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.

Are the big market teams the losers here?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2012, 07:45 PM
  #76
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 41,923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1b4me View Post
There could be that, but also as a shareholder with over 2000 shares in BCE Inc which owns 28% of the MSLE which in turn owns TML and 18% of the Habs I don't like that TML/Habs should have to continue to support teams in markets that can't support it. Company's like Walmart close stores in areas where it isn't making the profits it forcast and relocate them to better places.

This is what it's really about right? Supporting teams that can't make a go of it where they are and making the League stronger.
except that wal-mart and target are two competing companies. the leafs and habs are two franchises of a single company.

so, its more accurate to say that wal-mart would never let a store in one area attempt to steal business from a franchise in a neighboring area.

yea, if target can put a wal-mart store out of business, wal-mart will close the loser. they would not allow one wal-mart store to kill a fellow wal-mart store.

txpd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:49 PM
  #77
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
except that wal-mart and target are two competing companies. the leafs and habs are two franchises of a single company.

so, its more accurate to say that wal-mart would never let a store in one area attempt to steal business from a franchise in a neighboring area.

yea, if target can put a wal-mart store out of business, wal-mart will close the loser. they would not allow one wal-mart store to kill a fellow wal-mart store.
Happens all the time. That's how expansion works. First Walmart in a city has the city all to themselves. Next thing you know they open on the eastside, the westside, the north side, down the street, around the corner.

They let you make x amount and decide to cut into the first guy's territory / profits.

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 07:57 PM
  #78
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cam042686 View Post
I think this article from today's National Post makes a very good point on this topic.

Craig Wallace

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...y-influential/
This is the second article in a similar vein in a week. Good on the media to start asking these questions.

What do the large market franchises have to gain from this work stoppage? Why hasn't there been an attempt by Tanenbaum or Molson or Dolan to push to a conclusion, or at least that we know of? If all else fails, why not break rank, take the million dollar fine, and speak out publicly?

Here in Toronto, this lockout is all loss and no gain. It won't make tickets more affordable, it won't put a better team on the ice (to the contrary, it will likely further restrict spending), and it comes at a bad time. Eight years of no playoffs, four bottom 10 finishes in a row, and a collapse for the ages last spring has left the fan base frustrated, or worse, apathetic. The Leafs have already squandered the next generation of fans, with many choosing to follow the Penguins or Capitals or Bruins, effectively leaving a 'generation gap.' They cannot afford to further erode an already taxed fan base. Yet, that is exactly what they've been doing in supporting this ridiculous lockout.

htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:03 PM
  #79
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
This is the second article in a similar vein in a week. Good on the media to start asking these questions.

What do the large market franchises have to gain from this work stoppage? Why hasn't there been an attempt by Tanenbaum or Molson or Dolan to push to a conclusion, or at least that we know of? If all else fails, why not break rank, take the million dollar fine, and speak out publicly?

Here in Toronto, this lockout is all loss and no gain. It won't make tickets more affordable, it won't put a better team on the ice (to the contrary, it will likely further restrict spending), and it comes at a bad time. Eight years of no playoffs, four bottom 10 finishes in a row, and a collapse for the ages last spring has left the fan base frustrated, or worse, apathetic. The Leafs have already squandered the next generation of fans, with many choosing to follow the Penguins or Capitals or Bruins, effectively leaving a 'generation gap.' They cannot afford to further erode an already taxed fan base. Yet, that is exactly what they've been doing in supporting this ridiculous lockout.
Gary carries a big stick, the fine could just be the tip of the iceberg. You don't believe that unanimous crap do you?

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:04 PM
  #80
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 7,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
What team in the NY area is the doing of Bettman? Anaheim came around barely after Bettman became commissioner. Tampa Bay existed before Bettman. Florida got their team before Bettman. Atlanta was tried again because of wealthy ownership at first. Then the last owner they had didn't want the team in the building they owned, so no other owner could keep the team in Atlanta.

Why is Phoenix still around? Because other than the WHA cities, the NHL hasn't had that many relocating teams in the last 30 years. Plus, as of right now, where would they move to? They could've moved to Winnipeg, but the league had a coming mess in Atlanta. Move the Coyotes to Winnipeg, and then when the Atlanta Spirit Group can finally get rid of the Thrashers, where do they go? Fold? Not many teams fold anymore. That's not a good look for a league.
Let's see now. Florida, Anaheim, Nashville, Columbus, Atlanta, Minnesota have gained expansion franchises since Bettman took over. Also, he backed relocations to Dallas, Colorado, Phoenix and Raleigh/Durham. They had to do Minnesota because he allowed the North Stars to go to Dallas. He has done everything in his power to keep failing franchises on Long Island and in Phoenix operating, while he bailed on Atlanta for Winnipeg in about 5 minutes. The Ducks won the cup and went to the finals one other year, otherwise they cannot draw flies. Florida is a disaster, as is Phoenix. The Islanders played before 6-8,000 unless playing the Rangers, and are now are moving to an arena not configured for hockey. Columbus has been terrible and attendance challenged since the beginning. So, the Montreals, Torontos and Vancouvers of the world should happily pay these franchises to help make up for their inability to sell the game in their markets because Bettman has not come anywhere near gaining TV money and contracted sponsors to be split between the clubs.


Last edited by ThisYearsModel: 12-31-2012 at 08:08 PM. Reason: Update
ThisYearsModel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:12 PM
  #81
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,478
vCash: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
This is the second article in a similar vein in a week. Good on the media to start asking these questions.

What do the large market franchises have to gain from this work stoppage? Why hasn't there been an attempt by Tanenbaum or Molson or Dolan to push to a conclusion, or at least that we know of? If all else fails, why not break rank, take the million dollar fine, and speak out publicly?

Here in Toronto, this lockout is all loss and no gain. It won't make tickets more affordable, it won't put a better team on the ice (to the contrary, it will likely further restrict spending), and it comes at a bad time. Eight years of no playoffs, four bottom 10 finishes in a row, and a collapse for the ages last spring has left the fan base frustrated, or worse, apathetic. The Leafs have already squandered the next generation of fans, with many choosing to follow the Penguins or Capitals or Bruins, effectively leaving a 'generation gap.' They cannot afford to further erode an already taxed fan base. Yet, that is exactly what they've been doing in supporting this ridiculous lockout.
It doesn't matter if owners were pushing for a resolution since Fehr wasn't ready to make a deal. He had his January deadline in mind and any deal before that would have to be terrible for the owners.

Tanenbaum was involved in negotiations and he knows this.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:33 PM
  #82
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
Gary carries a big stick, the fine could just be the tip of the iceberg. You don't believe that unanimous crap do you?
Of course not. There undoubtedly would be consequences beyond a simple fine if an owner spoke out publicly against the lockout. The Leafs faced them in 2005.

I guess, in the end, it won't matter. Fans will flock back in these markets, though in ever thinning numbers. Such a statement, however, representing the interests of Leaf fans, would go a long way to repairing the damage the lockout has caused.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
It doesn't matter if owners were pushing for a resolution since Fehr wasn't ready to make a deal. He had his January deadline in mind and any deal before that would have to be terrible for the owners.

Tanenbaum was involved in negotiations and he knows this.
Conjecture, and nothing more.

htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:38 PM
  #83
du5566*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
There are no losers really.....

The players will still be paid millions of dollars to play hockey; and if revenue continues to increase, salaries will continue to increase. Like they always have.

The owners will get a better deal and now can continue to float the struggling teams while attempting to grow the league and revenue. Small market teams survive and big market teams can make money hand over fist.

The fans get hockey back, and parity.

And Donald Fehr came out of retirement and got paid 3 million dollars.... Mod

It's a win, win, win, win.


Last edited by Killion: 12-31-2012 at 10:23 PM. Reason: not reqd...
du5566* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:39 PM
  #84
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,478
vCash: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
Conjecture, and nothing more.
We know what Fehr's proposals have looked like at different stages. It wasn't until early December they went from absurd to bad but starting to look somewhat realistic. Anyone suggesting Fehr had any other plan than to wait until Dec/Jan hasn't been paying attention.

There was no way for the league to save a full season without capitulation to some pretty terrible NHLPA demands (guaranteed raises for the player collective no matter what happens with revenues, guaranteed minimum cap, cap on escrow).

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:46 PM
  #85
no1b4me
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 240
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
We know what Fehr's proposals have looked like at different stages. It wasn't until early December they went from absurd to bad but starting to look somewhat realistic. Anyone suggesting Fehr had any other plan than to wait until Dec/Jan hasn't been paying attention.

There was no way for the league to save a full season without capitulation to some pretty terrible NHLPA demands (guaranteed raises for the player collective no matter what happens with revenues, guaranteed minimum cap, cap on escrow).
Goes both ways, the NHL didn't get real until recently with a fair offer. They were low balling in the beginning.

no1b4me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 08:56 PM
  #86
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,478
vCash: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by no1b4me View Post
Goes both ways, the NHL didn't get real until recently with a fair offer. They were low balling in the beginning.
No doubt both sides have responsibility for the situation being deadlocked until now. If there is no trust and the sides don't expect reciprocity they will not be willing to offer up anything that may move the process forwards.

I do think the owners October $211M make whole 82 game proposal was a genuine attempt to get the process going but Fehr wouldn't even negotiate off it but decided to re-table his August proposal which had zero chance to getting any traction. After that you start to lose games and paychecks which makes it harder to get anything done.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:11 PM
  #87
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 5,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
No doubt both sides have responsibility for the situation being deadlocked until now. If there is no trust and the sides don't expect reciprocity they will not be willing to offer up anything that may move the process forwards.

I do think the owners October $211M make whole 82 game proposal was a genuine attempt to get the process going but Fehr wouldn't even negotiate off it but decided to re-table his August proposal which had zero chance to getting any traction. After that you start to lose games and paychecks which makes it harder to get anything done.
I don't understand why fans are concerned if paychecks keep flowing or not. If the players were concerned, they could dump fehr. They haven't, so my presumption is that they think it is worth the short term loss for the long term gain. That being said, it makes no difference to me if the checks stop or start.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:26 PM
  #88
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisYearsModel View Post
Let's see now. Florida, Anaheim, Nashville, Columbus, Atlanta, Minnesota have gained expansion franchises since Bettman took over.
Florida and Anaheim aren't really Bettman.

Quote:
Also, he backed relocations to Dallas, Colorado, Phoenix and Raleigh/Durham.
3 of those were former WHA teams, that were treated like 2nd class citizens in the NHL from the day they arrived.

Quote:
They had to do Minnesota because he allowed the North Stars to go to Dallas.
Minnesota had plenty of issues. They were merged with another team, and were going to move to San Jose. All of which came before Bettman. Then Norm Green moved the team.

Quote:
He has done everything in his power to keep failing franchises on Long Island and in Phoenix operating, while he bailed on Atlanta for Winnipeg in about 5 minutes.
Again, there was no choice with Atlanta. The people that own the building, who weren't the original owners of the Thrashers, didn't want the Thrashers in the building anymore.

Quote:
The Ducks won the cup and went to the finals one other year, otherwise they cannot draw flies. Florida is a disaster, as is Phoenix. The Islanders played before 6-8,000 unless playing the Rangers, and are now are moving to an arena not configured for hockey. Columbus has been terrible and attendance challenged since the beginning.
I've seen it explained here before, but apparently the Islanders have had just like the worst lease ever.

Columbus has had a bad hand dealt from the beginning, not the least of which is a bad alignment for an expansion team with no history, all so that Toronto could move east. Toronto took the easy expansion money, and then said screw you Columbus. Not that Columbus hasn't done an awful job of drafting and developing talent. Not that that's Bettman's fault.

To pin Florida and Anaheim directly on Bettman(good or bad) is unfair, as he just got on the job, so those were franchises in motion well before Bettman came along.

You had a franchise in Atlanta that had nowhere to play once the owners could get rid of them. At the same time you've got Phoenix with issues. The only city ready for a team, with willing ownership, and a building, and no other territory issues, during this time, was Winnipeg. Two teams, one city. One team wasn't going to be able to play in a building, the other team, however empty the building may be, had a building to play in.

Quote:
So, the Montreals, Torontos and Vancouvers of the world should happily pay these franchises to help make up for their inability to sell the game in their markets because Bettman has not come anywhere near gaining TV money and contracted sponsors to be split between the clubs.
The NHL can't get a decent TV contract because even hardcore NHL fans in traditional cities hardly watch any team but their own on TV. It's a very provincial fan base. If it's not O6 or Philly, then it doesn't exist. Pittsburgh and Washington are lucky they have Crosby and Ovechkin, because otherwise they're an afterthought at best. The only reason Vancouver matters as much as they do today is because they happen to have a particular roster that's very disagreeable. Once that goes away, they're a 10:30pm team again, which just doesn't cut it.

The Toronto's and Montreal's(and others) of the world happily took the expansion money, and then proceeded to push off all the new southern teams into their own little group, so that the only time they would have to think about them is if they happen to get an undeserved(because they play in a poor division with no history. Wow, what a terrible idea) higher seed in the playoffs.

The problems of the NHL predate Bettman by decades. The real problem was the first expansion. Other than Philly, not one of the 23 other teams that have come along since 1967 is in any way a long term success story. So have a 7 team league, and call it a day.

KingsFan7824 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:39 PM
  #89
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisYearsModel View Post
Let's see now. Florida, Anaheim, Nashville, Columbus, Atlanta, Minnesota have gained expansion franchises since Bettman took over. Also, he backed relocations to Dallas, Colorado, Phoenix and Raleigh/Durham. They had to do Minnesota because he allowed the North Stars to go to Dallas. He has done everything in his power to keep failing franchises on Long Island and in Phoenix operating, while he bailed on Atlanta for Winnipeg in about 5 minutes. The Ducks won the cup and went to the finals one other year, otherwise they cannot draw flies. Florida is a disaster, as is Phoenix. The Islanders played before 6-8,000 unless playing the Rangers, and are now are moving to an arena not configured for hockey. Columbus has been terrible and attendance challenged since the beginning. So, the Montreals, Torontos and Vancouvers of the world should happily pay these franchises to help make up for their inability to sell the game in their markets because Bettman has not come anywhere near gaining TV money and contracted sponsors to be split between the clubs.
this post is a perfect example of never letting the truth get in the way of an opinion. the number of inaccuracies in this post is truly amazing!

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 02:53 AM
  #90
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
We know what Fehr's proposals have looked like at different stages. It wasn't until early December they went from absurd to bad but starting to look somewhat realistic. Anyone suggesting Fehr had any other plan than to wait until Dec/Jan hasn't been paying attention.

There was no way for the league to save a full season without capitulation to some pretty terrible NHLPA demands (guaranteed raises for the player collective no matter what happens with revenues, guaranteed minimum cap, cap on escrow).
I don't think there is any doubt that Fehr has been stalling as a way to extract concessions from ownership, but at the same time, there is nothing definitive to suggest he had no interest in closing a deal before this date or that month. His job is to get the best deal for the players while losing as little salary as possible. If the NHL put an acceptable offer on the table in October, then he very well may have accepted it.

htpwn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 03:08 AM
  #91
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaketheCannoli View Post
Bettman is a representative of the owners. He does not represent the fans or the game.

This lockout is because the owners see a better split in the NFL, NBA and MLB. They don't want to pay a higher percentage of revenues. It's not about any specific market.
A better split? Like MLB? lol The NHL is in a weak state because of the weak markets, most of them supported/masterminded into existance by The Count. If it would have been for the big markets hockey would have been played in a long time. It's all about these guys.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 10:59 AM
  #92
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,394
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CREW99AW View Post
I read Brooks article. As usual, he's unhappy because his Rangers won't have a spending advantage.

Are the NYR with McDonagh, Stepan and Hagelin the only NHL team with key youngsters, who'll be looking at possible large arbitration awards?

Every team will be under the same terms.
Brooks mentioned that in the article. That being said, teams who have a strong mix of quality young players and productive veterans are the ones who will lose here. He makes a great argument that the NYR have done a good job of drafting and developing while adding pieces through free agency (sure, it's easy to argue that NYR has a massive advantage due to $$$) and I can understand that it would suck to be them.

I read on the radio the Sens would have 16M to sign 8 players I believe - or something along those lines... I'm sure there are more in even worse shape but it would suck to be at the top of the game (NYR) and most likely will have to tear it down.

Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 11:06 AM
  #93
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,394
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
We know what Fehr's proposals have looked like at different stages. It wasn't until early December they went from absurd to bad but starting to look somewhat realistic. Anyone suggesting Fehr had any other plan than to wait until Dec/Jan hasn't been paying attention.

There was no way for the league to save a full season without capitulation to some pretty terrible NHLPA demands (guaranteed raises for the player collective no matter what happens with revenues, guaranteed minimum cap, cap on escrow).
Both of these guys were throwing around crap ideas and trying to pull one over. the 43% set the tone and it moved from there. Do I believe Fehr would have signed a deal before Jan? No, not unless it was a FANTASTIC deal to save the start of the season. When that went I agree, everyone knew it was Jan. The same can be argued from Bettman, he's had about 4 "best offers", if he offered something decent in Sept this may have been avoided. Bettman and pro-owner types like to argue that the PA should have started bargaining earlier, but I think we still wouldn't and won't see the "BEST" offer until the season is in jeopardy.

Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:39 PM
  #94
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kimota View Post
A better split? Like MLB? lol The NHL is in a weak state because of the weak markets, most of them supported/masterminded into existance by The Count. If it would have been for the big markets hockey would have been played in a long time. It's all about these guys.
What portion of revenues does the MLB pay?

What portion of revenues does the NFL pay?

What portion of revenues does the NBA pay?


What portion are the NHL owners demanding?

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 02:46 PM
  #95
du5566*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaketheCannoli View Post
What portion of revenues does the MLB pay?

What portion of revenues does the NFL pay?

What portion of revenues does the NBA pay?


What portion are the NHL owners demanding?
NFL - 47 to 48 percent
NBA - 50/50
MLB - about 52 percent

NHL - 50/50?

du5566* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 04:23 PM
  #96
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,312
vCash: 500
Again, what constitutes "revenues" in each of those percentages isnt a fixed definition.

And MLB is said to have the lowest percetnage of revenues going to players, ironically, in fact, closer to 42% than 52%. Of course MLB is the only league where they dont try and define some specific number as revenues from which they are willing to share, its just plain all revenues. HRR for example may be $3.3 billion, but all the revenues related to hockey could be much closer to $4Bil or more. If MLB had to define revenues for the purpose of what are they willing to share, its likely the total revenues number would drop and the percentage would increase?

thinkwild is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 04:54 PM
  #97
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by du5566 View Post
NFL - 47 to 48 percent
NBA - 50/50
MLB - about 52 percent

NHL - 50/50?
Thank you. MLB is actually ~42%

Those figures are the reason the NHL owners are locking out the players. They believe they should pay less.

The players haven't agreed to this because they believe they are the entertainment and should not take less just because players in those other sports take less.

Its not about big markets or small markets. The owners as a group want to pay less and for a long period of time too.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 05:06 PM
  #98
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
Again, what constitutes "revenues" in each of those percentages isnt a fixed definition.

And MLB is said to have the lowest percetnage of revenues going to players, ironically, in fact, closer to 42% than 52%. Of course MLB is the only league where they dont try and define some specific number as revenues from which they are willing to share, its just plain all revenues. HRR for example may be $3.3 billion, but all the revenues related to hockey could be much closer to $4Bil or more. If MLB had to define revenues for the purpose of what are they willing to share, its likely the total revenues number would drop and the percentage would increase?
I'm not sure defining a % of salaries necessarily increases the. portion paid. According to the NHL pre-salary cap the league paid a much higher percentage of revenues than after the cap was instituted.

I also understand the players ' perspective as well. I don't understand why fans just expect them to reduce their portion and players ' actual salaries just because the owners want to pay less.

I also understand a lot of teams are not profitable and its reasonable to believe something needs to be done. I heard Jimmy Devellano say the Red Wings lose money if they don't reach the second round of the playoffs. That is a problem, albeit a different problem.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 06:59 PM
  #99
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
 
RandV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,910
vCash: 50
If they suddenly cut the salary cap to $60 million the big markets certainly will be. Consider that at the moment their are 16 teams over the $60M mark, with the Rangers being just beneath it for 17. The average cap salary in the league right now is also just a shade over $60M.

There's around $75M in payroll that the top half of the league will have to cut to get back down to the cap, and I doubt the bottom half of the league are really looking to add much in salary. Which means for the top half of the league they're likely going to have to simply buy out or cut free a number of veterans who will probably head to the KHL, and replace them with prospects and farm hands.

So yeah I can't see why the league would want to do this...

RandV is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 07:11 PM
  #100
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 19,362
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motown Beatdown View Post
that's false. They will share around 200 million, of over 3 billion in revenue. It's chump change compared to the other leagues.
the nba "massive revenue sharing" really amounts to about 3.6% (give or take a %) of revenue from rich to poor.

me2 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 08:05 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.