2008 by Seahawks21

[detlef]

If the busboy had the money and equipment needed to run a restaurant, and could hire the correct people to advise him as to the direction of the restaurant, wouldn't he personally be better off owning a restaurant than just being a freaking busboy??

OK, now I'm starting to wish that I hadn't backed you up on this one.

 

I think you need to stick with, "the players are the main attraction and there's enough smart ones that they could pull this off" story. Obviously most people would be "better off" if they were bosses rather than underlings but that's not much of an argument, now is it.

[Grits and Shins]

Where did I say you said they were? And I am absolutely telling you that I don't have 1 or 2 busboys that could take my place over and run it.

 

Now, when you ask someone a question, do you have your response to their answer already written? It sure seems that way. I'm going to try this one last time.

 

How do you know the players are not savvy enough? Like I said, the only thing you know about these guys is that they're good at football. You know nothing about them outside of that. And it is absolutely logical to think that some have simply chosen to play ball as opposed to be a lawyer or businessman, or what-have-you for no other reason than the fact that it's more fun to play football and it pays way more money. So, this guy who can do whatever he wants says, well, I love to play this game and have the chance to make a bloody fortune doing so. I'll go ahead and be a lawyer later. I'm not speculating that this is true in some cases, I know for a fact that there are certain players that this is true for. And they don't need to be the best players. In fact, that can be sort of a nice niche for 2nd tier talent the way long snappers manage to hang on. Good enough to be a back up QB and smart enough to be one of the team's player representatives. Once again, are you envisioning that the entire team would assemble in a big hall and hash out every detail? That's not the way the players union works, why would it be the way they run the league.

 

Now, back to the busboys. See, unlike the players, it's very freaking obvious that these guys aren't ready to run a restaurant because if they were any better at the specific job skills needed to do so, they wouldn't be at the bottom rung of the exact ladder they need to be on top of to run a restaurant. Once again, unlike players, these guys are doing this job because it's more fun and better paying than something else. These guys are doing this job for one of a number of reasons. 1) It's the first job they've ever had. 2) They barely speak any English. 3) They've been in the labor pool for many years but somehow lack the capacity to move up above the bottom rung. So, unlike the players, one can say with almost complete certainty that they're simply not qualified to do so. You don't need to have some predisposed notions, you can simply look at the facts. The facts being, if these guys had what it took to do something besides clear dirty dishes off tables, they would. I should say, BTW, that I've stories of busboys basically doing what you said, though I can't confirm them. In these cases, however, and allegedly, the "busboys" were really grown immigrants who were doing the job because it was all they could get when they arrived and needed to learn the language. Again, not saying that this really applies because that's a pretty fringe case but none the less, perhaps it was worth mentioning.

 

It is possible that there are some players that could successfully own a franchise. However, I don't believe they could do so WHILE THEY WERE PLAYERS. So while some players may have what it takes to be successful owners they can't be successful owners and successful players AT THE SAME TIME.

 

But presuming for a moment that it is possible for a successful player to also be a successful owner and presuming you could find 32 current players that could be successful owners and made them owners, you haven't accomplished the goal of players owning the teams. Why? First, because you have only a selected number of players that own teams ... and you will have to explain to me how having 32 player/owners is that different than having 32 owners. Second, because eventually current players become ex-players and you are once again back in the boat of non-players owning the teams.

Edited May 23, 2008 by Grits and Shins

[Big Country]

It is possible that there are some players that could successfully own a franchise. However, I don't believe they could do so WHILE THEY WERE PLAYERS. So while some players may have what it takes to be successful owners they can't be successful owners and successful players AT THE SAME TIME.

 

But presuming for a moment that it is possible for a successful player to also be a successful owner and presuming you could find 32 current players that could be successful owners and made them owners, you haven't accomplished the goal of players owning the teams. Why? First, because you have only a selected number of players that own teams ... and you will have to explain to me how having 32 player/owners is that different than having 32 owners. Second, because eventually current players become ex-players and you are once again back in the boat of non-players owning the teams.

 

Pretty much my thoughts, particularly that last paragraph. Even if you took a snapshot of the current roster and made those players the owning group, you end up in the same predicament with roster movement, new players each year, etc.

 

I suppose in the deepest reaches of theory it is possible for the current players only to own the teams, but in any sense of practicality or reality it can't happen.

[detlef]

It is possible that there are some players that could successfully own a franchise. However, I don't believe they could do so WHILE THEY WERE PLAYERS. So while some players may have what it takes to be successful owners they can't be successful owners and successful players AT THE SAME TIME.

 

But presuming for a moment that it is possible for a successful player to also be a successful owner and presuming you could find 32 current players that could be successful owners and made them owners, you haven't accomplished the goal of players owning the teams. Why? First, because you have only a selected number of players that own teams ... and you will have to explain to me how having 32 player/owners is that different than having 32 owners. Second, because eventually current players become ex-players and you are once again back in the boat of non-players owning the teams.

So, I was right, you do write your responses before you get answered. Note that I said "player representatives" just like how they run their union. So, the teams are not owned by 32 smart players. 32, or likely probably 3-4 from each team are elected by their teammates each year to represent the team in league meetings and in meetings with the GM and other team managers. The same sorts of league meetings that currently happen with the owners, now happen with this small group of elected players. Are you telling me that it's any easier for a guy who likely owns a hell of a lot more than a football team to find the time to have these meetings than it is for a guy who's got to fit these meetings in around practice?

 

Also, you need to avoid stating opinions as if they're facts. Please see the bolded sentence above.

 

None the less, oh christ, here I go...Sorry, I said I was done.

 

So, keeping in mind that I realize there's a mountain of sticky details...

 

Who's saying that each team needs to be owned specifically by the players on that team? Perhaps, rather than a franchise system, it's more like a chain that is "owned" by one body. Maybe a trust of some sort (OK, don't argue specifics with me on this one because I don't pretend to know what the best particular form that should take). None the less, players work on a base salary plus profit sharing with some amounts of the total profits being put into things like pensions for retired players. In terms of being a chain rather than a franchise format, it's not entirely unlike how the league currently divides up the TV money. Further, profit sharing could be skewed by how specific teams do. Maybe not.

 

None the less. So, each player either owns a piece of the league or more specifically, holds profit sharing rights based on seniority and other quantifiable data. Things like jersey sales could be skewed towards the guy who's name is on the back of it. It wouldn't be fair that he get all the proceeds because guys like O-linemen would get the short end of that stick. Some chunk of that sort of revenue goes into the pot but popular players get bonuses based on merchandise that pimps them.

 

When they retire, they rely on the pension. There's nothing really being bought or sold, so ownership isn't really the issue. It is an on-going cooperative that is simply governed by player representatives. If, at some point they decided to sell this league to someone and forfeit control over it, obviously a very complex deal would have to be struck to distribute proceeds of that sale not only to the current but also former players. My guess is that limitations to this extent would be put in place upon formation of this league.

 

Or something like that. I'm sure people in the know could find some serious issues that would need to be ironed out. However, forgive me if I don't just take your word on it that it's completely impossible. Your track record hardly merits that benefit of the doubt.

 

Oh, and yes, there would likely still need to be agents and salary caps. There's only so much money to go around and each player is going to want as big a piece (in terms of base salary) as he can get. The same caps that are in place to protect the owners from themselves would be there to protect the health of the league from individual greed. Obviously there would be issues of conflict of interest regarding the how the salaries of the player representatives who are in charge of dealing with the GMs but that seems like something that could somehow be handled.

Edited May 23, 2008 by detlef

[Seahawks21]

OK, now I'm starting to wish that I hadn't backed you up on this one.

 

I think you need to stick with, "the players are the main attraction and there's enough smart ones that they could pull this off" story. Obviously most people would be "better off" if they were bosses rather than underlings but that's not much of an argument, now is it.

True, but 99% of all employees in the world don't have the resources to become the owner. These people need their owners to supply them the tools required to complete their job. Of course everybody wants to own their own business and make the big chunk for themselves, my argument is that NFL players have the opportunity to do this while most of the rest of us aren't lucky enough to be in a situation where this would be possible.

Edited May 23, 2008 by Seahawks21

[Grits and Shins]

So, I was right, you do write your responses before you get answered. Note that I said "player representatives" just like how they run their union. So, the teams are not owned by 32 smart players. 32, or likely probably 3-4 from each team are elected by their teammates each year to represent the team in league meetings and in meetings with the GM and other team managers. The same sorts of league meetings that currently happen with the owners, now happen with this small group of elected players. Are you telling me that it's any easier for a guy who likely owns a hell of a lot more than a football team to find the time to have these meetings than it is for a guy who's got to fit these meetings in around practice?

 

Also, you need to avoid stating opinions as if they're facts. Please see the bolded sentence above.

 

None the less, oh christ, here I go...Sorry, I said I was done.

 

So, keeping in mind that I realize there's a mountain of sticky details...

 

Who's saying that each team needs to be owned specifically by the players on that team? Perhaps, rather than a franchise system, it's more like a chain that is "owned" by one body. Maybe a trust of some sort (OK, don't argue specifics with me on this one because I don't pretend to know what the best particular form that should take). None the less, players work on a base salary plus profit sharing with some amounts of the total profits being put into things like pensions for retired players. In terms of being a chain rather than a franchise format, it's not entirely unlike how the league currently divides up the TV money. Further, profit sharing could be skewed by how specific teams do. Maybe not.

 

None the less. So, each player either owns a piece of the league or more specifically, holds profit sharing rights based on seniority and other quantifiable data. Things like jersey sales could be skewed towards the guy who's name is on the back of it. It wouldn't be fair that he get all the proceeds because guys like O-linemen would get the short end of that stick. Some chunk of that sort of revenue goes into the pot but popular players get bonuses based on merchandise that pimps them.

 

When they retire, they rely on the pension. There's nothing really being bought or sold, so ownership isn't really the issue. It is an on-going cooperative that is simply governed by player representatives. If, at some point they decided to sell this league to someone and forfeit control over it, obviously a very complex deal would have to be struck to distribute proceeds of that sale not only to the current but also former players. My guess is that limitations to this extent would be put in place upon formation of this league.

 

I never said anything about players having to own the team they play for ... I specified 32 owners because there are 32 teams. However, it would probably be a conflict of interest for a player to own a team while also playing for another team.

 

So now let me see if I understand your business model ... instead of 32 teams affiliated in an organization where there is profit sharing there would be ONE organization that owned all teams and all things NFL. So all 32 GMs would be working for the same company? That sounds like a problem to me. In today’s market when there is a bidding war for a particular player the GMs work with their respective owners to determine how much money they can offer. When all GMs are working for the same company/owner how will one GM be given preference over another? Seems like the player’s union and the player’s agents would lose bargaining power as well. In regards to the agents in today’s world they can threaten to go to another GM/team but in the business model you propose there is no other party to threaten with – the agent can threaten to go to another team but in the end the amount of money approved comes from the same source.

 

You can’t believe that one organization that owns 32 teams would produce as good a product with teams as competitive than the current market with 32 individually owned teams?

[Big Country]

True, but 99% of all employees in the world don't have the resources to become the owner.

 

Sure they do, provided they work for a publicly traded company.

 

Otherwise, these people can always write a detailed business plan and present it to banks (or venture capitalists, etc.) to find funding for their business idea.

 

You talk like the opportunities to own your own business are limited to those that already have the finances to purchase it outright. This simply is not true.

[Big Country]

So now let me see if I understand your business model ... instead of 32 teams affiliated in an organization where there is profit sharing there would be ONE organization that owned all teams and all things NFL. So all 32 GMs would be working for the same company? That sounds like a problem to me. In today’s market when there is a bidding war for a particular player the GMs work with their respective owners to determine how much money they can offer. When all GMs are working for the same company/owner how will one GM be given preference over another? Seems like the player’s union and the player’s agents would lose bargaining power as well. In regards to the agents in today’s world they can threaten to go to another GM/team but in the business model you propose there is no other party to threaten with – the agent can threaten to go to another team but in the end the amount of money approved comes from the same source.

 

You can’t believe that one organization that owns 32 teams would produce as good a product with teams as competitive than the current market with 32 individually owned teams?

 

Wasn't MLS set up this way initially? The league itself owned the franchises, something like that. I don't have the time right now to search this out, but at least initially I believe the league gave certain teams "hometown marquee" players that were not acquired via draft. Granted, it's not the same as players owning the team, but IIRC is a different model than that used by the other major sports.

[detlef]

I never said anything about players having to own the team they play for ... I specified 32 owners because there are 32 teams. However, it would probably be a conflict of interest for a player to own a team while also playing for another team.

 

So now let me see if I understand your business model ... instead of 32 teams affiliated in an organization where there is profit sharing there would be ONE organization that owned all teams and all things NFL. So all 32 GMs would be working for the same company? That sounds like a problem to me. In today’s market when there is a bidding war for a particular player the GMs work with their respective owners to determine how much money they can offer. When all GMs are working for the same company/owner how will one GM be given preference over another? Seems like the player’s union and the player’s agents would lose bargaining power as well. In regards to the agents in today’s world they can threaten to go to another GM/team but in the business model you propose there is no other party to threaten with – the agent can threaten to go to another team but in the end the amount of money approved comes from the same source.

 

You can’t believe that one organization that owns 32 teams would produce as good a product with teams as competitive than the current market with 32 individually owned teams?

Well actually...

 

For starters, who say's GM's can't be incentivized? Part of their salary could be attached to bonuses based on how good the team does. As in, wins and losses. So each GM is going to try to put the best team he can on the field within the same limitations they have now (the cap, which, again would be even more important than now).

 

Do you think that GMs for different branches of the same chain don't care how their stores do relative to one another? I mean, they're all in it together, right? Who cares if my store is tanking and the next guy's is crushing it right? All the money's ending up in the same place.

 

I'm guessing you might get arguments from people living in AZ and Detroit that the current system is working all that well in terms of competition. Hell, look at my Niners. They were the pride of the NFL until Eddie D's sister took over the thing and now they suck and will likely continue to suck until the Yorks get chased off. How 'bout Cinci? They've been a joke forever. A few things broke just right and they started seeming like a team that was going to compete. Well, a ton of arrests and a couple of jerk-off WRs later and they're heading right back to their usual spot at the bottom. Anyone but the most myopic Raider fan think they're going to do jack poop until Al Davis finally gives that thing up? How 'bout Buffalo?

[Seahawks21]

Sure they do, provided they work for a publicly traded company.

 

Otherwise, these people can always write a detailed business plan and present it to banks (or venture capitalists, etc.) to find funding for their business idea.

 

You talk like the opportunities to own your own business are limited to those that already have the finances to purchase it outright. This simply is not true.

I didn't say it was impossible, it just isn't very plausible for many of us. In my lifetime I will most likely never be able to own a company like the one I work for now. There aren't any laws against it or anything, but in reality, it just isn't going to happen.

[Big Country]

I didn't say it was impossible, it just isn't very plausible for many of us. In my lifetime I will most likely never be able to own a company like the one I work for now. There aren't any laws against it or anything, but in reality, it just isn't going to happen.

 

Not sure what size company you work for now, but, you could certainly start a company that did something similar albeit on a smaller scale and grow it.

 

Like your paint van. You could have leased a van, put the items needed on a credit card and paid that debt off as you got jobs, then once that debt was cleared, repeat the process and hire a team to work that van, as you did for this other guy. Then, you would have the capability to do two jobs at once and clear debt a bit faster, allowing you to grow faster. Eventually, the job of managing the various crews means you are not the one out there doing the actual painting, but you are handling all of the business transactions, getting the jobs, handling hiring, etc. and all of a sudden you are the fat white guy that is doing nothing (though probably putting in twice as many hours as any of your laborers) but cashing checks.

 

The only thing stopping you is the defeatist attitude of I'll never be able to do this or that. Replace that with the can do attitude of it is possible, here is my plan of how I can do it and then execute it.

[Seahawks21]

Not sure what size company you work for now, but, you could certainly start a company that did something similar albeit on a smaller scale and grow it.

 

Like your paint van. You could have leased a van, put the items needed on a credit card and paid that debt off as you got jobs, then once that debt was cleared, repeat the process and hire a team to work that van, as you did for this other guy. Then, you would have the capability to do two jobs at once and clear debt a bit faster, allowing you to grow faster. Eventually, the job of managing the various crews means you are not the one out there doing the actual painting, but you are handling all of the business transactions, getting the jobs, handling hiring, etc. and all of a sudden you are the fat white guy that is doing nothing (though probably putting in twice as many hours as any of your laborers) but cashing checks.

 

The only thing stopping you is the defeatist attitude of I'll never be able to do this or that. Replace that with the can do attitude of it is possible, here is my plan of how I can do it and then execute it.

Believe me, my attitude is not the thing holding me back from buying a golf shop. I have tried.

 

Other than that, I honestly view what you wrote as backing my theory. With the proper attitude, the NFL players can own their own business.