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, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Westgarth talks about negotiating with owners

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-10-2012, 01:50 PM
  #26
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealkoho View Post
^^^^^^^^

now that's funny

Timmy's wit is the stuff of legend around here.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 01:50 PM
  #27
Heaton
Moderator
#hope
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 18,617
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Should probably get this out there as well:


We have gone a lot further than a great percentage of the membership has wanted us to go,” Westgarth said. “I don’t know how you look at our offer and say that we’ve been unreasonable.”
And since owners say the same thing - it appears that this 'small gap' is ********.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 01:53 PM
  #28
Heaton
Moderator
#hope
 
Heaton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Rochester, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 18,617
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Heaton
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Just because the players are informed doesn't mean they're skilled negotiators
I don't think I said otherwise. I just don't believe Westgarth that these owners that were brought in weren't informed. Especially due to the fact that everyone was all smiles until the owners weren't allowed to continue negotiating without Fehr in the room.

Heaton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 01:54 PM
  #29
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
And since owners say the same thing - it appears that this 'small gap' is ********.

Posturing. The NHL attempted to do an end-around Fehr, to try to drive a wedge between them and their exec leader. Unfortunately, it seems some agents may be willing participants-- just like last time.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 01:54 PM
  #30
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Just because the players are informed
Are they?

“There are a half-dozen or more players who knew exactly where we were and could detail every aspect of where we were at,” Westgarth said

__________________
Can we drop the puck yet? Next season is shaping up to be a very very good one!
Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 01:55 PM
  #31
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Are they?

“There are a half-dozen or more players who knew exactly where we were and could detail every aspect of where we were at,” Westgarth said

.... that were in attendance.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 02:02 PM
  #32
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Should probably get this out there as well:

We have gone a lot further than a great percentage of the membership has wanted us to go,” Westgarth said. “I don’t know how you look at our offer and say that we’ve been unreasonable.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heaton View Post
And since owners say the same thing - it appears that this 'small gap' is ********.
Posturing. The NHL attempted to do an end-around Fehr, to try to drive a wedge between them and their exec leader. Unfortunately, it seems some agents may be willing participants-- just like last time.
So the PA saying they've moved farther than "a great percentage" wanted us to go, shows that the league is being unreasonable. But the owners offering something that (and I'm paraphrasing here as I don't feel like watching GB's 32m PC to get an exact quote) "a large number were upset with that that was offered" is posturing.

[mod]


Last edited by mouser: 12-10-2012 at 03:47 PM. Reason: Let's stick to discussing the topic, not the posters
Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 02:25 PM
  #33
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
So the PA saying they've moved farther than "a great percentage" wanted us to go, shows that the league is being unreasonable. But the owners offering something that (and I'm paraphrasing here as I don't feel like watching GB's 32m PC to get an exact quote) "a large number were upset with that that was offered" is posturing.

[mod]

I think both sides had gone farther than their original position, or certainly farther than the hawkish sides within would agree to.

I made the point elsewhere that this may be a case where there are more than just two factions, especially on the owners side where that had been reported (no one side has a clear majority). It's like trying to build a coalition government.

Edit: To expand, the things each side needs from the other to close that deal lead away from the compromises or trade-offs needed to get support from the other faction.


Last edited by mouser: 12-10-2012 at 03:48 PM. Reason: qep
Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 02:40 PM
  #34
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Are they?

“There are a half-dozen or more players who knew exactly where we were and could detail every aspect of where we were at,” Westgarth said
You guys are reading way too much into that imo. Only people directly involved from either side are going to know "exactly" where they were at in negotiations. Westgarth was surprised that none of these owners knew "exactly" where they were at... probably a light jab about these moderates not being involved directly in negotiations.


Last edited by Scurr: 12-10-2012 at 02:47 PM.
Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 02:43 PM
  #35
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I made the point elsewhere that this may be a case where there are more than just two factions, especially on the owners side where that had been reported (no one side has a clear majority). It's like trying to build a coalition government.
Really good point. What both sides need to do is convince the moderates on the other... unfortunately both sides keep doing the opposites and pissing off the moderates on the other side.

Hardliners, moderates and hamrliks... at least 3 factions.

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 02:44 PM
  #36
overlords
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 26,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy View Post
Jacobs was way out of his office.

Fair game IMHO.
Well played, sir.

overlords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 02:50 PM
  #37
Conflicted Habs fan
Registered User
 
Conflicted Habs fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 1,014
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/10/sp...alks.html?_r=0

As a Princeton grad, he somewhat feels the need to excel at all aspects of his life.

Interesting that the owners were not as "briefed"/knowledgeable about the status as the players in last week's meetings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
“There are a half-dozen or more players who knew exactly where we were and could detail every aspect of where we were at,” Westgarth said, referring to last week’s talks. The league brought in four owners to join Jeremy Jacobs of Boston and Murray Edwards of Calgary in the negotiations.
“It became obvious that the guys they brought in had nowhere near a complete understanding of what the proposals were and where we were in the negotiations,” Westgarth said. “I thought it was great that Ron Burkle, Larry Tanenbaum, Mark Chipman and Jeff Vinik got involved — clearly they’re passionate and care about the game — but it shows how tightly controlled the league is.”

...
“Part of their tactics is to demonize Don — we’ve seen it before,” Westgarth said. The settlement ending the 2004-5 lockout was not signed by the union’s executive director at the time, Bob Goodenow. He had been excluded from the process.
Westgarth was asked if the players would agree to another set of talks without Donald Fehr present at all times.
“I think it would be unreasonable to restrict who is in the room, but that’s a decision for a great number of players to make,” he said.
Indeed. The owners should question their own "leadership" who seem to depend on half truths, deliberate misleading information and outright lies.

Conflicted Habs fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 03:03 PM
  #38
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu
I think both sides had gone farther than their original position, or certainly farther than the hawkish sides within would agree to.

I made the point elsewhere that this may be a case where there are more than just two factions, especially on the owners side where that had been reported (no one side has a clear majority). It's like trying to build a coalition government.

To expand, the things each side needs from the other to close that deal lead away from the compromises or trade-offs needed to get support from the other faction.
I would actually think the opposite. I think on the owners side you have 2 groups. Those that want/need something very specific out of the CBA and will only play once that's achieved aka hardliners. And those that want/need something better, but also want to play and do not want to lose any games (or the least amount possible) - aka moderates. There might be a couple in the group that will play under almost any circumstance (such as the last CBA), but I don't think there's many there (less than 2-3 - if that).

On the players side you're likely going to have multiple fractions.
-The hardliners who don't want to give up anything.
-The guys who want to play and will accept almost any deal.
-The guys who will allow some acceptable change, but want to play.
-Then there are the guys who in their heart are in one group, yet financially are somewhat forced into another group.


Last edited by mouser: 12-10-2012 at 03:48 PM. Reason: qep
Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 03:34 PM
  #39
Xref
Registered User
 
Xref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,548
vCash: 500
Put the sticks down, boys! (sorry, it's in my very fabric ).

Both sides have been issuing half-truths to sway opinions. That's nothing new and no one should be surprised. Just ignore all the quotes and tweets and look a the proposals to make an informed opinion. That's my worthless advise, for whatever it's worth from a noob.

Xref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 03:37 PM
  #40
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 11,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Posturing. The NHL attempted to do an end-around Fehr, to try to drive a wedge between them and their exec leader. Unfortunately, it seems some agents may be willing participants-- just like last time.
How else do members of the union get things done? It's pretty obvious given the treatment of others who express a dissenting opinion get treated and what is insinuated of there treatment once hockey is back on the ice. The only way to insulate themselves is to get their representatives involved in the process. That's the agents. now of course an agent doesn't have to do it but I suspect many would.

Remember the whole dissolving of the union thing impacts the agent profession as without the NHLPA there is no policing/sanctioning of the agencies and agents.

tantalum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 03:40 PM
  #41
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Fehr's interruption of the meetings was a sign that he was losing control, i.e. the players were about to make a decision without him.

We were incredibly close to having a season last week.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 04:32 PM
  #42
therealkoho
Gary says it's A-OK
 
therealkoho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: the Prior
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,165
vCash: 500
Apparently this Westgarth character does, or else he's merely spinning for the best effect

therealkoho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 04:48 PM
  #43
LeeIFBB
Teflon Doug
 
LeeIFBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Tanning Bed
Posts: 1,630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealkoho View Post
I think it's interesting to note that he is using the same arguments that the owners expressed in respect to the dissemination of info by Don Fair to what the owners were offering only weeks ago? Turnabout is fair play even though it's disingenuos and unimaginative. I suppose then the players that were doing their best to demonize Bettman are now asking why it is that the NHL is suddenly demonizing Don.

Westgarth was on HC at Noon today with Millard/Kypreos/MacLean

Maclean asked him point blank if the 300m was tied to the 3 specific items, I'll give Westgarth this, he gave the longest answer possible and didn't answer the question. Obsfucation at it's finest, not even Nick was sure how to defend his obvious avoidance.
Thought the same thing listening to it.

LeeIFBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 05:27 PM
  #44
Inkling
"Let's win it all"
 
Inkling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
I believe Westgarth. Doug Maclean was alternate Governor of Columbus during the last lockout and he said himself on Sportsnet recently that they didn't know what was negotiated until just about the same time as the public found out. He and his owner were not informed about what was going on during the process, it was Bettman and a small group of other owners. This is not news.

Inkling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 05:36 PM
  #45
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Should probably get this out there as well:

“We have gone a lot further than a great percentage of the membership has wanted us to go,” Westgarth said. “I don’t know how you look at our offer and say that we’ve been unreasonable.”
um westy, how about this: the average NHLPA salary will be around 2.35 - $2.4m...? How is that not a "reasonable" amount for you guys?

Butch 19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 05:40 PM
  #46
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
um westy, how about this: the average NHLPA salary will be around 2.35 - $2.4m...? How is that not a "reasonable" amount for you guys?
They keep getting accused of just being about the money but they are clearly fighting for more than that.

Scurr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 05:56 PM
  #47
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
They keep getting accused of just being about the money but they are clearly fighting for more than that.
Except that's not what their argument is. They're saying that a 5 yr term will pay the stars, and suppress the rest of the salaries (mid/bottom level guys).

Which is the same thing they said last time around. Reality is that it will suppress everyone.

But again, it's still about the money.

Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2012, 10:14 PM
  #48
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
um westy, how about this: the average NHLPA salary will be around 2.35 - $2.4m...? How is that not a "reasonable" amount for you guys?
How much the players make doesn't matter.
What matters is what was asked and what they've given. And Westgarth is right.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 09:31 AM
  #49
Gump Hasek
Spleen Merchant
 
Gump Hasek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: 222 Tudor Terrace
Posts: 8,381
vCash: 1200
Westgarth's claim that “the guys they brought in had nowhere near a complete understanding of what the proposals were and where we were in the negotiations” and that the players in the meeting were more informed than the owners is frankly downright laughable. Mark Chipman is a lawyer. Lawyers pride themselves upon being fully aware and apprised of all rules and current details when entering into negotiations. He is also an incredibly astute businessman. You can be sure that he fully understood each and every detail of what the NHL were offering and as well the details of what the players were requesting... as it impacts the bottom line of his business, and I'm quite sure he has a better grasp of this than do the players.

Frankly, a nuanced view is that the players surely saw these meetings as a chance to have moderate owners cave into their requests. When the moderates instead stood firm, the players then claimed the owners didn't understand their offer. The premise behind Wesgarth's comments is laughable, naive, near childlike in fact - when one considers the level of underestimation of the opponent.


Last edited by Gump Hasek: 12-11-2012 at 09:44 AM.
Gump Hasek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 11:04 AM
  #50
tko78
Registered User
 
tko78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 30
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gump Hasek View Post
Westgarth's claim that “the guys they brought in had nowhere near a complete understanding of what the proposals were and where we were in the negotiations” and that the players in the meeting were more informed than the owners is frankly downright laughable. Mark Chipman is a lawyer. Lawyers pride themselves upon being fully aware and apprised of all rules and current details when entering into negotiations. He is also an incredibly astute businessman. You can be sure that he fully understood each and every detail of what the NHL were offering and as well the details of what the players were requesting... as it impacts the bottom line of his business, and I'm quite sure he has a better grasp of this than do the players.

Frankly, a nuanced view is that the players surely saw these meetings as a chance to have moderate owners cave into their requests. When the moderates instead stood firm, the players then claimed the owners didn't understand their offer. The premise behind Wesgarth's comments is laughable, naive, near childlike in fact - when one considers the level of underestimation of the opponent.
I'll be honest with you, as both a lawyer and somebody who has previously been involved in several rounds of collective bargaining for a 700-850 member strong union, I can tell you two things with a completely straight face:

1) All lawyers are not always prepared. Many of us do the best we can to prepare but count on our smarts and acumen to pick up quickly as we play along.

2) Collective bargaining is incredibly complex and nuanced. When I was involved in bargaining, if I missed one day of meetings, I would be in a severely compromised position for a good while afterwards and I would depend on my bargaining team to fill in for my deficiencies. I can not imagine parachuting in to a round of bargaining and even pretending that I'm up to speed. The only time we ever did something like that as a bargaining team, parachute somebody in that is, was when we had somebody with specific and in-depth knowledge of a discrete issue.

So, with respect, you're operating on assumptions that are not necessarily true and spin or no spin, what Mr. Westgarth is saying is certainly within the realm of possibility.

tko78 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 07:08 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.