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
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.

Blinkage, Linkage & Stinkage (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XVII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-28-2012, 12:02 PM
  #151
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,710
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie10 View Post
Honestly, at this point, is anyone out there still on the PA's side? Doesn't seem like it.
Very few, stupidity just doesn't make sense...for most...can't believe they are clinging to what one guy wants, again...

BLONG7 is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:03 PM
  #152
Jeffrey93
Registered User
 
Jeffrey93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
There are people working for companies that make far more than $3.3B dollars a year and salaries usually stay the same.

But not only that, you can be laid off or released from a contract at any time. You salary is never guaranteed. Can an NHL player say that? Sure, they can be "bought out," but that's a pretty nice pay day.

There is absolutely no way the players should be asking for more than a 50/50 share of revenues. No way.
Show me those people that MAKE their company millions of dollars every year....just by themselves. Then show me their salary.

I don't understand why NHL players are supposed to act like they are janitors or call centre workers.

Jeffrey93 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:08 PM
  #153
Gotaf7
Registered User
 
Gotaf7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Winterpeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 650
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DutchShamrock View Post
It's funny to see teachers, cops and firemen used as an argument against the players' stance. Their feelings, argument and labor negotiations are all utilized by the unions of those professions. There is no protection or education system without those employees. Kind of why they are powerful unions. There's no league without the players. I don't understand the hate for players asking for one concession. They aren't asking for "more". They are accepting less, god forbid they determine the pace of their losses.

You don't pay the players any more than you pay a cop. Your ticket money and tax dollars get there eventually, but you pay corrupt owners and corrupt towns first. "Take it or leave it" and "It's my rules" wouldn't fly for one union, why would it fly for another?
You sure about that?

Gotaf7 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:08 PM
  #154
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey93 View Post
Show me those people that MAKE their company millions of dollars every year....just by themselves. Then show me their salary.

I don't understand why NHL players are supposed to act like they are janitors or call centre workers.
Because people on here have to compare NHL players to themselves and inevitably say, "if I was an NHL player I would play for nothing.. blah ..blah..blah.."

Fact is they wouldn't.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:12 PM
  #155
Fire Sather
new Niclas Wallin?
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 20,501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by DutchShamrock View Post
It's funny to see teachers, cops and firemen used as an argument against the players' stance. Their feelings, argument and labor negotiations are all utilized by the unions of those professions. There is no protection or education system without those employees. Kind of why they are powerful unions. There's no league without the players. I don't understand the hate for players asking for one concession. They aren't asking for "more". They are accepting less, god forbid they determine the pace of their losses.

You don't pay the players any more than you pay a cop. Your ticket money and tax dollars get there eventually, but you pay corrupt owners and corrupt towns first. "Take it or leave it" and "It's my rules" wouldn't fly for one union, why would it fly for another?
Theres also no league to pay the players the amount they will get in the NHL.

Both sides need each other.

"Theres no league without the players" doesn't fly

Unless of course they want to stay in Europe to spite themselves and everyone and make less money..

Man, it will be so great if the players have to end up agreeing to a worse deal than the one just taken off the table.

Fire Sather is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:12 PM
  #156
GO99
HFBoards Sponsor
 
GO99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,915
vCash: 355
Players are spoiled. They are used to making more than 50%. They are detached from reality.

They "really" want to make a deal eh guy. "lets run to Europe if more games are cancelled instead of showing solidarity and staying here".

GO99 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:13 PM
  #157
Jeffrey93
Registered User
 
Jeffrey93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pepty View Post
A circular argument.

We're great because we earn so much money!

We should earn so much money because we're great!

They are playing in Europe at a fraction of what they make in the NHL. Are they still so great if they make 300,000 rather than 3 or 4 million?

The NHL provides them with a great paycheque plus top venues, charter jets and 5 star hotels, the best trainers and equipment and promotes them as heroes.

Lets see how they do if the NHL is forced to contract and some of these player lose their jobs. Then some of these self important fringe players would get a reality check pretty quick.
How is that circular?

The players are paid well because they are great at what they do. They aren't great at what they do because they are paid well.

Jeffrey93 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:15 PM
  #158
Fire Sather
new Niclas Wallin?
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 20,501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Does the KHL have a CBA? I wonder what their revenue spilts are.

Not that the selfish NHL players care, they are over there stealing jobs.

Fire Sather is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:17 PM
  #159
GuelphStormer
Registered User
 
GuelphStormer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Guelph, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,888
vCash: 500
the simple fact that anyone here is willing to pay even a dollar, let alone thousands over a season, to see people play hockey is why these guys make millions.

when anyone here is willing to pay a dollar to see a fireman, teacher or nurse do their jobs, then lets talk. until then its strawman apples and oranges.

GuelphStormer is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:17 PM
  #160
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,641
vCash: 500
I think people need to step back and realize this entire thing is about 3 million instead of 3.3 million and not 80k instead of 3.3 million. If your entire argument suits both cases equally, then I don't imagine you are looking at this lockout through clear eyes.

Powdered Toast Man is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:18 PM
  #161
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Jones View Post
Is he talking to the fans here?
He was talking to a particular fan tweeting to him. But about 50 fans were ripping him

Crows* is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:18 PM
  #162
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
Here we go....



@Logancouture: Ever been told ur family? Then told, wait, I'm gonna reach into your wallet and take 25% of ur income. That's how
NHL owners are these days
Yeah, that's my family, too, brother.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:20 PM
  #163
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Yeah, that's my family, too, brother.
Yeah he's a joke. These guys had no clue the economy crashed in 08

Crows* is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:21 PM
  #164
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffrey93 View Post
Show me those people that MAKE their company millions of dollars every year....just by themselves. Then show me their salary.

I don't understand why NHL players are supposed to act like they are janitors or call centre workers.
Well, right now the average NHL player actually loses his company money when you factor in his salary. This isn't about janitors or call workers. It's about what can the league afford, and how we get to an agreement on it. The math in this situation all favors owners, AINEC.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:24 PM
  #165
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Well, right now the average NHL player actually loses his company money when you factor in his salary. This isn't about janitors or call workers. It's about what can the league afford, and how we get to an agreement on it. The math in this situation all favors owners, AINEC.
The players are unionised. If you agree with the owners rationale, that is fine, but the presence of a union indicates that what is best for the owners is not anywhere close to the only thing that is in consideration here.

Powdered Toast Man is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:26 PM
  #166
Fire Sather
new Niclas Wallin?
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 20,501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
The players are unionised. If you agree with the owners rationale, that is fine, but the presence of a union indicates that what is best for the owners is not anywhere close to the only thing that is in consideration here.
Problem is, the owners losing money will keep sitting on their hands and not lose that money.

Players will lose paychecks.

Eventually, whats best for the owners will win out when the players cave.. but how much money do the players want to lose first?

Appearently they want to lose more than they would have if they just worked off the last proposal..

Fire Sather is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:29 PM
  #167
ti-vite
Registered User
 
ti-vite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
Problem is, the owners losing money will keep sitting on their hands and not lose that money.

Players will lose paychecks.

Eventually, whats best for the owners will win out when the players cave.. but how much money do the players want to lose first?

Appearently they want to lose more than they would have if they just worked off the last proposal..
If the count of 200 players never playing another game is accurate from the last lockout, they are obviously ready to loose alot, since they know this.

ti-vite is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:30 PM
  #168
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
Problem is, the owners losing money will keep sitting on their hands and not lose that money.

Players will lose paychecks.

Eventually, whats best for the owners will win out when the players cave.. but how much money do the players want to lose first?

Appearently they want to lose more than they would have if they just worked off the last proposal..
That situation is always the case, lock the players out and it doesn't matter what the owners ask for because the players will eventually capitulate. I'm sure the players have an angle, the players may be less than educated but their advisors sure as know what they are doing.

Powdered Toast Man is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:31 PM
  #169
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
The players are unionised. If you agree with the owners rationale, that is fine, but the presence of a union indicates that what is best for the owners is not anywhere close to the only thing that is in consideration here.
Of course. But what's "best" for the owners and what the owners can afford are two different things. What would be best for the owners would be the players play for free and the owners make pure profit. But what the league can afford refers to what's best for both parties. The owners simply aren't going to let the game be played until a deal is on the table that makes it worth their investment. That is good for all parties involved, because the league doesn't survive long-term without being a good investment. Players don't want contraction, either. And right now, the math isn't even close - owners are getting shafted. The NHL is a terrible, stupid place to put your money. If players think them taking a piece of the pie so big that the median owner loses money trying to keep their team afloat every year is good for anyone in the long term, they've got another thing coming.

And that's why owners are going to win this one. They just sent a letter saying "Dear players, it's not worth it for us to continue funding the league under anything close to the proposals you've put forward. We'd just as well just shut it down. Thank anyways, Owners." So this isn't about getting what's best for owners. It's about getting owners barely enough to make it worth their while to run the damn show.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:36 PM
  #170
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Of course. But what's "best" for the owners and what the owners can afford are two different things. What would be best for the owners would be the players play for free and the owners make pure profit. But what the league can afford refers to what's best for both parties. The owners simply aren't going to let the game be played until a deal is on the table that makes it worth their investment. That is good for all parties involved, because the league doesn't survive long-term without being a good investment. Players don't want contraction, either. And right now, the math isn't even close - owners are getting shafted. The NHL is a terrible, stupid place to put your money. If players think them taking a piece of the pie so big that the median owner loses money trying to keep their team afloat every year is good for anyone in the long term, they've got another thing coming.

And that's why owners are going to win this one. They just sent a letter saying "Dear players, it's not worth it for us to continue funding the league under anything close to the proposals you've put forward. We'd just as well just shut it down. Thank anyways, Owners." So this isn't about getting what's best for owners. It's about getting owners barely enough to make it worth their while to run the damn show.
This is exactly what the owners are telling everyone, whether it's one hundred percent factual or not has yet to be established. I for one choose to believe neither side is exactly righteous so tend not believe that the explanation that the owners are only asking for the absolute minimum to ensure the long-term survival of the league is accurate. It looks like they are swinging for the fences with a man on second when they need a single run to win the game, to me.

Powdered Toast Man is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:37 PM
  #171
Gberg
Registered User
 
Gberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueChip01 View Post
Players are spoiled. They are used to making more than 50%. They are detached from reality.

They "really" want to make a deal eh guy. "lets run to Europe if more games are cancelled instead of showing solidarity and staying here".
haha, they can never win with fans like you. They go to practice in Europe, they're blamed. If they stay here and there's a season, they'll be blamed if they are rusty without practice!

Gberg is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:37 PM
  #172
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,520
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Powdered Toast Man View Post
That situation is always the case, lock the players out and it doesn't matter what the owners ask for because the players will eventually capitulate. I'm sure the players have an angle, the players may be less than educated but their advisors sure as know what they are doing.
Oh, I'm certain as **** that their advisors DON'T know what they're doing. The players already lost this negotiation.

There were $500M between the two proposals a week ago (cumulative over all years). Then the players went out and lost $500M letting games get cancelled (presuming we only have 3/4 of a season at this point). And the league withdrew its best offer. There's no way in hell the league is coming back with 51% in time for the players to make money back that they lost refusing to even negotiate off their best deal (a deal better or equal to what baseball, football AND b-ball give their players!).

The game is now how long does it take for the high school dropout membership of this union to realize they are ****ing themselves with every day they refuse to negotiate off of linkage and 50-50.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:39 PM
  #173
Powdered Toast Man
Is he a ham?
 
Powdered Toast Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Oh, I'm certain as **** that their advisors DON'T know what they're doing. The players already lost this negotiation.

There were $500M between the two proposals a week ago (cumulative over all years). Then the players went out and lost $500M letting games get cancelled (presuming we only have 3/4 of a season at this point). And the league withdrew its best offer. There's no way in hell the league is coming back with 51% in time for the players to make money back that they lost refusing to even negotiate off their best deal (a deal better or equal to what baseball, football AND b-ball give their players!).

The game is now how long does it take for the high school dropout membership of this union to realize they are ****ing themselves with every day they refuse to negotiate off of linkage and 50-50.
How many years of labour law experience do you have?

Powdered Toast Man is online now  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:45 PM
  #174
Gberg
Registered User
 
Gberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Of course. But what's "best" for the owners and what the owners can afford are two different things. What would be best for the owners would be the players play for free and the owners make pure profit. But what the league can afford refers to what's best for both parties. The owners simply aren't going to let the game be played until a deal is on the table that makes it worth their investment. That is good for all parties involved, because the league doesn't survive long-term without being a good investment. Players don't want contraction, either. And right now, the math isn't even close - owners are getting shafted. The NHL is a terrible, stupid place to put your money. If players think them taking a piece of the pie so big that the median owner loses money trying to keep their team afloat every year is good for anyone in the long term, they've got another thing coming.

And that's why owners are going to win this one. They just sent a letter saying "Dear players, it's not worth it for us to continue funding the league under anything close to the proposals you've put forward. We'd just as well just shut it down. Thank anyways, Owners." So this isn't about getting what's best for owners. It's about getting owners barely enough to make it worth their while to run the damn show.

do you believe everything thats told to you by rich billionaires? These are the same types of personalities that destroyed wallstreet thanks to greed. Oh no? they aren't turning a profit? Axe the player's salaries! Did you know that huge movies like Star Wars never turned a profit? Lord of the rings? Titanic? Thanks to accounting practices everyone can break even.

I'm sure there are teams that are struggling, but I don't buy the whole everyone is broke mentality. It's also quite easy to simply look at average team salaries from 7 years ago (no salary cap). It was 44 million. If the NHL gets their wish, the cap would be around 58-59milion. That simply doesn't make sense when you look at how much the HRR (which is not revenue people) has grown in those 7 years. It's all about the owners wanting to make more money. Sure, some of the poor teams can now survive, but honestly, the Coyotes should not be a franchise that continues to stay in that city. I want a deal asap... but I'm tired of people defending greedy owners. Both sides are greedy, meet in the middle right now, and get a deal done.

Gberg is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 12:45 PM
  #175
Jeffrey93
Registered User
 
Jeffrey93's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
Problem is, the owners losing money will keep sitting on their hands and not lose that money.

Players will lose paychecks.

Eventually, whats best for the owners will win out when the players cave.. but how much money do the players want to lose first?

Appearently they want to lose more than they would have if they just worked off the last proposal..
If players said "Damn...if we took their first offer I would be better off than I am right now!" they wouldn't be much of a Union. A player saying that would be looking out for himself only...screw the guys in Junior right now that would be looking at a 70/30 split when it is their turn. Then when they do the same thing the next group will be fighting to stay above a 25% take. And those poor AHL players another poster mentioned....their pay will drop considerably because of this as well.

Players are taking the hit right now so players 5, 10, 15 years down the road aren't looking at a 90/10 split.

What is best for the Owners will win out....which might be not taking as much from the players so a lot of them can get back to making money themselves.

Anyone that thinks the Players are the only ones sacrificing money to get what they believe is a 'fair deal' is kidding themselves. Owners are in the same boat.

I've seen manufacturing plants close because the Union "hadn't had a raise in 5 years"....the employees sacrificed their paychecks to try to get what they felt was fair. Lots of spinoff jobs were lost....plant closed...can we badmouth those guys too? Happens quite often, unskilled labour looking to make $30+ an hour, and in those places there definitely IS a sense of entitlement.

Remember folks....the old way was pay players as much or as little as you want. There was a minimum salary...but no Cap floor. Teams could have low balled everyone and been laughing. They INSISTED on this system and won. Salaries linked to revenues so Owners aren't allowed to overspend. Unfortunately (as weird as that is) revenues grew.

Jeffrey93 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 03:05 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.