The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Players and Owners reach an agreement (MOD: circa 5am ET 1/6/13)
95 is the reason bettman now has the 8 votes to veto a cba that he does not agree with. he was basically run over by a semi truck in that negotiations and he didn't like it.
It's unfair to fans and to workers and entrepreneurs who depend on the NHL for jobs and business. Not that Der Kaiser cares about us small folk.
basically refusing to comment on the process or give any explanation on what happened and why it took so long.
Yes, can't deny that he ended the press conference very "tersely". Unfortunately he's not always pleasantly tactful in the way he presents himself. We can probably imagine that he's been quite stressed with the whole issue, but still it is his job to deal with these things. He certainly should've ended in a nicer way. As for how he answered the questions though,... he said all that he could he rightfully say and that he should say.
The thirty members of the BOG is actually one man? Who would have thunk it!
No, but you can have 20 yes votes and if First Secretary Bettman isn't happy, the little people get screwed. That's ********. That's tyranny. And it's inexcusable for the NHL because the people who depend on it for business or employment have no recourse. The common man should never be put in this position in a society that professes a liberal democratic polity.
No, but you can have 20 yes votes and if First Secretary Bettman isn't happy, the little people get screwed. That's ********. That's tyranny. And it's inexcusable for the NHL because the people who depend on it for business or employment have no recourse. The common man should never be put in this position in a society that professes a liberal democratic polity.
Newsflash: The NHL is a private sector business NOT a government entity. Tyranny is instituted by governments. No one is forcing you to take your business to the NHL, you are perfectly capable of taking your business elsewhere. Without compulsion and force there is no tyranny.
And btw, private businesses are not charities: They don't "owe" anybody anything.
The only solution to this conundrum in my opinion is to ban strikes and lookouts in sports leagues and force everyone to binding arbitration once they reach an impasse like that. A lot of people depend on the cycle of professional sports leagues for livelihood and leisure, and for this reason they require an extra level of accountability to a democratically elected government.
The only solution to this conundrum in my opinion is to ban strikes and lookouts in sports leagues and force everyone to binding arbitration once they reach an impasse like that.
^^^^^ And you were complaining about tyranny? Oh how the irony drips off the page.....
A lot of people depend on the cycle of professional sports leagues for livelihood and leisure, and for this reason they require an extra level of accountability to a democratically elected government.
Yes, I actually do agree with your sentiments. Unfortunately the courts are loathe to intervene, even the Supreme's unwilling to wade in. The leagues with their convoluted Constitutions operating in a shadow world of their own laws. Much apparent & on display in Judge Baums' court through the Moyes BK down in Arizona. Non-decisions, deferential treatment in permitting a private enterprises Constitution displace, usurp or "trump" if you will that which exists in state, provincial or federal constructs.
^^^^^ And you were complaining about tyranny? Oh how the irony drips off the page.....
.... rather melodramatic. I dont think the op and certainly not I are calling for anything overly draconian, just a mild slap on the wrist will suffice, and if that means "no strike, no lockout & Binding Arbitration" statutes be crafted & created, then so be it. That the leagues recognize the enormous responsibilities that they have, honour their covenants with municipal & state/prov authorities who in many cases provide them with the platforms upon which they exist; the countless 1000's of smaller businesses & charities who rely upon them for their very existence & so on & so forth. Yes, its anathema to all one might hold Dear in terms of the democratic process, however, these are not "private businesses" in the natural Darwinian sense of the term at all. Entirely different animals, many owing their very existences to taxpayer largesse, using & abusing their positions of ownership to extract concessions & direct subsidies from public vaults.
.... rather melodramatic. I dont think the op and certainly not I are calling for anything overly draconian, just a mild slap on the wrist will suffice, and if that means "no strike, no lockout & Binding Arbitration" statutes be crafted & created, then so be it. That the leagues recognize the enormous responsibilities that they have, honour their covenants with municipal & state/prov authorities who in many cases provide them with the platforms upon which they exist; the countless 1000's of smaller businesses & charities who rely upon them for their very existence & so on & so forth. Yes, its anathema to all one might hold Dear in terms of the democratic process, however, these are not "private businesses" in the natural Darwinian sense of the term at all. Entirely different animals, many owing their very existences to taxpayer largesse, using & abusing their positions of ownership to extract concessions & direct subsidies from public vaults.
My point was that for there to be tyranny there must be force and compulsion. Sports leagues have possess no force and so can't compel anyone. On the otherhand, the poster I was responding to wants to use the force of government to compel others to give up their rights to strike or lockout.....Hence the irony: The one person complaining about tyranny (erroneously as the things he's complaining about do not fit the definition of tyranny) happens to be one person demanding tyrannical measures.
For what it's worth I'm against taxpayer subsidies for sports teams as well. As a civilization we ought to be past the point where we need the emperor to provide us with bread and circuses.
The only solution to this conundrum in my opinion is to ban strikes and lookouts in sports leagues and force everyone to binding arbitration once they reach an impasse like that. A lot of people depend on the cycle of professional sports leagues for livelihood and leisure, and for this reason they require an extra level of accountability to a democratically elected government.
Might as well do that in all industries. This isn't a sports industry only question. A lot of people depend on the cycles of many industries. Your entertainment is not a reason to elevate professional sports to a level of governmental accountability.
No, but you can have 20 yes votes and if First Secretary Bettman isn't happy, the little people get screwed. That's ********. That's tyranny. And it's inexcusable for the NHL because the people who depend on it for business or employment have no recourse. The common man should never be put in this position in a society that professes a liberal democratic polity.
If 20 NHL owners were unhappy with Bettman, he would be removed.
__________________ "It’s not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, it’s as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Why not a mutually agreed upon rule that the entire season is cancelled if they don't reach an agreement by Sept 15th?
I've suggested here that it should be programmed in that the negotiation process must begin 1 year in advance of the expiry of the CBA; and that it should be minimally arbitrated solely to assure that at least every month both sides submit proposals or proposal responses to the previous proposals submitted until an agreement is finally reached. Again, such an arbitrator would only serve to assure that the "process" is being adhered to and that both sides are at least responding in some part of each proposal to what had not been agreed upon in the previous proposals. It would likely be a slow process, but little by little they'd have a year to get it done or at least to discover in full what the most difficult problem areas are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser
I imagine everyone would view it as an artificial deadline. Nothing stopping them from changing their mind after the 15th.
That's why I'm suggesting an arbitrator that solely assures that they adhere to the process; not forcing them to actually come to any agreement. If both sides reject the process then that would show bad faith to making an effort to try to avoid lockouts.
I've suggested here that it should be programmed in that the negotiation process must begin 1 year in advance of the expiry of the CBA; ...
Good idea. Removes the Nuclear option from the table somewhat, but alas, people being what they are, games played, procrastinating, such & such a date impossible for us to meet with you & so on & so forth. Labour, Commercial & Litigation Lawyers experts in that regard.
rather melodramatic. I dont think the op and certainly not I are calling for anything overly draconian, just a mild slap on the wrist will suffice, and if that means "no strike, no lockout & Binding Arbitration" statutes be crafted & created, then so be it. That the leagues recognize the enormous responsibilities that they have, honour their covenants with municipal & state/prov authorities who in many cases provide them with the platforms upon which they exist; the countless 1000's of smaller businesses & charities who rely upon them for their very existence & so on & so forth. Yes, its anathema to all one might hold Dear in terms of the democratic process, however, these are not "private businesses" in the natural Darwinian sense of the term at all. Entirely different animals, many owing their very existences to taxpayer largesse, using & abusing their positions of ownership to extract concessions & direct subsidies from public vaults.
