HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

NHLPA annoyed with circumvention of negotiations

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-25-2012, 11:16 AM
  #326
no1b4me
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 270
vCash: 500
Looks like all is lost, some of the players reps (Hartnell for one) are heading over to europe to play today.

no1b4me is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 11:17 AM
  #327
loller12
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 191
vCash: 500
If the players want the NHL to honour there contracts, then if i was the NHL id tell the players you better honour your end also and forget about asking to get traded.

loller12 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 11:31 AM
  #328
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 7,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by loller12 View Post
If the players want the NHL to honour there contracts, then if i was the NHL id tell the players you better honour your end also and forget about asking to get traded.
Well, this is(sort of) how negotiations happen. I demand one thing, you demand something else, and in so doing, we get closer and closer to a deal that we can both live with.

...unlike some of the posters here, you seem to have grasped at least that, even if you have yet to fully embrace that. Most of the posters here seem to think that negotiation ought to be the NHL saying "no," and the players saying "oh, okay then."

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:00 PM
  #329
Retail1LO*
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 6,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO* Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO* Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO*
Quote:
Originally Posted by smithy View Post
Wouldn't a concession be a movement away from the previous status quo i.e. the last CBA?
No...it would not. You have to HAVE something, in order to concede it. There's no deal in place. If the last CBA worked, there'd be no need to change it. The only people it worked for, were ironically, the same ones that cried and cried about how they [mod] when they signed the CBA in the first place. For a bunch of people who got whacked so hard, it's truly hilarious that they wanted to play another season under the same conditions while they negotiated. It's amazing how one's perception of getting "screwed" can change from the miserable variety, to the pleasurable variety.

The owners have fashioned a new CBA for how they want and need things to work going forward. They own the league, they make the deal to be negotiated off of. As such, they're the only ones with anything to concede.

The status quo is...the owners still run the league, pay the checks, take the losses, and assume all the risk. The rest changes accordingly...as it should.


Last edited by Fugu: 10-25-2012 at 12:03 PM. Reason: offensive
Retail1LO* is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:04 PM
  #330
mnwildfan79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retail1LO View Post
No...it would not. You have to HAVE something, in order to concede it. There's no deal in place. If the last CBA worked, there'd be no need to change it. The only people it worked for, were ironically, the same ones that cried and cried about how they took it up the backside when they signed the CBA in the first place. For a bunch of people who got whacked so hard, it's truly hilarious that they wanted to play another season under the same conditions while they negotiated. It's amazing how one's perception of getting "screwed" can change from the miserable variety, to the pleasurable variety.

The owners have fashioned a new CBA for how they want and need things to work going forward. They own the league, they make the deal to be negotiated off of. As such, they're the only ones with anything to concede.

The status quo is...the owners still run the league, pay the checks, take the losses, and assume all the risk. The rest changes accordingly...as it should.


Please explain how the last CBA didn't work.

Record revenue growth, franchise values at an time high, and cost certainty for the owners.

As far as I'm concerned, no one has made a credible argument that shows that the most recent CBA is not sustainable.

mnwildfan79 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:10 PM
  #331
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by loller12 View Post
If the players want the NHL to honour there contracts, then if i was the NHL id tell the players you better honour your end also and forget about asking to get traded.

That's actually not unreasonable. At the same time, I don't know that there isn't some means for teams to write in something into the NTC or NMC clauses that protects them along these lines?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildfan79 View Post


Please explain how the last CBA didn't work.

Record revenue growth, franchise values at an time high, and cost certainty for the owners.

As far as I'm concerned, no one has made a credible argument that shows that the most recent CBA is not sustainable.

Bettman certainly hasn't.

I think fans are making more arguments about financial need than the league is, where Bettman basically has said he wants 50% because 2 of 3 other pro leagues managed to get that from their PAs--- ignoring MLB and how the NBA/NFL CBAs are extraordinarily unlike the the NHL's.

Fugu is online now  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:14 PM
  #332
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,438
vCash: 500
If the last CBA worked, we wouldn't be here.

Iggy77 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:15 PM
  #333
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,262
vCash: 500
Too call owners as nazis is foolish on all fronts.First of all Bettman is jewish along with many of the owners.Second if the players are being hard done by re-train and learn a new trade.

thom is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:21 PM
  #334
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
Too call owners as nazis is foolish on all fronts.First of all Bettman is jewish along with many of the owners.Second if the players are being hard done by re-train and learn a new trade.

I believe the shot was at the office of the ministry of propaganda, the means/tools used. Ironically, those that practice the art did retrain the public to call it "public relations" at some point along the way. The dissemination of propaganda seems more accurate portrayal of what's going on.

I guess if the truth isn't very useful, the next best alternative is to craft a message that will yield the more favorable response.

Fugu is online now  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:24 PM
  #335
mnwildfan79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 646
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77 View Post
If the last CBA worked, we wouldn't be here.
That logical argument requires a huge leap of faith in the owners that I'm not willing to make.

mnwildfan79 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:24 PM
  #336
Retail1LO*
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 6,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO* Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO* Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO*
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildfan79 View Post


Please explain how the last CBA didn't work.

Record revenue growth, franchise values at an time high, and cost certainty for the owners.

As far as I'm concerned, no one has made a credible argument that shows that the most recent CBA is not sustainable.
Team's are losing money. The last CBA ran it's course, and the teams losing money no longer want to, I'd imagine. There's a deal to be had that ensures two things:

A) ALL member teams make money
B) ALL NHL players make a sufficient amount of money to live

If "A" isn't important to the players, or they otherwise can't see the value in that happening, then I have no idea where this league is headed.

Record revenue growth? Yeah. Revenue. Not profit. No one ever seems to recognize the increase in costs. Every aspect of running a team from a cost perspective has gone through the roof. From the % increase in players salary over the term of the last CBA, to the rise in fuel costs (which make so many OTHER things expensive, like food, beer, etc), insurance... Everything. As far as cost certainty...I don't think they achieved that at all. Did they think they would? Yes. They were wrong. That's why CBA's aren't signed for life. You enter into one...you see how it goes, take notes, and make necessary adjustments. And the adjustments the league is making ARE necessary.

Retail1LO* is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:31 PM
  #337
Darlotto99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Bolton, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 342
vCash: 500
this NHLPA is really full of it...id support the idea of just canceling the entire season and in september invite the players back the table at far less and if things don't go the NHL's way just open camps and i bet alot of players cross the line.

Darlotto99 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:33 PM
  #338
Freudian
Clearly deranged
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 40,753
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77 View Post
If the last CBA worked, we wouldn't be here.
The last CBA worked, especially for the players who never have made more money. For the owners, record revenue created a very high cap floor which puts a strain on some franchises.

In the end greed will always exist and in this case players feel they have to get back at the NHL since they 'lost' the last time around, so there being conflict isn't that hard to understand. I mean, it's late October and the NHLPA have yet to table a serious offer but continue with their ridiculous delinked crap. They want conflict.

Freudian is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:36 PM
  #339
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Hawks!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Retail1LO View Post
Team's are losing money. The last CBA ran it's course, and the teams losing money no longer want to, I'd imagine. There's a deal to be had that ensures two things:

A) ALL member teams make money
B) ALL NHL players make a sufficient amount of money to live

If "A" isn't important to the players, or they otherwise can't see the value in that happening, then I have no idea where this league is headed.

Record revenue growth? Yeah. Revenue. Not profit. No one ever seems to recognize the increase in costs. Every aspect of running a team from a cost perspective has gone through the roof. From the % increase in players salary over the term of the last CBA, to the rise in fuel costs (which make so many OTHER things expensive, like food, beer, etc), insurance... Everything. As far as cost certainty...I don't think they achieved that at all. Did they think they would? Yes. They were wrong. That's why CBA's aren't signed for life. You enter into one...you see how it goes, take notes, and make necessary adjustments. And the adjustments the league is making ARE necessary.
The players have never said that teams shouldn't make money. The dispute is over how to get the teams to a position where they have the ability to be profitable (and note there is a difference between giving a team the opportunity to be profitable and ensuring they are profitable).

Most of the adjustments the league is making are not necessary...what's necessary is that a team is not put into a position where it is required to spend more money than it can make there are many different ways of getting to that outcome. The league has only been willing to consider one.

The deal the league is pushing to get is one borne out of desire, not necessity.

Incidentally, you know where you say that the deal (for the NHL, a pro sports league) should give the owners guaranteed profitability while the players should get "a sufficient amount of money to live"??...let's just say that even for you that's a stupid statement

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:40 PM
  #340
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 12,086
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildfan79 View Post
That logical argument requires a huge leap of faith in the owners that I'm not willing to make.
So you think the owners are making PLENTY of money, but they're saying amongst themselves, "hey guys! I got an idea: let's shut down the entire league again and we'll make even MORE money!! whadda-ya think about that?! Who's with me - all of you? great!"

I don't see it mentioned much here, but, did any player lose money last year... or over the last 7 years?? just wondering and all...

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:41 PM
  #341
Retail1LO*
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 6,613
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO* Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO* Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO*
Quote:
Originally Posted by UsernameWasTaken View Post
The players have never said that teams shouldn't make money. The dispute is over how to get the teams to a position where they have the ability to be profitable (and note there is a difference between giving a team the opportunity to be profitable and ensuring they are profitable).

Most of the adjustments the league is making are not necessary...what's necessary is that a team is not put into a position where it is required to spend more money than it can make there are many different ways of getting to that outcome. The league has only been willing to consider one.

The deal the league is pushing to get is one borne out of desire, not necessity.
You could remove the cap floor, yeah? If the NHL simply removed the floor, I wonder what the net effect would be on the total amount of money spent on player salaries, and therefore what the average NHL salary would be. I think it would certainly help a number of teams...but it'd be another hit to the players, would it not? I can't imagine the players wanting the floor to be allowed to go by the wayside while still maintaining a cap.

Retail1LO* is offline  
Old
10-25-2012, 12:45 PM
  #342
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
I think we're getting to a point in this thread where there's no longer any discourse on the NHL's attempt to circumvent union leadership.


We can start a new thread when any news about similar tactics or grievances comes up.

Fugu is online now  
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 10:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.