View Single Post
07-20-2012, 06:43 PM
Mod Supervisor
TMI's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 46,440
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by 29dryden29 View Post
Then why do 20 other teams have to prop up 10 teams with rev sharing if they truly are individually owned and operated?? If it is truly as you say then it should be true capitalism and each team should set pricing and keep ALL the money they make after paying salaries.
They are individually owned and operated within the structure of a mother corporation (the NHL). Revenue sharing makes sense because we are talking about a corporation with 30 daughter corporations, each existing with their own leases. The league cannot simply move or dissolve these daughter corporations because of the leases. The choices are 1) allow some teams to operate at huge profits while others operate at huge losses, or 2) use some of the huge profits to offset some of the huge losses. It's pretty simple really. If it weren't good for the league maybe you can explain the growth of the league since revenue sharing has come into existence.

I often see people complain about how unfair RS is, but it is almost always the same people who bemoan the salary cap. The fans who want their teams to be able to spend as much money as they want on player salary are the ones who seem to have their feelings hurt so badly by RS. The funny thing is it isn't even their money so they shouldn't care. It isn't hurting anyone. It isn't causing teams to have lower payroll (the salary cap does that nicely).

TMI is offline