HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Pittsburgh Penguins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012 CBA & Re-alignment: Lockout in Effect. Thanks Gary/Donald! PART II

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-05-2012, 02:06 AM
  #101
HuskerTornado
RIP UW AlwaysBelieve
 
HuskerTornado's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Parts Unknown
Country: United States
Posts: 12,289
vCash: 500
I'm getting really angry at this point. NHL Network was re-airing the 2012 series with Philly today, watched a bit of game 4, and was realizing that even in a re-run, that was more exciting than anything else I've watched since (the Letang PP goal was a beaut)......and may not see for a very long time because of two sides that will not come to a quick compromise because of short-sighted reasons. They need to stop acting like this stand-off is for some noble cause, sit down and crunch these inevitable numbers down now. The longer this goes on the worse everyone looks for it.

In my opinion, the NHL puts the best product out there night in and night out of all of the sports organizations, yet they are constantly the butt of jokes because of things like this. They have made up some decent ground on the NBA (were neck and neck for a while), and could continue to build on that, but instead we have this **** yet again...Don "Da ******" Fehr needs to get as far away from hockey as possible...his hiring by the PA has a lot to do with why no compromise is being made.

HuskerTornado is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 02:57 AM
  #102
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,411
vCash: 500
Oh the players will budge. Trust me.

Theres a whole lot more of them who will get screwed by this than billionaire owners who, the majority of, are doing this as a business move to make their NHL venture a more (potentially)profitable one.

What they should do is have a head economic guy or girl for the league and one for the players. Sit the players AND owners in one place and let each present thier cases and go from there. Or even 3 to 4 Economists who have no connection with either side state thier cases. Even let them have a point/counter point session in that very meeting. I know it won't happen but thats what should've been done.

SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 08:03 AM
  #103
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaylaJ View Post
What does protesting for one day accomplish? You get one day of media (considering the MLB playoffs are underway, NFL& college football is in their season, and NBA camps have opened that's a maybe) and then what? Don't you think if either side realized that the fans should have a say it wouldn't have gotten to this point?

I know you're upset and you feel like you should do something, but the only way to get both sides to be afraid of losing games isn't thinking one day or one season, you have to think about long term consequences.
It's not about accomplishing anything. Rather it's about making your voice heard. I guess I'm just on different wave lengths than the rest of you. As a fan of the NHL, I feel powerless in this whole thing (and we more or less are). However, we are the reason there is a league and I believe in the power of organizing. I just think it would be nice to see some solidarity among NHL fans that are standing up and saying this isn't acceptable. Will they listen? Not a chance. But if enough people in enough cities stand up, it might sway a few people closer to the issue.

I guess I'd rather do something than nothing and everyone else is just on message boards *****ing so what good does that do? And finally, what does long term consequences mean? The point is that we want to watch NHL hockey. Once the lockout comes back, there isn't a chance in hell fans are going to purposely not watch (unless they were casual hockey fans that turned to other sports). So we either do something now to show hockey fans don't find these lockouts acceptable or we do nothing. Nothing is fine too, I just felt like a protest wouldn't be THAT hard to do.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 09:29 AM
  #104
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
It's not about accomplishing anything. Rather it's about making your voice heard. I guess I'm just on different wave lengths than the rest of you. As a fan of the NHL, I feel powerless in this whole thing (and we more or less are). However, we are the reason there is a league and I believe in the power of organizing. I just think it would be nice to see some solidarity among NHL fans that are standing up and saying this isn't acceptable. Will they listen? Not a chance. But if enough people in enough cities stand up, it might sway a few people closer to the issue.

I guess I'd rather do something than nothing and everyone else is just on message boards *****ing so what good does that do? And finally, what does long term consequences mean? The point is that we want to watch NHL hockey. Once the lockout comes back, there isn't a chance in hell fans are going to purposely not watch (unless they were casual hockey fans that turned to other sports). So we either do something now to show hockey fans don't find these lockouts acceptable or we do nothing. Nothing is fine too, I just felt like a protest wouldn't be THAT hard to do.
Who would you be protesting? It seems obvious to most anyone the protest would mostly be against the NHL and wanting them to end the lockout. But right now they have a financial issue that is much more serious than some people getting ticked off. They have teams like the Penguins where everything is going great for them, sold out building every night and the most marketable star the game has ever seen and still they cannot turn a profit according to published figures at Forbes. That is a serious problem with the system in place and is of much more dire consequence then some people trying to protest.


The real problem is the bulk of the fans don't understand the nuances and think that the owners are just locking players out for a few extra bucks. The owners are trying to combat a dire situation that absolutely requires regression in the salary cap and thus reductions in players share of money in order for the entire health of the league to be ensured. The players are insisting that they have no responsibility for the health of the league, that it's the owners problem only (that is why I never believe players who wont incur any of the losses should be entitled to a majority of the gains). Their solution to the problem is a soft cap system that allows the big money to still be spent by teams like Toronto and NYR and then a luxury tax revenue sharing system similar to baseball.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:00 AM
  #105
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
Who would you be protesting? It seems obvious to most anyone the protest would mostly be against the NHL and wanting them to end the lockout. But right now they have a financial issue that is much more serious than some people getting ticked off. They have teams like the Penguins where everything is going great for them, sold out building every night and the most marketable star the game has ever seen and still they cannot turn a profit according to published figures at Forbes. That is a serious problem with the system in place and is of much more dire consequence then some people trying to protest.


The real problem is the bulk of the fans don't understand the nuances and think that the owners are just locking players out for a few extra bucks. The owners are trying to combat a dire situation that absolutely requires regression in the salary cap and thus reductions in players share of money in order for the entire health of the league to be ensured. The players are insisting that they have no responsibility for the health of the league, that it's the owners problem only (that is why I never believe players who wont incur any of the losses should be entitled to a majority of the gains). Their solution to the problem is a soft cap system that allows the big money to still be spent by teams like Toronto and NYR and then a luxury tax revenue sharing system similar to baseball.
Personally I would be protesting both groups. I know you are very pro owner and it's obvious here you think the health of many of the clubs is in jeopardy. I don't believe for one second that the Penguins aren't a profitable organization. As we have discussed before, there are ways to take accounting losses without real economic losses (as well as different legal entities and ways to not count certain revenue as hockey revenue). However, that's not the point. You are right that the current CBA is not sustainable in the future and if the players get their way it would be far worse for most NHL fans than if the owners get their way.

That said, neither side is willing to actually come to the bargaining table with real offers. Both groups are full of **** right now and are doing more harm to the game through trying to get their way than actually negotiating. My point is that they are taking the fans for granted and we are the lifeline of the league. Such a protest, while unrealistic, would say to both groups "quit being immature and looking out for your own interests. We the fans are tired of going through this every few years and we've had enough. Start taking these negotiations seriously and realize that you are really hurting are the fans. We are tired of being used addressed as pawns in your little game through the media. We've had enough." Something like that. Frankly, the players are pissing me off the most currently as they are trying to make us sympathize with them.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:26 AM
  #106
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
Personally I would be protesting both groups. I know you are very pro owner and it's obvious here you think the health of many of the clubs is in jeopardy. I don't believe for one second that the Penguins aren't a profitable organization. As we have discussed before, there are ways to take accounting losses without real economic losses (as well as different legal entities and ways to not count certain revenue as hockey revenue). However, that's not the point. You are right that the current CBA is not sustainable in the future and if the players get their way it would be far worse for most NHL fans than if the owners get their way.

That said, neither side is willing to actually come to the bargaining table with real offers. Both groups are full of **** right now and are doing more harm to the game through trying to get their way than actually negotiating. My point is that they are taking the fans for granted and we are the lifeline of the league. Such a protest, while unrealistic, would say to both groups "quit being immature and looking out for your own interests. We the fans are tired of going through this every few years and we've had enough. Start taking these negotiations seriously and realize that you are really hurting are the fans. We are tired of being used addressed as pawns in your little game through the media. We've had enough." Something like that. Frankly, the players are pissing me off the most currently as they are trying to make us sympathize with them.
You want to dismiss reported numbers and instead want to believe that other numbers exist that more closely resemble what you want them to. If that doesnt sound a bit wacky to you now that it's been rephrased and sent back then fine. Lets run with it for a bit. Those supposedly non legit numbers that Forbes has shows that some teams like Toronto are basically swimming in money. Ask yourself this, the pens have had a sellout streak for years now, they have huge merchandise sales and a rabid fanbase. There really is nothing more a franchise can do than what the Penguins have to be as financially successful as possible, it's basically only downhill from here as you can't have a generational talent/marketers dream forever. Yet the penguins according to those numbers which also show the very big leafs gain have a neutral/negative balance sheet. That should put up red flags to you that perhaps the pens arent doing so hot.

If you are to take your claim that the numbers are fudged then you'd have to apply them to all teams and the leafs have a 70 million dollar a year advantage on the penguins currently and thats with a crappy leafs team with no marketable stars on it and a penguins team that has everything going right for them. That swing will only get much much larger.

Also, what makes you think the players for a second give a flying crap about the fans? They have no long term interest in the NHL, they only care about the short term. Any protest (and most protests are a stupid waste of time) would only serve to be considered against the NHL and not "both sides" as you would like to put it.

How can you get "both sides" to come to the table when one side has zero interest in negotiating? The Players side has not budged at all from them wanting to retain their current 57% of revenues. The NHL side has moved from their figures. This all even makes more sense when you realize who is in charge for the players and how he typically operates in these scenarios. He was never meant to be a good faith negotiator. The sad thing is some fans have been hoodwinked into believing he was/is. I say this with little doubt in my mind, Donald Fehr will gladly scrap a season or more to get his way. He will not cave, the only way at all a possible result in which us fans get hockey and retain a fixed salary cap with no advantage to big market teams is if the players fire Donald Fehr. They won't fire him till they've been out of work long enough for it to sting so that'll at least take a full season.

Those wishing for hockey to be back and looking for something to protest, post on players facebook or twitter or whatever and tell them to dump their union head. In the end that would be the one solid thing they could do. If they had a reasonable person leading them then they could come to an arrangement where they are having their currently salary rates protected but still taking a step down in total % of revenue over time. It is what needs to be done for the health of the league but under Fehr it won't happen at all.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:28 AM
  #107
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,398
vCash: 500
Neither side is actually negotiating. You can continue to blame it all on the players and that's fine. I'd rather say that neither side is actually willing to come to the table with a reasonable offer.

"The NHL side has moved from their figures" is a load of crap. They moved from ridiculously unreasonable figures to just unreasonable figures. I agree it's the players turn but neither side is actually willing to have a real discussion on the issues.

For example, and I can't remember where I read this, the players will ask questions like "how will this increase in revenue help the bottom line of all clubs?" or some variation of that. They want to understand how any move they actually make will help the teams they are actually hurting (unlike the Leafs). The owners really don't address the question. Now you can say that's just posturing and the players really don't care, but they are still entitled to understand how any changes made actually benefit the lesser clubs. So, in my opinion, neither side actually wants to face the real facts. Revenue sharing absolutely needs to increase in step with any decrease the players take.

Anyway, at the end of the day, neither side give a **** about the fans. They only care about $$ signs. I'm not sure how you can say the players don't give a **** without also addressing that the owners could care less too. My point, however, is that we need to show them that we care. You, and everyone else hating on a protest, can say it won't work but what else do we have other than our voices? If we want to use social media then fine that works too.

Edit: Also, to your number fudging thing, it's not really fudging. It's just understanding the difference between accounting income and economic income. I would bet the Leafs are making more than 70 mil a year under that scenario.


Last edited by Shady Machine: 10-05-2012 at 10:38 AM.
Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:59 AM
  #108
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
Neither side is actually negotiating. You can continue to blame it all on the players and that's fine. I'd rather say that neither side is actually willing to come to the table with a reasonable offer.

"The NHL side has moved from their figures" is a load of crap. They moved from ridiculously unreasonable figures to just unreasonable figures. I agree it's the players turn but neither side is actually willing to have a real discussion on the issues.

For example, and I can't remember where I read this, the players will ask questions like "how will this increase in revenue help the bottom line of all clubs?" or some variation of that. They want to understand how any move they actually make will help the teams they are actually hurting (unlike the Leafs). The owners really don't address the question. Now you can say that's just posturing and the players really don't care, but they are still entitled to understand how any changes made actually benefit the lesser clubs. So, in my opinion, neither side actually wants to face the real facts. Revenue sharing absolutely needs to increase in step with any decrease the players take.

Anyway, at the end of the day, neither side give a **** about the fans. They only care about $$ signs. I'm not sure how you can say the players don't give a **** without also addressing that the owners could care less too. My point, however, is that we need to show them that we care. You, and everyone else hating on a protest, can say it won't work but what else do we have other than our voices? If we want to use social media then fine that works too.

Edit: Also, to your number fudging thing, it's not really fudging. It's just understanding the difference between accounting income and economic income. I would bet the Leafs are making more than 70 mil a year under that scenario.
Hold on, why is the owners second offer unreasonable? Because it asks the players % of revenue to be in the line of other professional sports?

So taking your assumption that the leafs are making more than a 70 mill a year profit, I am not talking about that I am talking about the swing, the difference in revenues between the Leafs and the Penguins.

Also, you bring up revenue sharing, when 2/3rds of the teams are not making a profit and the few that are only a select few are making enough to even be worthwhile to "tax" them for revenue sharing, the money just isnt there. I know you want to believe that the real announced numbers are all fake and that your pretend fairy land numbers that mean whatever you want them to mean are real but I'd imagine financial pros that do this for a living know a little something about accounting and wouldnt be so quick to publish total bullcrap numbers as you suspect. Also, when your entire argument is based on mythical fake numbers it's sort of difficult to take it seriously.

With your romanticism about protests and social media and accusations that someone who is supposed to represent the league doesnt care about the success and long term product of what they sell but only about immediate $$ is sort of juvenile. They do own their product, they will be around for 20+ years so they do look long term when they undergo something like this. Players don't own the product, as we see they have no problem simply going overseas to play hockey to get a paycheck. They have no interest whatsoever in the NHL being a competitive product where all teams are on equal footing. Their interests lie in simply how much money they can make while they are at their peak earning years. If you can rationally come to that conclusion then you can at least see that there are going to be clashes during negotiations and the two sides arent going to meet up evenly. There wont be meeting up for a compromise when the other side has their interests in a completely different direction.

How do you compromise and negotiate with a side that has zero interest in doing those things?

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 11:29 AM
  #109
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch View Post
Hold on, why is the owners second offer unreasonable? Because it asks the players % of revenue to be in the line of other professional sports?

So taking your assumption that the leafs are making more than a 70 mill a year profit, I am not talking about that I am talking about the swing, the difference in revenues between the Leafs and the Penguins.

Also, you bring up revenue sharing, when 2/3rds of the teams are not making a profit and the few that are only a select few are making enough to even be worthwhile to "tax" them for revenue sharing, the money just isnt there. I know you want to believe that the real announced numbers are all fake and that your pretend fairy land numbers that mean whatever you want them to mean are real but I'd imagine financial pros that do this for a living know a little something about accounting and wouldnt be so quick to publish total bullcrap numbers as you suspect. Also, when your entire argument is based on mythical fake numbers it's sort of difficult to take it seriously.

With your romanticism about protests and social media and accusations that someone who is supposed to represent the league doesnt care about the success and long term product of what they sell but only about immediate $$ is sort of juvenile. They do own their product, they will be around for 20+ years so they do look long term when they undergo something like this. Players don't own the product, as we see they have no problem simply going overseas to play hockey to get a paycheck. They have no interest whatsoever in the NHL being a competitive product where all teams are on equal footing. Their interests lie in simply how much money they can make while they are at their peak earning years. If you can rationally come to that conclusion then you can at least see that there are going to be clashes during negotiations and the two sides arent going to meet up evenly. There wont be meeting up for a compromise when the other side has their interests in a completely different direction.

How do you compromise and negotiate with a side that has zero interest in doing those things?
Well the owners last offer was "this is only on the table to try to get a deal done and we will pull off of it after the lockout" so in that sense, it was unreasonable. A reasonable offer to me is a 50/50 split in revenue, increased revenue sharing, and the revenue split would scale down over time. It would drop to 54.5, 52, and then 50 in year 3. I know the owners won't and shouldn't propose that. I'm just giving you an idea of the deal I hope they settle on so you can see where I'm coming from. So in the sense that the owners "try to get a deal done now" offer was 47% player share and immediate decrease to that %, then yeah I'd call that unreasonable.

Also, to your point that you are talking about the disparity of revenue between the Leafs and Pens, how in the world do you think a deal from the owners will actually decrease the disparity? Some teams will make more money no doubt, but the rich will get richer in step or likely increase that disparity. So that's why better revenue sharing is necessary. The owners currently aren't willing to actually discuss this option because they want to take from the players (which they should but just because they can).

The owners are looking out for their pocketbooks and for you to think they actually care about the game is just as juvenile as my desire to protest. The reason they want to cut the players' share is because they want to make more money, not out of some selfless desire to grow the game of hockey. The fact that improving the health of the league helps their pocketbook and the value of their investment is correlated to their motives, but it is far from the major reason.

Anyway, I prefer to have a balanced approach when it comes to placing blame. The players deserve more of the blame in their unwillingness to negotiate but neither side is innocent here. You seem willing to sling all the mud in the players direction.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 12:48 PM
  #110
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 32,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post

Also, to your point that you are talking about the disparity of revenue between the Leafs and Pens, how in the world do you think a deal from the owners will actually decrease the disparity? Some teams will make more money no doubt, but the rich will get richer in step or likely increase that disparity. So that's why better revenue sharing is necessary. The owners currently aren't willing to actually discuss this option because they want to take from the players (which they should but just because they can).
As long as the cap is firmly in place, it doesn't matter if the rich get richer as far as competitive balance goes. Anything they make beyond Enough to Spend to the Cap is irrelevant in that sense. That's assuming they close loopholes like front loaded contracts and the like I guess.

Ogrezilla is online now  
Old
10-05-2012, 01:47 PM
  #111
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
As long as the cap is firmly in place, it doesn't matter if the rich get richer as far as competitive balance goes. Anything they make beyond Enough to Spend to the Cap is irrelevant in that sense. That's assuming they close loopholes like front loaded contracts and the like I guess.
Correct. As long as the loopholes for front loaded deals and eating contracts by sending players to the minors or Europe is gone then I agree. My point was more to the financial viability of the franchises. Gooch was arguing that even if the teams are doing better financially than the Forbes numbers, which he denies, the disparity between the Leafs and the Penguins is still huge. I agree with that assertion. I just don't see how any decrease in the players' share does anything to decrease that disparity. Frankly I don't care, so long as teams aren't losing money and can afford to put a competitive product on the ice.

So really, I was discussing a technicality that doesn't really matter in the scheme of things.

Shady Machine is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 01:58 PM
  #112
Gallatin
A Banksy of Goonism
 
Gallatin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Shady Machine;54784097]Well the owners last offer was "this is only on the table to try to get a deal done and we will pull off of it after the lockout" so in that sense, it was unreasonable. A reasonable offer to me is a 50/50 split in revenue, increased revenue sharing, and the revenue split would scale down over time. It would drop to 54.5, 52, and then 50 in year 3. I know the owners won't and shouldn't propose that. I'm just giving you an idea of the deal I hope they settle on so you can see where I'm coming from. So in the sense that the owners "try to get a deal done now" offer was 47% player share and immediate decrease to that %, then yeah I'd call that unreasonable.

Shady - you should consider brushing up on basic negotiation tactics and sports management history.

Moving to 47% for players and the elimination of redefining HHR, was a an "olive branch" negotiation move at this point in the process when you are up against a Bulldog like Fehr. And Fehr basically scorned it. Fehr refuses to even negotiate the same system. They offered up 25% of their original offer, which is simply what the players have been getting, and basically got nothing back from the Union. It's clear as day 50/50 is there to be had by the NHLPA, but they aren't interested at this point.

You can't continue to negotiate against yourself in a situation like this. Fehr is not ready to negotiate in good faith. He will only do so, when he feels the NHL is under loads of pressure and likely to concede, or is ordered to do so by his membership. We are at minimum 4 weeks away from Fehr getting serious, if not months away. The early days of February, just before the league canceled the season last time, may be his actual target for getting serious.

I agree it's obvious what should happen here; 50/50 split with no cap growth until we get there, and a guaranteed give back by the players via escrow if minimal or negative growth occurs over the first several years of the contract. The PA, in return for agreeing to this deal, then get the NHL to adopt an NBA model revenue sharing program among the teams, which would be truly revolutionary for this sport, and solve many long-term issues, as well as being the right thing to do.

That's the win/win for everyone IMO, and clear-as-day there to be had. Unfortunately it ain't happening any time soon due to Fehr's unwillingness to truly negotiate right now. If he was ready, they would already be negotiating through Mediation, but he won't go there just yet.

I really can't stand Fehr, but I respect the h$ll out of him as a negotiating opponent. If he is actually willing to go 50/50, which he may not actually be, he will get an NBA Style Revenue Sharing System amongst the teams for it. That is my belief.

Gallatin is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 03:10 PM
  #113
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,960
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
As long as the cap is firmly in place, it doesn't matter if the rich get richer as far as competitive balance goes. Anything they make beyond Enough to Spend to the Cap is irrelevant in that sense. That's assuming they close loopholes like front loaded contracts and the like I guess.
Yep, I was just putting that out there to show that if there ever is a system like the players want we're screwed because even in our best situation and Toronto's worst we're still miles behind them fiscally.

People need to understand the players solution is a soft cap not the hard cap system we have now. So pointing out the disparity that we have is very relevant when it comes to shooting down why it would be disastrous for the players to have their way.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 03:21 PM
  #114
Gooch
Registered User
 
Gooch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Coeur d'Alene Idaho
Country: United States
Posts: 13,960
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Gallatin;54787477]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
Well the owners last offer was "this is only on the table to try to get a deal done and we will pull off of it after the lockout" so in that sense, it was unreasonable. A reasonable offer to me is a 50/50 split in revenue, increased revenue sharing, and the revenue split would scale down over time. It would drop to 54.5, 52, and then 50 in year 3. I know the owners won't and shouldn't propose that. I'm just giving you an idea of the deal I hope they settle on so you can see where I'm coming from. So in the sense that the owners "try to get a deal done now" offer was 47% player share and immediate decrease to that %, then yeah I'd call that unreasonable.

Shady - you should consider brushing up on basic negotiation tactics and sports management history.

Moving to 47% for players and the elimination of redefining HHR, was a an "olive branch" negotiation move at this point in the process when you are up against a Bulldog like Fehr. And Fehr basically scorned it. Fehr refuses to even negotiate the same system. They offered up 25% of their original offer, which is simply what the players have been getting, and basically got nothing back from the Union. It's clear as day 50/50 is there to be had by the NHLPA, but they aren't interested at this point.

You can't continue to negotiate against yourself in a situation like this. Fehr is not ready to negotiate in good faith. He will only do so, when he feels the NHL is under loads of pressure and likely to concede, or is ordered to do so by his membership. We are at minimum 4 weeks away from Fehr getting serious, if not months away. The early days of February, just before the league canceled the season last time, may be his actual target for getting serious.

I agree it's obvious what should happen here; 50/50 split with no cap growth until we get there, and a guaranteed give back by the players via escrow if minimal or negative growth occurs over the first several years of the contract. The PA, in return for agreeing to this deal, then get the NHL to adopt an NBA model revenue sharing program among the teams, which would be truly revolutionary for this sport, and solve many long-term issues, as well as being the right thing to do.

That's the win/win for everyone IMO, and clear-as-day there to be had. Unfortunately it ain't happening any time soon due to Fehr's unwillingness to truly negotiate right now. If he was ready, they would already be negotiating through Mediation, but he won't go there just yet.

I really can't stand Fehr, but I respect the h$ll out of him as a negotiating opponent. If he is actually willing to go 50/50, which he may not actually be, he will get an NBA Style Revenue Sharing System amongst the teams for it. That is my belief.
I really get why people are suspicious of financial numbers out there by Forbes but right now it's legitimately all we can go on. Going by that information I don't see how even revenue sharing would work when theres just so few teams even making substantial money. We're talking like maybe 5 teams cranking in enough money to where they could "share" that with others. With only 5 out of 30 paying in that just wont cut it. We can speculate that those numbers arent accurate but until then it's just that, speculation and the only evidence we actually have is one that shows there really is no financial grounds for revenue sharing under this current batch of expenditures.

Another thing to point out is those forbes numbers were before debt expenses, meaning those numbers are actually even worse once debt payments and interest on that debt is factored in. There can be a very real argument that the real financial numbers could be worse as much as they could be better due to that.

I don't find it too far fetched that teams could be losing money. For one, hockey while popular with us isnt all that so with the population. The local tv rights deals go for substantially less than baseball or basketball teams. The merchandise sales are also less than those two. The building houses less than half the amount of fans that a baseball stadium holds as well as much fewer home games to draw upon. Theres very real and rising travel expenses, especially for western conference teams. Payrolls are approaching mid 60 mill which is around what a lot of mid market baseball teams put out there on the field despite having much higher levels of income than hockey does. So I'd love for those who insist these hockey teams are rolling in it if they could think about it for the moment that many of these hockey teams are sporting more expensive rosters than the local MLB teams despite not having their tv deals, and larger stadium and lower traveling expenses.

Gooch is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 04:18 PM
  #115
Gallatin
A Banksy of Goonism
 
Gallatin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Gooch;54789433]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallatin View Post

I really get why people are suspicious of financial numbers out there by Forbes but right now it's legitimately all we can go on. Going by that information I don't see how even revenue sharing would work when theres just so few teams even making substantial money. We're talking like maybe 5 teams cranking in enough money to where they could "share" that with others. With only 5 out of 30 paying in that just wont cut it. We can speculate that those numbers arent accurate but until then it's just that, speculation and the only evidence we actually have is one that shows there really is no financial grounds for revenue sharing under this current batch of expenditures.

Another thing to point out is those forbes numbers were before debt expenses, meaning those numbers are actually even worse once debt payments and interest on that debt is factored in. There can be a very real argument that the real financial numbers could be worse as much as they could be better due to that.

I don't find it too far fetched that teams could be losing money. For one, hockey while popular with us isnt all that so with the population. The local tv rights deals go for substantially less than baseball or basketball teams. The merchandise sales are also less than those two. The building houses less than half the amount of fans that a baseball stadium holds as well as much fewer home games to draw upon. Theres very real and rising travel expenses, especially for western conference teams. Payrolls are approaching mid 60 mill which is around what a lot of mid market baseball teams put out there on the field despite having much higher levels of income than hockey does. So I'd love for those who insist these hockey teams are rolling in it if they could think about it for the moment that many of these hockey teams are sporting more expensive rosters than the local MLB teams despite not having their tv deals, and larger stadium and lower traveling expenses.
Great point Gooch. Seems like the Pirates have been talking about getting to that "magical" 60 million dollar payroll for years....

Gallatin is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 06:04 PM
  #116
KaylaJ
Tungsten!
 
KaylaJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: hell
Country: United States
Posts: 14,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
It's not about accomplishing anything. Rather it's about making your voice heard. I guess I'm just on different wave lengths than the rest of you. As a fan of the NHL, I feel powerless in this whole thing (and we more or less are). However, we are the reason there is a league and I believe in the power of organizing. I just think it would be nice to see some solidarity among NHL fans that are standing up and saying this isn't acceptable. Will they listen? Not a chance. But if enough people in enough cities stand up, it might sway a few people closer to the issue.

I guess I'd rather do something than nothing and everyone else is just on message boards *****ing so what good does that do? And finally, what does long term consequences mean? The point is that we want to watch NHL hockey. Once the lockout comes back, there isn't a chance in hell fans are going to purposely not watch (unless they were casual hockey fans that turned to other sports). So we either do something now to show hockey fans don't find these lockouts acceptable or we do nothing. Nothing is fine too, I just felt like a protest wouldn't be THAT hard to do.
No, a protest probably wouldn't be that hard to do, but if you don't have a long term plan, what is the point? I've said all along the NHL & PA are not afraid of a lockout and that is the biggest reason we are here. And why are they not afraid? Because fans like us. I know people want to squirm and say "hey, we're just innocent spectators here!", but as long as we come back in droves and eventually buy their overpriced merchandise they won't be afraid of using us as bargaining chips in the future. Go ahead, make your voice known (even though they already know, they don't care, and nothing will change), but in 5-6 years you'll probably just be used in a PA promotional video about #thefans


Also, I'm an NBA fan and went through this last season. No boycotts, protests, or hashtags on social media brought basketball back. It was those in the room who decided that compromise was the best interest for the people involved (notice how I didn't say the sport or the fans). It sucks not having a voice, but we never did and until we're willing to walk away, we never will.


Last edited by KaylaJ: 10-05-2012 at 06:18 PM.
KaylaJ is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 07:27 PM
  #117
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,411
vCash: 500
The crazy thing is, theres players who say they see this lasting even longer than a year. Thats a very scary thing.

They could solve this quicker if both sides, especially the players knew the actual financials of the league(each teams). That would certainly point this in the right direction. Everything i've heard tells me Fehr is telling the players the league is well off, with "record profits/revenues" and the players see it as owners just wanting more money on top of the piles they are raking in already, which just isn't the case.

The bottom line is, as a player, you're going to still get paid alot of money to play a game you love but they need to understand that they've been getting paid too much to sustain a healthy league.

I get that they can be a little peeved about the Phoenix situation and owners throwing around these large contracts but get over it. Take it as free money that you really should never have gotten in the first place. Owners were just trying to compete with the rest in the marketplace.

The frustrating part of all of this, is the PA side are fooled into thinking something that just isn't reality. That this is a healthy league with many owners making money hand over fist. They hired Fehr thinking the league would try and take them to the cleaners when the league is just trying to create a more sustainable business for it's owners.

A league that relies on taking money from the rich and distributing to the poor, just so the poor can stay afloat year after year EVEN if the poor have competitive teams, isn't a league thats gonna sustain itself in the long term. And theres a whole lot more poor than rich.


Last edited by SidTheKid8787: 10-05-2012 at 07:53 PM.
SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:11 PM
  #118
Fordy
the kid signify
 
Fordy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 13,524
vCash: 500
At the same time everyone in here is dying alive, the Business forum seems certain that things could be wrapped up soon.

Fordy is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:14 PM
  #119
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 32,558
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordy View Post
At the same time everyone in here is dying alive, the Business forum seems certain that things could be wrapped up soon.
the talks today sound like they addressed the fact that the positions both were at were just plain not going to work and they both need to regroup and sort of try again. Thats at least something.

Ogrezilla is online now  
Old
10-05-2012, 10:38 PM
  #120
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,493
vCash: 500
I think too many fans are letting Bettman's help to this franchise get in the way of their evaluation of this situation and the prior lockouts. Here's one reason you ought not assume all the owners are on the same page and Gary is just their spokesman. I think Boyle is pretty much on the money. There are certain powerful owners that want a money grab and want to give up nothing, and they'll dictate the course of the negotiations because of the stupid 8 member veto rule, which should be more like 12 or 14.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=406814

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 11:59 PM
  #121
KaylaJ
Tungsten!
 
KaylaJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: hell
Country: United States
Posts: 14,428
vCash: 500
I have a hard time believing Boyle is so in tune with what the owners are thinking and believe his comments are nothing but PR spin. The only people I've heard from that say the owners are cracking are from the PA side of things.


I do not recall who's tweet it was, maybe Bob McKenzie but someone said a player told him they believe only 8 owners were hardliners on the lockout, but a source on the NHL side told him it was opposite. Even Walsh right now is spouting off how he has "facts" on only 8-10 owners who supposedly oppose the lockout.




And for what it is worth, both Bettman & Fehr spoke to the Globe & Mail today:

Fehr:

Bettman


With Bettman, Daly, (who have to also deal with sponsors) and Alzner having all talked about compromise today, it seems both sides know what the end is, but want the other side to bite the bullet and do it first.


Last edited by KaylaJ: 10-06-2012 at 02:07 AM.
KaylaJ is offline  
Old
10-06-2012, 04:07 AM
  #122
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,411
vCash: 500
Yea, when i posted above, all i heard was a blurb on twitter about a non-announced meeting. Since then i've went and read about what the key players were saying today or more importantly, what they didn't say today.

Alzner's words were exactly what i wanted to hear coming from someone on the PA side.

I know it may take a few days to draw up a solid proposal but let's freakin' go. Fly your families in and have turkey at a restaurant if need be.

SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
10-07-2012, 03:29 PM
  #123
Darth Vitale
Moderator
Transitional Period
 
Darth Vitale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Victoryville
Country: United States
Posts: 25,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaylaJ View Post

And for what it is worth, both Bettman & Fehr spoke to the Globe & Mail today:

Fehr:
Good stuff. You might be right about Boyle but it wouldn't surprise me if there were two distinct camps of owners: those well enough off to side with the big whigs, and those who get their butts kicked every year that want better revenue sharing.

Darth Vitale is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 11:39 AM
  #124
Nitti*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 24
vCash: 500
Why isn't nhl live on the nhl network Is it because of the lockout?

Nitti* is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 05:01 PM
  #125
OnMyOwn
Extremist
 
OnMyOwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: State College
Country: United States
Posts: 8,825
vCash: 500
So where's this mediator they were supposed to be using now? If you can't figure it out, someone has to do it for you.

OnMyOwn 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 06:26 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.