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.
Owner-Player meeting only, no Bettman or Fehr (UPD: 12/4 in NYC)
That's no really fair.....if the players first counter would have been 71% of HRR (the owners subtracted 14% so the players add 14%) would we be saying the players have moved leaps and bounds from their original offer?
I'm pro owner but lets be real the only side giving anything here will be the players
The NHL simply reversed the shares... what's good for the goose is good for the gander... right? Wait no?
__________________ "It’s not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, it’s as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
That's no really fair.....if the players first counter would have been 71% of HRR (the owners subtracted 14% so the players add 14%) would we be saying the players have moved leaps and bounds from their original offer?
I'm pro owner but lets be real the only side giving anything here will be the players
There has always been a significant gap between what the player side claim they are willing to give up and what they actually are giving up, especially with the insistence that players should be protected against low revenue growth. At this point it's hard to estimate the damage done by the conflict, but I think it might be big.
The players share of revenue will go down, no doubt. But it won't be the 50/50 split the players claim they have accepted. Even the owners offer gives players more than 50/50.
I do think the owners are overreaching with the contracting demands. They might be wanted, but certainly aren't needed. RFA players having a bit more leverage isn't the end of the world and should be something GMs should be able to deal with.
The owners, I would imagine, don't think the players will sacrifice so much income.
The players, I would imagine, don't believe the financials are that bad and the owners will not cancel a second season. Alot of emotion from young stars, I dont grasp.
The owners will confirm they are together through this and adjustments (salaries reduced and fluctuate with revenues) is required.
I hope I am wrong (2 year lockout predicted at the beginning of this) and we can get back to watching NHL hockey with my son, drinking beer on saturday night, realising there is a second game on saturday pacific time like its a x-mas present
That's no really fair.....if the players first counter would have been 71% of HRR (the owners subtracted 14% so the players add 14%) would we be saying the players have moved leaps and bounds from their original offer?
I'm pro owner but lets be real the only side giving anything here will be the players
Instead of moving to 71%, they simply delinked their salary from the revenue. Much better.
SunGarrioch 6:43am via Web
Jeff Vinik has been in the league two years. Mark Chipman has been in the league one year. Both are in the room today. Why? #NHL
Can't speak for Chipman, but I can say that Jeff Vinik is a highly intelligent man and a brilliant businessman. Tampa Bay players are singing his praises in today's local papers and they say his willingness to listen and discuss could be very helpful in this process. One thing is for sure, he won't hurt the process and might be able to help the players gain some insight into this ordeal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BnGBear1970
TThe presence of Jacobs makes me fear he'll be the only one talking, and that Vinik and Chipman have already been warned to stay on point and be seen, not heard.
IMO, if that warning had been made, Mr. Vinik wouldn't be attending. That's not something he'd be likely to accept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar
How about signing over $100 million worth of contracts in the 48hrs immediately preceding the lockout only to turn around and say "sorry, we won't be paying you the full value of the contract we signed 24 hrs ago"?
I don't know for sure, of course, but in my opinion the players who signed those deals did so knowing full well there was a very good chance there would be some element of rollback to them. Most of the fans knew it, can't believe the players and agents have their heads so deep in the sand that they had no idea that likelihood existed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dellstrom
I hope it isn't another
"____ wasn't willing to negotiate and that's sad"
Won't be seeing that since, as far as I know, this wasn't a negotiating session.
IMO, if that warning had been made, Mr. Vinik wouldn't be attending. That's not something he'd be likely to accept.
I don't know for sure, of course, but in my opinion the players who signed those deals did so knowing full well there was a very good chance there would be some element of rollback to them. Most of the fans knew it, can't believe the players and agents have their heads so deep in the sand that they had no idea that likelihood existed.
From what I hear of Chipman, I would assume it's the same with him.
And as for those new contracts... no one knew exactly how they would phase in the new CBA (with regard to the split). There's several ways to do it so the players do not take a hit via escrow or from a rollback. But those players who signed deals (especially the ones who signed deals AFTER the NHL released it's first proposal) did so knowing full well what the NHL was looking to achieve.
Well the most telling examples would be just about everytime he hands the Stanley Cup to the winning team. And is the league significantly better off not playing and at risk of losing both players, sponsors, fans and credibility? Better off with a potential decertification move by the players which could ultimately result in 2 years of not playing, contraction or relocation of some franchises, loss of some of the best players in the world and a whole different system. And do you think if the NHL gets what its demanding in this round, we won't be right back here in 5, 7 or 8 years? I'm sorry but I'm not buying it and I'm putting about 70% of the blame on Bettman and his cronies.
Posters have been saying that Bettman was gone after this or that for a long time. I would like to see some put their money where their mouth is and stop with the predictions as he has survived through numerous supposed "Waterloos". He'll very likely survive again. Demonizing one person is generally counterproductive in viewing the true issues at hand in a conflict. "Why is Bettman in place?" is a better question to ask.
stevezipay2:14pm via TweetDeck Owners/players meetings here in Manhattan have passed three-hour mark; whenever complete, we expect to hear from NHLPA reps and Bill Daly
stevezipay3:36pm via TweetDeck
We're told the NHL/PA meeting today has included small group sessions and large group talks.
The 18 players present in New York today are:
Craig Adams
David Backes
Michael Cammalleri
Sidney Crosby
B.J. Crombeen
Mathieu Darche
Shane Doan
Ron Hainsey
Shawn Horcoff
Jamal Mayers
Manny Malhotra
Andy McDonald
Ryan Miller
George Parros
Brad Richards
Martin St. Louis
Jonathan Toews
Kevin Westgarth.
sorry if posted
This is actually a good group of players. A good mix of star players and role players. It's important that players who are the face of the league (Your Crosby's and Toews'), but it's also good that some of the very well educated guys are there (Parros, Adams, and Westgarth).
This is actually a good group of players. A good mix of star players and role players. It's important that players who are the face of the league (Your Crosby's and Toews'), but it's also good that some of the very well educated guys are there (Parros, Adams, and Westgarth).
More than that, Horcoff, Miller, McDonald, Backes, Hainsey, St. Louis, Darche . . . Many more college educated (at least some college) that is represented in the general group of the NHLPA. It's 20-30% college leaguewide and this is better than 50% at the meeting.
0 Euros on that list. I'm also curious if they just see a player with a college degree and put him in even if his degree has nothing to do with business or economics. Anyways the fact that the meetings have lasted this long is encouraging because it means that it wasn't just owners lecturing players and the players walking out.
