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
10-26-2012, 03:39 PM
  #151
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Absolute LIE

There is not ONE concession in any of the NHL's offers.

EACH one sees them take on every issue.

they have tweaked their offers to take less, but they are still TAKING on EVERY issue across the board.
Why should there be any concessions from the owners??

Every team does not make a profity every year.

Every player does make a profit every year.

Yes. That simple.

Butch 19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:40 PM
  #152
Brick City
Ignore me!
 
Brick City's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
When was the last time the Yankees missed the playoffs? Is it due to there superior management, scouting and player development system?
I can make a solid argument that most of the key players from the 1996-2000 dynasty years were in fact home grown. The difference is, unlike the Marlins, they can afford to retain them. I will admit after that they lost their way and started overpaying for free agents. The farm system simultaneously went into decline until being resurrected in the last few years. For all the talk about 'buying' championships, they only have one (2009) to show for that strategy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Yeah, this bubble is about to burst. MLB franchise values are going to fall eventually. FOX and the other networks that carry baseball overpaid by large amounts for the broadcasting rights. Americans care a lot more about the NFL and the BCS (Notre Dame at Oklahoma this weekend) than they do about the World Series.
I think baseball fans, like their hockey brethren, are far more provincial than football fans. I know very few people around New Jersey that care about the Series now that the Yankees are out. Personally I don't love or hate either team in the Series and thus don't care much myself.

Football is more of an event - people watch 'The Game.' I know people whose Sunday is essentially dedicated to football. I happen to treat the NFL the same as the NHL and MLB - I only really care if my team is playing. But I might be the minority or a plurality on that indifference to the other matchups. With hockey and baseball, I am definitely the majority with that attitude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I doubt we collectively can teach Donald much about sports labor economics and negotiations. There's a reason he's feared and respected by his peers and those against whom he's faced off.


Having said that, I fully endorse any systems that arrives at a figure that goes to labor without artificial/mandated shares. I don't think there's another industry in the world that guarantees employees a fixed share of revenues.
So you are against salary caps? Not being combative, but artificial/mandated shares are essentially the cap systems employed by the NHL, NFL and NBA. I guess this makes sense given you seem to be arguing in favor of baseball's system. I am a big baseball fan and can assure you that very, very, very few people think their labor system is a model for anything other than what should be avoided. The NFL system of a cap plus robust revenue sharing is the way to go.

Brick City is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:40 PM
  #153
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Who cares if fans respect him? He's paid by player associations to look out for their interests. His adversaries have a great deal of respect for him, as evidenced by comments from former MLB owners.

What you and I think of Fehr or Bettman in the end amounts to zilch. There's no reason for us to waste too much energy on it.
Yeah, I spent all of six words, now 15.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:40 PM
  #154
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottawah View Post
Its not that simple. You cannot launch an anti trust lawsuit without any merit. You would have to go back to playing and then prove there was anti trust in place.
.
It didn't stop the NFL and NBA players from doing it.

Iggy77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:42 PM
  #155
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,967
vCash: 873
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Respected by fans? I think not.
In the grand scheme of things I'm not a union guy.

I am pro player here because I think that the Owners need to look at themselves and adjust the revenue disparity before they look to correct that issue by continually taking from the players.

That said, Donald Fehr may be alot of things, but he is damn good at what he does and he has my respect.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:42 PM
  #156
MarkhamNHL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 283
vCash: 500
besides, their owners have locked them out and refuse to negotiate..

MarkhamNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:45 PM
  #157
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
I am pro player here because I think that the Owners need to look at themselves and adjust the revenue disparity before they look to correct that issue by continually taking from the players.
... I agree, and unfortunately, I dont see that happening. Nothing in Jacobs, Snider's, Bettmans positioning & posturing would indicate that thats even within the realm of possibilities.

Killion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:45 PM
  #158
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Or they can just contract a bunch of teams and have several players lose their jobs.
They could do that, too, but they won't, since it's economically stupid.

Greschner4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:46 PM
  #159
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkhamNHL View Post
besides, their owners have locked them out and refuse to negotiate..
Refused to negotiate on different terms.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:47 PM
  #160
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,967
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
Why should there be any concessions from the owners??

Every team does not make a profity every year.

Every player does make a profit every year.

Yes. That simple.
Because in a true negotiation there is give and take.

Not in the sense that I give you an offer and you take it.

In the sense that I want X and am willing to offer Y to get it.

The NHL has not done that.

And it's also that simple that if a team cannot make a profit in a certain region, they can always close their doors.

Yes, That simple.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:50 PM
  #161
MarkhamNHL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Refused to negotiate on different terms.
well it's not a negotiation unless there is something you can negotiate. if you are told we will only talk to you if you accept our terms, what's their to talk about ? the weather ?

MarkhamNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:50 PM
  #162
bobafettish*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 5,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Because in a true negotiation there is give and take.

Not in the sense that I give you an offer and you take it.

In the sense that I want X and am willing to offer Y to get it.

The NHL has not done that.

And it's also that simple that if a team cannot make a profit in a certain region, they can always close their doors.

Yes, That simple.
so where have the players given? the cba that goes to 50-50 right before the next cba?

bobafettish* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:51 PM
  #163
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neelynugs View Post
curious - and apologies if you've stated it at some point - what do you think is his/PA's end-game here?

Two-fold perhaps. He has stated he's going to try to get a deal that the players feel they had a part in crafting, and/or are happy to sign on. That's probably why the cap is still on the table, and that the only portion not being considered for linkage is existing contracts-- not future contracts, which would be fully under the 50/50 split.

Intellectually, I don't think he believes this system is the best for the NHL and their particular situation, hence the frequent references to RS needing to be higher in order to stabilize all 30 franchises given the revenue disparity. THAT is the key problem. There are several ways to solve revenue disparity, assuming one wants to address it, but Fehr obviously doesn't think it's fair that the players take on that entire burden. Why? It leaves a massive pile of money for the richest teams. He may have a secondary goal of pointing out to the middle and small market teams that they're putzing along, just getting by while the system they endorse will make the rich even richer. Both sides are attempting to drive a wedge between the constituencies within the team and player groups. It's pretty difficult to devise something that fulfills the needs of all the groups very well.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:51 PM
  #164
HavlatMach9
Registered User
 
HavlatMach9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,441
vCash: 500
The more this goes on, the more I blame the owners and players who if they really want to get the season going, would overpower Fehr/Bettman.

HavlatMach9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:51 PM
  #165
PBPantherfan
Here we go again
 
PBPantherfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lake Worth, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 2,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdl1 View Post
It's hilarious to hear people say the players have no leverage.

1. What percentage of last years players are now earning wages internationally? A lot, and that number will grow drastically the longer this goes on.

2. Mutually assured destruction. If this goes on for 1 year, the players lose. If this goes on for 2+ years, everyone involved loses - the players, the owners, all league employees, the fans, the public, local municipalities, all the way down.

Players saw what Fehr did for MLB, and nobody can say the sport is worse off for it. It's no secret that he has the players fully on board for whatever his plan is, and he is absolutely crazy enough to drive both the ownership and players union off the same cliff together to get what he's asking for.

Edit: I forgot to explain that in #2 that it is the only way to combat the new method of owner negotiations across all sports - lockouts and deadline demands.
The reason there are lockouts is that owners will never let what happened with baseball, starting a season and having no finish ever happen again. Owners make most of their money during the playoffs. Fehr knew that and struck to screw MLB half way through the year. That's why there are lockouts now, no sport will ever star a season without a CBA again. I knew as soon as Fehr was hired this was going to happen.

PBPantherfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:52 PM
  #166
ShootIt
Registered User
 
ShootIt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: 561
Country: United States
Posts: 6,062
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Because in a true negotiation there is give and take.

Not in the sense that I give you an offer and you take it.

In the sense that I want X and am willing to offer Y to get it.

The NHL has not done that.

And it's also that simple that if a team cannot make a profit in a certain region, they can always close their doors.

Yes, That simple.
Want 43%, willing to take 50%?

Close their doors and have 23 players without jobs? Doubt the PA would like to see teams simply closing their doors and making their members jobless.

Neither the NHL or PA want teams to go away.
With some teams, relocation isn't simple due to the contract signed with the city.

ShootIt is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:52 PM
  #167
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,076
vCash: 500
PA is screwed. Owners came down hard today, when the Winter Classic is pulled from the table in a few days, it's going to get worse for them. Less leverage to work with.

The NHLPA should've started negotiating way earlier, I never understand what they thought they'd gain by letting things run this late.

Soundwave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:53 PM
  #168
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkhamNHL View Post
well it's not a negotiation unless there is something you can negotiate. if you are told we will only talk to you if you accept our terms, what's their to talk about ? the weather ?
That's not what I meant.

If we have an existing CBA (the last one) and I say "okay we feel we should move this # down, move this # up, move this # up, change these amount of years" you're working within terms... the numbers are the only things changing.

If you come back and say "Hey! Why don't we change how these are defined, change how escrow actually works, change how all the revenue sharing is actually handled then those numbers will be okay!"

Then you have completely changed the terms.

LickTheEnvelope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:53 PM
  #169
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
So you're saying that HRR definition is flawed or are you saying that players should get a share of non-HRR revenues?

For you, I think I've said this many times. I don't think they deserve any fixed share of revenues, no matter how you define these.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave View Post
PA is screwed. Owners came down hard today, when the Winter Classic is pulled from the table in a few days, it's going to get worse for them. Less leverage to work with.

Okay.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:53 PM
  #170
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
In the grand scheme of things I'm not a union guy.

I am pro player here because I think that the Owners need to look at themselves and adjust the revenue disparity before they look to correct that issue by continually taking from the players.

That said, Donald Fehr may be alot of things, but he is damn good at what he does and he has my respect.
I think the owners need to address the revenue disparity as well, but Fehr hasn't made that one of his big issues.

Unlike the NFL and MLB, the NHL doesn't have a large revenue stream coming in to cover the big market teams a little when it comes to revenue sharing. NHL players get a far larger share of revenue than any of their counterparts. They are going to have to give some back, or increased revenue sharing will not happen and they will lose jobs eventually.

As near as I can tell the thing that Fehr seems to care the most about is becoming the only professional sports labor leader to turn back the clock on the salary cap. It isn't going to happen.

As I said earlier the next move by the NHL should be the elimination of guaranteed contracts with a HARD salary cap, just like the NFL has. If that brought the players to their senses and got them to decrease their demands regarding their percentage of HRR in exchange for guaranteed contracts and increased revenue sharing, I would welcome it.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:54 PM
  #171
Section337
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 4,144
vCash: 500
There have been no concessions by either side.

Both of them are afraid of coming out on the wrong side of future revenue growth, so they are trying to protect themselves even if it is at the expense of the other side. They have done this in two different ways. One continues with the linkage model and so manufactures actual dollars to be paid from revenue percentages. One does not believe in the linkage model and so manufactures revenue percentages from actual dollars to be paid.

Why do some of the people who believe in Donald Fehr not believe in enough and think he has already given up concessions.

Section337 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:54 PM
  #172
MarkhamNHL
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave View Post
PA is screwed. Owners came down hard today, when the Winter Classic is pulled from the table in a few days, it's going to get worse for them. Less leverage to work with.
it's the league that is screwed, they make a lot of money off it.. it's just a regular day's pay for the players...


I could see this coming anyways...

Canadians wondering why no canadian team ever gets the big game... so they give the Leafs in a potential lock out year...

Bettman gets to say we did have a canadian team... yet doesn't have to worry about the game ever taking place for NBC's sake.... we'll see how fast negotiations go after the classic is cancelled.

MarkhamNHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:57 PM
  #173
JMT21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Honeycutt View Post
How are the TV raitings for the world series, the main even of baseball?

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/...ow-for-game-2/

Shows a real healthy league growth.
Still about 5x higher than best rated SCF game got earlier this spring.

JMT21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:58 PM
  #174
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I have a hypothesis in answer to your question with regards contracting rules being important to the NHL. That was dismissed by so many. It goes to the core of your issue of why it was important. Most of us know that the real solution to a healthy 30 lies in reduction in salaries plus a real increase in rev share. Possibly a modification of the ranging system. My hypothesis is that GB's insistence on changing the contracting rules was at the core of his consensus with owners. That consensus was his marching order going into the negotiation. They couldn't get a full commitment to rev share from the big guys and the next best alternative was to change the contracting rules such that low rev teams could compete more comfortably nearer the cap floor. In reality, very few teams played below the mid-point. In theory, the change in contracting rules would allow more teams to field a competitive team at or below the midpoint. This is a theory, feel free to poke holes.

I don't think it is 2 or 3 owners who run the show. I do think it is one owner/one vote. And I do think that deriving consensus from all 30 is like herding cats. And in this case, I don't think their consensus is arriving at solutions that are the best option for all 30. I think better options are out there that are discarded because of one group or another within the collective ownership.

I think you're on to something here, which isn't surprising since you're one of the most insightful posters here, imo

It really shouldn't matter to the league how players split the money, but clearly plugging the cap circumvention and other restrictions on RFA and rookies would mostly benefit the smaller teams. After the last lockout, I felt moving the UFA age to 27 from 31 was going to be very harmful to smaller teams.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 04:01 PM
  #175
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkhamNHL View Post
it's the league that is screwed, they make a lot of money off it.. it's just a regular day's pay for the players...


I could see this coming anyways...

Canadians wondering why no canadian team ever gets the big game... so they give the Leafs in a potential lock out year...

Bettman gets to say we did have a canadian team... yet doesn't have to worry about the game ever taking place for NBC's sake.... we'll see how fast negotiations go after the classic is cancelled.
The Winter Classic was a bargaining chip for the PA though, they know the owners wanted it, and if it's off the table, that's less for them to work with.

The owners are not going to "lose" this CBA. I just don't see the owners' end game here.

Soundwave is offline   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 06:04 AM.

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.