Was listening to Doug McLean on fan590 and he commented a bit on the columbus situation with preseason games... basically he said that unless a team can get away with including preseason tickets into the season package... they dont make money in preseason
so that 100 mill number... is a league number and is being earned by the same teams that earn money in the regular season too. Its not really the league that just lost 100 million dollars of potential profits since they would have to pay expenses from this 'revenues' anyhow and for most teams expenses outweigh the revenues...
the only people that lost money are the guys that are trying to get 57% of this money counted towards their share of the pie. Doug Mclean didnt say this specifically, but that's what this story boils down too.
And the owners arent stupid... if 100 million lost revenues actually meant 100 million lost profits then theyd settle this lockout in a nano second... but IT DOESNT! 100 million in revenues is only profitable to a small number of them and is actually a huge loss to the majority of them. This is why there is a lockout and hard negotiations going on. Its difficult maybe to get the players to understand when the term revenue keeps getting tossed around as if its the same thing as profit. I know the players dont trust the owner's words.. so the owners cant really use the term profit...
but the players should realize their salary is directly tied to total revenues for the year... thats what the whole percentage thing is all about. The owners actually might be better off chopping the season off a couple months. At least most of them will be better off. The players are already hurt more then they will recover from and additional time off will only hurt them more.
Not that an average salary of nearly 2 mill a year is hurting... hell even minimum salary is way more money then these guys would make from any other job they can get. I suppose a new league would pop up if the current NHL ceased to exist... but would they find 30 billionares willing to lose this much money just to run some pro hockey teams? If running profitable NHL hockey teams was so easy... the union should just go co-op and run their own teams. The reality is that without HUGE GOVERMENT SUBSIDIES from the taxpayers, very few teams can stay in business.
So i still think that is where the real issue should be here. I dont say the owners deserve the 3-5-7% extra revenues they are fighting the players over. We know theyd gladly spend it stupidly on the players anyhow. The money should be taken and put into a fund that will let us taxpayers off the hook when thinks like new buildings are getting built to jack the revenues for all these guys to begin with.
in fact if i was a mediator id probably tell them both they get like 45% of revenues to live on and the extra 10% goes to an adminstered fund that is for 'the good of the game' and will be used to make poor markets stable thus protecting jobs and protecting the fans of those poor markets and even protecting the owners of those poor markets.
The rich owners obviously dont need protection and neither do fulltime employed players that have a minimum salary close to a million dollars a year.
I guess I had too much faith in the people that run this league, on both sides.
If this thing really drags out and ends with missed games it would be a monumentally stupid, self-inflicted wound.
I really ****ing hate the NHL sometimes.
I'll spend some money on BU games the next couple of years instead.
Well when they were only meeting for 2 or 3 days a week since august i figured this thing was gonna drag out. Both sides are trying to leverage each other and have a nice big richard measuring contest. Its time to their pieces away.. split **** 50/50 and call it a win and play some ****ing hockey.
Never agreed with anyone's assumption yesterday was going to be the announcement for cancelled games. Mine was/is tomorrow.
I'm guessing the first two weeks gets cancelled around 4 pm tomorrow.
Still doesn't mean they can't get a full 82 games in if they agree before then. Cancel all-star break, condense a little here and a little there.
Just another way the NHL puts pressure on the union. Unfortunately, has to happen for things to get serious
I think its been mentioned before but any possibility of a late start but still a full 82 but the playoffs starting near the end of april. know it would push everything back but would both sides be against it? i'm sure the players would just incase they went deep in the playoffs.
Don't really care anymore...if they play any games at all I would call it an upset. Another season with an asterik.
If they could play around the 66 that the NBA played last year then no asterisk from me. I'm hopeful they still can get it figured out at some point soon, but I know it's very wishful thinking. So brutal they only got seven seasons in.
120M in player salaries lost in the cancelled games.
Pretty brutal.. still don't see a solution anytime soon. No matter how much money is lost on either side we all know now that both sides are too proud to admit which side is wrong or right and they won't get over themselves anytime soon.
I honestly thought that the league and NHLPA would not allow this to happen again. Figured that they had learned their lesson with much the game suffered after the last lock out. I know that the NHL has had a lot of success in the last 3-4 years, but this is a massive set back and I fear that it will hurt the league much more than the last lock out did. I am quite disappointed in both sides.