Lockout discussion thread 2.0
View Single Post
11-02-2012, 05:52 PM
Join Date: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by
" The commish has three groups of owners: the ones who want to play; the ones in the middle, including Tampa and Nashville, who want a better collective bargaining agreement but recognize not playing is worse; and the hardliners. It would be a mistake to underestimate the last group. There are several who would rather cancel the season than accept a bad deal because they are hemorrhaging money and need immediate satisfaction.
While the players believe Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is calling the shots, an educated guess at the final group includes but may not be limited to Anaheim, Columbus, Florida, the Islanders, Phoenix, St. Louis, Washington and Dallas -- enough to block any agreement from getting done (It's tough to lock it down because owners are forbidden to discuss this stuff. Attempts to talk to a couple were politely shot down). "
Which is my main problem "siding" with the owners/blaming the PA. The ones who want more revenue now, generate almost no revenue.
It's no doubt in my mind, that majority of owners would welcome a gradual increase of their share over certain period of time, but that won't work for teams that need $ this season/next season before they go bye bye and become insolvent.
That group of owners who don't create any revenue, is mostly due, of course, to Bettman and the league guaranteeing future revenues the the owners who decided to invest in non existent hockey markets. So it's only natural Bettman is fighting so hard for them, if not, would basically mean Bettman failed at speculating future markets and cost these owners millions of dollars, on top of the millions they have already lost over the years, waiting for that "market" to come to fruit.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by uiCk