View Single Post
11-24-2012, 02:20 AM
Registered User
DAChampion's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,742
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Habbadasher View Post
I do not wish to debate with you, but you should know that even the NHLPA have not disputed the claim that 18 teams loose money. So far as I am aware, the PA has unfettered access to all 30 teams books, and have made on site audits of the books. Despite this, players, such as Ryan Miller, still say something like "we have trouble trusting them (the owners that they are loosing money)".
I am not disputing that around half the owners are losing money. I am sorry if my post was misunderstood, I will try again.

The numbers,are clear, there is record growth in revenue, much higher than growth in player payroll. 180% vs 80%. Yet, half the owners are losing money, why?

I will give the answer. There are two parts.

First, no matter what, some teams will grow more than others. The NHL has the least revenue sharing if the major sports leagues. It is inevitable that some teams will lose money... Even if player payroll was at.30%, you would have many money losing teams.

Second, and this is the complex point that a lot of people do not get, a decrease on player payroll does not mean an,increase in profits. It means more money available for other expenses. Owners want to win, and only one team can host 16 home playoff games. Savings on players = investments in drafting, scouting, management, psychologists, trainers, coaches, etc. Teams have admitted that the reason the last CBA had not saved them is that other hockey related expenses went up.

This is why the NHLPA has requested cost controls on non player payroll. They do not want to have another lockout in give or six years, as the Bettman plan will necessitate.

DAChampion is offline