View Single Post
Old
11-19-2004, 11:12 AM
  #12
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan mao rong
People say that negotiating in good faith is moving off of your position, it is not. It is negotiating with an open mind. The National Labor Relations Act says that neither side is required to agree to a proposal or make any concession. People say Major League Baseball did not get impasse because implementation is not allowed. This is not right. Major League Baseball did not get impasse because they continued to negotiate off of their position.
the league hasn't "negotiated." they've just stated what they want/need. have they shown an "open-mind" concerning a luxury tax? the reason they don't want a luxury tax is because that takes money out of the owner's pockets, whereas a salary cap takes money out of the players pockets. if they are really interested in creating competitive balance a luxury tax is easy to construct that will accomplish.

it's as simple as this...

tax threshold, set it at whatever you want, 40 million seems reasonable. the 30 million dollar number is an idiotic offer by the league, and shows how badly the expansion policy of bettman has worked.

year 1: tax 10% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 2: tax 30% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 3: tax 50% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 4: tax 70% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 5: tax 100% for evey dollar over 40 million.

so... the flyers would have had an 80-odd million dollar squad last year, the wings/rangers would have been well over a 100 million. i don't think too many people are willing to go there, and if they are that is a lot of cash coming back to the rest of the league, WHICH THEY HAVE TO USE ON THEIR TEAM. if they start doing revenue sharing, and they don't force these guys to spend it on their teams, it is really accomplishing nothing.

hell, lets make this more punitive. tax roster salary if they are over the luxury tax. escalating based on how far over the limit they are. so if you have an 80 million dollar squad, it is the 80 million that has the tax applied, not the 40 million that is cross the threshold. i would be shocked if too many teams would be flaunting the tax at that point... and if they are, even more money into the pot.

the problem with baseball's tax is that it isn't nearly punitive enough, and the owners that receive cash from the other teams aren't forced to spend it on their team.

this system would get the league spending under control with a quickness. the reason for scaling it in is to let the big contracts clear before you really start railing on teams... allow time for the market to assimilate to the idea of the tax, and then start hitting teams hard.

make no mistake. the reason the owners aren't discussing a luxury tax has absolutely NOTHING to do with the fact that they don't think it will create "cost certainty." cost certainty really isn't at the heart of this thing, competitive balance is... this is a method that will create that, but it will do so by attacking the owners themselves, not the players.

Jester is offline