Why are the "experts" so puzzled by former Microsoft chief Steve Ballmer's $2-billion offer for the Los Angeles Clippers? ("Experts puzzle over $2-billion bid for Clippers," May 31)
It does not make financial sense, they argue. But is profit the only logical explanation? It would seem so since even his supporters defend his decision purely in economic terms, claiming it is a farsighted financial investment.
But what about emotional sense? Clearly, he sees his offer as an opportunity to create a new kind of community and to live out his biggest and boldest dream.
After all, what is money for? Is not its highest goal to free us from its chains, from the tyranny of having to think in terms of profit? How liberating to act based on what one finds personally fulfilling and intrinsically valuable.
Ballmer's decision reminds us that the most important things in life are human values that have no price tag.
Sara E. Melzer
Experts are puzzling over Ballmer's $2-billion offer for the Clippers.
But the sale makes perfect sense from a human-nature standpoint. A major professional sports franchise is the ultimate rich guy's toy, and he who dies with the most toys wins.
On top of that, buying the Clippers moves Ballmer's social status from BMOP to IGGG (Big Man on Planet to Intergalactic Good Guy) for getting rid of Donald Sterling.
Besides, $2 billion may be chump change for someone worth $20 billion.
Ballmer isn't paying $2 billion for the Clippers; you are.
The moment the ink is dry on that deal, the team will be monetized to the max to recoup the investment. And that isn't just an increase in ticket prices or cable television rates for folks who'll never watch a basketball game. The cost of every product endorsement or advertisement connected to the team will be passed along to consumers.
And that doesn't include the taxpayer subsidies for downtown development around Staples Center or any forced-sale tax deductions for the Sterlings.
So sit back and enjoy Ballmer Ball. You're paying for it.
Woodland HillsCopyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times