View Single Post
12-25-2012, 01:38 AM
Registered User
hockeyball's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,040
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Its not my math its the NHLs... Its from the report produced by a former SEC Charmian. Unless you are accusing the NHL of fraud you can't just deny the numbers because it doesn't fit your point of view. The PDF of the 2004 report can be found on the net.
Let me ask you something. When all revenue is accounted for do you really believe that SJSE&E is losing money? Sure they are losing money on the Sharks but once you consider a basic principal of cost accounting you would know that they would be far worse off without the team. You do realize that teams can still be making money despite the league losing money as a whole which is hard to believe is still the case anyway. I do understand that there are teams that are losing money overall, but a lot of that was due to bad decisions made by the league.
With that said I think only hockey related revenue should be considered in these talks. I also think the players will have to make concessions which they have already agreed to do so, however the idea that the owners shouldn't have to share in the pain is absurd. The NHL will not be able to solve its problems just by chipping away from their players. The NHLPA isn't going to want to be in a position to continually have give more and more every eight years. The NHL will have to get serious about coming up with a plan to make the league sustainable.
I didn't say your numbers were wrong, I just said I can't speak to their accuracy. I also said running a sports team on that kind of budget must have been pretty rough. I don't see today's budget as that outrageous, and with most teams more than half the revenue is going to the players.

Do I think the SVSE is profitable? No, likely the just about break even, but that is good enough for them for tax reasons to keep operating as is. Do I think they can spare more money for the players? Absolutely not, I doubt if the cap got much higher they would spend up to it, they didn't last season. If the percentage of salary the players increased the Sharks would simply buy less expensive players, benefiting no one.

You are speaking very idealistically without really thinking through (it seems) the consequences of what you are saying. If the current roster cost Phoenix, or Long Island, or Columbus 10% more they would simply reduce the quality of their team, not meet it, they can't afford it. They are already trying to get the league minimum reduced because so many teams simply cannot afford it. Paying players more is not going to make anything better for anyone, even the players.

hockeyball is online now