10/26 - NHLPA Statement from Don Fehr
View Single Post
10-29-2012, 02:21 AM
Veni Vidi Toga
Join Date: Jul 2003
Originally Posted by
I'll buy revenues increasing, profits not so much as there is no proof of increased profitability. And, danishh made a good case for profitability peaking and sliding down hill since the last CBA.
When Levit was announcing the leagues levit losses, much to the chagrin of many of us who argued that you cant look at the leagues losses as a whole because there is such revenue disparity and a cap will only worsen that, the leagues overall profitability was claimed to be $200 mil loss a year. Those URO's now allegedly show that flipped to over $200 mil profit a year overall even after accounting for all the teams losing money.
Why is the last cba no longer working? Because some big revenue teams are making too much money causing havoc on all the teams not growing at that pace because of linkage.
I seriously doubt that more than a couple of players have seen the owners books and I doubt whether any player has seen all of them. Both the HRR reports and the 76k pages. That's work for financial professionals
Is this a serious point? That the players arent properly up to speed on the legal states of anti trust regulations, the economic ramifications of slower increasing marginal revenues, and the fine points of labour negotations that both sides are paying millions of dollars to professionals to manage that process for them? Does it really matter what players are saying on twitter as they struggle with something they dont want to be forced into dealing with?
Of course the players representatives being paid to advise them on this are the ones that have seen the proposals and are dealing with the issues that are worthy of discussion on a business board.
What petulant fans think of player outbursts on twitter should probably be best left to other gossip boards perhaps? (Not directed at SJeasy, just using that point to go off on a rant)
If you want an alternative that I haven't seen proposed, it is to remove the current escrow system. I am sure part of Fehr's agenda is to remove or mitigate it. There have been individual complaints from players every year about escrow. I am sure that it grates on them.
I think thats exactly what Fehr offered. A freeze that requires no escrow cause its a fixed amount. Its a fair trade off i think, the owners get to pay less, yes assuming revenues grow, and in return they shouldnt need any escrow cause they know beforehand what they can spend.
Escrow for sure is a huge irritant to the players. People keep thinking his offer removed linkage, but i think the more important point was it alleviated escrow.
I would believe that part of the reason for the owner gag is to prevent league liability during a labor negotiation. It would not surprise me if many owners had no experience with collective bargaining where labor law is a bit more stringent. That is not to say that this is the only reason for the gag as Devellano's words definitely merited censure.
The gag order definitely works to give the appearance of owner solidarity even though common sense tells us that is unlikely.
Last edited by thinkwild: 10-29-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by thinkwild