HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

The lockout seems to be a sure thing...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-10-2004, 10:12 AM
  #1
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 500
The lockout seems to be a sure thing...

and it just gets me madder and madder. They obviously went nowhere because the league won't move without a salary cap (interesting point: if there was a cap, the the GMs, coaches, employees, etc., be subject to salary caps too, and would they rollback their salaries and benefits 5%, or does this apply to the people that are generating revenue so they do have a job?).

Seems as though the NHLPA did bridge the gap of losses, but since it doesn't include 'cost-certainty', it doesn't matter to the NHL. What was noted in the Post, and is pretty funny to me, is that Chicago and New York are two of the teams that stand to gain a bunch from a salary cap - meaning they're the ones bleeding the most. In New York you have a situation where the GM makes million of dollars, was given stock options, etc., and yet it's the players that need to suffer. Further, nobody told Sather to spend so much money.

This whole situation is disheartening. The next meeting is scheduled with the Board of Governors, I believe, where they will discuss the lockout, which will almost assuredly happen.

Fletch is online now  
Old
09-10-2004, 10:58 AM
  #2
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
As I have been stating for a while now, the main problem is that the only "cost-certainty" that Bettman is willing to accept is a hard salary cap. One of the major problems of his thoughts is that he is trying to make the cap such a low number, so as to ensure that the smallest of Canadian teams can have equal footing with the Detroit Redwings or the Rangers. He is turning a blind eye to the different economies of the 2 different countries.
The players once again countered with a luxury tax system, that was rejected outright. In reading the comments, it appears that Bettman does not take any proposal seriously if it has any language in it that does not specifically include the words "salary cap".
Mayhaps he should be reminded that the only major sport to include such a cap is football. However, football also has a huge central revenue source 2 things that make it possible for such a cap: non-guaranteed contracts and guaranteed signing bonuses.
Still, it just appears that Bettman wants to punish the players for mistakes that the owners made (and still make).

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 02:06 PM
  #3
Frozen North
Healthy Scratch
 
Frozen North's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: OK
Country: United States
Posts: 1,135
vCash: 500
I happenned to have an NHL Linesman play with us at our open-hockey game at the local rink on Wednesday. I don't want to use his name, as I didn't ask him if I could post his comments. He makes this area his off-season home. Basically, he said that he has been given a plane ticket to attend NHL Officials Training Camp (they have camp too), and if there is no progress by the 17th, he's supposed to return his ticket to Management and "find something else to do." If there is any progress in talks between the 15th and the 17th, he's been told to use the plane ticket and come to camp.

He also mentioned that some players (particulary a certain former Ranger playing center for Atlanta) have told their GMs that if there is a lockout, they will have to file for bancruptcy.

Frozen North is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 03:42 PM
  #4
JCProdigy
Registered User
 
JCProdigy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I want what I want
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JetRanger
He also mentioned that some players (particulary a certain former Ranger playing center for Atlanta) have told their GMs that if there is a lockout, they will have to file for bancruptcy.
Not to offend the players but boo *** hoo. Learn to manage your millions better. Maybe Savard shouldn't have bought that 6th Lambo.

Like what has been said before. Millionaires and Billionaires fighting over greed and it's the lil guys (vendors, other employees, fans) that pay the biggest price.

JCProdigy is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 04:22 PM
  #5
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCProdigy
Not to offend the players but boo *** hoo. Learn to manage your millions better. Maybe Savard shouldn't have bought that 6th Lambo.

Like what has been said before. Millionaires and Billionaires fighting over greed and it's the lil guys (vendors, other employees, fans) that pay the biggest price.
You have to wonder how he can earn 2.7 million and be worried about a work stoppage...this goes right up there with Bryan McCabe saying they're looking out for the next generation of players....riiiight.

Fish is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 05:48 PM
  #6
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,426
vCash: 500
well they just blow their money like it's nothin cuz they think there's more coming, of course

while you and me could get $2.7 million dollars and probably be pretty comfortable for the rest of our lives (well, probably would have to have some kind of job, but you get the point) 2.7 for whatever player is making it probably is more like a years spending money.

of course they should manage their money better...but if you're getting millions handed to you every single year you might spend a lot also.

just a thought...it's probably a damn good thing for tom poti that he made it as a NHL player...with all those allergies i bet he'd have a hell of a time paying medical bills and the such if he wasn't making millions

Levitate is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 07:57 PM
  #7
Infensus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 487
vCash: 500
2.7 Million doesn't go as far as it used to. You would be surprised. You definitely need to keep working.

Infensus is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 10:07 PM
  #8
Sather Hater
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infensus
2.7 Million doesn't go as far as it used to. You would be surprised. You definitely need to keep working.
2.7 million is the equivalent of working 27 years at a job paying $100,000/yr. That's more than most people will make in a lifetime. I would say 2.7 million is more than enough to retire and live a very comfortable life.

Sather Hater is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 10:09 PM
  #9
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sather Hater
2.7 million is the equivalent of working 27 years at a job paying $100,000/yr. That's more than most people will make in a lifetime. I would say 2.7 million is more than enough to retire and live a very comfortable life.
we could get technical and start factoring in all the insane taxes we have to pay...but this is a hockey site, lol.

Balej20* is offline  
Old
09-10-2004, 11:27 PM
  #10
NYR2
Registered User
 
NYR2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 1,322
vCash: 500
We're forgetting the most important fact here is I AM NOT HAPPY I WILL BE WITHOUT HOCKEY FOR GOD KNOWS HOW LONG. Get your priorities straight people. Geez.

Seriously though, this is just so frustrating that these people can't get a deal worked out. They're just going to hurt the sport even more than it's been already, not make it better like they think they're trying to do.

NYR2 is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 12:01 AM
  #11
Balej20*
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 11,045
vCash: 500
You're right NYR. You almost get the impression from these guys like thye just don't care what happens...sad...

Balej20* is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 10:29 AM
  #12
Infensus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sather Hater
2.7 million is the equivalent of working 27 years at a job paying $100,000/yr. That's more than most people will make in a lifetime. I would say 2.7 million is more than enough to retire and live a very comfortable life.
$100,000/yr is not all that either. You can start factoring in kids, home, stay at home wife possibly (biggest expense), childcare, 28% taxes (federal alone, receive 2.7 at once and take a 35% hit, depending on country and locale), etc...

2.7 - taxes (35% leaving out state)=1755000.

Let's say you use 755000 on a home leaving you with 1 million. Put that 1 mil in some sort of an investment earning approximately 5% (i'll even assume tax free). That will give you $50,000/yr. Can you live on that alone if you have wife and kids? I am not sure of your location or lifestyle but in Northern NJ you would have a tough time living a "very comfortable life" on $50,000/yr. You can live a life without working again but it will be lean.

You aren't living carefree at $100,000/yr.

Infensus is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 11:17 AM
  #13
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
You're 2.7 million dollars isnt enough a year to live like a $#$#% prince of a small world country.

They obviously deserve much more.

I mean if we're gonna start factoring in kids and stuff.

Sorry but that's gotta be the biggest stretch i've ever seen in my life, even for these boards.

Edge is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 11:17 AM
  #14
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 500
Nobody feels sorry for these guys, but...

they are being as the best at what they do in the world and people are willing to pay the price of admission. They work hard to keep where they're at, and they worked hard most of their life to get to where they're at. They're worth whatever people are willing to pay. And if we were in the position to make as much money as possible, we would take advantage of the situation, no matter how simple a life any of us live currently. Suddenly a few million dollars can be put to use and we're pretty happy - and it won't last a lifetime, trust me. Further, if you're making $5 million per year, you work to make more and more still, and if your salary is cut all of the sudden to $3 million, it hurts.

Fletch is online now  
Old
09-11-2004, 11:30 AM
  #15
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
they are being as the best at what they do in the world and people are willing to pay the price of admission.
Actually they aren't and THAT is where the big problem comes in. Hockey's cash flow is a joke. Of course teams like the Rangers dont have to worry about it, they have cash no matter what.

But people aren't watching on TV and elsehwere around the league they really aren't willing to pay the price of admission.

Quote:
They work hard to keep where they're at, and they worked hard most of their life to get to where they're at. They're worth whatever people are willing to pay.
Problem is they are worth whatever a select few are willing and able to pay and at the current rate they aren't gonna be employed for very long. Hockey is dieing right now. Having worked around it in one form or another since i was 18 i just don't think the average ranger fan realizes just how hard it is for many of these other teams to even try to come close to breaking even.

Quote:
And if we were in the position to make as much money as possible, we would take advantage of the situation, no matter how simple a life any of us live currently.
At the cost of running the industry into the ground? Sorry doesn't work that way. I'd love to be making 7 figures a year but it does me no good if it subsequently ruins my industry because i just shot myself in the foot.

Quote:
Suddenly a few million dollars can be put to use and we're pretty happy - and it won't last a lifetime, trust me. Further, if you're making $5 million per year, you work to make more and more still, and if your salary is cut all of the sudden to $3 million, it hurts.
Man that's gotta suck, I guess it means you can only afford 5 new cars this season.

That's the same BS story the executives for airlines try to pull at their industry gets run into ground.

If you can't make a good life with 3 million dollars a year than maybe the salary isn't the problem......

The bottom line is that industry can't support it. The players know it and so does the league. If you wanna base it on what would happen in the private sector than we can all do that, but i dont think anyone is gonna like what it left. About 1/5 of the teams and 1/5 of the jobs and the death nail in a sport that already has lower ratings than pro bowling.

These arguments you have when you have a product that is working.....not what the NHL is right now.

Edge is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 02:53 PM
  #16
JCProdigy
Registered User
 
JCProdigy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: I want what I want
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
Well I never begrudge anyone getting as much as he can get for what he can offer in services. Still, no matter what, you have to live within your means and be smart about it. YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO PREPARE FOR UNFORSEEN SETBACKS. And trust me that it is alot easier to do if your making 2.7 mil a year as compared to 30k a year. Savard having to file for bankruptcy shows that he doesn't know how to manage his money and it's his own damn fault. I won't feel sorry for him one bit.

As far as him temporarily losing his job....well I'll feel sorry for the many millions of qualified americans making less then 30k a year (including those in working around the league) who have just lost their jobs recently rather than the millionaires. I'm sorry but you can't convince me that going from 5 mil to 3 mil in annual salary will hurt as much as going from 40k to less then 25k.

JCProdigy is offline  
Old
09-11-2004, 04:02 PM
  #17
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 500
Edge...

I liken this to my business. I work at a small boutique investment bank. We cannot afford to pay the salaries and offer the platform that a Goldman Sachs can offer, but somehow we manage to stay in business. Nobody's out there trying to help us out at all, and we're on our own to compete. If a team cannot make the $$$ necessary to stay in the league, maybe it should be folded or moved, a la the many teams that have moved in the last 30 years.

And yes Edge, unless you're a saint you'd try to get out as much as possible and aren't sitting there saying to yourself, hmmm, I should not take the $8 million contract being offered to me, I should go with the team offering $5 million because it's better for the league. I don't see anybody doing that, and wouldn't expect you or I to do if we were in the position to do so.

And yeah, making a couple million a year less hurts even when you're making millions. Yeah, it means less cars, but if that's what makes the guy happy, then let him be happy. They have every right to make as much money as possible. Noone, I believe, is asking for someone to feel sorry for these guys, and I don't, but I can understand their position. I couldn't imagine working where my salary's capped and the rest go to my owners. My bonus is based on my group's performance, and it's unlimited (sounds like a big word, but just means that there's no cap).

And as mentioned JC...I don't feel sorry, nor do I think anybody's asking to be felt sorry for. Just stating why these guys feel it necessary to fight what quite possibly should be there's.

You'd be amazed what a $100 means to multi-millionaires and even billionaires. I get amazed every time because I'm mostly a generous person when it comes down to money and don't bicker over a lot of numbers. These guys look for the last cent every time, which is why they became so wealthy, in many cases.

Fletch is online now  
Old
09-11-2004, 06:17 PM
  #18
Infensus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 487
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
You're 2.7 million dollars isnt enough a year to live like a $#$#% prince of a small world country.

They obviously deserve much more.

I mean if we're gonna start factoring in kids and stuff.

Sorry but that's gotta be the biggest stretch i've ever seen in my life, even for these boards.
What's the stretch? It was stated that with 2.7 million dollars a person can live very comfortably for their entire lives.

I merely feel that a person can not live very comfortably for an entire life on that amount. You still need to go to work every day and have a job. You are not retiring on that amount of money and if raising a family is stetching things, well, what's your idea of a life?

Besides, I wasn't basing this on 2.7/yr. It was 2.7 total.

Infensus is offline  
Old
09-13-2004, 09:40 AM
  #19
303Joe
Registered User
 
303Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,288
vCash: 500
Here's what bothers me about the whole thing...

besides the fact that 2 sides in a labor dispute cannot figure out how to divide the roughly 2 billion to be made. I'm gonna go on a rant here.
1st lets look at a few news headlines from the last week or so.
1- Over 300 innocent children are killed by rebels in a school.
2- The 1000th soldier is killed in Iraq.
3- Thousands lose their homes in Florida dueto 2 hurricanes.
Then we have these 2 parties who can't figure out how to divide the money the league makes. Do these guuy know what idiots they look like regardless who's side you are on. You have these 2 arrogant idiots who are going to run these league into the ground and possibly destroy the league to the point there is no NHL left.
Each has to make sure the other guy doesn'twin and it doesn't matter at what cost.
It doesn't matter these poor innocent people that work at the NHL offices are going to lsoe their jobs, or the peolple thaty work for each team offices are going to lose job or the ticketstakers and vendors that relyon the few bucks they make atr each game to keep their families going are going to lose the money. Plain and simple both sides do not care about them or the fans. If they would they would not be sitting home while the deadline of 9/15 approaches. When have you ever heard or 2 parties in a labor dispute with the deadline approaching not going into sreious negotiations? This just plain stupid. They have to realize the great sport is not that popular in the US. yes the die hards like myself and most on the board will go back to the games if they ever begin again but the marginal fan in all the areas that the league worked so hard to get over the past 10 ys are not going to go back.
My point of view on the issue I'm siding w/ the Owners on most issues except for the hard cap of 31 million. I don;t mind a hard cap but you have to bring that to a realistic 45-47 million and then have to bring the back end to 32-34. You can;t have the same teams in the 20's. I believe alst year there were only about 3 teams under 31miliion the rest over you can't have all the current contracts be dispersed throughout the league and have the payrolls of all teams under 31 millionthere is just not enough room. There are several teams over 50 if they wanted to get under teh 31 cap the few teams under the 31 couldn;t fit them in let aloncveall the teams in the 40's. If Bettman atleast came in w/ some realistic figures maybe they could start talking. This is just plain stupid that were are not going to have the greatest sport playing atleast a good portion of the year if at all. OK I'm going now as my rant is getting long.

303Joe is offline  
Old
09-13-2004, 10:17 AM
  #20
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
.
But people aren't watching on TV and elsehwere around the league they really aren't willing to pay the price of admission.
People have NEVER watched on TV, and that isn't going to change. It's not as if hockey used to be a popular sport in the US, and now nobody cares.

The vast majority of people and media in the US could give a damn about hockey, and it will alwaysbe that way.

15 of 30 teams last year sold 95+% of tickets

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
09-13-2004, 11:06 AM
  #21
Jackson Ranger
Registered User
 
Jackson Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,571
vCash: 500
I don't know if anyone else has said this but I just received my 'season' tickets which are comprised of two sets of seven tickets. Tickets 1-3 are for the preseason games and 4-7 are for the first four home regular season games.

You think they know something or what?!!!

Jackson Ranger is offline  
Old
09-13-2004, 11:56 AM
  #22
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,044
vCash: 500
Are the dates the same...

on both sets of tickets?

Fletch is online now  
Old
09-13-2004, 03:03 PM
  #23
Jackson Ranger
Registered User
 
Jackson Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 2,571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
on both sets of tickets?
I received two books of tickets because I have two seats. The books have no dates of the games or who they are playing, only R1 thru R7 and my seat location. In other words, generic tickets.

Obviously, the owners are also concerned about the cost of printing tickets for a potential upcoming season.

Jackson Ranger is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.