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
10-20-2012, 10:13 AM
  #626
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BerniernextRoy View Post
Right there with you. If we had anyone but Fehr and Bettman negotiating, we would be playing hockey. There's too much ego in these negotiating talks. Which is a shame, this was supposed to be a great year for hockey, Kings raise their banner and begin their defense...and I was looking forward to seeing the Winter Classic at the Big House.
I am gonna call BS on the thought that anyone other than Bettman and Fehr would have had a deal by now. In a labor negotiation, when two sides are so far apart, some pain has to be injected to force them together. Before the season, nobody was feeling any pain because nobody was losing money. Now, both sides are feeling it. Pain always brings a sense of urgency.

SLang is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 10:33 AM
  #627
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLang View Post
I am gonna call BS on the thought that anyone other than Bettman and Fehr would have had a deal by now. In a labor negotiation, when two sides are so far apart, some pain has to be injected to force them together. Before the season, nobody was feeling any pain because nobody was losing money. Now, both sides are feeling it. Pain always brings a sense of urgency.
Go back and read the articles Ollie posted a page back. Kelly was fired in some part because he had a fairly strong working relationship with the NHL people. Fehr Dragged his feet when he took over and is still showing up to meetings unprepared (allegedly.) If Paul Kelly was still in charge of the NHLPA we absolutely would not be having this discussion and would be enjoying NHL hockey. He had all the right contacts in all the right places and likely had good enough standing with people that he could have negotiated a faird deal. But in the case of Fehr, and Bettman there is so much dislike between the two of them that neither will give an inch an has to be viewed as the clear cut winner. Basically this is what happens when ego gets involved and that would not have been the case with one of those two out of the picture.

tigermask48 is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 10:55 AM
  #628
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty Batch View Post
Players need to accept 50-50 but not until year 3 of deal. HRR definition should not change. Owners need to give up on all of the rest of the changes.

Owners are trying to steamroll players. And players keep trying to change framework. Cluster ****!
You mean those changes that were probably the most sensible and likable things about the deal?

The ONE and ONLY thing hinging these negotiations up is that the players want no less then 57%. Even if you look at their 3rd proposal of the most recent negotiations, and the ones prior to that...

They say "Yup let's go 50/50...BUT we want a lump sum of money paid out over X amount of years (In this case 650 million) to replace the 7% we would lose.

So essentially the NHLPA does not want to lose ANY money. The 7% they are taking of revenue sharing they want paid out to them.

Real life example: Your parents give you an allowance that allots to 1000 bucks a year. You agree to take a reduced overall yearly allotment of 800 dollars but you want them to give you 200 dollars cash in the first 3 weeks of the new year.

It's the same. It's all semantics from the PA recently, they aren't actually changing anything except for the way that they are going to get paid the 7% the NHL is asking them to give back.

Jason Lewis is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 10:56 AM
  #629
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigermask48 View Post
Go back and read the articles Ollie posted a page back. Kelly was fired in some part because he had a fairly strong working relationship with the NHL people. Fehr Dragged his feet when he took over and is still showing up to meetings unprepared (allegedly.) If Paul Kelly was still in charge of the NHLPA we absolutely would not be having this discussion and would be enjoying NHL hockey. He had all the right contacts in all the right places and likely had good enough standing with people that he could have negotiated a faird deal. But in the case of Fehr, and Bettman there is so much dislike between the two of them that neither will give an inch an has to be viewed as the clear cut winner. Basically this is what happens when ego gets involved and that would not have been the case with one of those two out of the picture.
Yeah, Bettman's dislike of Fehr was made obvious in is statement regarding the the NHLPA's latest offers when he was making it out like the off was juvinile and unintelligent. He said that is took him about 2 minutes to understand the language of their offer. These offers usually need to be poured over for many hours to understand the language and intention. Bettman was purposely throwing a jab at Fehr.

no name is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 11:15 AM
  #630
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,246
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
Yeah, Bettman's dislike of Fehr was made obvious in is statement regarding the the NHLPA's latest offers when he was making it out like the off was juvinile and unintelligent. He said that is took him about 2 minutes to understand the language of their offer. These offers usually need to be poured over for many hours to understand the language and intention. Bettman was purposely throwing a jab at Fehr.
It didn't help that Fehr came out and said they didn't even crunch the numbers on the 3rd proposal and that they just threw it out there.

Showing that they are careless with their negotiating at this point has to be frustrating.

Jason Lewis is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 12:57 PM
  #631
Rusty Batch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
You mean those changes that were probably the most sensible and likable things about the deal?

The ONE and ONLY thing hinging these negotiations up is that the players want no less then 57%. Even if you look at their 3rd proposal of the most recent negotiations, and the ones prior to that...

They say "Yup let's go 50/50...BUT we want a lump sum of money paid out over X amount of years (In this case 650 million) to replace the 7% we would lose.

So essentially the NHLPA does not want to lose ANY money. The 7% they are taking of revenue sharing they want paid out to them.

Real life example: Your parents give you an allowance that allots to 1000 bucks a year. You agree to take a reduced overall yearly allotment of 800 dollars but you want them to give you 200 dollars cash in the first 3 weeks of the new year.

It's the same. It's all semantics from the PA recently, they aren't actually changing anything except for the way that they are going to get paid the 7% the NHL is asking them to give back.
If the players proposed a deal using the nhls same framework. But instead of immiateley hitting 50% it
It started at 54.5% then 52 then finally 50 and stayed there. Would this not be a great deal for the owners? Why do the owners need 50 this year? Also, shouldnt owners realize that the revenue split is the main issue, and that if they can get to 50 over the duration of this cba then they have basically won the negotiation? Im not sure why their proposals also include taking so much more then just revenue from the players. Owners should fix the retirement contracts and thats it.

Rusty Batch is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 02:21 PM
  #632
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 18,749
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
Yeah, Bettman's dislike of Fehr was made obvious in is statement regarding the the NHLPA's latest offers when he was making it out like the off was juvinile and unintelligent. He said that is took him about 2 minutes to understand the language of their offer. These offers usually need to be poured over for many hours to understand the language and intention. Bettman was purposely throwing a jab at Fehr.
In a negotiation like this, who in their right mind puts two sheets of paper on the table and then verbalizes something else, and calls it three proposals?

KINGS17 is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 02:35 PM
  #633
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Do you think fehr allowed an unintelligent proposal? I believe that a guy with that much experience put together he best offers he could within the time constraints he was forced into by bettman. Bettman was just throwing stones.

no name is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 03:04 PM
  #634
Fishhead
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,524
vCash: 500
I very much think that Fehr put some stinkers out there, and he knew that they wouldn't be accepted. Time was not a problem here. If it truly was, he would have came up with one good proposal, not 3 thrown together ones. I mean seriously, who goes to a meeting like that without running numbers on their proposal? Answer: No one that wants to make a deal that day.

To me, the fact that he showed up late shows that he didn't respect the meeting anyways. Any high-level professional knows that showing up late is something you don't do - ever. That was done on purpose. Wouldn't surprise me at all if he just threw some stuff out there to irritate the owners. I'm not saying Fehr couldn't have come up with something good, he just didn't. And now we are left to try and figure out what kind of gamesmanship he is playing and what his intentions are.

Maybe a push back to the NHL on the PR front, and it worked in a way. The NHL was probably already irritated at the lateness, then to have a shoddy proposal? Well, they would obviously turn it down and quickly. I think this is exactly what Fehr was looking for: "They barely read our proposal and didn't even discuss it" It would surely cast the NHL in a bit of a bad light to some.

Of course, any solid proposal would take 15 minutes to even read and look over, much less make a decision on. Otherwise, it's something they've already read before. Even a children's book takes a few minutes to read if you are truly trying to comprehend it.

Fishhead is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 03:37 PM
  #635
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
As a union rep I am not in the rooms when our team drafts proposals but I do know that we have a team of 35 lawyers, business pros, and union professionals and a counter proposal takes about two weeks to be drafted. It takes another 3-5 days for us to get the ok from our people to to let it fly.

Bettman and the NHL gave fehr one week. Essentially bettman was saying take it or leave it. The offer was only taking and fehr had to get an expidited counter out in hopes the NHL would talk. Fehr got a counter out within 30 hours. Fehr is lgendary in attention to detail and has put more hours into this than anyone in sports lockout history. To assume fehr put together a shotty proposal is absurd. It probably read like an old English book for the time constraints he had.

Bettman and company did not like the fact that there was a counter and went back into discrediting position. I

no name is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 03:46 PM
  #636
damacles1156
Moderator
 
damacles1156's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,051
vCash: 500
The huge gap they had is taken care of. Now it's a matter of how that remaining 7% the players want covered, gets paid.

The owners don't want to pay it(they want it to come out of salary rollback). Even Westgarth said "Now it's a matter of meeting in the middle on the remaining issues".

They are closer to a deal than people think, the crap Bettman and Fehr are spouting is PR. Both sides know the deal is close.

The players were waiting for the owners to blink; and they did with 50/50. It just a matter of the owners giving a little more now.


Last edited by damacles1156: 10-20-2012 at 03:54 PM.
damacles1156 is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 04:35 PM
  #637
Minor Boarding
Registered User
 
Minor Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Corleone
Posts: 1,533
vCash: 500
This is the graph for the last CBA:


The NHLPA offer is based on a 5%+ yearly growth in revenues that would in year 6 (till then players get the shares from 57% to 52%) get to the 50-50 split the owners want right now.
For the 50-50 split to happen in the NHLPA offer, the NHL would have to have a 30% growth in revenue during the next six years (with TV deal, Beer deal, Jersey deal, Radio deal, Winter classic.. already in place) that is ~1.4 billion USD in additional revenue income.


Fehr at work.

Minor Boarding is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 04:36 PM
  #638
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by damacles1156 View Post
The huge gap they had is taken care of. Now it's a matter of how that remaining 7% the players want covered, gets paid.

The owners don't want to pay it(they want it to come out of salary rollback). Even Westgarth said "Now it's a matter of meeting in the middle on the remaining issues".

They are closer to a deal than people think, the crap Bettman and Fehr are spouting is PR. Both sides know the deal is close.

The players were waiting for the owners to blink; and they did with 50/50. It just a matter of the owners giving a little more now.
Right!. The players got a quick offer back and they are still within their week limit. The cancellation of games was all pr and they could still play the proposed expidited schedule.

no name is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 05:38 PM
  #639
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Boarding View Post
This is the graph for the last CBA:


The NHLPA offer is based on a 5%+ yearly growth in revenues that would in year 6 (till then players get the shares from 57% to 52%) get to the 50-50 split the owners want right now.
For the 50-50 split to happen in the NHLPA offer, the NHL would have to have a 30% growth in revenue during the next six years (with TV deal, Beer deal, Jersey deal, Radio deal, Winter classic.. already in place) that is ~1.4 billion USD in additional revenue income.


Fehr at work.
Thanks for the breakdown. These are the perfect posts.

no name is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 07:25 PM
  #640
Minor Boarding
Registered User
 
Minor Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Corleone
Posts: 1,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
Thanks for the breakdown. These are the perfect posts.
I hope you managed to understand why the NHLPA offers were ridiculous.
Every year at least a 5% growth till 2017 is a ridiculous term. And even then the 50-50 split comes in place in 2017-18 season.

And while Betman has his faults, Fehr is just a greedier rat.

Minor Boarding is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 07:30 PM
  #641
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 10,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
As a union rep I am not in the rooms when our team drafts proposals but I do know that we have a team of 35 lawyers, business pros, and union professionals and a counter proposal takes about two weeks to be drafted. It takes another 3-5 days for us to get the ok from our people to to let it fly.


As a union rep, can you be objective in this situation?

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 09:33 PM
  #642
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Boarding View Post
I hope you managed to understand why the NHLPA offers were ridiculous.
Every year at least a 5% growth till 2017 is a ridiculous term. And even then the 50-50 split comes in place in 2017-18 season.

And while Betman has his faults, Fehr is just a greedier rat.


I am on nobodies side (except my own because i want hockey) and I said from the get go that the counter offer was not a good one. Of course I don't believe Fehr's offer was anything close to his final offer. It was just his turn.

no name is offline  
Old
10-20-2012, 09:35 PM
  #643
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
As a union rep, can you be objective in this situation?
I'm not a fan of the big boys in these circumstances, but my allegience lies onwhichever side gives me my favorite sport.

no name is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 08:34 PM
  #644
KingsCorona
Registered User
 
KingsCorona's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
Real life example: Your parents give you an allowance that allots to 1000 bucks a year. You agree to take a reduced overall yearly allotment of 800 dollars but you want them to give you 200 dollars cash in the first 3 weeks of the new year.
If my parents had signed a legally binding contract with me to pay me that allowance in the new year, that sounds like a perfectly reasonable request. Especially if I have agreed to work for $800/year for every year subsequent to that one. Why is it unreasonable to request to be paid monies that have already been negotiated and signed for?

KingsCorona is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 09:06 PM
  #645
LaFan1967
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minor Boarding View Post
I hope you managed to understand why the NHLPA offers were ridiculous.
Every year at least a 5% growth till 2017 is a ridiculous term. And even then the 50-50 split comes in place in 2017-18 season.

And while Betman has his faults, Fehr is just a greedier rat.
And yet revenue growth for the last CBA is 7.1 % per year for 7 years , NHLPA
assuming a 5% growth is reasonable.

LaFan1967 is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 11:34 PM
  #646
no name
Registered User
 
no name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 11,939
vCash: 500
Now the NHL is leaking Fehr's emails. The lockout will not stop until both sides stop trying to get the fans on their sides. Silence is golden.

no name is offline  
Old
10-21-2012, 11:37 PM
  #647
Ron
Bandwagon Since 1967
 
Ron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brea, California
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no name View Post
Now the NHL is leaking Fehr's emails. The lockout will not stop until both sides stop trying to get the fans on their sides. Silence is golden.
Link?

I am not sure what you mean. Do you mean they are leaking e-mails that they received from Fehr?

Or did they hack into Fehr's e-mail account?

__________________
Ron is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 11:59 AM
  #648
Buddy The Elf
Kings!
 
Buddy The Elf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Belmont Shore
Country: United States
Posts: 10,835
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LaFan1967 View Post
And yet revenue growth for the last CBA is 7.1 % per year for 7 years , NHLPA
assuming a 5% growth is reasonable.
I don't understand why there has to be any assumptions. Maybe that is a conservative firgure but what happens if revenue doesn't grow at 5% for 2 or 3 years in a row? Base the cap off revenue like it is now but create a plan for revenue sharing so the lower end teams can meet their operating cost and we will probably never be in this mess again. When people starts assuming things, this type of crap happens. Just like the owners assumed that since the cap was tied to revenues, costs would stay manageable. That worked for the haves but not the have-nots.

I think it is in both the players and owners interest to get an agreement in place that doesn't see GM's and agents exploiting loopholes and allows all teams to at least break even at the end of the year.

Buddy The Elf is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 12:52 PM
  #649
tigermask48
Maniacal Laugh
 
tigermask48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: R'Lyeh, Antarctica
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 2,994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron View Post
Link?

I am not sure what you mean. Do you mean they are leaking e-mails that they received from Fehr?

Or did they hack into Fehr's e-mail account?
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407747

Not sure if this is what he was referencing or not but it's the latest I've seen. Also it appears to be a memo from Fehr to the players, so I'm not sure where or how the league would've gotten their hands on it if that's what no name was talking about.

This does bring a question to mind though. This is now the second time a document sent to the players has gotten into the hands of the press, pure speculation on my part, but a possible sign of dissent somewhere in the ranks or simply a step in the PR war?

tigermask48 is offline  
Old
10-22-2012, 12:58 PM
  #650
Jason Lewis
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Jason Lewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 5,246
vCash: 500
Obviously nothing to get excited about, BUT, the twitterverse is kind of starting to speak as if a deal could be made by the end of the week. Notably, the attitude is that the league could use the 1st or 2nd proposal as a base.

Jason Lewis 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 04:25 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.