HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

We'll Meet Again, Don't Know Where, Don't Know When (CBA/Lockout) XXVII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-14-2012, 02:38 PM
  #926
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
Again your blaming Bettman for something the PA wants. The owners would happily give up guaranteed contracts.
The players would happily give up the cap. What's your point?

Mr Jiggyfly is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:39 PM
  #927
Tra La La
Registered User
 
Tra La La's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo, New York
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
No, they're pretty damn shrewd.

And they have an agenda that isn't about current NHL players.The current players can be sacrificed. I think Fehr intends on a two year lockout.

Tra La La is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:39 PM
  #928
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
You should get your facts straight. Bettman had nothing to do with the 24% rollback that was the PA's idea.
That's exactly true, and IMO one of the biggest gaffes that the Goodenow-led NHLPA ever made. It was supposed to be their "shocking" response to NHL's demands for a cap system that the PA hoped would entice enough owners to abandon the cap for a quick fix, but instead Mr. Bettman took the PA's own idea, incorporated it into the NHL's own offer, and was able to get the PA's signature on it after they came shuffling back to the table.

That rollback stings the PA like nothing else because they know they ultimately have only themselves to blame.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:41 PM
  #929
Fehr Time*
The Don of Hockey
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tra La La View Post
Which brings things back to the NHL revenues being subject to currency fluctuations.
That being said, why should player salaries be tied at all to currency fluctuations or any other economic happenings? Players have no control over the economy so why should their salaries have to be tied to it?

Fehr Time* is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:42 PM
  #930
IslesBeBack*
NHL Free Agent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
And on one last note:

Are these players dumb enough to think that sitting out and holding out for what, a higher percentage of HRR, is better then MAKING MONEY NOW and saving a year of your career? Money lost during the lockout, aside from HRR, will never come back.

So good luck to these guys for following a leader who is blind and is just getting retribution for the last lockout. It's so apparent what is going on here. Donald Fehr has zero incentive to make a deal with the league. And he'll probably go after the salary cap, too.

And then it gets real.

IslesBeBack* is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:43 PM
  #931
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottawah View Post
I seem to remember the claim was that the owners had unilaterally imposed rules/conditions in the 93 season (in which there was no cba) and they had no right to do that while negotiations were ongoing. Fehr himself claimed that was the reason for the strike (as opposed to pressuring owners).

I do not think the NHL is in the same boat in this case as they chose the safest way out, a lockout.
The MLB owners lost in 1995 due to stupidity and arrogance.

In 1995 they tried to unilaterally impose a set of new work rules - abolishing salary arbitration, centralizing all player negotiations with the commissionerís office, and ending an agreement not to collude on salaries - without even trying to declare an Impasse.

They simply said they were imposing those terms, lifting the lockout, and opening for business with replacement players.

The NLRB ruled this an unfair labor practice and NY District Court Justice Sotomayor issued an injunction prohibiting implementation of the new terms.

Had MLB tried to declare an impasse (and has it upheld by the NLRB), they would have been able to impose their previous last offer (a CBA with a cap but without the draconian restrictions of their final imposed terms) - there would have been no ULP charge or injunction.

kdb209 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:45 PM
  #932
IslesBeBack*
NHL Free Agent
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,151
vCash: 500
One last thought of the day:

How come the owners don't just come out and say, come Thanksgiving we don't have a deal, we cancel the season. Enough is enough with this already????

IslesBeBack* is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:46 PM
  #933
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Their revenue is not and will not be decreasing any time soon (current lock-out excluded).


History has shown that revenue will increase by 5% (or more): This is unreasonable in some way? The real problem is that you're buying Bettman's "poor me" attitude.

As stated before: HRR does not include all revenue that it could (and should).
How are your dot.com stocks doing? How about the value of your home? History showed that those were safe investments that would keep appreciating in spite of all common sense as well. All history shows is that you can't count on history to show you a guaranteed outcome.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:47 PM
  #934
Tra La La
Registered User
 
Tra La La's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo, New York
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fehr Time View Post
That being said, why should player salaries be tied at all to currency fluctuations or any other economic happenings? Players have no control over the economy so why should their salaries have to be tied to it?

The survival and stability of the Business. Dragging franchises back and forth over the border because of currency fluctuations isn't the answer.

Tra La La is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:47 PM
  #935
SLang
Registered User
 
SLang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 3,599
vCash: 500
What's the average NHL career length? 5-6 years? Less? Crazy that they're giving up a LARGE percentage of the average player's career by not playing right now. Hope it's worth it!

SLang is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:47 PM
  #936
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
The players would happily give up the cap. What's your point?
That you're using the NFL CBA as an argument, where there is both a cap and non-guaranteed contracts and now there is a rookie pay scale limiting salaries.

bluesfan94 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:48 PM
  #937
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesBeBack View Post
One last thought of the day:

How come the owners don't just come out and say, come Thanksgiving we don't have a deal, we cancel the season. Enough is enough with this already????
The players would say.. " we don't believe them"

Crows* is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:49 PM
  #938
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
I suggest you get your fact straight before preaching. The rollback was offered in Dec '04 to prevent a cap. Bettman put that in his back pocket and forced the players to accept it 7 months later along with the cap.

Then people wonder why the PA has zero trust in Bettman.
So what it was still the PA's idea. If they were so opposed to the idea they should have never offered it. Plus it was not 7 months that offer is what started the real negotiation that came to the agreement.

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:49 PM
  #939
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Jiggyfly View Post
Hmmm... No players got grossly overpaid under the old system, right? Bobby Holik ring a bell?
How does one get "no players got grossly overpaid under the old system" from "Gratton wasn't all that overpaid, let alone to the degree that Horcoff is."

If you wanted to make some point about players being "grossly" overpaid prior to 2006, there are any number of guys you could have picked (Lapointe, Kamensky, Zhamnov, Holik, Prospal, Blake, Allison). Gratton isn't one of them.

billybudd is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:49 PM
  #940
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fehr Time View Post
That being said, why should player salaries be tied at all to currency fluctuations or any other economic happenings? Players have no control over the economy so why should their salaries have to be tied to it?
Because the money which pays the organizations that pay the players is tied to those economic factors, it isn't delivered by magical unicorns. When you design a league where magical unicorns deliver the money, then your post would make sense.

Ducks DVM is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:50 PM
  #941
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fehr Time View Post
That being said, why should player salaries be tied at all to currency fluctuations or any other economic happenings? Players have no control over the economy so why should their salaries have to be tied to it?
Welcome to life.

bluesfan94 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:50 PM
  #942
JoeLH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesBeBack View Post
One last thought of the day:

How come the owners don't just come out and say, come Thanksgiving we don't have a deal, we cancel the season. Enough is enough with this already????
Because they would lose money? Because it were them who started the lockout? Because Bettman prolonged the process with unnecessary offers and behavior?

I'm not on the PA's side, that's for sure, but there's no need for the owners to implement that kind of deadline. If they'd do, they would make it easy for Fehr and the players to say 'yes' to another lost season.

JoeLH is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:50 PM
  #943
Tra La La
Registered User
 
Tra La La's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo, New York
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,715
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesBeBack View Post
One last thought of the day:

How come the owners don't just come out and say, come Thanksgiving we don't have a deal, we cancel the season. Enough is enough with this already????

I think they should fax over a complete CBA. And tell them no more talks until there is a player vote. The league is quite sure what they have on the table would pass.

Tra La La is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:51 PM
  #944
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
The MLB owners lost in 1995 due to stupidity and arrogance.

In 1995 they tried to unilaterally impose a set of new work rules - abolishing salary arbitration, centralizing all player negotiations with the commissionerís office, and ending an agreement not to collude on salaries - without even trying to declare an Impasse.

They simply said they were imposing those terms, lifting the lockout, and opening for business with replacement players.

The NLRB ruled this an unfair labor practice and NY District Court Justice Sotomayor issued an injunction prohibiting implementation of the new terms.

Had MLB tried to declare an impasse (and has it upheld by the NLRB), they would have been able to impose their previous last offer (a CBA with a cap but without the draconian restrictions of their final imposed terms) - there would have been no ULP charge or injunction.
I have but one qualm with this. Wouldn't she be referred to as Judge Sotomayor in this instance, because you're referring to her time as a judge?

bluesfan94 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:52 PM
  #945
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,563
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fehr Time View Post
That being said, why should player salaries be tied at all to currency fluctuations or any other economic happenings? Players have no control over the economy so why should their salaries have to be tied to it?
Because they would get the economic upswings, why should they be exempt from the downswing?

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:53 PM
  #946
Mr Jiggyfly
Registered User
 
Mr Jiggyfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 14,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesfan94 View Post
That you're using the NFL CBA as an argument, where there is both a cap and non-guaranteed contracts and now there is a rookie pay scale limiting salaries.
NFL contracts can include guaranteed money and the rookie cap has been in effect for years. It still didn't stop Young and Russell from getting paid millions for doing nothing.

Again as the poster I replied to tried to claim, how did the NFLPA get screwed over more than the NHLPA?

Utter nonsense.

Mr Jiggyfly is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:53 PM
  #947
mranderson
Registered User
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Their revenue is not and will not be decreasing any time soon (current lock-out excluded).

History has shown that revenue will increase by 5% (or more): This is unreasonable in some way? The real problem is that you're buying Bettman's "poor me" attitude.

As stated before: HRR does not include all revenue that it could (and should).
I'm not sure which text book or business school the assertion above was taken from, but that is an extremely curious position to take.

With so many variables in play, included human behavior being what it is, predicting future revenue is an extremely difficult task, even for the most (financially) successful individuals.

Moreover, while some expenses (namely employee salary) vary proportionately with revenue, others will not. And the potential for the growth rate of those other expenses to surpass income is yet another part of the risk each businessman takes in owning an NHL franchise.


In relation to HRR:

There are very real reasons why some items aren't included.

If player compensation is set to X% of HRR and if all items were included, then it would actually be more beneficial for an NHL team no STOP selling items - such as beer, fast food, etc. - whose profit margin is less than (100-X)%.

And that would make absolutely zero sense.


Last edited by mranderson: 11-14-2012 at 02:57 PM. Reason: Added paragraph breaks to make this post easier to respond to and argue with.
mranderson is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:54 PM
  #948
bluesfan94
#BackesforSelke
 
bluesfan94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeLH View Post
Because they would lose money? Because it were them who started the lockout? Because Bettman prolonged the process with unnecessary offers and behavior?

I'm not on the PA's side, that's for sure, but there's no need for the owners to implement that kind of deadline. If they'd do, they would make it easy for Fehr and the players to say 'yes' to another lost season.
Most wouldn't. Any labor stoppage has dual responsibility. Fehr refused to negotiate and still hasn't started moving from his delinked proposals.

Sounds like you are. And I don't think it's easy for any player to say "yes" to losing a year of salary.

bluesfan94 is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:54 PM
  #949
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 781
vCash: 500
I enjoyed this tweet from Scott Cullen (fantasy sports guy at tsn):
Scott Cullen ‏@tsnscottcullen

Regarding the give-and-take of CBA negotiations, does anyone know what the NBA or NFL players gained from last year's lockouts?

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
11-14-2012, 02:55 PM
  #950
rdawg1234
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,617
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tra La La View Post
I think they should fax over a complete CBA. And tell them no more talks until there is a player vote. The league is quite sure what they have on the table would pass.
Pretty close to passing.

I think the HRR would pass 100%, that's a substantial offer from the NHL and there's not much more they can or will put into it.

Contract rights though, the players wont agree on, and I wouldn't either, changing UFA, arbitration and even the 5 year limits(I'd offer 8-10 year limits) are not needed for anything really.

5% variation limit, cap-hit after retirement and the dumping in minor rule should be kept. And maybe a 10 year limit on contracts just for a bonus.

NHL comes off on some of that stuff and you'd have an agreement. Why dont they now? Well that's because the PA wont agree to the make whole yet and continue with delinkage, so why cave on contracts when they havent agreed to the other major thing?

rdawg1234 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 05:31 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.