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.
"I want to be able, with the players, to negotiate an agreement that they are proud of, that they are satisfied with and were a part of forming," Fehr says. "I want them to have that agreement, and begin a relationship with us to set the stage for other things in the years to come. I know that's sort of amorphous, but it's really the goal here."
I want that, too, although it's such an ephemeral itinerant flittery statement that it's hard to disagree with.
It's like saying "I like puppies and love".
Seems like we're in for a lockout.
Agreed!! Don Fehr is great union rep as demostrated back in the days with the MLB when the players wanted no Salary Cap and there is no way I can take him lightly as a result.
NHLPA is a lot smarter than people give credit for. They held none of the cards a few years back and still
Improved arb and RFA rights.
Improved UFA time.
Got buyouts (free money for players who can then sign with someone else) which the owners considered a victory.
Got 1 way salaries not counted in cap if not in the NHL. (not in first NHL plan)
Counting players on rosters and all 1 way contracts not on rosters the players make more (adjusted for revenue) than they did in 2003-04. This happened because the players realized the owners were not working for each other but operating in clicks.
The players used this to their advantage. Much of what they wanted it was clear the big markets might be willing to give them but they had to (in appearance) present a united front. The NHLPA proposed heavy revenue sharing along with much of the things noted above. The big market owners didn't flinch at most of it but balked at revenue sharing. Eventually in exchanged for bumping the share of revenue players get if overall revenue rose the players dropped the rev. sharing portion and aligned with the big market owners.
In a nutshell ownership got a cap that cost them more than when they didn't and from the players perspective if you have to have a cap getting one that makes players more with more freedom is the way to go.
The worst part is big market owners bring in more and small market owners pay out more. It is a deal bad for the game in general.
What players want now is the unfinished business from last time. They know that the lack of revenue sharing is bad. They know small markets are being killed and they also know they are getting very well paid. What they want now is to right the ship, everyone will still make money but it will piss off the big markets. ...
THEY WILL EXCHANGE A FEW PERCENTAGE POINTS OF HRR FOR, ...
1) Real revenue sharing. They will be very public now with Fehr in charge that the money is there but the large markets are keeping it all and killing the small markets. Giving back a few % will show fans they will do their share IF big market owners ALSO do theirs.
2) Some (to be determined) say in marketing, relocation and expansion. The logic is if they are 600 - 650 of the maybe 800 best in the world at what they do. If they are going to be without a free market (salary cap) in which to negotiate they want a say in "helping" the NHL in maximizing revenue.
3) A proper accounting of revenue. (one example) you may recall in Chicago if you were in your seat and bought a beer it was counted as HRR however if you were in the concourse (not in view of the ice) Bill Wirtz claimed it was not HRR.
The players know the game will grow. No league has done worse marketing its game and players than the NHL. There are avenues to greatly increase revenue without raising ticket prices the owners are doing an awful job at this. The players want to fix it.
Oh, and you don't like puppies. You're just saying that so Killion doesn't think you're one of the blue meanies.
.. anyone who uses words like "ephemeral, itinerant & flittery" on these boards is beyond Finestkind with me.... still, expensive words for a taco eater. Ya reckon he got any on his bib Fugu?
As it should be last time the NHLPA had to give and after Buttman and his BoG tried to destroy them Fehr will finally resurrect it.
The status quo should be good enough for most parts if some owners aren't willing to open their pockets well then don't own a hockeyteam and off you go.
If the players win the fans win so I'm for sure siding with the players in that case hope they'll get a deal the NHLPA can be proud off.
.. anyone who uses words like "ephemeral, itinerant & flittery" on these boards is beyond Finestkind with me.... still, expensive words for a taco eater. Ya reckon he got any on his bib Fugu?
That one is all steak and lobster. Good with numbers too, I hear. Now that I've successfully fended off another of LS's merging operations.....
Is it even conceivable that the players would want earlier free agency, or that the owners would consider it? Fehr worked under Marvin Miller, and Miller believed (per Wiki anyway) that:
As an economist, Miller understood that too many free agents could actually drive down player salaries. Miller agreed to limit free agency to players with more than six years of service, knowing that restricting the supply of labor would drive up salaries as owners bid for an annual, finite pool of free agents.
When you have a cap that keeps increasing, along with the floor, you have a system that's inflationary in nature. The money has already been redistributed to younger players approaching free agency earlier vs post 31+ yrs and three contracts to stretch it out in the last CBA. Is seven years the best number for players?
As it should be last time the NHLPA had to give and after Buttman and his BoG tried to destroy them Fehr will finally resurrect it.
The status quo should be good enough for most parts if some owners aren't willing to open their pockets well then don't own a hockeyteam and off you go.
If the players win the fans win so I'm for sure siding with the players in that case hope they'll get a deal the NHLPA can be proud off.
As it should be last time the NHLPA had to give and after Buttman and his BoG tried to destroy them Fehr will finally resurrect it.
The status quo should be good enough for most parts if some owners aren't willing to open their pockets well then don't own a hockeyteam and off you go.
If the players win the fans win so I'm for sure siding with the players in that case hope they'll get a deal the NHLPA can be proud off.
Why do the fans win if the players win? You'll have to explain that one to me.
Why do the fans win if the players win? You'll have to explain that one to me.
Why do the fans win if the owners win?
Unfortunately, it seems everyone picks one side as being all right or all wrong. It's possible that some of the NHLPA positions would yield better results for fans, and that some of the owners' positions would as well. Can't we make it about the individual issues and not sides?
For example, increased revenue sharing would certainly benefit everyone except large revenue teams.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snow Soccer
some people just want to watch the world burn
This makes absolutely no sense. Zero. Nada. Zilch.
One could read from Fehr's comments plenty of displeasure towards the fact that previous CBA is seen as product of the League to which the players submitted to and these comments are definitley in line with NHLPA's stance regarding realignment. Whether this means that he wants and tries to have players behind him to tear the CBA in pieces and construe a whole new one is anyone's guess. Somehow I get the feeling that Fehr can and will be reasonable, but it could be just wishfull thinking - or the owners can fail to be reasonable and mess things up. As aside note, quite interesting how Ferh and Bettman share at least the personal trait of being oblivious to media criticism - something they both seem to be very familiar with.
Reading through the article, I think as usual, everyone is overreacting. Reading between the lines, Fehr will most likely fight to save any sort of salary rollback & increase revenue sharing amongst clubs. The salary cap wasn't even mentioned, so that appears to be settled business. Seriously, would everyone just relax regarding this. We are not heading toward another nuclear winter here. It might go down to the wire, but it will get done. And chances are, it will be a slight tweak here & there that most fans probably won't catch anyway.
One could read from Fehr's comments plenty of displeasure towards the fact that previous CBA is seen as product of the League to which the players submitted to and these comments are definitley in line with NHLPA's stance regarding realignment. Whether this means that he wants and tries to have players behind him to tear the CBA in pieces and construe a whole new one is anyone's guess. Somehow I get the feeling that Fehr can and will be reasonable, but it could be just wishfull thinking - or the owners can fail to be reasonable and mess things up. As aside note, quite interesting how Ferh and Bettman share at least the personal trait of being oblivious to media criticism - something they both seem to be very familiar with.
The bottom line is, as much as some people hate either of them, neither Fehr nor Bettman is stupid. They both realize the situation the league is in. It will hurt the players at least as much as the league for there to be any sort of work stoppage. At this point, (assuming nothing otherwise has happened) I don't know that either side will invoke the clause ending the CBA. I think we will have 1 more year under the current ruleset, with negotiations for the writing of an entirely fresh CBA ongoing for all of next season.
One could read from Fehr's comments plenty of displeasure towards the fact that previous CBA is seen as product of the League to which the players submitted to and these comments are definitley in line with NHLPA's stance regarding realignment. Whether this means that he wants and tries to have players behind him to tear the CBA in pieces and construe a whole new one is anyone's guess. Somehow I get the feeling that Fehr can and will be reasonable, but it could be just wishfull thinking - or the owners can fail to be reasonable and mess things up. As aside note, quite interesting how Ferh and Bettman share at least the personal trait of being oblivious to media criticism - something they both seem to be very familiar with.
Fehr seems to be saying he wants a CBA the players can claim "victory" on, cuz I think there is a sense that they "lost" the last CBA round. This CBA round is being cast a battle to restore the NHLPA's pride & honour after it was lost in the last CBA, and the internal chaos that followed.
You mention some similarities of Bettman & Fehr, besides not answering to the media criticism, they are both very aware of who they do answer to. Bettman to the Governers, and Fehr to the players.
At the end of the day, I don't think much will change besides a few % points, but expect a big song & dance to be made over a few populist but relatively benign issues (2014 olympics? maybe some retooling of the escrow system because players hate paycheque clawbacks) that Fehr will be allowed to claim a major victory on, to keep his constituents happy, and then life will go on.
If a prolonged lockout is what we're facing, bye-bye NHL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick
That's what everyone said last time too. The NHL won't go "bye-bye" if there's a prolonged lockout.
The league as we know it will go "Bye-bye". If Fehr & Bettman both dig in & neither side is willing to concede for any length of time, I could honestly see this dragging out long enough for the league/BOG to declare an labour impasse (2yrs IIRC), thereby dissolving all agreements with the players union and allowing for the use of replacement/non-union players (ie: no CBA going forward, no Union - the league/teams will hold all the cards) to ensure this never happens again
Not to mention the amount of financial damage a prolonged lockout would do to their TV contracts/Arena Leases/Gate driven fan $$$ etc...
.
