2012 CBA Discussion Part IV (Lockout talk here)
View Single Post
11-17-2012, 12:21 AM
Dom - OHL
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stratford, Ontario
Originally Posted by
OOG - another couple of questions for you.
In these Profit & Loss numbers is an owner's salary included in there? i.e. If Team A shows a $3M loss but the owner got paid $5M then they didn't lose money.
Yes. All Financial statements are done by 3rd party accountants approved by the league and the NHLPA. The NHLPA has to sign off on it before they are considered final. And even though they agreed to the 3rd party accountants, they have their own accountants dissect them before giving that final stamp of approval
Why are there only lockouts - never strikes and only at the end of the CBA? Are there rules in place that prevents lockouts and strikes during a CBA? Can players never strike again to gain leverage?
The last CBA didn't allow for any strike or lockout during the life of the CBA, They had to wait until the CBA expired. It's the number one reason why the league wanted negotiations to begin last season and the number one reason the owners didn't want to play this year while they negotiated - because no work stoppage either way was allowed. Can you imagine them playing right now under this scenario and May comes around with no agreement at playoff time? More than likely you'd have a strike because players don't get paid then and owners make their most money. The way the NHL's paychecks are done - Sept thru April, you will never see a strike by the players. That's when they get paid. If anything, you'll see them strike before the playoffs, when they don't get paid and the owners make the bulk of their $$. Which is why its in the CBA - No strike, no lockout provision.
Possibly answered above if not allowed but if things were so bad why haven't owners locked out the players before now?
Back to your other questions. You have to stop thinking of this as a whole and begin to look at it as 30 franchises. I'll use the same thing I did with MMB 3 threads ago that seemed to change his opinion somewhat on the situation.
Think of Tim Horton's. The NHL is the same way. The NHL is run by the 30 owners, each owning their own franchise. Tim Horton's is the same way. The difference is, like any franchise operation, you don't rob one franchise to pay another. Each and every franchise has to be able to turn a profit. If it doesn't, they find a way to do it, or they move it, or shut it down. In sports, they've gotten away from that a bit and come up with revenue sharing. Good on the owners. They've gotten away from the typical franchise agreements. Not just the NHL, but in all major sports. But each individual franchise has to be self sustaining, or it doesn't work. The League (or Tim Horton's) as a whole shows profitability, but not every franchise is.
As for Forbes, like I said, they are pretty close. But when your talking about $3.3 billion in revenue, $2 or $3 million here or there isn't a lot of money per season is it? Over the life of the CBA, still not a lot when you consider the revenue that came in. Re-do the numbers of those teams on the cusp with a $2 or $3 million difference and see what you come up with.
As for the proposals that put $250 million back in the hands of the owners. I'm not denying that it is fact. It does. Look at it this way: How much does it put in the hands of the 30 franchises? It's not split equally 30 ways when it's done. The majority of that money goes back to the top 5 teams that produce revenue. I haven't seen any formula proposed where it's split evenly. Again, you have to stop thinking as a whole, it has to work for all 30 franchises.
I didn't have time earlier today to explain where I think the biggest problem was with the expired CBA so I don't think it was very clear (and can't look up exact numbers so bare with me here)
The original cap floor started as 55% (?) of the cap and as revenues rose it turned into $16 million (?) below the cap. But that's how it was originally negotiated so it is what it is.
The original players share started at 54% and rose to 57% as revenues reached a certain threshold. Again, that's what was negotiated and it is what it is. But neither side expected revenues to grow as they did, certainly not the league or we wouldn't have had a 57-43 split.
Here's a little project for you: Go back to the beginning of the CBA (use Forbes) and re-calculate everything using the 54% players share and a cap floor of 55% (?) of the cap thru the complete term of the CBA - and you can even leave out revenue sharing - and you'll be surprised at how many teams you don't find in the
As for numbers I've seen, I have an acquaintance at the NHLPA (cant remember off hand whether it was Scotto or doubleminor I shared some of the info with just so there'd be no questions asked - or maybe it was DKH). In short, I don't want to burn any bridges, which is why when something is told to me in confidence, it stays that way. I've also learned that you don't share it privately either. Last time I did that, it was all of 5 minutes before it got posted here on HF and I had to get mods to delete every post that directly related to it.
I'm not asking that you or anyone else trust me. Honestly, it doesn't matter to me. What I am saying is that it's hard for the average person to get the facts. And to use statistics that are already known to not be 100% accurate not only clouds your judgement, but also the judgement of everyone reading it. And I know that it may be the only information readily available to you, but if we already know it not to be entirely accurate, then is it not better to leave it alone and discuss the facts that are available?
Personally, right now, I don't care whether they settle or not - only that they get it right this time, because the last time, they sure as hell didn't (both sides). With a hockey game last night, another tonight, another Saturday and a double header on Sunday, I have enough hockey to keep me on the road until June. And in most cases, more entertaining than the NHL.
On another note, if you have time - read the CBA on the expenses the NHL is responsible for. There's only about 40 pages of it. I think you'll be quite surprised. $3000.00 a month mortgage expense? WOW
Dom - OHL
View Public Profile
Dom - OHL's albums
Visit Dom - OHL's homepage!
Find More Posts by Dom - OHL