Now on top of those contracts, the owners have to give more in revenue sharing.
Why shouldnt they? People are saying the players should earn less based on other leagues. Why can't the players suggest the owners share more, based on other leagues?
And, again...those contracts aren't the players' fault. Stop acting like these contracts approved and backed by ownership are somehow inflicted on them by the players.
The players and NHLPA deserve criticism for quite a few things, but you're trying to blame them for some really off the wall stuff.
Edit: just to throw this out there, I'm of the opinion that the players should earn less and the owners should share more. Radical, I know.
__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
They are willing to get there of course if they get the money they are making now PLUS raises each year.. It will never be 50/50 until the last contract signed under the previous CBA is expired. We are going to be waiting awhile for that to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McNasty
It's not really 50/50 if the owners have to pay anything about 50% out of their share...
so a even split of the pot isnt fair for the owners? whats fair a 43-57 split?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna
The way the players are panding to the media, they knew that the owners could not afford them. So they are also a reason why the league is in this mess.
players pander to the media. Bettman does the same for the owners. Bettman knows very well how to play the PR game to people like you who are anti-NHLPA
Why bother wasting the day meeting instead of making up a new proposal?
So but what else do Daly and Bettman have to do other than try and fix this situation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sa cyred
Also whats the harm in meeting anyway? Like what negative effect does it have? If anything there is a higher probability thats something good comes out.
Agreed.
We obviously don't know about the exact details on what's been happening in the meetings, though, and if the NHLPA really did pull off the shenanigans that article said it did, then I can understand why the NHL and the owners might be pissed off and not willing to meet unless the NHLPA has something concrete to put on the table. In the end, they don't answer to anyone but themselves, so there's really no reason to meet if they'd rather go with the more emotional response.
so a even split of the pot isnt fair for the owners? whats fair a 43-57 split?
players pander to the media. Bettman does the same for the owners. Bettman knows very well how to play the PR game to people like you who are anti-NHLPA
50.something for one side and 49.something for the other is not a true 50/50 split.
They would be waiting something like 14 years to finally get a true 50/50 split. Not to mention that the owners still pay for a ton of other **** for the players which drops their number down even lower
owners are greedy too.
the owners of the big market clubs leading the way. see Snider, the Dolans ect.
The owners are the ones paying everything for the players. Salary, travel, hotel rooms, and a ton of other crap while losing money. The players are just making tons of money. That's not a true partnership when one side is hemorrhaging money while the other side is just getting tons of profit
50.something for one side and 49.something for the other is not a true 50/50 split.
They would be waiting something like 14 years to finally get a true 50/50 split. Not to mention that the owners still pay for a ton of other **** for the players which drops their number down even lower
well fine, I asked you the question. what number should they be at?
I dont know know where you get your 14 year number from. CBAs dont last that long.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna
The owners are the ones paying everything for the players. Salary, travel, hotel rooms, and a ton of other crap while losing money. The players are just making tons of money. That's not a true partnership when one side is hemorrhaging money while the other side is just getting tons of profit
so it all comes down to the players being 100 percent at fault.
why dont we just turn the clock back 30 plus years before there was player unions and the players made crap for money and the owners were the only ones making money.
Last edited by GoneFullHolmgren: 10-23-2012 at 11:31 PM.
well fine, I asked you the question. what number should they be at?
I dont know know where you get your 14 year number from. CBAs dont last that long.
Yes, I know CBAs don't last that long. The make whole proposal thing would not be made whole until the last of the previous CBA contracts expires. I believe the longest ATM is 14 years from now.
Besides the fact that round numbers are wonderful and nice, what is so magical about having a 50/50 split?
I'm not quite sure. Without better investing and improved revenue sharing on the owners' side, I doubt it truly fixes anything...and then in 6 years we get treated to another lockout because they need to take more money from the players to keep their Mexico City and Moonbase franchises afloat
I'm not quite sure. Without better investing and improved revenue sharing on the owners' side, I doubt it truly fixes anything...and then in 6 years we get treated to another lockout because they need to take more money from the players to keep their Mexico City and Moonbase franchises afloat
/1950s SciFi logic
This is a red herring.
Fair CBA =/= the problem of Phoenix Coyotes.
The owners need to address the 2-3 teams that are clear market / investing failures. That's a legitimate complaint, but it is only partially relevant.
But those 2-3 teams that are money pits are only part of the picture. Other teams are losing money that are not money pits and the only way the owners are going to fix it is by moving from 57% to 50%.
In addition, even if the all the teams were making money over operating costs, a strong argument could be made for a 50/50 split.
Last edited by DownieFaceSoftener: 10-24-2012 at 06:26 AM.
The owners are the ones paying everything for the players. Salary, travel, hotel rooms, and a ton of other crap while losing money. The players are just making tons of money. That's not a true partnership when one side is hemorrhaging money while the other side is just getting tons of profit
$15 parking, $7 cups of miller lite, $5 cups of soda, and $4 soft pretzels say hi. and don't forget the TV money they are getting while all this is going on.
$15 parking, $7 cups of miller lite, $5 cups of soda, and $4 soft pretzels say hi. and don't forget the TV money they are getting while all this is going on.
That means you're bad with money.
Park near 9th and Oregon and walk. Eat before the game. Crush some beer before you enter. Buy some high alcohol content high quality ales and hit them before you enter. You'll be fine all game.
Park near 9th and Oregon and walk. Eat before the game. Crush some beer before you enter. Buy some high alcohol content high quality ales and hit them before you enter. You'll be fine all game.
You're volunteering to bleed money.
you are making assumptions, and incorrect ones at that. just because i quoted the prices they charge doesn't mean i'm bad with money. i never said i pay for all that every time i go there, but there's certainly a large amount of fans who do. i only posted those numbers to refute the claim that the owners are hemorrhaging money.
i usually park at jetro ($5), and always eat before i get there. but i am guilty of getting a few $8 guiness'.
Beers are getting more expensive everywhere; if not for you, then definitely for the establishment.
That's no justification for the $7 Yeungling I bought at the 9:30 Club last week nor the $8 (half foam) Bud Light I bought in New York a year ago---I'm still bitter.
That said, once upon a time those expensive beers at made a much higher profit. The cost of beer has gone up far more than liquor.
$15 parking, $7 cups of miller lite, $5 cups of soda, and $4 soft pretzels say hi. and don't forget the TV money they are getting while all this is going on.
Chartered flight for the team to a game $15,000, First class hotel $4,000, Catered meals $1,000.
you are making assumptions, and incorrect ones at that. just because i quoted the prices they charge doesn't mean i'm bad with money. i never said i pay for all that every time i go there, but there's certainly a large amount of fans who do. i only posted those numbers to refute the claim that the owners are hemorrhaging money.
i usually park at jetro ($5), and always eat before i get there. but i am guilty of getting a few $8 guiness'.
You're right, it may not be you paying that (sorry), but if people are willing to pay that, then either they are bad with money or have disposable income they are okay parting with. Either way:
It's not an argument against the owners. The fact the owners are taking losses on operating costs show they are losing money.
And, really, the job of any seller of a product is to determine the market and get an individual to pay as much as they can afford within that market for an item.
So obviously, people are somewhat OKAY paying for the convenience of stadium food and its high price-- or they wouldn't pay it. For example: You won't see 50 dollar beers. Why? It's unreasonable. The most common market of people who are able to splurge on hockey tickets aren't breaking the bank paying 7 dollars.
The owners need to address the 2-3 teams that are clear market / investing failures. That's a legitimate complaint, but it is only partially relevant.
Agreed. something needs to be done about those, and there are rumblings of teams in Quebec and Seattle. I think its highly relevant, actually. If Phoenix is bleeding money at a high rate because of it's location then moving it should be a priority. It's the players' duty to realize at some point (hopefully soon) they're going to get their pay down to 50% somehow. I think it's also the owners' duty to address the problems on their side of the table.
If Phoenix stays put, continues to bleed money, and the owners lockout the players again while claiming they're poor in 6 years (or whatever it will be), I will have zero pity for them. They have messes in their own house they need to clean.
Quote:
But those 2-3 teams that are money pits are only part of the picture. Other teams are losing money that are not money pits and the only way the owners are going to fix it is by moving from 57% to 50%.
In addition, even if the all the teams were making money over operating costs, a strong argument could be made for a 50/50 split.
As I've said several times before, I'm in favor of bumping the salary down to 50%.
It should also be noted that the "red herring" part of my post wasn't serious in the slightest, hence the sarcasm smiley. Only the part that suggests the owners clean the messes in their own house was.
Wow. I thought that the seating made that a poor venue?
EDIT: Seems this is universally regarded as good news on the Islanders board.
Can't be worse than the Nassau Colosseum..
On an unrelated note :
Reading the business board is getting harder and harder to do without wanting to yell at people. It's not even november yet and people are already saying the season is done
It's not even november yet and people are already saying the season is done
The fact that the two sides are miles apart, one side is refusing to meet, and neither side appears willing to compromise, writing off the season is not that much of a stretch.
The fact that the two sides are miles apart, one side is refusing to meet, and neither side appears willing to compromise, writing off the season is not that much of a stretch.
I don't really think the season is in jeopardy, they're arguing about money and both sides lose out if there isn't a season. Sure some teams might save money compared to the losses of last season, but it benefits both sides to get a deal done.
The fact that the two sides are miles apart, one side is refusing to meet, and neither side appears willing to compromise, writing off the season is not that much of a stretch.
