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.

How will Fehr explain a missed season (if that happens)?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2012, 09:58 AM
  #26
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 7,291
vCash: 1250
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyBowman View Post
The CBA is not broken. The owners and management of those teams losing money are broken.
Wrong.

The CBA is indeed broken, in fact, it doesn't even exist at current. The previous CBA has expired and as such is dead. That is why there is a lockout right now; the owners and players need to craft a new CBA.

The old rules no longer apply, so it seems silly to claim they work(ed) when in fact they are presently being changed to a new set of rules.

Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 09:59 AM
  #27
Analyzer
#WeAreBoston
 
Analyzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Renfrew, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 41,001
vCash: 500
When he says the owners were unwilling to budge. Could be true, but when it comes down to it there's no deal with Fehr.

Analyzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 09:59 AM
  #28
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,951
vCash: 5792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sour Shoes View Post
even JR, hardliner that he was in 2004, said the players should sign the ****ing thing.
A lot of the retired players like to become moderates or pro-owners once they no longer have anything to gain.



As for the topic, can we not ask the same about Bettman. The players knew everything about Fehr when they hired him. They knew he lost a post-season in baseball (due to a strike, NOT lockout), and hired him anyways because they knew he would fight to the death. And they know for that, baseball players were rewarded handsomely. Fehr has been through enough character assassinations that he probably doesn't care. He's not in this for long-term gain, and within 5 years he'll likely be gone, win or lose.


But again, how about Bettman? How does he explain to owners that he had to cancel a whole season a SECOND time, against two different PA executive directors? All the Torontos and New Yorks and Philadelphia and Vancouvers dealt with it one time, a second time for the sake of Phoenixes and such who can't draw flies? After the last time a season was lost that eventually during the summer they essentially got to write the CBA and had the players sign? Bettman will have more hell to pay than Fehr.



For these reasons, it won't happen. Not enough separates the two.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:00 AM
  #29
alkurtz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mahopac, NY
Posts: 892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
So it's the owners who deserve the blame for players missing craploads of money the will never get back?

Okay.
Being a member of a union means being part of something bigger than yourself. It means sometimes you need to sacrifice for the common good and for those who will come after you. It might mean a substantial financial sacrifice. It might mean taking a stand on principal. It might mean that you need to fight for the concept that you are entitled, by the dint of your talent and hard work, to a major portion of the profit an industry makes because of your skill.

What makes hockey so unique among all the major sports is the concept of team and sacrificing for your brothers sitting next to you on the bench. It means standing up to the bully intimidating some of your players. A union is a team built on workers loyalty to each other, as is a hockey team.

So yes, ownership is to blame. We should all admire players who are giving up their salaries, especially since their careers are finite.

alkurtz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:01 AM
  #30
atomic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tra La La View Post
Seems to me Fehr has always wanted a court case. He hasn't been negotiating with the owners to get a deal. He's been trying to drive the players into disclaiming/decertifying.

Season will be canceled, union will decert or disclaim, courts will rule just like in NFL- negotiating ploy.Players will have lost season, 200 + will never play in the NHL again. Lockout will still be on.

As Bob Mac said yesterday the contract term limits would effect maybe 40 players.

The 10 year CBA is a good thing in everyones eyes. What happened to Fehr's crap about ending the cycle of lockouts?
If the union decertifies than Fehr is out of a job.

atomic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:03 AM
  #31
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 31,110
vCash: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyBowman View Post
http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...-nhl-revenues/

He said the NHL recovered from the work stoppage on the same day that it re-opened for business in August 2005, and has been pulling in record revenues since then. NHL revenue will hit $3.2 billion this year, a 50 percent increase in seven years since the lock-out wiped out a full season.


Even better numbers in 2012. Again, I don't understand where the CBA is broken. The only broken thing is the owners allowing cities like Atlanta, Phoenix, Carolina, Miami etc.. to get an NHL franchise in order for the owners to split the expansion fee.
Might want to check your history of how those organizations came to be again. No expansion involved unless you count the merger with the remaining WHA franchises as an expansion.

DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:03 AM
  #32
atomic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkurtz View Post
Being a member of a union means being part of something bigger than yourself. It means sometimes you need to sacrifice for the common good and for those who will come after you. It might mean a substantial financial sacrifice. It might mean taking a stand on principal. It might mean that you need to fight for the concept that you are entitled, by the dint of your talent and hard work, to a major portion of the profit an industry makes because of your skill.

What makes hockey so unique among all the major sports is the concept of team and sacrificing for your brothers sitting next to you on the bench. It means standing up to the bully intimidating some of your players. A union is a team built on workers loyalty to each other, as is a hockey team.

So yes, ownership is to blame. We should all admire players who are giving up their salaries, especially since their careers are finite.
yeah i am sure the stars who are playing in europe are sharing their salaries with the third and fourth liners who can't find work.

The players are greedy. If they really cared about each other everyone would be paid the same amount.

atomic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:05 AM
  #33
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,951
vCash: 5792
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
Might want to check your history of how those organizations came to be again. No expansion involved unless you count the merger with the remaining WHA franchises as an expansion.
In fairness to him, Phoenix and Carolina weren't WHA markets. They moved WHA markets to there, and in one case moved back to one.


I do think people aren't correct in associating relocation with expansion. They put teams in Phoenix and Florida, and they were not properly set up to accept them.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:07 AM
  #34
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
I don't think the players even know what they're fighting for. I really doubt the majority of them really support this, but it's hard for them to speak out.

And one of the most ridiculous, weakest arguments from the NHLPA side is that "it's the owners' lockout because we'd still be willing to play right now". Give me a break.

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:13 AM
  #35
spudnick
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
So it's the owners who deserve the blame for players missing craploads of money the will never get back?

Okay.
No it's the owners who are 100% at fault for this mess, be it the big market owners for handing out ridiculous contracts or the small market owners for actually thinking that buying a team and putting it in Phoenix would be a smart investment. Even if the owners get everything they want Phoenix will not turn a profit, team will still lose a lot of money, probably not as much but will still lose and in 8 years the owners will lock the players out saying the current system doesn't work and needs to change. The players have every right to hold out and I'm glad they are. I want the season to be cancelled because I want to see Nashville pay weber 13 more million on July 1st so that would be 26 million paid without a game being played.

spudnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:14 AM
  #36
grego
Registered User
 
grego's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,293
vCash: 500
I doubt it will cost Bettman to lose a second season.

He got Goodenow kicked out by the PA with the last negotiation. Someone similar to Fehr that would say no to any proposal with a cap, and even if the system was flawed the NHL did get their cap in the old agreement so he won something quite major because th PA has accepted a cap.

Now with Fehr another almost impossible opponent he is doing as good as can be expected. I am sure the owners recognize that it is not like they are up against a normal negotiator in Fehr, they either let Fehr run the agenda and take his deal or risk burning a season or 2, since he follows many similar ideas of Bob Goodenow in negotiation.

Bettman will come out of this and leave the NHL when he is ready to retire, and really he has been the comish for 20 years so he may be wanting to exit the moment he feels the NHL is in a stable position and he is content with how it is

grego is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:16 AM
  #37
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkurtz View Post
Being a member of a union means being part of something bigger than yourself. It means sometimes you need to sacrifice for the common good and for those who will come after you. It might mean a substantial financial sacrifice. It might mean taking a stand on principal. It might mean that you need to fight for the concept that you are entitled, by the dint of your talent and hard work, to a major portion of the profit an industry makes because of your skill.

What makes hockey so unique among all the major sports is the concept of team and sacrificing for your brothers sitting next to you on the bench. It means standing up to the bully intimidating some of your players. A union is a team built on workers loyalty to each other, as is a hockey team.

So yes, ownership is to blame. We should all admire players who are giving up their salaries, especially since their careers are finite.

So what exactly is the PA fighting for? How does PA explain the lost 1.89B to it's members?

How does those "brothers" explain the fact they will lose 1.89B and most likely end up getting a worse deal than they are currently offered?

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:22 AM
  #38
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
So what exactly is the PA fighting for? How does PA explain the lost 1.89B to it's members?

How does those "brothers" explain the fact they will lose 1.89B and most likely end up getting a worse deal than they are currently offered?
The Union is doing this for the greater good, just like the owners so everyone can make money.


Last edited by ThirdManIn: 12-08-2012 at 04:01 PM. Reason: No one is forcing you to be here
Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:23 AM
  #39
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
The Union is doing this for the greater good, just like the owners so everyone can make money.

What is the so-called "greater good" for the players? Please explain that to me in detail.


Last edited by ThirdManIn: 12-08-2012 at 04:01 PM. Reason: quote/response
Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:25 AM
  #40
spudnick
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Why are the owners fighting for contract lengths? I they get rid of front loaded contracts why does it matter how long an owner wants to sign a player for. Put a 5% variance on year to year and that's it. If the Flyers want to sign thier star player Giroux to a 15 year contact let them, can't really circumvent the rules with a 5% variance. It makes no sense an Definately not worth cancelling a season for. One of the main reasons I love my job is the job security, I am under contract until I am 60 years old and have been doing the Job since I was 18. It's a good feeling knowing that I can't lose my job. That is exactly why players like Richards, carter, ovie kovy etc like the contract lengths, Job security. Get rid of the cap circumvention and leave contract lengths alone, if a owner signs a player to a contract and it turns out to be a crappy one (ala diepietro) so be it.

spudnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:33 AM
  #41
spudnick
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
So what exactly is the PA fighting for? How does PA explain the lost 1.89B to it's members?

How does those "brothers" explain the fact they will lose 1.89B and most likely end up getting a worse deal than they are currently offered?
Why does any union go on strike and lose money? The players will not get worse than what is currently offered I gaurentee that. They are not accepting what is offered now they will not accept less, even if a season is lost. Not going to happen. I think the players can't wait out the small market owners, it's just a matter of time that either those teams say, we need to make money we can't let this go on or teams will end up filing for bankruptcy.

spudnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:34 AM
  #42
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
What is the so-called "greater good" for the players? Please explain that to me in detail.
This is to get more money for the players. That's all. The NHL will even offer more make whole next time. And they keep the contract lengths as well. You'll be surprised.


Last edited by ThirdManIn: 12-08-2012 at 04:01 PM.
Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:35 AM
  #43
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spudnick View Post
Why does any union go on strike and lose money? The players will not get worse than what is currently offered I gaurentee that. They are not accepting what is offered now they will not accept less, even if a season is lost. Not going to happen. I think the players can't wait out the small market owners, it's just a matter of time that either those teams say, we need to make money we can't let this go on or teams will end up filing for bankruptcy.
The small market teams are generally the ones happy with sitting out, because they're not losing as much money this way.

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:37 AM
  #44
spudnick
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
I'd like to know too. I thought more money for everyone would be the ultimate goal, but that doesn't seem to be it anymore.
How is it more money for everyone?? Players are going from 57% to 50%, I'm no math expert but if my calculations are correct that is less money, even if revenues rise to 5 billion in 4 years they will still be making less by getting 50% of 5 billion then 57%, the owners are the only ones coming out a head, just like the last CBA

spudnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:37 AM
  #45
DrVanntastic
Registered User
 
DrVanntastic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wentzville, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 1,873
vCash: 350
Amazing that there are still people that think money is the most important thing in life.

DrVanntastic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:38 AM
  #46
spudnick
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
The small market teams are generally the ones happy with sitting out, because they're not losing as much money this way.
Tell Nashville that next July when Weber comes knocking for 13 more million.

spudnick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:42 AM
  #47
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
RIP Kev
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 31,110
vCash: 2498
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
In fairness to him, Phoenix and Carolina weren't WHA markets. They moved WHA markets to there, and in one case moved back to one.


I do think people aren't correct in associating relocation with expansion. They put teams in Phoenix and Florida, and they were not properly set up to accept them.
That's exactly my point, relocation and expansion are two entirely different beasts. One simply requires the league to be looking for a market where they can get as solid short term and long term gains as possible, with ownership that will prove to be stable. Finding the optimal locations for that is the challenge.

Relocation is all about an individual owner and the ability of the prior markets to handle difficulties with said teams.

That said it certainly isn't unreasonable to question just how (in)effectively the NHL marketed the sport to the new markets on not only the level of the individual team but at the grassroots level as well. Some have been successes, some have been flops of varying degrees, but the one thing I've noticed is that the NHL has seemed to tell these owners "alright, here's your team, good luck growing the game" instead of having the necessary resources in place to make that a much more attainable outcome.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
The small market teams are generally the ones happy with sitting out, because they're not losing as much money this way.
Glad you worded it like that, though it's interesting to see how some of the hardliners from last time (Nashville and Carolina) have seemingly moderated to an extent. Certainly helps that both markets were generating significant buzz before the lockout locally (strong playoff run last season by Nashville, record STH sales and retention by Carolina).

DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:42 AM
  #48
GKJ
Global Moderator
Entertainment
 
GKJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Do not trade plz
Country: United States
Posts: 109,951
vCash: 5792
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd View Post
The small market teams are generally the ones happy with sitting out, because they're not losing as much money this way.
For this reason, for the most part, while I don't tear down most "non-traditional markets," any small market whose owners would rather sit out than play are welcome to go fly a kite and get out of our sport. Let the people who want to get serious, get serious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by spudnick View Post
Tell Nashville that next July when Weber comes knocking for 13 more million.
Hold on, I am not anti-Nashville by any means, but they matched the offer sheet knowing full well what it meant in terms of Weber's payments. They weren't worried about money, they were worried about long-term damage to the market and fan base. They overpaid Pekka Rinne essentially because they just wanted to prove they'll give players money.

GKJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:45 AM
  #49
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
This is to get more money for the players. That's all. The NHL will even offer more make whole next time. And they keep the contract lengths as well. You'll be surprised.
So you think PA will get a better deal if the whole season is missed?

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2012, 10:46 AM
  #50
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GKJ View Post
For this reason, for the most part, while I don't tear down most "non-traditional markets," any small market whose owners would rather sit out than play are welcome to go fly a kite and get out of our sport. Let the people who want to get serious, get serious.
I don't really disagree, but they are current owners, and their teams are in trouble. So it's well within their rights to fight for a CBA that works for them.

Seachd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 12:53 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.