View Single Post
Old
10-27-2012, 03:56 PM
  #765
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Many players make millions in endorsements? If you consider under 5% of players 'many' then sure.
If your argument you gave us 1 owner so their isn't much difference is there.

Plus any owners independent wealth have nothing to do with this. This is where you fail the most in this argument. You feel because an owner has money he should give up his own money out of his pocket to to run his team, which is ridiculous, why should an owner pay out of his pocket to pay his players 57% of what he makes when they are already making millions a year. But you see $ only and not how a business operates, you feel because owners have more $ then players they should pay it out. That's not how a business works. 1. Whether the players share is 100% or 10% or anywhere in-between for them it's all profit. Since a player doesn't put any of the money he makes back into the league it's all profit for him. For the owners they pay to run their team, so they pay for everything, travel, hotels, food, cost, equipment, player salaries, arena operating cost and everything else. For that very reason owners should be making much more then the players because they run the league and they should make enough from the NHL so they can run their team without paying out of their pocket and that is what this whole thing is about, many teams aren't making enough.
2. Owners are billionaires why shouldn't they have to pay out of their pocket. Why are the owners billionaires? because they are good and smart with their money, they won't continue to invest in a business that costs them money, the owners of those teams will sell those teams and no one will buy a team that can't generate a profit. So now teams are folding and the league is losing teams every year until eventually it's the 12-15 teams that could actually turn a profit left. Great atleast the players making an average of 2.4 million a year didn't take a pay cut.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
My arguments show I have no knowledge? Riiiight, keep believing that. Maybe you disagree with my arguments, but I have a really good idea of what is going on. Not one thing I have said is a lie.
Nothing you said is a lie doesn't mean everything you said is factual. Lots of what your saying is speculation and opinion. I love how you say the same thing to me at the end of your post, ohh burn
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
The owners are helping other owners, but clearly not enough.
The owners are proposing 200M in profit sharing for the upcoming year and then keeping it in the same proportion based on HRR. Well if they used the same math the players are using in the 5% growth over the life of a 5 year CBA that's almost 1.5 billion dollars in profit sharing, that's a lot of money and even more then what they are asking back from the players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
If Tampa is losing money, why should players not playing for the Lightning have to help them...thats a pretty weak argument. Not only that, with the last deal, the players are helping the owners quite a bit with their proposal over the entire agreement. They are willing to transfer up to 1.2BIL to the owners in their latest proposal.
No it's not, because of the structure of it all. The players aren't willing to transfer anything. That 1.2 BIL is what they would lose if they signed the 50-50 vs the 57%, well since the 57% deal doesn't exsist anymore they aren't losing anything. Right now players are making 7% of their salary based on escrow, well imagine if they signed a deal that cut their current salary but the 7% they owners want, they would be making 93% of their salary, which is much greater then 7% their making now. [/QUOTE]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Players are willing to negotiate, more so than the owners who just laid a take it or leave it offer to the players.
Neither side has shown a real want to but at least the owners are willing to make changes to their proposal. They have changed their demands and they have changed their proposals and tried to come up with neat ways to get the deal done including the "make whole" provision where they delay the payments to the players but in the end pay out the $ in the current contracts.

The players have refused to negotiate off any of the NHL proposals and only used their own and in their recent 3 deals, 2 where complete garbage and the third they didn't even crunch the numbers on. How do you offer a deal to the owners and when they ask, so $ wise what do that mean over the life of the deal and you answer "I don't know" I don't sign that deal either.

Most importantly the owners wanted to negotiate over a year ago but the players refused, so for the players to come out now and act like the owners had played this all along is a joke and a flat out lie to everyone. The players are the ones who stalled the talks and then tried to blame that on the owners.

Sir Psycho T is offline