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.

We'll Meet Again, Don't Know Where, Don't Know When (CBA/Lockout) XXVII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-13-2012, 12:37 PM
  #226
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,481
vCash: 14214
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPyro View Post
We will have no season if the PA expects the league to pay for the loss in revenue.
This. These negotiations are going nowhere

MikeK is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:37 PM
  #227
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langdon Alger View Post
No, we don't. We don't know for sure what ANY of the offers have been so far, except for the ones that have been leaked by either side.

Don't trust the "insider" reports. They likely know just as much as you do about what's going on.



They're BOTH spinning things for their own purposes.

Do people really think the players are the only ones playing this game?
I was actually going to say that too, but I felt it was redundant and left it out. Spin from both sides.

McRib is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:37 PM
  #228
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
PensFanSince1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cashville View Post
See LeBrun's quote above. I expect them to take a several day break, Steve and Bill have a chat on Saturday, some negotiations happen next week, and we have a new CBA on Wednesday before Thanksgiving. Sound the optimism alarm, but if the NHL gives on the UFA/arbitration demands (which almost everyt pundit out there says they should and will), things could fall into place fairly quickly.
The big issue is still HRR split (and linked vs delinked/gauranteed dollar figures), not UFA/Arbitration rights.

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:41 PM
  #229
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
I think more than anything the "we are close" mantra is supposed to appease the media and the fans.
Fans aren't appeased that they are close when they are not done. LIstening to the stupid radio people, they are saying silly things like, "I would bet my bottom dollar some entrepreneur starts a new hockey league since the NHL and Bettman are greedy!"

Ya well you'd lose your dollar.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:41 PM
  #230
Langdon Alger*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
You aren't factoring in:

1. A shortened season
2. The NHLPA wants pay for games not played.
Here's the thing about point number 2:

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT.

Nobody knows if the NHLPA wants to be paid for the unplayed games. Sure, some reports have come out saying they want it, but then some other ones came out saying they didn't. Then they said they did. Then they said they didn't. Then they said they sorta did. Then they said they mostly didn't.

Has nobody learned anything from the lockout reporting so far? We're not getting ANY information we can trust! Reporters are just tweeting tidbits of information without considering the spin involved or even whether they're true. We know that because almost every single thing that's come out about this lockout so far has been contradicted so many times that nobody can tell what's the truth.

Here's what we know about what's going to happen regarding lost games: NOTHING. Fehr already said they're going to complete a CBA as if the full season was being played, THEN figure out what to do about the missed time. As far as we know, nothing about the shortened season has even been discussed yet, and yet you and others like you are gossiping about this talking point like it's an established fact. It's not.

Langdon Alger* is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:47 PM
  #231
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langdon Alger View Post
Here's the thing about point number 2:

YOU DON'T KNOW THAT.

Nobody knows if the NHLPA wants to be paid for the unplayed games. Sure, some reports have come out saying they want it, but then some other ones came out saying they didn't. Then they said they did. Then they said they didn't. Then they said they sorta did. Then they said they mostly didn't.

Has nobody learned anything from the lockout reporting so far? We're not getting ANY information we can trust! Reporters are just tweeting tidbits of information without considering the spin involved or even whether they're true. We know that because almost every single thing that's come out about this lockout so far has been contradicted so many times that nobody can tell what's the truth.

Here's what we know about what's going to happen regarding lost games: NOTHING. Fehr already said they're going to complete a CBA as if the full season was being played, THEN figure out what to do about the missed time. As far as we know, nothing about the shortened season has even been discussed yet, and yet you and others like you are gossiping about this talking point like it's an established fact. It's not.
Can you not see that the fact that Fehr said the bolded means that he is using this issue as a negotiating carrot? It doesn't matter how concrete or likely it is: everyone knows that getting the nhl to pay players for games not played is a pipedream. The fact that Fehr is even putting the issue out there makes it another one of his off-the-wall negotiating ploys.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:53 PM
  #232
Langdon Alger*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
Can you not see that the fact that Fehr said the bolded means that he is using this issue as a negotiating carrot? It doesn't matter how concrete or likely it is: everyone knows that getting the nhl to pay players for games not played is a pipedream. The fact that Fehr is even putting the issue out there makes it another one of his off-the-wall negotiating ploys.
I'm sure that's spin-doctoring and posturing too. Doesn't mean that any of what's been reported is true. This thread has degenerated into a bunch of hockey-mad posters desperate for any little bit of information spreading rumours as facts.

Since Friday evening's torrent of misinformation, I have personally pared my Twitter feed down to the following members of the hockey media: Bob McKenzie, Pierre LeBrun, and Renaud Lavoie. They're the only ones left whom I trust to report the facts - and ONLY the facts - about this mess. I will consider adding the rest of the hangers-on and suckers-up again once a CBA is signed.

Langdon Alger* is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:54 PM
  #233
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
Can you not see that the fact that Fehr said the bolded means that he is using this issue as a negotiating carrot? It doesn't matter how concrete or likely it is: everyone knows that getting the nhl to pay players for games not played is a pipedream. The fact that Fehr is even putting the issue out there makes it another one of his off-the-wall negotiating ploys.
The owners are trying to take a bite out of the players from all angles. First they want to change up all previously negotiated contracts so that they pay the players less than those contracts were negotiated for. Now they don't want to pay for games the players didn't play... games that the owners themselves locked the players out and prevented them from playing. Are the owners going to accept responsibility for anything that has transpired and any of the losses they've endured as a result of the last CBA they negotiated, losing a whole Season, in order to get that agreement?

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:54 PM
  #234
habfan1968
Registered User
 
habfan1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,115
vCash: 50
The thing I don't get is this:

Both sides agree that the HRR split needs to be 50/50

Contract length and ELC's and UFA status should not really be a concern because ultimately the player share is still going to be 50% of HRR for any given season no matter what the total revenue is. If revenue for 14 - 15 hit 4b the player share is 2b. whether some one is on a 5 year deal or 10 year deal makes no difference. the 5% variance year over year covers that.

Note: I believe the option to play 11 -12 in the now expired cba was the NHLPA option? and they still were not willing to start work on a new deal until Sept. 2012?

habfan1968 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 12:59 PM
  #235
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
The owners are trying to take a bite out of the players from all angles. First they want to change up all previously negotiated contracts so that they pay the players less than those contracts were negotiated for. Now they don't want to pay for games the players didn't play... games that the owners themselves locked the players out and prevented them from playing. Are the owners going to accept responsibility for anything that has transpired and any of the losses they've endured as a result of the last CBA they negotiated, losing a whole Season in order to have that CBA?
Can you state any example of locked out workers without a contract between their union and their employer being compensated for work not done during a lockout?

I'm not sure if you're trolling, or actually have a really skewed view of how labour negotiations work.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:01 PM
  #236
scott99
Registered User
 
scott99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,473
vCash: 500
R.I.P NHL 2012/2013, Daly told Philly Inquirer they are VERY far apart. I suspect all of December get's cancelled by the end of the week.

Sam Carchidi ‏@BroadStBull

Daly tells Phila Inquirer sides r "very far apart. The players are asking for guaranteed dollars + a 'raise' year-over-year." #NHL #NHLPA


scott99 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:01 PM
  #237
Anderson9
Registered User
 
Anderson9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Kazan, Russia
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 262
vCash: 500
I'm at the end of my tether. What did we do to deserve such agony?

Anderson9 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:03 PM
  #238
Hockey Crazy
Registered User
 
Hockey Crazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 502
vCash: 500
People don't realize that the PA can't possibly demand getting paid a full year's worth of salary. If they do, the lockout results in more and more games missed, making the percentage of revenue more and more obscure on a shortened season.

Eventually the season would be cancelled and the PA would lose out on the year regardless. If a season was cancelled, you really think the PA would continue to demand a full 1.83 billion for the lost season? The league would just fold if they stuck by those guns.

This whole worry about the PA wanting the owners to pay for the lockout is not logical. Eventually the owner's leverage will force the PA's hand to agree to a pro-rated deal.

Hockey Crazy is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:03 PM
  #239
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
Can you state any example of locked out workers without a contract between their union and their employer being compensated for work not done during a lockout?

I'm not sure if you're trolling, or actually have a really skewed view of how labour negotiations work.
I understand that completely. But the players can look at it as yet another bite taken out of their salary pie; and a bite that was forced on them because the League locked them out. I'm just saying that as long as it's all a money subtraction from the players by the League, then resistance from the players shouldn't be unexpected.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:03 PM
  #240
JMT21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artz19 View Post
Almost all the published reports I've seen state that the issue of "who pays for the lockout" have yet to be decided.

LeBrun hints the PA will want the league to pay for it since they locked out the players. If that's true, the PA would be asking for at least $1.883B and more likely $1.915B. Which is where the 65% number comes from.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...-where-were-we
Who paid for the lockout back in 04 -05? This seems like a new concept to me.

JMT21 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:08 PM
  #241
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT21 View Post
Who paid for the lockout back in 04 -05? This seems like a new concept to me.
If the players weren't totally on the giving end in this CBA negotiation, they'd probably just accept their games lost as part of the cost of the negotiation process. But it's all been give from their end, so the loss of games has just become another issue.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:08 PM
  #242
kingpest19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
The owners are trying to take a bite out of the players from all angles. First they want to change up all previously negotiated contracts so that they pay the players less than those contracts were negotiated for. Now they don't want to pay for games the players didn't play... games that the owners themselves locked the players out and prevented them from playing. Are the owners going to accept responsibility for anything that has transpired and any of the losses they've endured as a result of the last CBA they negotiated, losing a whole Season, in order to get that agreement?
Except those contracts are subject to the CBA that is in effect. The players know that and still signed them. The owners also came forth with a proposal to make sure those contracts were paid or did you ignore that one? And as far as having to pay for games not played? Which union, sports or otherwise, has ever gotten paid for time lost during and owner lockout?

kingpest19 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:08 PM
  #243
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
I think more than anything the "we are close" mantra is supposed to appease the media and the fans.
Gotta agree with you here Renbarg.

At the negotiating table, you never want to be the party to acknowledge that the clock is ticking loudly in the background and that you're close to a deal. By doing so, you're indicating you value reaching a deal more than you value getting what you want. And a skilled negotiator on the other side might use this as an opportunity to stall and negotiate further concessions. Always try to create a situation where the counterparty is more eager to finalize the deal than you.

Crease is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:09 PM
  #244
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,691
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I understand that completely. But the players can look at it as yet another bite taken out of their salary pie; and a bite that was forced on them because the League locked them out. I'm just saying that as long as it's all a money subtraction from the players by the League, then resistance from the players shouldn't be unexpected.
If you understand it, I'm puzzled by your statement:

Quote:
Now they don't want to pay for games the players didn't play... games that the owners themselves locked the players out and prevented them from playing. Are the owners going to accept responsibility for anything that has transpired and any of the losses they've endured as a result of the last CBA they negotiated, losing a whole Season, in order to get that agreement?
You acknowledge that workers are never paid for work they do not do while locked out, and yet criticize the owners for not making said compensation.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:09 PM
  #245
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,753
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AirheadPete View Post
darche, isnt he the one who has been running his mouth an awful lot on twitter?
The host was taking uestions and someone asked if it was true that Fehr's been late to meetings etc..., and we got the roundabout that "Well, we never meet at specified times, it's more an approximate time and then we let them know when we're ready to get into the room"

It was such a roundabout, ******** answer that for the first time in my life i wanted to actually wait on hold to get on a stupid talk show so I can tell a guy off.

MtlPenFan is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:09 PM
  #246
Artz19
Registered User
 
Artz19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT21 View Post
Who paid for the lockout back in 04 -05? This seems like a new concept to me.
everyone.

There was no season, so no pro-ration of deals was needed.

Artz19 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:09 PM
  #247
habfan1968
Registered User
 
habfan1968's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,115
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
The owners are trying to take a bite out of the players from all angles. First they want to change up all previously negotiated contracts so that they pay the players less than those contracts were negotiated for. Now they don't want to pay for games the players didn't play... games that the owners themselves locked the players out and prevented them from playing. Are the owners going to accept responsibility for anything that has transpired and any of the losses they've endured as a result of the last CBA they negotiated, losing a whole Season, in order to get that agreement?

The bolded part of your post is a bit disingenuous, those deals were made subject to the new, ratified CBA. Also, the NHLPA was notified well in advance that the NHL would not play under the now expired CBA.

habfan1968 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:10 PM
  #248
kingpest19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 10,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
If the players weren't totally on the giving end in this CBA negotiation, they'd probably just accept their games lost as part of the cost of the negotiation process. But it's all been give from their end, so the loss of games has just become another issue.
What exactly have the players given up in these negotiations?

kingpest19 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:10 PM
  #249
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 9,947
vCash: 492
The Lebrun article hits so many of the most important points
http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...-where-were-we

As quoted in an earlier post, he speculates that the PA is going to try to get the League to absorb the full cost of the games lost because they initiated the lockout.. Other points:

I’m not exactly sure how NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr expects to protect that $1.883 billion salary threshold in this new CBA. I mean, that figure alone is why the league -- which claims more than half its teams lost money last year -- triggered a lockout to begin with. The point of wanting the players to go down from 57 percent of hockey-related revenue down to 50 percent is to say that $1.883 billion out of $3.3 billion was too high for its industry.

Regarding contracting rights:

The league won’t move on its player contacting rights until it has "make whole" figured out, and the NHLPA doesn’t want to give an inch either on player contracting rights, feeling its willingness to go down to 50 percent of HRR at some point in the new deal is a large enough concession on its own. Several NHL players reached out to me via text messages over the last two days saying they are through-the-roof frustrated on this issue, feeling the league is giving them a take-it-or-leave-it option on their player contracting demands. Of course, that assertion frustrates the league, which says it wants the NHLPA to come back and counter in this area but instead says the union simply says it is not interested in any of it.

pepty is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:11 PM
  #250
Freudian
wild card, *****es
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 26,882
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I understand that completely. But the players can look at it as yet another bite taken out of their salary pie; and a bite that was forced on them because the League locked them out. I'm just saying that as long as it's all a money subtraction from the players by the League, then resistance from the players shouldn't be unexpected.
So basically for all future CBA negotiations, all the players have to do is not sign any deal, get locked out and then get paid afterwards?

Sweet gig.

Freudian 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 04:43 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.