Ladies and gentleman we are going on a strike or lock-out

[29dryden29]

Originally Posted by Frozenice

When the players are locked out/on strike, there's no salary being paid to any of them. I don't think the owners can do anything to stop them from playing anywhere, I'm not even sure the Habs can stop Carey Price from joining the rodeo.

Their bonus money still gets paid from what I remember just not their earned salary.

[shamrun]

I guess the players response threat to a lockout is this. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/...urces_lockout/

[Roulin]

Originally Posted by shamrun

I guess the players response threat to a lockout is this. http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/...urces_lockout/

Interesting that Quebec City and "an undetermined site in Southern Ontario" are two of the tentative sites. IMO promoting potential new homes for failing teams is in the NHLPA's interest.

[Issacar]

A pro franchise is not an investment. If you buy one, it's because you are a fan and you want them to win no matter the cost.

People thinking pro sports are an investment is the problem. If you can't afford it, don,t buy it. In the end it's a luxury.

Owners don't care about you and me.
Players don't care about you and me.

What owners and players really care about is their wallet.

For all their talk about parity and wanting to give back to the fans. Thanks for rising tickets price on a season to season basis.

For all the Gorges who shows up to every game and puts it all on the ice, there are 500+ players who seems complacent on the ice. For all the players saying they want to give back to the fans. Thanks for playing like you couldn't care less for most of the season (Mike Cammalleri, Andrei Kostitsyn and Rene Bourque are very good examples).

Seriously, siding with either the players or the owners is rather dumb. Money has corrupted them both and we're stuck with a half arsed product.

[Issacar]

Originally Posted by Roulin

Interesting that Quebec City and "an undetermined site in Southern Ontario" are two of the tentative sites. IMO promoting potential new homes for failing teams is in the NHLPA's interest.

If we include Seattle and Kansas City we might jsut be looking at a 34 teams league.

[29dryden29]

The Rangers on paper show a loss LOL I call BS on that in a big way.

[nhlfan9191]

Originally Posted by Issacar

If we include Seattle and Kansas City we might jsut be looking at a 34 teams league.

34 teams is way to many. It's already hard enough to win a Stanley Cup nowadays. No more expansion.

[DekeLikeYouMeanIt]

Originally Posted by Issacar

A pro franchise is not an investment.

LOL ofcourse not... I mean businessmen don't buy teams to make the most money they can out of it. No no. They buy teams because they're big fans! Here's some groundbreaking info: With the exception of Lemieux and the Pens, it's 100% profit.

[MasterDecoy]

Originally Posted by DekeLikeYouMeanIt

LOL ofcourse not... I mean businessmen don't buy teams to make the most money they can out of it. No no. They buy teams because they're big fans! Here's some groundbreaking info: With the exception of Lemieux and the Pens, it's 100% profit.

Absolutely right. Whether its straight up profits at the end of a quarter, or maximizing arena use, or whatever, it's always about profits.

However, there are a few exceptions like Lemieux or the owner of the mavericks

[29dryden29]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=403609

http://watch.tsn.ca/...5034#clip745034

http://watch.tsn.ca/...5070#clip745070

[phoque taupe]

http://www.kelownacapnews.com/sports/166970506.html

With all these ex-Kelowna Rockets, im reassured

[29dryden29]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...v=UaNz6UHK-sE#!