View Single Post
11-15-2012, 12:39 AM
Bear G
Scurr's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,062
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
There is. It's called "The Stanley Cup."
Obviously not enough incentive for a lot of franchises.

Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
No, you don't have to tie it to wins. Revenue Sharing exists because the floor eliminates the ability for teams to spend within their means. It slashes their budgets from things like scouts and marketing that enables the team to get better. That's why the rich teams are paying the poor teams; because they voted to take away the poor team's ability to control their own expenses.
Interesting. You'd think that the poor teams would be able to out vote the rich teams considering how many poor teams the NHL is claiming. How many votes does Toronto have?

Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
Revenue Sharing doesn't throw good many after bad. If you want to talk about a team pocking millions and not putting a good product on the ice, look no further than Toronto. They signed off on Revenue Sharing because it gives them someone else to blame while choosing to not go the extra mile to win because they'd rather pocket millions.
The Vancouver Canucks make money, some of it mine. They do it by running their team well, signing good contracts, drafting and developing well etc. That's a well run business, that's why it makes money. Giving money to another owner so they can **** it away on a poorly run team is throwing good money at bad. The same teams that struggled before this system are still struggling, giving them handouts so they can continue to run their business into the ground doesn't help anyone except the inept owner. Hire well, invest in your team, have success, make money.

Originally Posted by KevFu View Post
If you bought a Tim Horton's you'd be paying corporate a 10% higher percentage of your HRR (Horton's Related Revenue) than the Maple Leafs percentage of Hockey Related Revenue to their corporate body for revenue sharing. Tim Horton's can and does redistribute that to other franchises (usually in the form of equipment, signage, etc) that benefits their overall enterprise as a whole. Tim Horton's shares more revenue than the NHL so that their business is in the best possible position.

Do you advocate 14% revenue sharing?
I wouldn't be interested in my hard earned money going to a guy that thought opening a Tim Hortons in a town of 12 people with no through road and hiring his 12 year old nephew to run it was a good idea.

Last edited by Scurr: 11-15-2012 at 12:59 AM.
Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote