If Revenue Sharing had been 100% Last Year...
View Single Post
11-20-2012, 07:35 AM
Join Date: Apr 2007
Originally Posted by
It's not that it would make everything the same price. It is that the incentive for taking risks, making investments, and generally improving or maintaining the product is not there. You place the burden of 100% of the cost of any action on the individual, but they only receive 1/30th of the profit.
Let's say you have a player come to you, and says you can sign me for the next 15 years for 100 million. Now let's say you know this player is going to make you 200 million. In a normal case, you would sign him.
Under a system where all profits are shared among 30 teams, the owner is paying out 100 million, but only getting 6.6 million back. So you don't do it.
This mentality applies for a range of situations in hockey.
There is also the "well, I'm getting the same profit as everybody else anyway, so I don't have to make the playoffs or try to be good or sign good management or coaches or trainers, etc." mentality, which is a big problem.
Which is exactly what I had written in my previous post. Thank you.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by barneyg