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.

Our Hockey Fate is 24 Hours Away....

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2004, 03:02 PM
  #1
FLYLine27
BrassGod
 
FLYLine27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 39,144
vCash: 500
Our Hockey Fate is 24 Hours Away....

Tomorrow the owners and players will sit down...at around this time I would think he first headlines will start to appear on TSN and Sportsnet either saying something like:

"Short Talks" "Hope Gone"
OR what we are ALL hoping to see:
"Progess" "Season Hopefull?"

So tonight before you go to sleep..religious or not...say small prayer. I dont how i'll be able to last without hockey even until Sept. Once April comes around it will be the worst months because there will be no playoff action which I look foward towards every year...Rangers in them or not.

So let us not use this thread to bash the Owners or PA..but to just come together again and hope for a an end to these dark days...

NO BASHING OWNERS OR PLAYERS ON THIS THREAD..There are PLENTY of other Threads where you can do that. THANKS


Last edited by FLYLine27: 12-08-2004 at 04:43 PM.
FLYLine27 is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 03:36 PM
  #2
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
I agree. Lets not talk about players or owners, lets hope for the game. I hope for the games sake that the season is cancelled and that we can move forward to some meaningful negotiations come the New Year. There's a lot to fix and it would be an injustice to not do it right just to get the players on the ice for an abreviated season and then a playoff run.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 03:39 PM
  #3
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine4LIFE
Tomorrow the owners and players will sit down...at around this time I would think he first headlines will start to appear on TSN and Sportsnet either saying something like:

"Short Talks" "Hope Gone"
OR what we are ALL hoping to see:
"Progess" "Season Hopefull?"

So tonight before you go to sleep..religious or not...say small prayer. I dont how i'll be able to last without hockey even until Sept. Once April comes around it will be the worst months because there will be no playoff action which I look foward towards every year...Rangers in them or not.

So let us not use this thread to bash the Owners or PA..but to just come together again and hope for a an end to these dark days...
I agree, If they dont play it will be a long winter for me as well.

c-carp is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 03:45 PM
  #4
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 8,012
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Don't want to be depressing but i doubt a solutuion will be made. But hey winter aien't so bad with christmas and everything. Personally i'd rather a long term, sensible solution was determined whether or not we miss the season. I'd rather miss the season than loss the NHL

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 03:47 PM
  #5
Charge_Seven
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,631
vCash: 500
The Toronto Star had a nice article in reference to what the players are offering...it's mainly all the same stuff everyones heard before, 10% pay cut, seventy five cent tax on the dollar over a cap between 38-45 million, younger free agency (like 28...). I can't really recall any of the others. It was worth a read though.

EDIT: Personally, I think the proposal is a very solid one. (well...will be a very solid one...when given). The owners should definitely consider it, with their own input on it of course. I'm a player suporter through and through, but honestly I hope they're all working towards the same goal, and if they are, then these talks should get the ball rolling...or the puck sliding...or whatever you want to say.

Charge_Seven is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:07 PM
  #6
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregStack
The Toronto Star had a nice article in reference to what the players are offering...it's mainly all the same stuff everyones heard before, 10% pay cut, seventy five cent tax on the dollar over a cap between 38-45 million, younger free agency (like 28...). I can't really recall any of the others. It was worth a read though.

EDIT: Personally, I think the proposal is a very solid one. (well...will be a very solid one...when given). The owners should definitely consider it, with their own input on it of course. I'm a player suporter through and through, but honestly I hope they're all working towards the same goal, and if they are, then these talks should get the ball rolling...or the puck sliding...or whatever you want to say.
And I'm on the side of the game, so I hope the NHL flatly refuses the offer and sends the players packing. The players offer does nothing to address the disparity between the haves and the have nots. The Leafs will continue to spend like drunken sailors and the Oilers will continue to sell players off each season. The players offer does not address the problems that are really hurting the game and that is out of control salary costs that have far surpassed revenue growth. We'll see how serious the owners are. If they are in real trouble they will rebuff the offer and cancel the season. If they are bluffing they will consider the offer. I for one think the game is in serious trouble and nothing short of a salary cap saves a dozen franchises from folding in the next three to five years.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:26 PM
  #7
FLYLine27
BrassGod
 
FLYLine27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 39,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
And I'm on the side of the game, so I hope the NHL flatly refuses the offer and sends the players packing. The players offer does nothing to address the disparity between the haves and the have nots. The Leafs will continue to spend like drunken sailors and the Oilers will continue to sell players off each season. The players offer does not address the problems that are really hurting the game and that is out of control salary costs that have far surpassed revenue growth. We'll see how serious the owners are. If they are in real trouble they will rebuff the offer and cancel the season. If they are bluffing they will consider the offer. I for one think the game is in serious trouble and nothing short of a salary cap saves a dozen franchises from folding in the next three to five years.
This isnt the POINT of this THREAD. We have PLENTY of these....re-read the first post.

FLYLine27 is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:27 PM
  #8
CorneliusBennet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
And I'm on the side of the game, so I hope the NHL flatly refuses the offer and sends the players packing. The players offer does nothing to address the disparity between the haves and the have nots. The Leafs will continue to spend like drunken sailors and the Oilers will continue to sell players off each season. The players offer does not address the problems that are really hurting the game and that is out of control salary costs that have far surpassed revenue growth. We'll see how serious the owners are. If they are in real trouble they will rebuff the offer and cancel the season. If they are bluffing they will consider the offer. I for one think the game is in serious trouble and nothing short of a salary cap saves a dozen franchises from folding in the next three to five years.

So instead of losing a couple of franchises which in certain cases shouldn't exist anyway you're willing to sacrafice the entire NHL? Makes zero sense at all. I'm sorry there is such a disparity between team incomes but why is that the players fault and why should they be the ones to be forced to "make up for it?"
Want lower player contracts? Quit offering guys like Holik 9 million per year. God, it's really simple.

CorneliusBennet is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:33 PM
  #9
coyotechrisz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Thailand
Posts: 182
vCash: 500
Does anybody know when (Time ... pm? ) the meeting will take place`?

coyotechrisz is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:34 PM
  #10
se7en*
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 3,737
vCash: 500
The NHL should just stop ******* around and just cancel the season. The union's only leg to stand on is waiting for the owners to cave, when they don't what will they do? End the garbage already. I for one do not wish to see them salvage a pitiful 30 or so games for one season, just play hardball and cancel the season already.

se7en* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:36 PM
  #11
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregStack
The Toronto Star had a nice article in reference to what the players are offering...it's mainly all the same stuff everyones heard before, 10% pay cut, seventy five cent tax on the dollar over a cap between 38-45 million, younger free agency (like 28...). I can't really recall any of the others. It was worth a read though.

EDIT: Personally, I think the proposal is a very solid one. (well...will be a very solid one...when given). The owners should definitely consider it, with their own input on it of course. I'm a player suporter through and through, but honestly I hope they're all working towards the same goal, and if they are, then these talks should get the ball rolling...or the puck sliding...or whatever you want to say.
Is there a web site or link where I can read this article, we get almost no coverage of this where I live.

Thanks

c-carp is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 04:46 PM
  #12
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 13,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
And I'm on the side of the game, so I hope the NHL flatly refuses the offer and sends the players packing. The players offer does nothing to address the disparity between the haves and the have nots. The Leafs will continue to spend like drunken sailors and the Oilers will continue to sell players off each season. The players offer does not address the problems that are really hurting the game and that is out of control salary costs that have far surpassed revenue growth. We'll see how serious the owners are. If they are in real trouble they will rebuff the offer and cancel the season. If they are bluffing they will consider the offer. I for one think the game is in serious trouble and nothing short of a salary cap saves a dozen franchises from folding in the next three to five years.
Well, I hope the NHL comes back strong in 2007 if you have your way.

Do you think the Leafs would be willing to pay Belfour $14M per season? Because that's is what he'll cost under the proposed CBA ($8M base + 6M tax). Don't you think that the tax will keep costs down?

Same issue with a 10% rollback and stricter rookie cap. Both will keep costs down if the owners have any sense whatsoever. And if they don't have any sense whatsoever, they guilty parties will pay through the nose with a 75% (and I bet the owners could negotiate that up to 100%) luxury tax.

I don't see how this doesn't at least start addressing the major issues. Come up with something for arbitration & the qualifying offer %, and it's a very strong starting point.

Beukeboom Fan is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 05:00 PM
  #13
Leafer4Life
Go Jays Go!
 
Leafer4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Owen Sound,Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,188
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Leafer4Life Send a message via Yahoo to Leafer4Life
I always pray for the 2 sides to come to a deal. Tonight will be no different. I really hope that they come to a deal tomorrow.........

Leafer4Life is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 05:03 PM
  #14
OlTimeHockey
Registered User
 
OlTimeHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: home
Country: China
Posts: 16,463
vCash: 500
Seven teams regularly offer the money without consequence to their fiscal health, players know they can ask for the moon because the money is there if they care to hit up the big daddy seven teams, and they hold out or get the money at the expense of the team's health, the average salary of Joe Tripowitz third line hack goes up to a million a year because he scores half of what Yuri Floatseltsev did (and Yuri gets $8M), so the fourth liner Vinny Bagadonuts wants some cash; he asks for $800k more because he scored four goals one month and can fight.

Though the above was erratic and incoherent and rambling, so is the thought that relying on owners to stop spending on players. The fat seven (the money wasters in TO, NYR, Det, Col, Philly, StL and Dallas (though Dal has not been bad lately)) will spend the money, cause a ripple and increase the salary of every player near term or long term because of the hike in what said players are worth in relation to the big meal ticket scrubs signed to huge contracts.

The Rangers just upped the value of washed up but serviceable forewards with their signing of Nylander. One goal, 14 pts and seventeen in 2003.......I can think of dozens of guys who could ask for more now. They might not get it, but they sure will get more now. Market dictates it. Owners can refuse or decline or whatever.....but the agents and the players will try.

Mind you, this isn't the players fault. It's not the owners' fault. It's not the GM's fault.

The fault lies with all of them and one special but oft neglected market influencer: the fans.

Pay twice as much for tickets as you did pre-trap/boring hockey and you give a thumbs up to everything the owners have shoveled upon this game, the players and coaches have decided to present you (or deny you) and everything the GM's have inked and traded away. You still buy the seats and forfeit your veto to an increasingly pathetic game that is far overpriced and a shell of its former self.

Sorry to rant, but I can't stand one side blaming everything on the players, one side blaming everything on the owners and few allowing for just about everybody to be accomplices to the raping of the game. I see the only people in the entire situation who are 100% right are the fans who have to pay for this (though I fault them for going to games and supporting the teams and players when they should not).

Let's hope one or both of Goodenow or Bettman get canned tomorrow if nothing happens.

Or if something happens.

OlTimeHockey is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 05:07 PM
  #15
Vomiting Kermit*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,561
vCash: 500
I miss NHL and Oilers hockey, and most notably, going to Oiler games on a regular basis, especially the Saturday night games. Please come back.

Vomiting Kermit* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 05:11 PM
  #16
MS
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 19,931
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
And I'm on the side of the game, so I hope the NHL flatly refuses the offer and sends the players packing. The players offer does nothing to address the disparity between the haves and the have nots. The Leafs will continue to spend like drunken sailors and the Oilers will continue to sell players off each season. The players offer does not address the problems that are really hurting the game and that is out of control salary costs that have far surpassed revenue growth. We'll see how serious the owners are. If they are in real trouble they will rebuff the offer and cancel the season. If they are bluffing they will consider the offer. I for one think the game is in serious trouble and nothing short of a salary cap saves a dozen franchises from folding in the next three to five years.
With a luxury tax as proposed:

- If the tax is successful in lowering spending, teams like Edmonton will be spending much closer to the league average, leveling the playing field.

- If the tax isn't successful in lowering spending, there will be a huge pool of tax money to be distributed to teams like Edmonton, leveling the playing field.

How does this proposal do nothing to reduce that disparity? As I see it, it does a hell of a lot.

No franchises will fold. If any team even looks like going under, it will be snapped up immediately by interests in places like Kansas City and Portland which have big money and top-notch arenas waiting for the NHL.

MS is online now  
Old
12-08-2004, 05:40 PM
  #17
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorneliusBennet
So instead of losing a couple of franchises which in certain cases shouldn't exist anyway you're willing to sacrafice the entire NHL? Makes zero sense at all. I'm sorry there is such a disparity between team incomes but why is that the players fault and why should they be the ones to be forced to "make up for it?"
Want lower player contracts? Quit offering guys like Holik 9 million per year. God, it's really simple.
So losing a couple of franchises is okay? Great, Any volunteers? How about the Edmonton Oilers and the Carolina Hurricanes as the sacraficial lambs to be lead to the slaughter. Neither franchise is worth its salt and needs to be folded for the good of the game. Forget the fans. Fair?

The owners are indeed very guilty of making some massive mistakes along the way. I don't know anyone that is arguing that. But they are doing what they feel needs to be done for the long term survival of the game. Unfortunately the players do not want to take their part of the responsibility and admit that they may have gone a little far and that the system that was created, and which they took advantage of, has become unhealthy for the game. You have a bunch of fellows with GED educations trying to wrap their heads around some very complex financial matters and they are struggling. They haven't been able to nail down where the owners numbers are incorrect (The declined to look at the numbers of multiple teams as well as the Leavitt report in detail) and are hold fast to a system that has been damaging to the game. The league wishes to tie salaries to revenues, yet the players decline. Can you name another industry where salaries are not tied to revenues? To me the players are not being realistic and need a serious wakeup call. If that means folding everything and starting all over, maybe that's what needs to be done. The golden goose is pretty well cooked. The players just refuse to acknowledge this fact.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 05:59 PM
  #18
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS
With a luxury tax as proposed:

- If the tax is successful in lowering spending, teams like Edmonton will be spending much closer to the league average, leveling the playing field.

- If the tax isn't successful in lowering spending, there will be a huge pool of tax money to be distributed to teams like Edmonton, leveling the playing field.

How does this proposal do nothing to reduce that disparity? As I see it, it does a hell of a lot.

No franchises will fold. If any team even looks like going under, it will be snapped up immediately by interests in places like Kansas City and Portland which have big money and top-notch arenas waiting for the NHL.
Problem with a tax based system is that those revenues are unreliable and can fluxuate wildly from year to year. When you are trying to budget you cannot rely on these funds, especially when you are signing players to long term contracts and doing budget forecasts. Its a nice gift to get, but not money that you can count on from year to year. Who knows how much is going to be there and how that pie is sliced? That is not cost certainty, it is more cost uncertainty and still allows the problems that plague the smaller teams to fester.

I respectfully disagree that there are cities looking to snap up NHL franchises if available. Pittsburgh has been available for years and no one has stepped forward. The Sabres could have been had for a song and no one stepped up. Ottawa was in financial straights and a deal could have been worked out there. Add in teams like Nashville and Carolina and you have some very rocky markets that could be coherced to move easily, but no one has stepped to the plate and buy these teams. The only teams that are attractive are the money makers. And those teams are money makers because they are in great hockey markets and have huge followings. The hockey markets are tapped. Its a fact of life and something the NHL is very aware of.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 07:05 PM
  #19
PecaFan
Registered User
 
PecaFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
Posts: 8,922
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
Problem with a tax based system is that those revenues are unreliable and can fluxuate wildly from year to year. When you are trying to budget you cannot rely on these funds, especially when you are signing players to long term contracts and doing budget forecasts. Its a nice gift to get, but not money that you can count on from year to year.
Yup. Imagine Edmonton gets $10 million in tax revenue. So they invest that in player salaries. Next year, the high salary teams all cut their budgets, and no money goes towards Edmonton. Now, they're $10 million *over budget*. So they're forced to ditch some players.

Yeah, they get a one year bonus so to speak, but long term planning is essentially useless. Unless they just pocket the extra revenue, and don't put any of it into the team. Which basically defeats the purpose of the tax.

PecaFan is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 07:15 PM
  #20
Charge_Seven
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
So losing a couple of franchises is okay? Great, Any volunteers? How about the Edmonton Oilers and the Carolina Hurricanes as the sacraficial lambs to be lead to the slaughter. Neither franchise is worth its salt and needs to be folded for the good of the game. Forget the fans. Fair?
Well, as the owners put it...It's a business.

I wouldn't be too happy to see those teams gone, but I don't think my Toronto Maple Leafs should have to help the Oilers, or the Hurricanes out in any way whatsoever with funds. If the game can't function in certain markets, yes, fold them. There is no reason for the owners to have a team in a non-hockey market if they want to make a profit, if they're in it for the love of the game, great, keep your franchise.

Charge_Seven is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 07:20 PM
  #21
Charge_Seven
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by c-carp
Is there a web site or link where I can read this article, we get almost no coverage of this where I live.

Thanks
I looked into it, apparently you need a Toronto Star online subscription or something of the sorts to find it on the net...if I find the time I'll see about typing it all out and posting it on here...not sure that'll happen though...

Charge_Seven is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 08:44 PM
  #22
Jack Canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hawaii
Country: Canada
Posts: 622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecaFan
Yup. Imagine Edmonton gets $10 million in tax revenue. So they invest that in player salaries. Next year, the high salary teams all cut their budgets, and no money goes towards Edmonton. Now, they're $10 million *over budget*. So they're forced to ditch some players.

Yeah, they get a one year bonus so to speak, but long term planning is essentially useless. Unless they just pocket the extra revenue, and don't put any of it into the team. Which basically defeats the purpose of the tax.
Or they could take that 10mil and spend 3.3 mill over 3 seasons. I'm sure they can find a way to save the bonus and distribute it over the long term. There is no reason they would have to go spend the bonus all at once.

Jack Canuck is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 08:48 PM
  #23
Go Flames Go*
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 943
vCash: 500
I hope a deal is reached, but it looks highly unlikely there will be hockey for a few years. I think if the NHL bent on the hard cap, and moved to a soft cap there might be a deal. NHLPA has to agree to tie revenues to salaries, just like other leagues who are doing well. Its a give and take situation, but the players will have to give a lot more.

Go Flames Go* is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 09:37 PM
  #24
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,054
vCash: 500
am i the only person that expects good news tommorow night?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
12-08-2004, 10:32 PM
  #25
me2
Team Ben Anti-Tank 0
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Team Tank 1
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 28,147
vCash: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by PecaFan
Yup. Imagine Edmonton gets $10 million in tax revenue. So they invest that in player salaries. Next year, the high salary teams all cut their budgets, and no money goes towards Edmonton. Now, they're $10 million *over budget*. So they're forced to ditch some players.

Yeah, they get a one year bonus so to speak, but long term planning is essentially useless. Unless they just pocket the extra revenue, and don't put any of it into the team. Which basically defeats the purpose of the tax.

Spending all $10m in on go isn't good planning on Edmonton's part. Stockpile the cash for few years so you can spread it out. Its not that hard to forecast the future of other teams so you can run a budget 3 years ahead. After 2 years of collecting $10m/y you might up your budget by $5m/y. After 3 years of collecting $10m you might up it $8m. In both of these cases you have enough cash stockpiled to last for 3 years without getting a cent more in tax in those 3 years.

If after 3 years they are getting $0 tax revenue then it means that salaries have deflated significantly and the payroll should be less.

me2 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"

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.