Your point makes zero sense. There is nothing nice about a business sustaining a loss, the goal of a business is to make money every day, every year. You want to avoid tax liability through tax law not by incurring losses. If you do have a loss, you can use that against future tax liability but, I rather avoid the losses and avoid the tax through different means vs. A carry forward to offset future profits. Just my .02
This business is in year 10, at what point does your cash flow analysis method say it's ok to turn a profit?
MJ has owned the team for 33 months, when would you advise him it's ok to stop losing money and all the nice things that come along with it?
Bob Johnson had to cover $80 million in operating losses while he was the owner. Bob is a better business man than I will ever be and his cash flow analysis must have tighter restrictions than yours.
I didn't claim the company needed the name change to remain operational, I said they can't continue to sustain high level losses and stay in business. The Heat could trade Lebron and D-Wade for Diop, Tyrus and a few more and the Bobcats could turn a huge profit without a name change.
My point is the current situation isn't sustainable.
If the team doesn't need the "hypothetical incremental fans" why are they investigating switching names?
You should call them and tell them they can stop investigating a name change, also let them know about all the nice things that come along with losing money.
I'm sure after you school them, they will abandon any further research and investigation into rebranding.