View Single Post
Old
09-25-2003, 02:49 PM
  #26
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeathFromAbove
They would argue that what is being gained is economic viability of all it's member franchises.
It would be interesting to hear the courts view of their current unviability. And if it were caused by bad management practices, like setting budgets you cant afford. I cant believe the court would allow them to combine like this, in a way, as you said, intended to restrict the competition for player services.

The relevant market to the owners bottom line may well be the entire disposable income of beer drinking males distributed amongst many entertainment sources, however, Vancouver and Ottawa arent really competing for the same gate receipts, and its unlikely many hockey players that determined they were being unfairly paid could then try their luck in the NBA, NFL, or MLB.

The competition in this case is for hockey player salaries, and the potential employers are all the teams in the NHL. Just combining as a single entity to get around this couldnt possibly get by the courts, if it could even get by the current owners lawyers. I agree with discostu here, it would take years. Both sides would lose a lot. This is one reason I dont believe they actually cant negotiate a compromise.

But then the whole point of a lockout must be because the owners are pleading incompetence. They need to break the union to make the profit they want. If it comes to a lockout, then it is war to the death. The owners want to break the union. The union will financially devastate the owners. Unless they care so little about us they would embark on this path to win minor concessions. Winning or losing an anti trust battle would likely just return them to the bargaining table.

thinkwild is offline