HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

10/26 - NHLPA Statement from Don Fehr

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-29-2012, 12:49 AM
  #476
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mranderson View Post
I'm not sure there is actually rebuttal in there.
Well i guess it cuts both ways. But if Bettman would accept his victory and play the season out now, they are going to continue with great revenue growth.

If the owners lock them out the rest of the year, then they will gain the satisfaction of being right about the PA's calculations of revenue growth being too high and making their preferred method of compromise more difficult. Meaning a new creative attempt at compromise and negotation will probably need to be found since delinkage in order to freeze salaries could be much costlier then.

thinkwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 12:50 AM
  #477
mranderson
Registered User
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
If you lose the entire year, then yes, growth might be affected.
Uhh.... I think you missed (implied) the argument.

The point was whether revenues could slow down or even decrease even if there was a season. (It was in relation to the PA's generous* offer of fixed raises of 2%.)

Footnotes:
* generous is a very subjective term.

mranderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 12:58 AM
  #478
mranderson
Registered User
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
Well i guess it cuts both ways. But if Bettman would accept his victory and play the season out now, they are going to continue with great revenue growth.

If the owners lock them out the rest of the year, then they will gain the satisfaction of being right about the PA's calculations of revenue growth being too high and making their preferred method of compromise more difficult. Meaning a new creative attempt at compromise and negotation will probably need to be found since delinkage in order to freeze salaries could be much costlier then.
I'm not so sure how anyone can predict whether revenues will increase or decrease in future years - let alone put a numerical estimate on it.

I don't claim to know whether 57% HRR or 50% HRR is fair. But what I do know is that the PA's best offers thus far did not include linkage - something that is a guaranteed non-starter for the NHL.

mranderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 01:21 AM
  #479
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,245
vCash: 500
They offered a salary freeze, and opponents have seized on that as de-linkage. That is just ridiculous.

We have seen the league weather a decade that saw the worst financial crisis since the great depression and never see revenue growth less than 5% and it actually was starting to hit 9%.

How you can look at at that and think delinking in order to freeze salaries or give 1 and 2% raises for a few years is too risky to warrant the owners taking the risk of saving a few hundred million year from the 57% previously paid is beyond me. If revenue growth pretty much stays on track as the economy begins to improve those increases seem certain and not even disputed by owners.

This is seizing on a buzzword cliche out of context and then missing the forest for the trees.

But again, if thats the issue, why not ask then for the players to once again absolve the owners of any risk by making them have to use different numbers if revenues dont grow as usual?

thinkwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 02:01 AM
  #480
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
Making salaries whole i beleive is an nhl term not a PA one. And their method is to get future players to take less to pay them. It is a clever phrase, but it distracts from the fact the owners are asking the players to take an immediate overall salary envelope pay cut to solve a problem while revenues and overall profits are increasing. It would surely be understandable if revenues were dropping.
I'll buy revenues increasing, profits not so much as there is no proof of increased profitability. And, danishh made a good case for profitability peaking and sliding down hill since the last CBA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
I know the owners want that. I dont see it as justifiable, but what do i know. The players have seen the books and they dont see it as justifiable. And they arent going to accept it because it looks like plain bullying. You ask what the problem is and try to solve it and they change the problem.
I seriously doubt that more than a couple of players have seen the owners books and I doubt whether any player has seen all of them. Both the HRR reports and the 76k pages. That's work for financial professionals not players.

From the rhetoric it is certain that part of ownership issues lie with the weak sisters. Fehr offering Bettman a $100mil rev share pool for his personal account to distribute certainly indicates that he is well aware that there are problems outside of the current system of sharing.

If you want an alternative that I haven't seen proposed, it is to remove the current escrow system. I am sure part of Fehr's agenda is to remove or mitigate it. There have been individual complaints from players every year about escrow. I am sure that it grates on them. An alternative would be to make contracts whole each year but to adjust the subsequent year's cap for the overage. An effect would be to make the owners wait one year to pull even with percentages, taking risks one year at a time. Another hit would be a one time hit to the players when it was enacted to suppress the value of new contracts and extensions. Neither side has proposed this solution.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Adults don't need to be gagged. What is Bettman afraid they might say?


What could an owner possibly say that warrants him not being allowed to talk about the team/business he paid hundreds of millions of dollars to acquire (or currently valued as such)?
I would believe that part of the reason for the owner gag is to prevent league liability during a labor negotiation. It would not surprise me if many owners had no experience with collective bargaining where labor law is a bit more stringent. That is not to say that this is the only reason for the gag as Devellano's words definitely merited censure.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 02:07 AM
  #481
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I would believe that part of the reason for the owner gag is to prevent league liability during a labor negotiation. It would not surprise me if many owners had no experience with collective bargaining where labor law is a bit more stringent. That is not to say that this is the only reason for the gag as Devellano's words definitely merited censure.

Excellent point. I overlooked that aspect. What I don't know or recall is if it is always used by pro sports teams during lockouts or strikes. I seem to remember Jacobs giving interviews during the last lockout.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 02:14 AM
  #482
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Excellent point. I overlooked that aspect. What I don't know or recall is if it is always used by pro sports teams during lockouts or strikes. I seem to remember Jacobs giving interviews during the last lockout.
Jacobs has certainly been involved with organized labor with his core business. And I do seem to recall that he commented last go round as well.

I have been kind of compiling a list of Hawks and Doves for Owners. Most of it from comments when the CBA is not being negotiated.

Here's the list, some of whom are gone. I only got one Dove.

Hawks:
Jacobs
Snider
Leipold
Hicks
Jamison

Dove(s):
Hotchkiss (Calg)

If anyone wants to contribute to the list above feel free.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 02:21 AM
  #483
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I'll buy revenues increasing, profits not so much as there is no proof of increased profitability. And, danishh made a good case for profitability peaking and sliding down hill since the last CBA.
When Levit was announcing the leagues levit losses, much to the chagrin of many of us who argued that you cant look at the leagues losses as a whole because there is such revenue disparity and a cap will only worsen that, the leagues overall profitability was claimed to be $200 mil loss a year. Those URO's now allegedly show that flipped to over $200 mil profit a year overall even after accounting for all the teams losing money.

Why is the last cba no longer working? Because some big revenue teams are making too much money causing havoc on all the teams not growing at that pace because of linkage.

Quote:
I seriously doubt that more than a couple of players have seen the owners books and I doubt whether any player has seen all of them. Both the HRR reports and the 76k pages. That's work for financial professionals not players.
Is this a serious point? That the players arent properly up to speed on the legal states of anti trust regulations, the economic ramifications of slower increasing marginal revenues, and the fine points of labour negotations that both sides are paying millions of dollars to professionals to manage that process for them? Does it really matter what players are saying on twitter as they struggle with something they dont want to be forced into dealing with?

Of course the players representatives being paid to advise them on this are the ones that have seen the proposals and are dealing with the issues that are worthy of discussion on a business board.

What petulant fans think of player outbursts on twitter should probably be best left to other gossip boards perhaps? (Not directed at SJeasy, just using that point to go off on a rant)


Quote:
If you want an alternative that I haven't seen proposed, it is to remove the current escrow system. I am sure part of Fehr's agenda is to remove or mitigate it. There have been individual complaints from players every year about escrow. I am sure that it grates on them.
I think thats exactly what Fehr offered. A freeze that requires no escrow cause its a fixed amount. Its a fair trade off i think, the owners get to pay less, yes assuming revenues grow, and in return they shouldnt need any escrow cause they know beforehand what they can spend.

Escrow for sure is a huge irritant to the players. People keep thinking his offer removed linkage, but i think the more important point was it alleviated escrow.

Quote:
I would believe that part of the reason for the owner gag is to prevent league liability during a labor negotiation. It would not surprise me if many owners had no experience with collective bargaining where labor law is a bit more stringent. That is not to say that this is the only reason for the gag as Devellano's words definitely merited censure.
The gag order definitely works to give the appearance of owner solidarity even though common sense tells us that is unlikely.


Last edited by thinkwild: 10-29-2012 at 02:30 AM.
thinkwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 02:52 AM
  #484
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 11,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
When Levit was announcing the leagues levit losses, much to the chagrin of many of us who argued that you cant look at the leagues losses as a whole because there is such revenue disparity and a cap will only worsen that, the leagues overall profitability was claimed to be $200 mil loss a year. Those URO's now allegedly show that flipped to over $200 mil profit a year overall even after accounting for all the teams losing money.

Why is the last cba no longer working? Because some big revenue teams are making too much money causing havoc on all the teams not growing at that pace because of linkage.
Danishh's point was that the numbers were sliding down. He made the point that the first year post lockout was the most profitable on a percentage basis. There is an additional indication as this past year saw less dollars committed towards the cap (not so many teams bumping cap). These and other points* are indicators for the owners seeing things getting worse.

It isn't just the big teams making too much although thinking that they earned their profits because of their markets is discouraging. They got a huge windfall from the last CBA at the expense of lesser teams and at the very least should be giving some of it back.

I am solidly on middle ground as others will attest. I have proposed original solutions to that which is at issue. I am interested in the underlying motivations of each side and look at the comments of both sides as indicators of their real issues. I am appalled at the antipathy of both sides because they are doing damage to each other and the game as a whole and they are preventing each other from finding solutions that would be more productive in the long run. You can call me a supporter of a "healthy 30".

I wasn't taking shots at players' intelligence with the financial documents. Probably beyond my intelligence as well. The amount of paper is just too overwhelming for almost anyone.

*Fuel costs rising faster than NHL revs. Same for electricity. Insurance? Health care?

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 02:42 PM
  #485
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 14,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
I don't understand why he didn't. They are just coming across as uneducated and juvenile on twitter. If I was Fehr, after the first or second idiotic comment by a player, I'd put them on a gag order.
Because they started out with just saying "we just wanna play", which they were totally told to say because Fehr wanted to win the PR battle. Now the players aren't following their scripts and showing their true colors, which is making them look like spoiled, uneducated children.

Ragamuffin Gunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 04:13 PM
  #486
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,605
vCash: 500
Players say: "We just wanna play but the owners won't let us!"
By hiring the mastermind behind the 1994 strike? Ask MLB fans how much players wanted to play by striking!

Players say: "The league had record revenues and still wants to cut our salaries they agreed to"
Revenues =/= profits

Players has only fed the fans lies except for many people on here have enough common sense to see through them.

CN_paladin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 04:16 PM
  #487
Section337
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 4,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Jacobs has certainly been involved with organized labor with his core business. And I do seem to recall that he commented last go round as well.

I have been kind of compiling a list of Hawks and Doves for Owners. Most of it from comments when the CBA is not being negotiated.

Here's the list, some of whom are gone. I only got one Dove.

Hawks:
Jacobs
Snider
Leipold
Hicks
Jamison

Dove(s):
Hotchkiss (Calg)

If anyone wants to contribute to the list above feel free.
Dodo:
Katz

Section337 is online now   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 06:55 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.