Revelations shed light on Dan Synder’s frugal approach after he took the exit as the Washington Commanders’ owner. In stark contrast, Mavericks owner Mark Cuban showcased gratefulness in the NBA World by prioritizing his loyal employees after a significant stake sale. This just shows the divergent views on ownership responsibilities.
Advertisement
Mark Cuban is a walking example of how team ownership should be when it comes to team ownership. Cuban, after selling the majority stake in the Mavericks, demonstrated a remarkable gesture by sending an email to team employees. In this email, he announced that he, along with the new owners, would be providing approximately $35 million in bonuses to the dedicated Mavericks staff. ESPN reported.
“To calculate your bonus, we used a framework that took into consideration how long you have worked for the Mavs. You will receive your bonus in the very near future.” Cuban’s letter read.
Mark Cuban conveyed his excitement in the letter expressing enthusiasm for the ongoing efforts to elevate the Dallas Mavericks to the pinnacle of sports franchises. The billionaire and longtime team owner retained a 27 percent ownership share.
Additionally, Cuban remained at the helm of the Mavs’ basketball operations. He pointed out that the business would benefit from a new owner dedicated to expanding revenue streams. We’re about to delve into a contrasting example of team ownership.
The disparity in Mark Cuban’s and Dan Snyder’s methods is akin to former NFL player Plaxico Burress’s exceptional performances before 2009 versus his post-Giants endeavors. While one approach serves as a positive exemplar, the other tends to exhaust and demoralize individuals involved in the franchise.
Two Divergent Paths in Team Ownership: Mark Cuban’s Gift vs. Dan Snyder’s Austerity
Commanders Daron Payne, along with free agents Jacoby Brissett and Andrew Wylie, encountered an unusual contractual stipulation. Their initial signing bonus payments were deferred until May 12, 2023, a departure from the norm where players typically receive their first payments within a month.
Speculation suggested that the peculiar arrangement shielded Dan Snyder from immediate payout and aimed to shift the financial responsibility to a new team owner.
“Relative to their prior contract precedents, it would seem that they have intentionally delayed the first installment of their signing bonuses. Very plausible that it’s related to the expected timeline of a sale. … I think the payout dates are fairly telling.” A former front-office employee said.
Snyder had a track record of dubious business practices, delaying players’ payments aligns with his questionable approach. He was under federal investigation before the sale of the team, and the IRS scrutinized a $55 million team loan taken without his business partners’ knowledge. Therefore, prolonging payment to keep his coffers full and potentially passing the financial burden to a new owner, is very much understandable.
Snyder’s history includes suing 125 Commanders season-ticket holders during the 2008 recession for contract release requests due to payment challenges. John Cooke, son of ex-Commanders owner Jack Kent Cooke, also expressed that Snyder has “destroyed the reputation of this franchise.”
This longstanding pattern reveals Snyder’s consistently poor decision-making. Comparing him to Mark Cuban elevates Snyder to the lowest echelons of NFL and NBA ownership.
