The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Make Whole, Not War (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XIX
That's a second snarky, useless response to a pretty logical point in a row.
Can I get an answer to my request for clarification, now? Why is it, exactly, that testing the water for what Dreger describes would not have been far more constructive in seeking a future deal than showing up late with a worse offer than your previous ones claiming you haven't "run the numbers yet?" Why, exactly, would thinking it is a more constructive course of inaction make one a, ahem, "sockpuppet."
Is that something you can answer, or is the next step to accuse me of some new weird thing.
Since your questions here don't seem to make sense (to me), I've pulled up your first post:
Quote:
You tell me, the players' big rallying cry was wanting their contracts honored. The previous make whole provision, which was explicitly spelled out as negotiable, was something Fehr told the players was bad because it was "players paying players, not owner paying players." This solves that, too.
Some of us are operating under the impression that the only thing that was negotiable was the Make Whole clause.
As for your claim that 'this solves that, too'... What is 'this'? Do you have the details?
Quote:
Are you saying it was more reasonable to show up 90 minutes late with two variations on a Bob Goodenow offer that was rejected in 2005 and a third that represented a percentage increase on present salaries that Fehr "didn't run the numbers on" is somehow more constructive than, I don't know, showing up on time with something like what Dreger describes?
I don't believe I said any of that. How did -->you<-- get from point A to point B?
Every time there has been reports about a glimmer of hope, it's been fehred on soon afterwards. Not going to get my hope up this time. I'm expecting the same stale re-runs of NHLPA statements we've been seeing for months now.
I've read through all these threads all these days keeping silent, but I have to ask a question in context of the cancellation of the winter classic. Does anyone believe that the cancellation of the Winter Classic may have been done as a way to bring down potential revenue for a shortened season, thus reducing the player's share further? I'm unsure how previous Winter Classic revenue is split or distributed amongst teams.
I'm just speculating here, but it appears to be driven by two factors:
1) The simple logistics behind the event. Brad Richards might think you can just throw up some tents overnight, but pulling off an event of WC scope requires months of preparation. The current standstill makes it infeasible, plain and simple. At some point they have to pull the plug.
2) The players have projected a lack of urgency to get to the table thus far. IMO, Fehr came into this fight expecting to force a lockout and pressure the league not to lose another entire season, and his lack of urgency has been calculated toward getting the owners to break in December. By canceling the WC, the owners have removed one of the biggest leverage points that made a December timeframe realistic. At this point the players are going to have to seriously consider whether they are willing to forego their entire paycheck this season to fight for 12% over 7 years. That math doesn't make sense. And what do you know... here's the NHL with a new offer on the table. There seems to be a bit of brinkmanship behind the events of the past few days, with Fehr really not in a favorable position to justify a long holdout to the rank and file players.
It should be interesting to see where things stand on Monday. Much as the owners have been rumored to have fractures, I have to think the players are going to start splintering now that a lost season has become much more of a reality.
Quote:
Also: Kudos to the mods and admins here. It's not an easy job in the best of times.
Amen to that. This has to be the hardest board to moderate right now.
They released this today. Dreger stated it has been on the table for three days.
What seems to have leaked out thus far is that the NHL made some verbal offer three days ago (Dreger add question marks, two of them). PA has asked for details. They meet tomorrow.
Three days ago would have been the first morning after Sandy rolled into NYC/NJ.
No, my comments had nothing to do with anything you posted here. What it had to do with was the implication that there was only one more issue outstanding. Not only do we not know what the NHL proposed, we still didn't know the core issues to the two sides on the other points.
And I agree that there is several issues still left to negotiate...that is the wiggle room.
MOD
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu
What seems to have leaked out thus far is that the NHL made some verbal offer three days ago (Dreger add question marks, two of them). PA has asked for details. They meet tomorrow.
Three days ago would have been the first morning after Sandy rolled into NYC/NJ.
Cancellation of the WC was stated long before Sandy...or are you only picking the one issue that became public today? Do you honestly believe that the owners are so calloused to have only come up with the proposal regarding the "make whole" issue based on Sandy? You do understand that several of the owners were directly affected by Sandy.
Getting away from some of the language issues here...
Is the following statement reasonable?
"If the major problem with Make Whole was that the payments came from the players' share, the NHLPA should have countered with a version in which the payments came from the owners' share."
I'm just speculating here, but it appears to be driven by two factors:
<snip>
2) The players have projected a lack of urgency to get to the table thus far. IMO, Fehr came into this fight expecting to force a lockout and pressure the league not to lose another entire season, and his lack of urgency has been calculated toward getting the owners to break in December. By canceling the WC, the owners have removed one of the biggest leverage points that made a December timeframe realistic. At this point the players are going to have to seriously consider whether they are willing to forego their entire paycheck this season to fight for 12% over 7 years. That math doesn't make sense. And what do you know... here's the NHL with a new offer on the table. There seems to be a bit of brinkmanship behind the events of the past few days, with Fehr really not in a favorable position to justify a long holdout to the rank and file players.
It should be interesting to see where things stand on Monday. Much as the owners have been rumored to have fractures, I have to think the players are going to start splintering now that a lost season has become much more of a reality.
I'm not sure I agree that the WC was seen as only important to the owners in the sense of leverage. It's a huge event that means more money for everyone, the current crown jewel of the NHL's marketing program. It indeed hurts them to have to tell NBC and their sponsors, never mind the fans and STHs, other attendees (VIPs), that it's off. The importance of the even as a money machine isn't lost on the PA either, imo.
It hurts both sides.
That said, the mathematics of it never made sense for the PA. It won't make sense under any scenario where the owners can demand that the players take a lower share than the current share. This is one equation that will always favor the owners in net terms. The question then is, from the PA's side, how do you break that cycle? You either agree to always take whatever is offered because it will ALWAYS be greater than zero, or you draw the line. (Or you leave it to the next generation to draw that line.)
What seems to have leaked out thus far is that the NHL made some verbal offer three days ago (Dreger add question marks, two of them). PA has asked for details. They meet tomorrow.
Three days ago would have been the first morning after Sandy rolled into NYC/NJ.
ahh that makes some sense, Sandy probably interfered with the communication a bit. Couldn't meet in person.
Still though I'm surprised the players werent notified in some way.
hopefully something comes from tomorrows meetings. Never know what to expect from fehr.
Cancellation of the WC was stated long before Sandy...or are you only picking the one issue that became public today? Do you honestly believe that the owners are so calloused to have only come up with the proposal regarding the "make whole" issue based on Sandy? You do understand that several of the owners were directly affected by Sandy.
Why do you keep rephrasing my posts?
The Winter Classic was formally cancelled today.
The Make Whole proposal from Dreger also broke today. He implies (with question marks) that it was made three days ago, and qualified by saying that the PA asked fore details.
Try the creative writing exercise on someone else. I'm perfectly capable of articulating my own points.
That said, the mathematics of it never made sense for the PA. It won't make sense under any scenario where the owners can demand that the players take a lower share than the current share. This is one equation that will always favor the owners in net terms. The question then is, from the PA's side, how do you break that cycle? You either agree to always take whatever is offered because it will ALWAYS be greater than zero, or you draw the line. (Or you leave it to the next generation to draw that line.)
I never really agreed with this argument. If we were talking about the owners wanting the players to drop their share from say 50% to 43% and were dead set on getting it, then yes I'd say they're going to far.
But they want 50/50, like every other league in North America has. I highly, highly doubt the owners will ask for a significant drop(last time it was 24% from a massive 76% of the share, this time it's more of a 10% cut) next time around. Especially if they get the cba they want(as it will fix many, many problems currently in the system.).
We dont even know if there is a cycle to break, when the players have been making a large majority of the profits/revenues anyway.
ahh that makes some sense, Sandy probably interfered with the communication a bit. Couldn't meet in person.
Still though I'm surprised the players werent notified in some way.
hopefully something comes from tomorrows meetings. Never know what to expect from fehr.
Fehr was in Minnesota on the eve of the storm, iirc. I don't believe he was able to fly back to NYC, so if a face-to-face was needed, that obviously couldn't happen.
As for notifying the players, has the league passed on the details yet, and what are they? Do you know?
I never really agreed with this argument. If we were talking about the owners wanting the players to drop their share from say 50% to 43% and were dead set on getting it, then yes I'd say they're going to far.
But they want 50/50, like every other league in North America has. I highly, highly doubt the owners will ask for a significant drop(last time it was 24% from a massive 76% of the share, this time it's more of a 10% cut) next time around. Especially if they get the cba they want(as it will fix many, many problems currently in the system.).
We dont even know if there is a cycle to break, when the players have been making a large majority of the profits/revenues anyway.
We each can speculate as to what may happen. I can say two things with conviction:
1) IF the owners wanted or needed to get another drop, well, this equation will always work. Any number they put up is greater than zero, well... unless they offer 0%.
2) See you in 6 or 7 years to find out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobotomizer
yes, it amazing that the players had no clue about the NHL's proposal...
Yes, truly amazing. The guy having to negotiate the best deal possible for the players collectively isn't tweeting all the points of sensitive negotiations to the e-verse.
The Make Whole proposal from Dreger also broke today. He implies (with question marks) that it was made three days ago, and qualified by saying that the PA asked fore details.
Try the creative writing exercise on someone else. I'm perfectly capable of articulating my own points.
Ouch...
Regarding the WC being cancelled - it has been in the works since the NHL cancelled the November games. Not three days ago. The NHL brought this up prior to the October 25th date.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu
We each can speculate as to what may happen. I can say two things with conviction:
1) IF the owners wanted or needed to get another drop, well, this equation will always work. Any number they put up is greater than zero, well... unless they offer 0%.
2) See you in 6 or 7 years to find out?
Yes, truly amazing. The guy having to negotiate the best deal possible for the players collectively isn't tweeting all the points of sensitive negotiations to the e-verse.
Isn't it his job to articulate any negotiation issues to the membership? Are the members not the ones who vote on proposals. Are the membership not included in any discussion regarding new proposals? Is it not the membership who should be sensitive to any proposals submitted by the NHL? Based on your statement, Fehr is functioning exactly as you believe Bettman is doing.
Regarding the WC being cancelled - it has been in the works since the NHL cancelled the November games. Not three days ago. The NHL brought this up prior to the October 25th date.
I know it's been speculated on and yes, I'm sure most people figured that's where it was headed. That doesn't change facts though--- it was formally cancelled today.
Was there a point somewhere?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobotomizer
Isn't it his job to articulate any negotiation issues to the membership? Are the members not the ones who vote on proposals. Are the membership not included in any discussion regarding new proposals? Is it not the membership who should be sensitive to any proposals submitted by the NHL? Based on your statement, Fehr is functioning exactly as you believe Bettman is doing.
The NHLPA has a negotiating committee. The NHL has a negotiating committee.
Any CBA has to be approved by the NHLPA; and by the BoG.
The NHLPA has a negotiating committee. The NHL has a negotiating committee.
Any CBA has to be approved by the NHLPA; and by the BoG.
And who votes for the NHLPA committee? The players. Same guys who rolled out Kelly for Fehr. They are the final voice based on 700 votes on any proposal. If they are not informed, that is the fault of the "committee"...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu
I know it's been speculated on and yes, I'm sure most people figured that's where it was headed. That doesn't change facts though--- it was formally cancelled today.
Was there a point somewhere?
yes there was a point - the WC was not cancelled because of Sandy. Contrary to your original post.
Does anyone else wonder if hockey fans are at each others' throats with animosity towards the owners, the players or both, whether attendance really will pick-up where it left off before the work stoppage?
With the last lock-out at least there was some rhyme or reason. When it ended the NHL emerged with a new system, new hope for better competitive balance, new enforcement of holding and grabbing, and new young stars to carry the play.
This time, when it ends there will be none of that. Just a different division of the same and probably smaller pie.
What is it that would draw fans back, in Canada or the US?
The Raptors do look interesting this year. More and more of us are learning to enjoy life without (NHL) hockey. Lots of other avenues to enjoy
When the lockout ends, the NHL won't miss a beat. The fans will come back in droves....only to go through this again in another 5 years.
yes there was a point - the WC was not cancelled because of Sandy. Contrary to your original post.
You're the only one who made that connection from what was posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg
They released this today. Dreger stated it has been on the table for three days.
What seems to have leaked out thus far is that the NHL made some verbal offer three days ago (Dreger add question marks, two of them). PA has asked for details. They meet tomorrow.
Three days ago would have been the first morning after Sandy rolled into NYC/NJ.
There is no way that statement can be construed as having anything to do with the WC. It clearly addresses the Dreger report.
That said, the mathematics of it never made sense for the PA. It won't make sense under any scenario where the owners can demand that the players take a lower share than the current share. This is one equation that will always favor the owners in net terms. The question then is, from the PA's side, how do you break that cycle? You either agree to always take whatever is offered because it will ALWAYS be greater than zero, or you draw the line. (Or you leave it to the next generation to draw that line.)
I still don't agree with you on this whole 'lockout to end lockouts' business.
Again, while not morally justified, at least the owners are predictable. If you look at the current situation, the league is looking at tweaks so they are actively trying to save the season.
Right now the NHL is agreeing to honour the face value of contracts that they don't have a legal obligation to honour, and negotiating against itself - and you think this is precedent for another similar situation after the end of the next CBA? If they are right and these tweaks fix things, they will have almost no financial incentive to go for another clawback.
Not only that, but you have no idea what the financial situation will be at the end of the next CBA. Maybe profits become so high league-wide that the players feel like they have to strike to get a bigger piece. That's their right - just as it's the owner's right to try to make them take a smaller piece.
I still don't agree with you on this whole 'lockout to end lockouts' business.
Again, while not morally justified, at least the owners are predictable. If you look at the current situation, the league is looking at tweaks so they are actively trying to save the season.
Right now the NHL is agreeing to honour the face value of contracts that they don't have a legal obligation to honour, and negotiating against itself - and you think this is precedent for another similar situation after the end of the next CBA? If they are right and these tweaks fix things, they will have almost no financial incentive to go for another clawback.
Not only that, but you have no idea what the financial situation will be at the end of the next CBA. Maybe profits become so high league-wide that the players feel like they have to strike to get a bigger piece. That's their right - just as it's the owner's right to try to make them take a smaller piece.
That's fine, mossey. We're both speculating. You have a good basis for your conclusion. There's only one way to find out.
Barring unexpected progress in the NHL's labour talks this week, the league's signature Jan. 1 event will follow the 326 regular-season games already wiped from the schedule. The formal cancellation is expected to be made by Friday, according to a source, just ahead of a deadline built into the NHL's contract with the University of Michigan.
You are well off base.
Nothing you have said links this quoted post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu
What seems to have leaked out thus far is that the NHL made some verbal offer three days ago (Dreger add question marks, two of them). PA has asked for details. They meet tomorrow.
Three days ago would have been the first morning after Sandy rolled into NYC/NJ.
to the Winter Classic. None of it. I don't know how you've derived anything WC related out of this post.
Last edited by Live in the Now: 11-03-2012 at 04:08 AM.
If its true that owners shifted the make whole part of their proposal to owners side, and such are honouring the players contracts, then this lockout should end. Because it takes the only remaining excuse the players have left.
If its true that owners shifted the make whole part of their proposal to owners side, and such are honouring the players contracts, then this lockout should end. Because it takes the only remaining excuse the players have left.
I'm sure Fehr is perfectly capable of coming up with some new excuse for the players.
If its true that owners shifted the make whole part of their proposal to owners side, and such are honouring the players contracts, then this lockout should end. Because it takes the only remaining excuse the players have left.
It sounds promising but for all we know, it could be another wolf in sheep's clothing type deal. We'll find out soon enough. Hopefully the PA is willing to talk based off this deal though. From the last proposal the PA made it sounded like the NHL and the PA were speaking a different language, let alone being on the same page.
