HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

NHL Lockout Discussion: Despite All My Rage I Am Still Just A Rat In A Cage

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-17-2012, 01:39 PM
  #26
VeteranNetPresence
Disco Super Fly.
 
VeteranNetPresence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,735
vCash: 500
looks like they went from zero talks to the players being frustrated as hell and wanting to be back at the negotiating table. all within ~3 days. genius move by bettman with this moratorium

VeteranNetPresence is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:40 PM
  #27
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeteranNetPresence View Post
looks like they went from zero talks to the players being frustrated as hell and wanting to be back at the negotiating table. all within ~3 days. genius move by bettman with this moratorium
Now watch the players say that Bettman couldn't even get a two week moratorium right. But it was a good move by Bettman. It was a decent throw and didn't cause a whole lot of harm.

Mike Jones is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:41 PM
  #28
colchar
Registered User
 
colchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBPantherfan View Post
Yup there is a big difference between trying to fix problems and just being ********.
Bettman is the one who is ********.


Quote:
Because every pro league even the ones with a salary cap the revenues go up the salaries go up the players are cutting off their nose to spite their faces can't help you if you can't see that.
And I can't help you if you can't see what the owners are trying to do here.


Quote:
No I think the players should give up a few million so their industry is healthier and the people that take all the financial risk and fund the industry that pays them can break even.

Why should the players be the ones to give it up? And while the owners do take financial risk, they are in the situation they are in because they cannot control their own employees (the GMs) who give out these ridiculous contracts. And they would be in better financial shape if they weren't required to prop up teams that are in lousy markets - are the players to blame for that or is Bettman?


Quote:
I see exactly what the owners are doing here but I side with them because why should they lose money that they EARNED for our entertainment and to fund spoiled players.

They chose to buy teams and they choose to support Bettman who has placed teams in unsustainable markets. They also choose to employ people (GMs) who give out moronic contracts. How can they agree to contracts like the ones they negotiated in the 48hrs preceding the lockout and then claim two days later that they are poor?

colchar is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:42 PM
  #29
TMI
Mod Supervisor
 
TMI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 44,764
vCash: 500
Ugh

I'd love to have ONE thread without the term "********" appearing. I guess this won't be that thread...

TMI is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:46 PM
  #30
Freudian
No Guenin, No cry
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,003
vCash: 0
Despite the rhetoric lately, I'm more hopeful now than I've been in the last couple of weeks that we will get a deal done.

I think it's dawning on everyone that they won't win this and it's time to salvage what they can from this mess.

Freudian is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:46 PM
  #31
colchar
Registered User
 
colchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
The players are a product that costs more to produce that what it can be sold for.


But the owners aren't bearing all the costs of producing that product - they are getting assets that are almost fully produced before they pay out a single penny.

colchar is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:47 PM
  #32
azaloum90
Registered User
 
azaloum90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The coop!
Posts: 3,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Despite the rhetoric lately, I'm more hopeful now than I've been in the last couple of weeks that we will get a deal done.

I think it's dawning on everyone that they won't win this and it's time to salvage what they can from this mess.
every time our hopes get sunk, the dawn peaks a little bit brighter. honestly, it wears EVERY SINGLE TIME everything gets shut down... players are starting to come to reality.

IOf they end this lockout before the end of the year, I will commend them. Its hard giving up 12% of your income, and that goes for ANYONE... I know these people have alot of money, but they worked for that money, and this is not an easy endeavor.

Things will happen. We won't lose a season. I'm still not convinced of it

azaloum90 is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:47 PM
  #33
colchar
Registered User
 
colchar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinicer View Post
This is not true for some teams, and I think the books would look very, very different if all TRUE hockey related income and expenses were included in the owners' computations, but they are not because our tax law allows for them not to. I find the claims of the owners that they are losing all this money very dubious for this reason: there is no way any of them would own a hockey "business" for such a long period of time if they were losing money hand over fist. If this were truly the case and over such a long period of time, then all of these owners would be OUT of business because they are dumb, pure and simple.

Like all billionaires, the hockey team is part of a much larger portfolio of assets, and none of these owners would be owning hockey teams if it was not beneficial to it.

Might some who own them be using them as tax write-offs?

colchar is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:48 PM
  #34
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,696
vCash: 500
To get started by the beginning of December, it needs to get done by Friday doesn't it? Someone mentioned they need 9 days or something?

SolidSnakeUS is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:49 PM
  #35
TMI
Mod Supervisor
 
TMI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 44,764
vCash: 500
Reminder: politics need to stay in the political forum. This includes discussing the merits of economic systems. We are not here to debate those things.

TMI is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:50 PM
  #36
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,471
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
Bettman is the one who is ********.




And I can't help you if you can't see what the owners are trying to do here.





Why should the players be the ones to give it up? And while the owners do take financial risk, they are in the situation they are in because they cannot control their own employees (the GMs) who give out these ridiculous contracts. And they would be in better financial shape if they weren't required to prop up teams that are in lousy markets - are the players to blame for that or is Bettman?





They chose to buy teams and they choose to support Bettman who has placed teams in unsustainable markets. They also choose to employ people (GMs) who give out moronic contracts. How can they agree to contracts like the ones they negotiated in the 48hrs preceding the lockout and then claim two days later that they are poor?
It's asinine to think that it's all on the GM's and Owners that the price of contracts keep going up. It's got a lot to do with the CBA that the players helped negotiate.

If the NHL really wanted to make it so player salaries couldn't grow at all, then they would have a permanent hard cap of say $60 million. But the players made sure that their salaries would climb with every year. Started out at the beginning of the last CBA with guys making good money, but nothing stupid, now you get contracts like the Parise and Suter ones at the end of the CBA due to the cap rising based on overall revenue. Hell even if they tied it to overall profit in the league the players salaries still would have stayed fairly normal. Not to mention the NHLPA will take a player to task if he takes anything less than what he could possibly drag out of the owners.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:51 PM
  #37
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by burf View Post
People saying that the NHLPA needs to offer its members an introductory course in economics have obviously never taken an introductory level course in economics. If they had, they'd have realized that early-level economics courses generally give you no practical knowledge at all. And I'm saying this as someone with a master's degree in economics.

A few basic finance courses, on the other hand, would probably be useful. But then again, the same thing would apparently be useful to a lot of posters here on both sides of the debate.
I think you're being a bit too literal with the "introductory level course" quote. It's pretty clear to me that what those of us who have suggested some type of financial/investment guidance for the players meant was just some basic education to help them understand how not to squander their fortunes and have a secure future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyisforeveryone View Post
The players are not that stupid, don't you think they've got friends, much family, advisors, agents, etc. that they consult with about the situation? Please for people to insinuate 3 times each page that the families etc. are that ignorant is preposterous.
There's a difference between stupid/ignorant and uneducated. I'm pretty smart but (or perhaps because of that) I readily admit I'm totally uneducated on many of the ways the financial world works. I don't think it's at all preposterous to think that the average person/family isn't highly proficient in high finances. Doesn't make them stupid, just uneducated on the topic. Nothing to be ashamed of. I've made investments over the years that have helped me to the spot where I am today - with a guaranteed income that will help me retain my current lifestyle. However, I made very few of those investments on my own. I spoke with investment counselors and people who are educated in that area. I recognized my own shortcomings and sought help from people who actually understand the stuff - something that these players should do.

Quote:
Oh wait, you love the emblem on the sweater, not the players? As time passes new players fill that jersey, they make a team what it is. Players are not going to be taken advantage of like the 1950's.
They don't have to continue to be "taken advantage of" the way they currently are. They don't have to settle for 5-star hotels, chartered flights, top-notch training/clubhouse facilities, hefty per diem or anything else. They are quite free to pursue employment elsewhere upon the expiration of their contracts. If they find the NHL's treatment so horrific, I'm sure other leagues will welcome them. They just need to do their homework and find leagues where they will be treated better.

Quote:
It's impossible for players, who make an avereage of 2.5 mil a year and can only work 10 years, to be the greedy ones here. All they ask is for a shred of respect and some consolation as a sign of who truly is the NHL,
Oh, dear. Yes, $25M in ten years is borderline poverty. What I wonder, however, is if there is some sort of mandate that NHL players aren't allowed to pursue other careers when their playing days are over. If $25M can't be budgeted to take care of them for their life, or even if a minimum wage player who only lasts one contract can't make $1.5M last for a while, can they not engage in other professions? As far as I know, there's no rule against it. They can make their millions playing and, when they're done, get a job in the real world just like the rest of us.

As for the "shred of respect" - I highly doubt the players have any concerns about this. Just give 'em their paychecks, that's what they're really interested in.

Quote:
Does anyone in the BOH even comprehend that a billionaire makes 1000 times that of a millionaire?? It's like I make 30,000 a year and you make 30 million, how can you not pay for our dinner? Owners should view their team as entertainment, If I pay $1500 a year for hockey a billionaire can can lose 50 million, that's fair right? It should be but in this sick world we glorify the sociopath mega-capitalists as heroes and philanthropists while demonizing a group of elite athletes that just want their fair share.
There's such a huge difference. You can choose whether or not to pay that $1,500 per year. It's absolutely no risk for you. You either pay it or you don't. The owners have risked that $50M with no guarantee of ever seeing it again. The owner who makes $30M while you make $30K doesn't owe you dinner. He owes you your salary and any benefits that come with your job. He takes the risk, you get the salary/benefits you agreed to take when you accepted your employment. The only differences between you and the NHL players is they make millions and those millions are guaranteed, while you can get fired at any time and get nothing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thinicer View Post
How exactly are the players telling the owners how to "run" the NHL? This is collective bargaining - it pertains to working conditions, and other industries have unions too, the only difference is that in the NHL the players ARE the product that is being sold and marketed.
I have to disagree with this. The game/sport is the product. It's like TV/movies. The show is the product, the actors bring it to the screen. Over time, the actors change but there are still TV shows and movies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
And Bettman isn't trying to make up for the mistakes he made the last time?
Absolutely, he is trying to correct the mistakes and close the loopholes. There's a big difference between that and the players seemingly only seeking revenge for "losing" the last CBA. Concentrating on revenge and ignoring the path to a fair deal for both sides isn't wise.

Quote:
What gives you or anyone else the right to tell people what labour conditions/contract conditions they should accept?
It's a message board, here for people to voice opinions. It's a thread about the CBA. What else do you expect us to talk about here?


Last edited by TMI: 11-17-2012 at 01:54 PM. Reason: qdp
Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:52 PM
  #38
officeglen
Registered User
 
officeglen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 3,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
It just boggles my mind that the players are willing to forfeit an entire year of their short playing careers and millions of dollars over a 7% reduction in HRR and some contract restrictions that only a few players took advantage of anyway (IIRC someone posted that under 100 players have contracts that are 6 years or longer).

This lockout will not only cost them millions of real dollars this year it will hurt HRR, which will cost them potential dollars down the road.

****ing idiots.
Let me put this in terms that will not boggle your mind.

A bigger kid comes up to you in the school yard and demands that you give him a quarter or he will beat you up. Are you willing to forfeit your physical well-being just for a quarter? However if you give up the quarter today, do you think the bigger kid isn't going to ask for more tomorrow?

Now let me put this in terms how this type of situation has personally cost my family. Over a decade ago the strike of my wife's union collapsed. Since that time there has been absolutely no increase in salaries (thus, with inflation a loss in salary). Each time the contract comes up for renewal, the benefits keep changing for the worse, both fewer benefits and the employer contributes less. The employer can do it and does do it because they know the union is not strong enough to take their lumps in another strike.

Taking the short term route of appeasement is often long term stupid, and gets you the legacy of a Neville Chamberlain. Sometimes you need a leader who can say "we shall never surrender."

officeglen is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:54 PM
  #39
Erik Estrada
@Denis.Coderre
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,479
vCash: 500
Well time for the League and their proxies to put the kibosh on the Snyder story before it gets out of hand... I'm reading PA related tweets. It's seriously raised their morale. A huge psychological shift has just happened...

Erik Estrada is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:57 PM
  #40
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
Well time for the League and their proxies to put the kibosh on the Snyder story before it gets out of hand... I'm reading PA related tweets. It's seriously raised their morale. A huge psychological shift has just happened...
I am too but wouldn't league types have to be careful? This isn't just any owner they'd be messing with.

Mike Jones is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:01 PM
  #41
thinicer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Orlando, Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
Might some who own them be using them as tax write-offs?
I'm not expert on taxes and investments, but I don't think that you can use a sports team as a tax write-off.

I think that owners hold onto their teams primarily because of capital gains - the values of NHL franchises have increased about 50% since the last lockout.

thinicer is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:03 PM
  #42
Gigantor The Goalie
Registered User
 
Gigantor The Goalie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: New London
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,458
vCash: 500
Ed Snider can say all he wants about wanting a deal. Problem is unless the NHLPA offers a deal that involves a linked cap, the NHL will not talk to them. As of now the NHLPA has offered 5 delinkage type deals to the NHL. All of them have been laughed off the table. Sure Snider wants hockey back but he's not going to be dumb about it. For all we know he's just playing the players, trying to get the message "we want to negotiate a deal to so stop with the useless complaining".

Gigantor The Goalie is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:05 PM
  #43
Mike Jones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoytoSakic View Post
Ed Snider can say all he wants about wanting a deal. Problem is unless the NHLPA offers a deal that involves a linked cap, the NHL will not talk to them. As of now the NHLPA has offered 5 delinkage type deals to the NHL. All of them have been laughed off the table. Sure Snider wants hockey back but he's not going to be dumb about it. For all we know he's just playing the players, trying to get the message "we want to negotiate a deal to so stop with the useless complaining".
Isn't this something that could be communicated through a backchannel?

Mike Jones is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:06 PM
  #44
Frodo Baggins
Registered User
 
Frodo Baggins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 541
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuck in Socal View Post
Why are they going to negotiate next week if both sides have nothing new to offer...

This is such a circus.
maybe they do have something new to offer? there was a report that Ed Snider is making a push to end the lockout

Frodo Baggins is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:07 PM
  #45
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpontbriand View Post
I also will NOT attend a NHL game until the owners grow a pair and get a new commish.
I guess you won't be going to any games for a while. That said, when the new commish does the exact same job as the old commish, what do you do then?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DocBrown View Post
The NHLPA's offer to play while negotiating a new CBA would be more sincere had they been willing to do so last year. Apparently last year negotiating during the regular season was too much of a distraction though.
Yep. Or it could have been that pesky CBA still being in place, which would have meant a strike wouldn't be possible. Nah.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuck in Socal View Post
Why are they going to negotiate next week if both sides have nothing new to offer...
Hopefully, the 2-week moratorium suggestion, together with the "we're through making offers" (paraphrased) showed the union it's fish or cut bait time. They're either going to have to finally break down and actually participate in *real* negotiations, or it will again go nowhere.

Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
Bettman is the one who is ********.
Please. The only "********" people are the players, who are so resentful over "losing" the last CBA that has reaped them incredible rewards. Bettman is a businessman, he doesn't get his feelings hurt.

Quote:
They chose to buy teams and they choose to support Bettman who has placed teams in unsustainable markets.
Which teams did Bettman place in unsustainable markets?

Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
But the owners aren't bearing all the costs of producing that product - they are getting assets that are almost fully produced before they pay out a single penny.
Well, the NHL does have farm systems and does pay to develop players that are drafted. I would imagine the costs involved in running farm teams are quite significant (I don't know how much, if any, the parent clubs share in expenses, but they do have employees on staff and they have players in the system who have to be paid, insured, etc.). Same for MLB. Not so for the NFL, which lets colleges take care of that.

That said, I'd say most industries in the "real world" where most of us reside are more fitting of your example. In reading job ads, most employers have requirements such as college degrees, certifications, etc., before considering someone for employment. Those employers certainly don't pay for people to get those pre-required degrees and certifications.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:07 PM
  #46
Kings4thecup
Registered User
 
Kings4thecup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
Might some who own them be using them as tax write-offs?
And what does this statement do to further the discussion? Whether an owner loses money and is able to write those losses off on his taxes would only further the need for more revenue torwards the owners. If the owner can write off his loses, that means he has loses. Just think about it....

Kings4thecup is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:07 PM
  #47
uncleherman77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 310
vCash: 500
Like others have said unless the PA offers a linked cap and moves on contract issues it doesn't matter if they're talking or not talking.

uncleherman77 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:08 PM
  #48
thinicer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Orlando, Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
I have to disagree with this. The game/sport is the product. It's like TV/movies. The show is the product, the actors bring it to the screen. Over time, the actors change but there are still TV shows and movies.
You disagree? If the game/sport is truly the product, then the NHL would be no more popular than the AHL, ECHL or any of the Canadian leagues, right? The market would be very saturated, but because the game/sport is NOT the product, the NHL is way above these leagues in popularity. What makes the NHL different? It differentiates itself from the others because it's where the best players in the world play, thus proving my point that the players ARE the product. If they were not, the fans would have no problem whatsoever with the NHL locking out.

thinicer is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:10 PM
  #49
officeglen
Registered User
 
officeglen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 3,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by uncleherman77 View Post
Like others have said unless the PA offers a linked cap and moves on contract issues it doesn't matter if they're talking or not talking.
Why can't the NHL move on contract issues?

officeglen is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:10 PM
  #50
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
Well time for the League and their proxies to put the kibosh on the Snyder story before it gets out of hand... I'm reading PA related tweets. It's seriously raised their morale. A huge psychological shift has just happened...
And that shift can come crashing back down if they try to push some more and is met with a brick wall by the league. They can't rest their hopes in this article being complete truth and that Snyder will get the league to cave to their proposal. They still need to be smart with how they proceed next.

Ari91 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 03:36 PM.

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.