HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NHL and NHLPA having problems

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-16-2011, 11:31 PM
  #26
knorthern knight
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,873
vCash: 337
Didn't Glendale shell out the previous year as well? That would make it 57% of $50 million = $28.5 million over 2 years.

knorthern knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-16-2011, 11:34 PM
  #27
OttawaRoughRiderFan
Make It 30!!!!
 
OttawaRoughRiderFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Niagara
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
Didn't Glendale shell out the previous year as well? That would make it 57% of $50 million = $28.5 million over 2 years.
Yup.

OttawaRoughRiderFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-17-2011, 12:13 AM
  #28
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Real math or the funny bean-counting kinda math?
57% of potentially $25M if the NHLPA presses its point is more than just a few beans.
Maybe even buy yourself an Estate Plantation on the Big Island with change leftover...


Last edited by Killion: 10-17-2011 at 12:27 AM.
Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-17-2011, 12:17 AM
  #29
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
Didn't Glendale shell out the previous year as well? That would make it 57% of $50 million = $28.5 million over 2 years.
Since the NHLPA did not contest the previous season's ('09-'10) Final HRR Report, submitted by the Independent Accountants in Sept '10, and signed off on the distribution of escrow funds, the NHLPA no longer has any recourse to claim any of the $25M CoG subsidy from that year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBA Article 50.13(b)
(b) In the event that either party challenges the Initial, Interim or Final HRR
Report, a proceeding must be commenced within fifteen (15) days following delivery of
such HRR Report. A party's failure to commence a proceeding within fifteen (15) days
shall forever bar that party from asserting or seeking relief of any kind for any such
dispute or claim.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-17-2011, 12:36 AM
  #30
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Since the NHLPA did not contest the previous season's ('09-'10) Final HRR Report, submitted by the Independent Accountants in Sept '10, and signed off on the distribution of escrow funds, the NHLPA no longer has any recourse to claim any of the $25M CoG subsidy from that year.
Do you think the NHLPA would agree to the appointment of Richard Bloch
to Arbitrate this dispute kdb?. Did a wonderful job on the Kovalchuk case...

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-17-2011, 06:39 AM
  #31
Fourier
Registered User
 
Fourier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Waterloo Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The only issue I see is differentiating monies paid to the team for team expenses and money paid to the arena operator for arena expenses.

If the CoG subsidy were truly just for reimbursement of arena operating costs, the NHL might have an argument - however, IIRC, the $25M subsidy agreement defined reimbursable expenses very broadly, including some costs directly related to the teams operation. The NHL could have an argument, though, that out of the $25 subsidy only a portion went to team operations which would be included in HRR - and that the balance which legitimately went to arena expenses should be excluded.
Good point!

Fourier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-17-2011, 11:11 AM
  #32
Tinalera
Registered User
 
Tinalera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Known Universe
Posts: 6,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
Since the NHLPA did not contest the previous season's ('09-'10) Final HRR Report, submitted by the Independent Accountants in Sept '10, and signed off on the distribution of escrow funds, the NHLPA no longer has any recourse to claim any of the $25M CoG subsidy from that year.
So I'm guessing that the NHLPA will probably contest the 10-11 HRR report then?

Tinalera is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-17-2011, 10:49 PM
  #33
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,493
vCash: 500
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hocke...Top+Stories%29

Allen on situation. Not only holding up escrow refund to players, but also team revenue sharing checks.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 03:45 PM
  #34
hatterson
Global Moderator
 
hatterson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,560
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to hatterson
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Why do you think it's an indication of how Fehr would run things? If anything is spent on players, it counts against their share. If the league receives money to run a team, why isn't that considered as money on their plus side of the column?


According the cited article, the NHL is holding up the disbursement of refunds for last year since the accounting cannot be closed--- per Daly's reference to the CBA that it must be closed before disbursement can happen.

I don't see Fehr really being out of line.
It isn't really a case of Fehr being out of line or not. It's just that in the past the NHL and NHLPA have always been able to come to an agreement without arbitration. In this case Fehr seems to want to push much harder than his predecessors.

Again, that's not wrong of him to do, but it does go to show that the NHLPA won't be any kind of a pushover in the new negotiations. Fehr obviously has a history of fighting hard for anything he believes the players should have and this shows he hasn't changed one bit.

hatterson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-18-2011, 04:43 PM
  #35
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevyD View Post
I have no problem with a strike if it is necessary.

I want to see the NHLPA put pressure on the BoG to back teams in areas where they are wanted and where they will produce revenue to benefit BOTH sides instead of the crazy dream of U.S. southern expansion.
I know that the common line is that money is all that matters, however I highly doubt this would happen.

There are plenty of players living in Raleigh, south Florida, Nashville, Dallas, etc who absolutely LOVE living there. It's a significant difference making $30m in the south than it is making the same money in NYC. I know there are at least a few players who continued to live in Raleigh post-retirement. A resolution on the players part to put pressure on would never pass.

In addition, why would a market like Edmonton or Buffalo (despite the owner's deep pockets) want to eliminate the teams that keep the midpoint down?

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 08:15 AM.

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.