View Single Post
11-03-2012, 01:17 AM
Fugu's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,791
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Kent C Tugood View Post
I've read through all these threads all these days keeping silent, but I have to ask a question in context of the cancellation of the winter classic. Does anyone believe that the cancellation of the Winter Classic may have been done as a way to bring down potential revenue for a shortened season, thus reducing the player's share further? I'm unsure how previous Winter Classic revenue is split or distributed amongst teams.
Originally Posted by onlyalad View Post
Doesn't make sense because it would bring the owner's share down as well. I take it more that the NHL doesn't want to spend money on something that may not happen. It is not just the cost of the stadium but the sponsors invest money in ads and promotions and give aways. Can't have player X selling tires for 3 months if there is no game. Can't have HBO doing 2 months of promo

I think it was a logistical issue, and one the NHL had a fixed deadline set (in their own circle, of course). As onlyalad points out, it's a huge event with all sorts of co-marketing and sponsorship issues. Several other leagues and venues are involved, travel has to be set up, and so on.

Not sure about the timing of the announcement and the hints of movement on Make Whole. It may be as simple as the weather, or as complex as a PR and negotiating tactic.

Fugu is offline