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
Notices

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.

Lockout V: Take the Long Way Home

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2012, 05:59 PM
  #151
me2
Team Ben Anti-Tank 0
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Team Tank 1
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 27,383
vCash: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mork View Post
This is why its astounded me that the NHL should treat the union with such animosity and disrespect from the outset. Rather than treating trhe union as a valued and necessary business partner
The NHL tried that with Kelly. The PA responded by sacking Kelly.

Quote:
I wouldn't be advising the union to decertify, but if that's a path they eventually follow (however remote that possibility might be), I'm sure interested to see how it turns out.
I'm looking forward to it. It has to be more interesting that another year of staring at each other.

me2 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:02 PM
  #152
me2
Team Ben Anti-Tank 0
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Team Tank 1
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 27,383
vCash: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplefan View Post
I know it's crazy but actually many owners have leaned towards 9 year CBA deal and I don't think players dont want to get close to 5 years max contract. It's only for 10% of the NHL.

Actually, if the league just moved to 6, we would have a deal.
If it was that simple it'd be done. There are likely other issues involved as well and neither side is prepared to move on one issue until they get wins on others. Stalemate atm.

me2 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:34 PM
  #153
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterEmpire View Post
PA didn't get 57% the last 7 years. It was only at 57% in the final year iirc.
It's been at 57% for several years (3?).

__________________
I've been looking for trouble... but trouble hasn't been cooperating!
Riptide is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:37 PM
  #154
JAX
Registered User
 
JAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToursLepantoVienna View Post
Per LeBrun ...

"Looking back, the NHL made a terrible strategic mistake back in July with an original offer that asked for players to accept 43 percent of hockey-related revenue, down from the 57 percent it had in the previous deal. I cannot tell you how many level-headed NHL players -- not militants but rather moderates -- have told me repeatedly how that first offer from the NHL in July felt like a punch to the head and galvanized the player membership in a way in which NHLPA executive director Don Fehr likely could have never managed on his own.

That offer set the tone for the level of mistrust that has plagued what should have been a simpler negotiation, the players knowing deep down all along that they'd be accepting a 50-50 split of revenues."


The mid-point of 57 and 43 is, drum-roll, please, ... 50!

If the players really knew "they'd be accepting a 50-50 split of revenues", how was the league's original offer "a punch to the head"?
Honestly, if that's true the players need to grow the **** up, the league came back with a 50-50 offer where as the players were still playing games. This stamping their feet act is getting old.

I also have to think Lebrun is exagerrating some.......are the players realy that stunned. 'Now we are galvanized and will jump off a cliff"

JAX is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:44 PM
  #155
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 14,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterEmpire View Post
PA didn't get 57% the last 7 years. It was only at 57% in the final year iirc.
The Players Share has been at 57% the last 3 years - since HRR hit $2.7B in '09-'10.

kdb209 is online now  
Old
12-17-2012, 07:59 PM
  #156
Nanuk23
Registered User
 
Nanuk23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 380
vCash: 500
NHLPA'S LEGAL STRATEGY COULD BACKFIRE

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l...antitrust_law/

Nanuk23 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 08:07 PM
  #157
Freudian
Clearly deranged
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 37,299
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk23 View Post
NHLPA'S LEGAL STRATEGY COULD BACKFIRE

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l...antitrust_law/
"That's because the players have gone about this process in such a transparent way. What the NHL players are doing (as I'm writing this) is two steps closer to an obvious charade than what the NFL players did in 2011. First of all, since a disclaimer of interest is a quick process, it will be easier for Judge Engelmayer to conclude that it doesn't represent a real breakup between the union and the players. But second, the players are actually in the process of voting to have the union disclaim interest. Disclaimers of interest normally happen when a union has grown disenchanted with its membership and essentially fires the members and says we refuse to represent you anymore -- kind of like a contentious divorce. But when the players actually vote to have the union disclaim interest, which is like asking someone to fire you, it's pretty obvious that they aren't disenchanted with their union at all. And just to make the sham clear, it was the NHLPA's executive board that voted to authorize the players to vote to authorize the union to disclaim interest in further representing the players."

Loved that part.

Freudian is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 08:07 PM
  #158
crump
~ ~ (ړײ) ~ ~
 
crump's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ontariariario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,012
vCash: 705
@RealBillWatters: Glad to hear that the Disclaimer vote willpass.No kidding!Is a 15 lb robin fat?Fehrtown has already had the vote;results are in,not public.

crump is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 08:23 PM
  #159
tantalum
Registered User
 
tantalum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 13,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk23 View Post
NHLPA'S LEGAL STRATEGY COULD BACKFIRE

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l...antitrust_law/
I think that's why the NHLPA is apparently voting on (essentially) dissolving the union and setting up a trade association. They needed to include something that indicates that they are indeed willing to go away from the union for good provided a trade association exists. Not sure how a trade association helps them out that much nor do I think it makes it any less transparent.

tantalum is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 09:04 PM
  #160
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
I was wondering when this would end up in court. Good move by the league - surprised that it took this long though.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:09 PM
  #161
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 24,104
vCash: 500
longest and strangest stall tactic ever

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:22 PM
  #162
me2
Team Ben Anti-Tank 0
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Team Tank 1
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 27,383
vCash: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by tantalum View Post
I think that's why the NHLPA is apparently voting on (essentially) dissolving the union and setting up a trade association. They needed to include something that indicates that they are indeed willing to go away from the union for good provided a trade association exists. Not sure how a trade association helps them out that much nor do I think it makes it any less transparent.
Trade association might open them up to anti-trust cases against them. Anyone know?

me2 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:56 PM
  #163
Actual Thought*
Blashill Blows
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydor25 View Post
And this is exactly why it will pass, with "huge" numbers. Even the slowest players can see that a "No" vote would kill their leverage and the NHL would pull more off the table. The NHLPA leadership has backed their membership into a corner and a "Yes" vote is the only answer.
They are not in a corner. The union dissolution is the owner's worst nightmare. It will put the players in the driver seat. The NFL owners sure signed a deal quick when decert. went on the table. The only way I will consider supporting is if the players do decert. It might make the owners think twice before locking out again next cba. Otherwise another lockout is a foregone conclusion.

Actual Thought* is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 10:59 PM
  #164
Actual Thought*
Blashill Blows
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyhounds View Post
That would be exciting for everyone but the Oilers. One way or another the league would put controls in to prevent this. I doubt the league plays another game, until a new union is formed/certified.

What would really be interesting is if they decertified, and another party (say Paul Kelly and Mark Recchi) stepped in to certify, receiving majority support.

Regardless, if they decertify, there won't be any hockey this year, and probably next.
If they decertify the lockout will be over. The owners will cave and sign a deal.

Actual Thought* is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:00 PM
  #165
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
If they decertify the lockout will be over. The owners will cave and sign a deal.
Wishful thinking on the part of some.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:06 PM
  #166
Actual Thought*
Blashill Blows
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Wishful thinking on the part of some.
Personally I would rather see an open market as the result but the owners will never let that happen. It would be like actual competition. Billionaires hate that.

Actual Thought* is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:09 PM
  #167
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
Personally I would rather see an open market as the result but the owners will never let that happen. It would be like actual competition. Billionaires hate that.
I'd rather see a league with competitive balance than a league where two or three teams buy a championship every year.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:11 PM
  #168
Turbofan
Just shoot it Toby!!
 
Turbofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,176
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
If they decertify the lockout will be over. The owners will cave and sign a deal.
Decertification has to last at least 45 days. Also, this from Becker's article:

Quote:
At first, the NFL players' plan worked. They prevailed in the federal district court in Minnesota, which ruled they could bring antitrust suits and enjoined the NFL lockout. But the league appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the district court judge by a vote of 2-1 and essentially found that all the parties were still in the midst of the same labour dispute they were involved in when there was a union. And the appellate court stated that under the Norris-La Guardia Act, federal courts are forbidden from enjoining lockouts in the middle of labour disputes. So the lockout continued. Yes, there eventually was a settlement, but in reaching that settlement, the NFL was bargaining from a position of strength.

Turbofan is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:12 PM
  #169
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
If they decertify the lockout will be over. The owners will cave and sign a deal.
I disagree. We know the owners have the backbone to cancel a season. They'll just stay the course with their lawsuit.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:16 PM
  #170
Actual Thought*
Blashill Blows
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
I'd rather see a league with competitive balance than a league where two or three teams buy a championship every year.
I would rather see great teams play great teams. The Rangers spent more than anyone and were unable to buy the Cup. Parity brings every team down to the least common denominator. Garbage. If the players don't leave scorched earth behind this lockout you can bet the next lockout is an absolute certainty. The owners need to get punched in the mouth so hard they think twice before locking out again.

Actual Thought* is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:21 PM
  #171
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
I would rather see great teams play great teams. The Rangers spent more than anyone and were unable to buy the Cup. Parity brings every team down to the least common denominator. Garbage. If the players don't leave scorched earth behind this lockout you can bet the next lockout is an absolute certainty. The owners need to get punched in the mouth so hard they think twice before locking out again.
Enjoy that three team league. Nobody else will. As for the other, the players need to get their pay in line with what NFL and NBA players make. 57% doesn't cut the mustard.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:34 PM
  #172
Timmy
Registered User
 
Timmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
I would rather see great teams play great teams. The Rangers spent more than anyone and were unable to buy the Cup. Parity brings every team down to the least common denominator. Garbage. If the players don't leave scorched earth behind this lockout you can bet the next lockout is an absolute certainty. The owners need to get punched in the mouth so hard they think twice before locking out again.
For most owners, including the Yankees of the NHL (in terms of revenue), this work stoppage doesn't even approach a hangnail let alone a punch in the mouth even given the worst possible outcome.

The fans and players are the only ones who stand to lose from a scorched earth policy.

Mutually Assured Distruction is only applicable if both sides are risking everything by pushing the button.

Timmy is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:38 PM
  #173
Turbofan
Just shoot it Toby!!
 
Turbofan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,176
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
I would rather see great teams play great teams. The Rangers spent more than anyone and were unable to buy the Cup. Parity brings every team down to the least common denominator. Garbage. If the players don't leave scorched earth behind this lockout you can bet the next lockout is an absolute certainty. The owners need to get punched in the mouth so hard they think twice before locking out again.
This doesn't make sense at all. You'd see 'great teams play great teams'....20-25% of the time. Then the other 75% of the time you get blowouts/non-competitive games?

Unless what your really mean is, that you want your team to do great. All the time. And not competitive games throughout the league.

This is probably the point where you step in with a recommendation for drastic contraction, and with hyperbole about 'diluted talent' and how 'unwatchable the game is and the skill is at an all-time low'.

Turbofan is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 11:39 PM
  #174
Actual Thought*
Blashill Blows
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy View Post
For most owners, including the Yankees of the NHL (in terms of revenue), this work stoppage doesn't even approach a hangnail let alone a punch in the mouth even given the worst possible outcome.

The fans and players are the only ones who stand to lose from a scorched earth policy.

Mutually Assured Distruction is only applicable if both sides are risking everything by pushing the button.
At this point the league has very little to offer me. Frankly this debacle is more entertaining than the league has been since the last lockout. The current trajectory only serves to make it worse. Either way they won't be getting any more money from me.

Actual Thought* is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:16 AM
  #175
BigWheeler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 7
vCash: 500
Hopefully the owners hang tight and don't cave.

Let the players BEG for their jobs back. But not for 50-50, tell them after the damage they've done to the league with their lockout, that now you need minimum 55%-60% in order to recoup your losses and potential losses since there's no WAY the league will make $3B again for a long time.

[Mod]


Last edited by Killion: 12-18-2012 at 10:26 AM. Reason: not reqd...
BigWheeler 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 11:44 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.