HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The lockout thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-18-2012, 10:40 AM
  #526
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
Thank you for explaining to me the difference between revenues and net profit, because I was indeed not aware. It is quite obvious that the NHL made a profit last year. I am unable to find the exact number, but one can assume it was substantial. Thus, what the real issue in all of this is the net distribution of those profits among the other owners. Otherwise, it really is just greed isn't it? A group of Billionaires crying foul. Again, I reiterate, how can anyone support multi-billionaire league owners over farm boys and middle class kids who fought their way to make it. Does not make much sense to me.
Yeah it is greed. Greed from the players, greed from have owners and greed from the have nots.

How do you know where the NHL owners came from? Are you making an assumption they were born into wealth or something? Secondly, it is THEIR money and THEIR business. Do you dictate what you will get paid to your boss? The players are very lucky to have a union and be part of the process of negotiating their pay. You can call it greed or whatever you want but if you develop a very profitable business and a partner in your business is bleeding money and another is asking to take more of your profit, why would you want to throw money at a sinking ship?

The bottom line is until they all see themselves as partners, they aren't going to reach a deal. But blaming one side or the other is ridiculous because they are all part of the problem. And yeah, the owners and players are both greedy. If it weren't about money, they would be playing hockey right now.

Buddy The Elf is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 10:41 AM
  #527
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
Thank you for explaining to me the difference between revenues and net profit, because I was indeed not aware. It is quite obvious that the NHL made a profit last year. I am unable to find the exact number, but one can assume it was substantial. Thus, what the real issue in all of this is the net distribution of those profits among the other owners. Otherwise, it really is just greed isn't it? A group of Billionaires crying foul. Again, I reiterate, how can anyone support multi-billionaire league owners over farm boys and middle class kids who fought their way to make it. Does not make much sense to me.
A lot of that has to do with, people have never ran anything in their life(small company).

Not all NHL owners are turning a profit. That is not hard to see.

And not all NHL owners are billionaires. Not all Owners should take a loss just because they bought a sports team.

The top end owners should not have to prop up the low end owners.

The NHL does not have a Billion Dollar T.V. contract to subsidize Loser franchises (like the NFL).

So the NHL has to keep costs under control (that would be player salary). Even at a 7 percent rollback the average NHL salary would be........Six figures.

It's really not that hard to understand why Owners want a 50/50 split.

damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 10:42 AM
  #528
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
Yeah it is greed. Greed from the players, greed from have owners and greed from the have nots.

How do you know where the NHL owners came from? Are you making an assumption they were born into wealth or something? Secondly, it is THEIR money and THEIR business. Do you dictate what you will get paid to your boss? The players are very lucky to have a union and be part of the process of negotiating their pay. You can call it greed or whatever you want but if you develop a very profitable business and a partner in your business is bleeding money and another is asking to take more of your profit, why would you want to throw money at a sinking ship?

The bottom line is until they all see themselves as partners, they aren't going to reach a deal. But blaming one side or the other is ridiculous because they are all part of the problem. And yeah, the owners and players are both greedy. If it weren't about money, they would be playing hockey right now.
BRAVO.


Everyone is too blame.

damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 10:45 AM
  #529
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
Thank you for explaining to me the difference between revenues and net profit, because I was indeed not aware. It is quite obvious that the NHL made a profit last year. I am unable to find the exact number, but one can assume it was substantial. Thus, what the real issue in all of this is the net distribution of those profits among the other owners. Otherwise, it really is just greed isn't it? A group of Billionaires crying foul. Again, I reiterate, how can anyone support multi-billionaire league owners over farm boys and middle class kids who fought their way to make it. Does not make much sense to me.
Overall there was a profit, for sure.

The Leafs, Rangers, and Canadiens combined for around $170M in profits last year. The rest of the league lost $44M

If you throw in the Canucks and Oilers, it changes to like $210M profit for the top 5 teams, and an $86M loss for the rest of the league.

Revenue sharing would help, sure, but this is not a long term solution. It is not coincidence that 4 of the top 5 profitable teams are from Canada. It has nothing to do with it being a hockey mad country, it has everything to do with the strength of their dollar. Go back 10 years or so when their dollar was struggling, and the national government was actually considering subsidizing teams to help them stay afloat. They were just as hockey mad back then. Could you imagine if the league was relying on revenue sharing and the Canadian dollar dropped? The league would be royally screwed. The Leafs, Habs, and Rangers would still make good money, but not nearly enough to keep a league afloat.

I'm not saying RS isn't needed, I personally think it needs to be increased. It is not the big solution though. That would be reducing personnel/team costs to reflect the current economic downturn of the last few years, just like every other company/corporation in America.

Fishhead is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 12:15 PM
  #530
HockeyCA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fishhead View Post
Overall there was a profit, for sure.

The Leafs, Rangers, and Canadiens combined for around $170M in profits last year. The rest of the league lost $44M

If you throw in the Canucks and Oilers, it changes to like $210M profit for the top 5 teams, and an $86M loss for the rest of the league.

Revenue sharing would help, sure, but this is not a long term solution. It is not coincidence that 4 of the top 5 profitable teams are from Canada. It has nothing to do with it being a hockey mad country, it has everything to do with the strength of their dollar. Go back 10 years or so when their dollar was struggling, and the national government was actually considering subsidizing teams to help them stay afloat. They were just as hockey mad back then. Could you imagine if the league was relying on revenue sharing and the Canadian dollar dropped? The league would be royally screwed. The Leafs, Habs, and Rangers would still make good money, but not nearly enough to keep a league afloat.

I'm not saying RS isn't needed, I personally think it needs to be increased. It is not the big solution though. That would be reducing personnel/team costs to reflect the current economic downturn of the last few years, just like every other company/corporation in America.
I do agree with some of your points, specifically having to do with the Canadian Dollar. However, I think it is safe to say that what we are now experiencing is the new normal in that respect. I do not think we will be seeing the canadian dollar being worth 65-70 cents American anytime soon, if ever.

I do not agree though that because of this "economic downturn," as you phrase it, the players should be forced to to significantly reduce their share of the pie in order to subsidize struggling markets. The League had RECORD revenue last year. Economic downturn or not, cannot argue with the facts. People still spend money on sporting events no matter the economic climate, period.

I honestly believe that in the end the way fans view this lockout is the same way they view the current political climate. There are those who believe the Billionaires are taking all the risk, and should therefore get a larger share of the profits. The other side believes it is a players league, and there the ones risking their bodies on a nightly basis, putting all the work in, and in the end like it or not, responsible for generating all the revenue. Professional sports is not like other employee/employer relationships. The owners cannot just go find someone else to do the job. It is unique, it is different. When an individual decides to spend a couple hundred million dollars on a sports franchise, I believe they are doing it with their eyes open. Do they want to turn a profit? Absolutely. But really, the main motivation is being granted access to the exclusive club of professional sports ownership. There are risks involved with such purchases, and there are rewards to such endeavours, but how can anyone believe it is the players responsibility to subsidize those risks when the collective membership decides to drive up player salaries by handing out higher and higher contracts on the OPEN market.

HockeyCA is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 12:54 PM
  #531
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
I do agree with some of your points, specifically having to do with the Canadian Dollar. However, I think it is safe to say that what we are now experiencing is the new normal in that respect. I do not think we will be seeing the canadian dollar being worth 65-70 cents American anytime soon, if ever.

I do not agree though that because of this "economic downturn," as you phrase it, the players should be forced to to significantly reduce their share of the pie in order to subsidize struggling markets. The League had RECORD revenue last year. Economic downturn or not, cannot argue with the facts. People still spend money on sporting events no matter the economic climate, period.

I honestly believe that in the end the way fans view this lockout is the same way they view the current political climate. There are those who believe the Billionaires are taking all the risk, and should therefore get a larger share of the profits. The other side believes it is a players league, and there the ones risking their bodies on a nightly basis, putting all the work in, and in the end like it or not, responsible for generating all the revenue. Professional sports is not like other employee/employer relationships. The owners cannot just go find someone else to do the job. It is unique, it is different. When an individual decides to spend a couple hundred million dollars on a sports franchise, I believe they are doing it with their eyes open. Do they want to turn a profit? Absolutely. But really, the main motivation is being granted access to the exclusive club of professional sports ownership. There are risks involved with such purchases, and there are rewards to such endeavours, but how can anyone believe it is the players responsibility to subsidize those risks when the collective membership decides to drive up player salaries by handing out higher and higher contracts on the OPEN market.
A 50/50 split is fair.....The rest of the four major leagues are at that or close too it.


That is not an unreasonable request by the owners. Also it is in the players best interest that the NHL remain profitable.

Without profit, the best owners/sponsors would want nothing to do with the sport. Thus the league would turn into a second tier league. The vast majority of owners buy teams to make money.

The Buffalo owners (fan that is willing to lose money) are few and far between. The Owners and players need each other, until they both realize that......It's going to be a long lockout.

Also the whole record revenue thing, has more to do with inflation. It costs more to see a hockey game today; than it did 10 years ago.

But with the rising revenue, also means rising Costs across the board. The players are not innocent in this, they have yet to put an offer on the table that is:

A : Not smoke and mirrors.

B: Completely unrealistic.


Last edited by damacles1156: 10-18-2012 at 01:04 PM.
damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 01:16 PM
  #532
scramble91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by damacles1156 View Post
A 50/50 split is fair.....The rest of the four major leagues are at that or close too it.


That is not an unreasonable request by the owners. Also it is in the players best interest that the NHL remain profitable.

Without profit, the best owners/sponsors would want nothing to do with the sport. Thus the league would turn into a second tier league. The vast majority of owners buy teams to make money.

The Buffalo owners (fan that is willing to lose money) are few and far between. The Owners and players need each other, until they both realize that......It's going to be a long lockout.
Bingo

Reading alot of the proplayer posts on the Business of hockey boards think that all the owners are just billionaires that can throw money away. I dont know any percentages, but i would bet that most of the owners are pretty much corporations that have investors, or minority owners, which i would assume they all wouldnt invest for losses.

That being said, the owners arent the ones stalling this process. THey have put proposals on the table, and especially this last one (which has the good framework for a solid deal), while the PA just sits back and keeps with the you are screwing with us and the fans attitude. The fact that today is the first counter proposal that the PA has put forth, IMO shows the players are the ones dragging this process out.

Ultimately from my belief, the more the players union drags this out, the more they will be hurt in the next 3-5 years. I think the owners will not budge too much from the 50/50 model. If the players union holds out a season or 2, to only agree on a 50/50 model, they will basically shoot themselves in the foot. When the revenue drops after a season lock out, so will the cap, and player salaries, forcing more of the middle tier (paid) to take alot lower salaries once they hit UFA (since there are alot of long term money deals for the upper tier). Just look at the 2014 UFA group, there is alot of talent there that will probably take severe paycuts to just be in the NHL.

Are the owners completely innocent? no, but to me the negotiations have been 1 sided. So we will see what happens today, but listening to some of the rumblings, im not optimistic anymore.

scramble91 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 01:24 PM
  #533
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
I do agree with some of your points, specifically having to do with the Canadian Dollar. However, I think it is safe to say that what we are now experiencing is the new normal in that respect. I do not think we will be seeing the canadian dollar being worth 65-70 cents American anytime soon, if ever.

I do not agree though that because of this "economic downturn," as you phrase it, the players should be forced to to significantly reduce their share of the pie in order to subsidize struggling markets. The League had RECORD revenue last year. Economic downturn or not, cannot argue with the facts. People still spend money on sporting events no matter the economic climate, period.

I honestly believe that in the end the way fans view this lockout is the same way they view the current political climate. There are those who believe the Billionaires are taking all the risk, and should therefore get a larger share of the profits. The other side believes it is a players league, and there the ones risking their bodies on a nightly basis, putting all the work in, and in the end like it or not, responsible for generating all the revenue. Professional sports is not like other employee/employer relationships. The owners cannot just go find someone else to do the job. It is unique, it is different. When an individual decides to spend a couple hundred million dollars on a sports franchise, I believe they are doing it with their eyes open. Do they want to turn a profit? Absolutely. But really, the main motivation is being granted access to the exclusive club of professional sports ownership. There are risks involved with such purchases, and there are rewards to such endeavours, but how can anyone believe it is the players responsibility to subsidize those risks when the collective membership decides to drive up player salaries by handing out higher and higher contracts on the OPEN market.
If anything the CDN is becoming even more volatile than it already was. It was stable in the 50s and 60s, but has been a complete mess since the mid 70s. It dropped 40 cents from the mid 70s to the mid 80s. Then in 5 years it gained 20 cents. Then in 7 years it lost 30 cents. In the last 5, its gained 50 cents. It's predictable cycle shows it is going to drop down in another 5-7 years. All I know is that when it gets back in the 70s I'm going to buy a truckload of them.

The players are not forced to do anything, they can choose not to take a reduction in salary. Just find a different career, people do it all the time. I did it, my wife did it, many of my friends did it. They didn't like what they were getting paid and moved on to something they feel is better. Most of them did it because companies they worked at were being downsized because of lower profits, of all things. Just because they are in a unique situation doesn't mean players aren't subject to economic ebb and flow.

What's ironic is that people are spending more money than ever to go to events, and that same money is worth less to the owners than ever. Their costs have skyrocketed, just like everything else. While it is a status thing, eventually an owner will get to the point where they just want to take their ball and go home. It's the reason why so many teams are up for sale right now, and there are so few buyers.

Fishhead is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 01:25 PM
  #534
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by scramble91 View Post
Bingo

Reading alot of the proplayer posts on the Business of hockey boards think that all the owners are just billionaires that can throw money away. I dont know any percentages, but i would bet that most of the owners are pretty much corporations that have investors, or minority owners, which i would assume they all wouldnt invest for losses.

That being said, the owners arent the ones stalling this process. THey have put proposals on the table, and especially this last one (which has the good framework for a solid deal), while the PA just sits back and keeps with the you are screwing with us and the fans attitude. The fact that today is the first counter proposal that the PA has put forth, IMO shows the players are the ones dragging this process out.

Ultimately from my belief, the more the players union drags this out, the more they will be hurt in the next 3-5 years. I think the owners will not budge too much from the 50/50 model. If the players union holds out a season or 2, to only agree on a 50/50 model, they will basically shoot themselves in the foot. When the revenue drops after a season lock out, so will the cap, and player salaries, forcing more of the middle tier (paid) to take alot lower salaries once they hit UFA (since there are alot of long term money deals for the upper tier). Just look at the 2014 UFA group, there is alot of talent there that will probably take severe paycuts to just be in the NHL.

Are the owners completely innocent? no, but to me the negotiations have been 1 sided. So we will see what happens today, but listening to some of the rumblings, im not optimistic anymore.
Put it this way, this is a perfect example of how much someone wants to buy a loser.


Take the Yotes for example, How many Smart, Rich , people were lined up to buy that franchise ?

It's 150 million plus about 50 million in losses so 200 mill total.....No one with any real money wants to buy that franchise....WHY?

CAUSE IT LOSSES MONEY. It doesn't turn a profit, 200 mill for a sports franchise is peanuts.

The loser Browns of the NFL just sold for 1 BILLION. The guy that's buying (PHX) wants to move it(cause his share holders want a return). So he is getting the league to subsidize a lot of his losses through backroom deals.

So in the end the (Canada teams are going to subsidize PHX's move) Cause no one with real money (Rich) will buy that team.

damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 01:25 PM
  #535
HockeyCA
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by damacles1156 View Post
A 50/50 split is fair.....The rest of the four major leagues are at that or close too it.


That is not an unreasonable request by the owners. Also it is in the players best interest that the NHL remain profitable.

Without profit, the best owners/sponsors would want nothing to do with the sport. Thus the league would turn into a second tier league. The vast majority of owners buy teams to make money.

The Buffalo owners (fan that is willing to lose money) are few and far between. The Owners and players need each other, until they both realize that......It's going to be a long lockout.

Also the whole record revenue thing, has more to do with inflation. It costs more to see a hockey game today; than it did 10 years ago.

But with the rising revenue, also means rising Costs across the board. The players are not innocent in this, they have yet to put an offer on the table that is:

A : Not smoke and mirrors.

B: Completely unrealistic.

Didn't the players offer a deal that would see their % of revenue drop from 57% down to 51% in the last year of the deal? That, to you, is completely unrealistic? The players are asking for NO increases in benefits. They are only offering reductions, seems pretty reasonable to me.

Owners who own professional sports teams are not hurting for money. They just aren't. They are worth many hundreds of millions of dollars, and I bet most of them would be willing to tell you just that. Not to mention I am sure they are able to use any loss they incur in the business operations of an NHL franchise as a tax liability write off, thus, in the end, not really hurting their yearly bottom line. Why do they own hockey teams? Well, if you or me were in their position, your damn right we would try and own one also. Right? Who wouldn't want to own a professional sports team, it looks like a whole lot of fun to me. So, they need to come up with a deal that allows all teams to remain competitive (which can be accomplished through increases in revenue sharing), while continuing to provide a fair partnership for both sides. THAT requires compromise on both ends, and to say the players in all of this are the ones who are being unreasonable is just flat out wrong in my opinion. Both sides need to give, and with the owners moving from their original draconian offer of 43% up to 50% is a good start, so long as it is not coupled with other draconian measures that are hidden "in the details."

HockeyCA is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 01:30 PM
  #536
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
Didn't the players offer a deal that would see their % of revenue drop from 57% down to 51% in the last year of the deal? That, to you, is completely unrealistic? The players are asking for NO increases in benefits. They are only offering reductions, seems pretty reasonable to me.

Owners who own professional sports teams are not hurting for money. They just aren't. They are worth many hundreds of millions of dollars, and I bet most of them would be willing to tell you just that. Not to mention I am sure they are able to use any loss they incur in the business operations of an NHL franchise as a tax liability write off, thus, in the end, not really hurting their yearly bottom line. Why do they own hockey teams? Well, if you or me were in their position, your damn right we would try and own one also. Right? Who wouldn't want to own a professional sports team, it looks like a whole lot of fun to me. So, they need to come up with a deal that allows all teams to remain competitive (which can be accomplished through increases in revenue sharing), while continuing to provide a fair partnership for both sides. THAT requires compromise on both ends, and to say the players in all of this are the ones who are being unreasonable is just flat out wrong in my opinion. Both sides need to give, and with the owners moving from their original draconian offer of 43% up to 50% is a good start, so long as it is not coupled with other draconian measures that are hidden "in the details."
That deal was smoke and mirrors by the players. It was dependent on 7% growth(yearly).....Which is unrealistic. I can tell you have no idea how our TAX code in America works...

I do I am an Accountant. You can not write off ALL of your losses. It only comes down to small percentage of your Losses. And you can only do that for a couple consecutive years.

The US Tax Code SAVES NO ONE(that pays). It only saves people that Don't pay taxes at all(which is about 40 percent of America). That is why, A lot of rich People move their assets OFF shore.

But a public traded company like some NHL teams......You can't


Last edited by damacles1156: 10-18-2012 at 02:29 PM.
damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 01:55 PM
  #537
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCA View Post
Owners who own professional sports teams are not hurting for money. They just aren't.
Maybe you should stop counting the owners' money? The issues related to the NHL have to do with revenue and how it is split not with the owners' bank accounts. You seem to think that since these guys are rich that they should line up and start paying the players whatever they ask for because they got the money to spare.

Buddy The Elf is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 02:06 PM
  #538
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buddy The Elf View Post
Maybe you should stop counting the owners' money? The issues related to the NHL have to do with revenue and how it is split not with the owners' bank accounts. You seem to think that since these guys are rich that they should line up and start paying the players whatever they ask for because they got the money to spare.
Not to pick on people,

But this reminds me of how my small company was closed (by me).

I use to own a sign company here in the central valley. I had 25 employee's.

Now my company made enough REVENUE (not profit); to pay my people, bills (taxes , overhead ETC). Also allow me to expand at a small rate. Then put about 70k dollars in my pocket.

Not bad for a 25 year old back in the day. Well my employee's figured since I expanded yearly, and gave small raises. They were entitled to more, higher raises.

Now keep in mind my profit stayed about 70k through the years; cause I put a vast majority of the money Back into the company.

I paid a competitive wage to start. People with just a JC or High school education were making 12 to 15 an hour at my company.

We also didn't work Monday.....I hated Monday.

But none the less they thought since I AM RICH(cause I own the place, I must be)...... I should pay more to them. Well I was open to it, provided they work more(IE more hours, more days).....

That didn't fly, so they tried to unionize. Now that is their right as Americans. But it is also my right to just close the place down.

Which is what I did. The moral of the story I guess is.
If you think you are worth more(than what the owner is willing to pay); you need to start your own endeavor. That comes with all the risk/personal finance losses/responsibility that comes with it.


Last edited by damacles1156: 10-18-2012 at 02:42 PM.
damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 02:56 PM
  #539
Cook24
Registered User
 
Cook24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Chino, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,020
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Cook24
Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Bettman confirms NHLPA made three counter proposals. Says none of them "even began to approach 50-50." Not encouraged


Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Bettman calls it a "step backward."

Darren Dreger‏@DarrenDreger

Bettman says the league and union are not speaking the same language. Concerned by lack of progress.

Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Bettman says today's offers "nowhere close" to what league offered Tuesday



o boy...

Cook24 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:00 PM
  #540
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
The players offered basically the same deal three times. It's a step raise program that guarantee's they get raises every year no matter how poorly the league does.

There is not a point at any time in that deal, they go below the 1.4 billion they made last year. Unless both sides concede on something.....Well you know.

damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:00 PM
  #541
bobafettish*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,961
vCash: 500
just cancel the season already.

and why not just ****ing give the specifics, not it wasnt close ********.

bobafettish* is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:10 PM
  #542
scramble91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by damacles1156 View Post
The players offered basically the same deal three times. It's a step raise program that guarantee's they get raises every year no matter how poorly the league does.

There is not a point at any time in that deal, they go below the 1.4 billion they made last year. Unless both sides concede on something.....Well you know.
This is the Fehr effect. They will spin it every way possible saying the players are giving up alot of money, while the math will show different. Now they will say the league is not willing to play ball.

I already said I'm not optimistic, now I think this season is pretty much doomed. Fml . I hope the lakers put on a pretty good showing this season, cuz I'll need to replace my hockey fix.

The stamp of doom came when eklund says he is optimistic!

scramble91 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:21 PM
  #543
Ron
Bandwagon Since 1967
 
Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brea, California
Country: United States
Posts: 7,786
vCash: 500
Fehr = Idiot.

And the players will suffer if the season is lost, and now it looks just plain awful.

Will it still be relevant to see a banner raised sometime in 2013 or 2014? This is just an awful development.

__________________
Ron is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:24 PM
  #544
Martyros
Registered User
 
Martyros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Holly Hood
Country: Armenia
Posts: 5,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cook24 View Post
Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Bettman confirms NHLPA made three counter proposals. Says none of them "even began to approach 50-50." Not encouraged


Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Bettman calls it a "step backward."

Darren Dreger‏@DarrenDreger

Bettman says the league and union are not speaking the same language. Concerned by lack of progress.

Pierre LeBrun‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Bettman says today's offers "nowhere close" to what league offered Tuesday



o boy...
So one says all offers include 50/50 split, yet another says it's not even close...

Martyros is online now  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:26 PM
  #545
Minor Boarding
Registered User
 
Minor Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Corleone
Posts: 1,343
vCash: 500
Classic Fehr.


Is it bad to point out and say I told you so. Some of us said the negotiating will be almost impossible at the time of Fehrs hiring.

Minor Boarding is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:44 PM
  #546
scramble91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martyros View Post
So one says all offers include 50/50 split, yet another says it's not even close...
The key word is gradually getting to 50/50. NHL basically implies that the current model is broke and need the 50/50 now. Players union says they will gradually conceded to 50/50 over the course of 5-6 years. So with growth factored in across the 5-6 years, the players aren't giving up anything now, just the growth money in years 5-6. I hope they release the proposals so I can see if that's what they are doing.

scramble91 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 03:45 PM
  #547
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,734
vCash: 500
What a joke but I'm not surprised. I wasn't optimistic in the first place. I really just need to tune this out completely because it seems useless to even discuss it at this point. What a shame, embarrassment and a complete waste.


Last edited by Buddy The Elf: 10-18-2012 at 04:15 PM.
Buddy The Elf is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:13 PM
  #548
damacles1156
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 12,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by scramble91 View Post
The key word is gradually getting to 50/50. NHL basically implies that the current model is broke and need the 50/50 now. Players union says they will gradually conceded to 50/50 over the course of 5-6 years. So with growth factored in across the 5-6 years, the players aren't giving up anything now, just the growth money in years 5-6. I hope they release the proposals so I can see if that's what they are doing.
The best part is according to Bettman. The players asked for a raise in year one in ALL THREE proposals.


Now that is balls.....

damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:14 PM
  #549
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 9,734
vCash: 500

Buddy The Elf is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:14 PM
  #550
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,761
vCash: 500
Having been through this recently as a union rep I understand the players side here. As a fan I am unhappy. Really though, the owners are requiring the players to take a 7 percent dip without offering anything in return. In fact the owners are asking the pkYers to put themselves at risk this year by cramming games in order for the owners to not lose more money. The owners are requiring the plAyers to bail them out for bad mistakes they have made in the past. Bad business plan and poor spending habbits. The players know that with the revenue made this year there should be no way for the NHL to not make money if they built this right. Bad business plan and once again the lower people are taking the heat for it.

no name 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 11:09 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.