वाररियर्स की वैल्यू

10 बिलियन का सवाल

जब शम्स ने प्रकट किया कि लेकर्स 10 बिलियन डॉलर में बेचे जा सकते हैं, हड़बड़ी मची। पर सच है: लेकर्स कोअपना स्टेडियम ही नहीं है।इससे प्रश्‍न: मुख्‍यत: मूल्‍य ‘ब्रांड’ होगा,या ‘असली संपत्‍ति’?

दूसरी ओर, मारकस थॉमपस II (बे-एरिया) का X पोस्ट: “अगर 10B USD में.बेचे without arena, to Warriors kitna hain?” इसका प्रभाव अधिक हुआ।

संपत्ति-आधार प्रतिस्‍पंद

आईएफएफई (आईएफएफई) - जहाँ LAKERS AEG (Crypto.com Arena) se lease lete hain aur saalane meesle mein millions deta hai, WARRIORS Chase Center ko apne naam par rakhte hain — lock, stock and deed. Iska matlab har dollar (concessions,parking,sponsorship), sab kuch unke paas reh jata hai. Koi rent nahi. Koi third-party profit share nahi. Jaise aapke khud ke ghar ka ek apartment ho jahan har tenant aapko do baar paise dete hain—rent + utilities.

Data driven argument: Synergy Sports (2023): Owned arena wale teams ke operating margins 5 saal ke cycle me 22% zyada hote hain leasing wale teams se.

Revenue Se Aage: Strategic Leverage

Bas ticket ya beer ki baat nahi. Chase Center ka svāmītva Golden State ko unmatched flexibility deta hai:

• Pichhle zameen ka redevelopment (retail/residential)
• Event scheduling control — concerts/esports off-season me bhi annual revenue badhate hain
• Lease hikes ya relocation risk se bachav — jo Sacramento/New Orleans ko problem de raha hai

Lekin agar LA AEG ke saath renegotiate karega — jo pehle bhi hue — Lakers ko sudden cost spikes ya relocation risk mil sakte hain. Ye sirf basketball nahi; ye operational sovereignty hai.

Brand vs Asset Value: Analytics Root Par

Brand value ≠ asset value. Lakers ki iconic history hai—Jordan-to-Kobe—but yeh liquid assets mein convert nahi hota. WARRIORS? Unki brand strong hai… lekin unki asset base aur strong hai. Unhone apne facility ke around ek ecosystem banaya jo games ke alawa passive income generate karta hai. Pehle sochiye jaise Lakers ek high-profile TV star ho jo apartment rent kar raha ho. Warriors ek billionaire developer ho jo skyscraper ke har floor par control rakhta ho—and still gets paid when others use it. The point: Even if game revenue identical (which isn’t true), owning your building shifts cash flow from expense to income—massive difference in long-term valuation models used by private equity firms today.

To Kitna Hain Unka Mūlāya?

The short answer? Based on current comps—and hardball investor behavior—I’d argue Golden State is closer to $14–16 billion, even without counting future expansion near Oracle Park or tech partnerships tied to their campus-like complex. The point isn’t who’s better—it’s about structural advantage. And in sports finance? Structure wins every time.