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.

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-13-2012, 01:14 PM
  #201
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,481
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by moosehead81 View Post
Mark Recchi, who benefited to the tune of about $51,000,000 over his career, should just keep his mouth shut and let today's players worry about today's CBA.
That is also Nick Kypreos view when he just went on an anti-Recchi rant on Sportsnet.

Why is it that the ex players who bang the PA drum like Nick Kypreos who never shuts up with the PA spin, should just be able to sound off ad nauseam and another,more thoughtful player like Recchi with a different point of view should just shut up ?

I expect that mind set paints a pretty good picture of what goes on in the PA.

pepty is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:14 PM
  #202
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,799
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanklite View Post
Too bad if they negotiated back in the summer and were actually playing now, revenues would naturally go up and they would be getting their raises anyways...
Jesus H Christ, I would need to be at this place full time to even get any kind of reasonable discussing going.

HOW ON EARTH DO YOU ENVISION THE PROPOSED SYSTEM, IDENTICAL TO THE SYSTEM USED PREVIOUSLY IN THE RELEVANT PARTS, TO WORK IF THE CAP IS FLAT FOR TWO YEARS AND THEN GOES DOWN SOME?

There would be very little room for players that become free agents in Y2 and Y3. Teams has signed players counting on atleast a reasonable growth, if not, the marginal used would have been much bigger.

Who benefits from a the mess you would get with a flat cap in Y1 and Y2 and then a decline in y3? Set a number that you agree on, and then make sure you get a little growth y1-y3 untill revenues catch up. Thats the only reasonable thing to do. Then I am perfectly aware that Fehr could use a diffrent "starting point" then Bettman would want (while I am 100% sure both parties agree with the principle).

But the principle is not in any way about the "players wanting a raise".

Ola is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:15 PM
  #203
Freudian
No Guenin, No cry
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 30,990
vCash: 0
edit: I'm an idiot. I thought Daly said NHL. He said NHLPA


Last edited by Freudian: 11-13-2012 at 01:24 PM.
Freudian is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:16 PM
  #204
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
The Daly quotes mean we are back in PR spin mode. Sad.

The league has to sweeten the deal for the PA. It's that simple really.
I think alot of people don't understand just how much future dollars the league will be raking in up'ing their share to 50 percent of the course of the CBA. Those numbers reach the billion number. If you absolutely can't pay out year 1, promise them more dollars on the tail end when everyone expects more growth to happen.
The NFL and NBA players seemed to be able to stomach 50% or less in their latest CBAs. NHLers are welcome to try to starve the nhl for a better deal, however futile that maybe. However you should realize that it is the NHLPA that is being stubborn compared to their counterparts in other sports, not NHL management.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:16 PM
  #205
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,731
vCash: 500
Having the NHLPA spout off and say that the sides aren't that far apart and having the NHL say the opposite really tells me that they're incredibly far apart. It's just the PR spin by the NHLPA.

They ain't close. If they were close they'd be meeting right now.

McRib is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:16 PM
  #206
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
 
waffledave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 View Post
The same Mat Darche who currently has no contract and has been sounding off on Twitter about the owners and against fans alike? That one? Because if that's the gist of his interview, then that's quite a change of attitude since I last saw tweets of his being posted.
The strange thing is he even said unless he gets an NHL contract he'll just retire, not looking to play AHL or Europe at this point in his career.

Maybe he's trying to get a PA job.

__________________
Yours in Christ,

waffledave
waffledave is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:17 PM
  #207
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,799
vCash: 500
Freudian- Daly's math, not Fehr's...

Ola is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:17 PM
  #208
Langdon Alger*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
Exactly! Too bad for him and the PA that we the fans have even more access to information then ever before. They info on what Fehr is demanding is an embarrassment. I don't understand how anyone can support the players now after all we have come to know about this process.
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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
Having the NHLPA spout off and say that the sides aren't that far apart and having the NHL say the opposite really tells me that they're incredibly far apart. It's just the PR spin by the NHLPA.

They ain't close. If they were close they'd be meeting right now.
They're BOTH spinning things for their own purposes.

Do people really think the players are the only ones playing this game?

Langdon Alger* is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:19 PM
  #209
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Looking at the numbers, assuming NHLs make whole proposal where players get $149M in make whole payments and there is a 50/50 split of HRR.

For the players to get 65% of HRR in year one the total HRR would have to be (assuming the $149M comes out of HRR before any split is made) $1000M.

I'm calling major BS on Fehrs math here. There is no way anyone with any kind of intellectual honesty could claim that HRR for this year at this stage would be that low.

I'm all on the owners side when it comes to finances but don't try to sell it with lies.
You aren't factoring in:

1. A shortened season
2. The NHLPA wants pay for games not played.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:19 PM
  #210
Hanklite*
Bettman's Bro
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: TO
Country: Canada
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Jesus H Christ, I would need to be at this place full time to even get any kind of reasonable discussing going.

HOW ON EARTH DO YOU ENVISION THE PROPOSED SYSTEM, IDENTICAL TO THE SYSTEM USED PREVIOUSLY IN THE RELEVANT PARTS, TO WORK IF THE CAP IS FLAT FOR TWO YEARS AND THEN GOES DOWN SOME?

There would be very little room for players that become free agents in Y2 and Y3. Teams has signed players counting on atleast a reasonable growth, if not, the marginal used would have been much bigger.

Who benefits from a the mess you would get with a flat cap in Y1 and Y2 and then a decline in y3? Set a number that you agree on, and then make sure you get a little growth y1-y3 untill revenues catch up. Thats the only reasonable thing to do. Then I am perfectly aware that Fehr could use a diffrent "starting point" then Bettman would want (while I am 100% sure both parties agree with the principle).

But the principle is not in any way about the "players wanting a raise".
Maybe the players should be interested in growing the game no matter what and not worrying about HRR split.

Hanklite* is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:20 PM
  #211
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Jesus H Christ, I would need to be at this place full time to even get any kind of reasonable discussing going.

HOW ON EARTH DO YOU ENVISION THE PROPOSED SYSTEM, IDENTICAL TO THE SYSTEM USED PREVIOUSLY IN THE RELEVANT PARTS, TO WORK IF THE CAP IS FLAT FOR TWO YEARS AND THEN GOES DOWN SOME?

There would be very little room for players that become free agents in Y2 and Y3. Teams has signed players counting on atleast a reasonable growth, if not, the marginal used would have been much bigger.

Who benefits from a the mess you would get with a flat cap in Y1 and Y2 and then a decline in y3? Set a number that you agree on, and then make sure you get a little growth y1-y3 untill revenues catch up. Thats the only reasonable thing to do. Then I am perfectly aware that Fehr could use a diffrent "starting point" then Bettman would want (while I am 100% sure both parties agree with the principle).

But the principle is not in any way about the "players wanting a raise".
Thanks for proving our point. So proposing de-linked caps doesn't work unless they are accompanied by guaranteed raises every year. They don't allow player salaries to grow if the league's revenues grow. Of course, if the revenues don't grow, they don't lose money either.

Seems that the reasonable thing to do would be to agree to a linked share of revenue now with provisions for existing contracts, then trust in the continued growth of the league - this would minimize the amount of player salary lost and allow them to maximize their salaries in the long term.

Oh wait, they already did that but Fehr is not on board. My bad.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:20 PM
  #212
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,673
vCash: 500
Is the fact that the NHLPA saying they are close meant to appease the majority of their 700 constituents who are looking for work? We may never know but it certainly is a possibility. Tell those 3rd liners to get off our backs, we are close after all.

what is posturing, a lie, and what is the truth is such a mess in these situations.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:21 PM
  #213
Tkachuk4MVP
23 Years of Fail
 
Tkachuk4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frodo Baggins View Post
OH MY GOD LOCKOUT PLEASE END.

I'm going to an NBA game tonight and I don't even know why. i'm losing my soul due to this lockout.


I'm no fan of the NBA, but basketball is a pretty good live sport. A hell of a lot better than football anyway.

Tkachuk4MVP is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:22 PM
  #214
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
The Daly quotes mean we are back in PR spin mode. Sad.

The league has to sweeten the deal for the PA. It's that simple really.
I think alot of people don't understand just how much future dollars the league will be raking in up'ing their share to 50 percent of the course of the CBA. Those numbers reach the billion number. If you absolutely can't pay out year 1, promise them more dollars on the tail end when everyone expects more growth to happen.
Maybe even enough to show an operating profit on their investment. Damn those greedy, selfish ********.

KINGS17 is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:22 PM
  #215
Renbarg
Registered User
 
Renbarg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CerebralGenesis View Post
Is the fact that the NHLPA saying they are close meant to appease the majority of their 700 constituents who are looking for work? We may never know but it certainly is a possibility. Tell those 3rd liners to get off our backs, we are close after all.

what is posturing, a lie, and what is the truth is such a mess in these situations.
I think more than anything the "we are close" mantra is supposed to appease the media and the fans.

Renbarg is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:23 PM
  #216
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,309
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?
It's funny all of the pro-owner and pro-player people here (mostly pro-owner) that think this is so simple, that only one side has a valid case and a valid approach.

Both sides are working to get what they view is fair. Both are spinning. Both are to "blame"

BringBackStevens is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:23 PM
  #217
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,842
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanklite View Post
This is just the Unions latest PR tactic. Say they are close to get the public all excited and then when things break down they will just blame the owners.

"we were so close to getting back on the ice and giving the fans what they want and the NHL said no"
I have seen this movie before.

KINGS17 is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:24 PM
  #218
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Looking at the numbers, assuming NHLs make whole proposal where players get $149M in make whole payments and there is a 50/50 split of HRR.

For the players to get 65% of HRR in year one the total HRR would have to be (assuming the $149M comes out of HRR before any split is made) $1000M.

I'm calling major BS on Fehrs math here. There is no way anyone with any kind of intellectual honesty could claim that HRR for this year at this stage would be that low.

I'm all on the owners side when it comes to finances but don't try to sell it with lies.
I think you're referring to Daly's math, not Fehr's.

Why are you combining parts of the league's proposal with the PA's proposal? I believe his math is based on his interpretation of the PA's proposal. The PA wants money paid at face value (1.8B) + 1.75% raise this equals 1.91B players share for a full season. Now if you prorate that to a 70 game season, that 1.91B turns into more than 1.6B but I'll keep it at 1.6B for the purpose of calculation. So if the players are looking to get 1.6B in a 70 game season, 65% HRR share for the players would mean that the overall HRR would be about 2.5B not 1B.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:25 PM
  #219
Falconone
Registered User
 
Falconone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Suburb of Boston MA
Country: United States
Posts: 218
vCash: 500
Maybe

Quote:
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Recchi played for over 20 years and was a part of more than one CBA negotiation. I'm thinking maybe, just maybe the guy understands that the players will never get that money back.
Maybe its not the present dollars that's at issue?

Maybe it's about controlling the players and their opportunity to get market value for their services in any future contract?

Because don't most if not all PA members have contracts under the old CBA that would then be made part of any 'new' CBA?

Maybe the players are taking the long view of things?

Maybe the recognize that no matter what they sign for now, the NHL will continue to bring out the Bully Club (lockout and yes I picked bully instead of billy) to get more next time around?

Maybe they believe it's time to fight and perhaps get ownership to use different negotiating tactics in the future?

Just maybe, baby, just maybe ? ? ?

Falconone is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:28 PM
  #220
Freudian
No Guenin, No cry
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 30,990
vCash: 0
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.
It's me that's stupid. I thought Daly was talking about NHLs proposal (as in look how generous we are) and not NHLPAs (as in look how greedy they are).

For NHLPA to get 65% it would mean HRR would be $2.95B if players want full 82 game pay or $2.5B if they get paid for a 70 game season which seems reasonable.

Freudian is online now  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:28 PM
  #221
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackStevens View Post
It's funny all of the pro-owner and pro-player people here (mostly pro-owner) that think this is so simple, that only one side has a valid case and a valid approach.

Both sides are working to get what they view is fair. Both are spinning. Both are to "blame"
Of course both sides are to blame. But I think the NHLPA has to acquiesce to the 50/50 linked split ASAP because they are already being made whole and because they are in a far more vulnerable position than the owners.

They can win plenty of little battles along the way, and it's a virtual certainty that the agents and GM's will find another loophole and overpay them again.

You see companies everywhere shut down work sites and end up saving or making money because of it. The players can't afford to lose this salary for a principle that is not a principle - they are in an untenable position compared to the owners.

Watching the NHLPA negotiate as they have so far is like watching a guy repeatedly stab himself in the eye.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:33 PM
  #222
Cashville
RIP Lindback
 
Cashville's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
Having the NHLPA spout off and say that the sides aren't that far apart and having the NHL say the opposite really tells me that they're incredibly far apart. It's just the PR spin by the NHLPA.

They ain't close. If they were close they'd be meeting right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeBrun
As bleak as things look, one thing I learned after covering the last lockout in 2004-05 is that the breakthrough in talks can come completely out of nowhere with absolutely no apparent momentum leading up to it. Out of nowhere during a secret meeting between Bill Daly and Ted Saskin in Niagara Falls, N.Y., came the NHLPA’s acceptance of a salary cap, which for better or for worse was the first step in finally reaching an eventual deal seven years ago.
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 every pundit out there says they should and will), things could fall into place fairly quickly.

Cashville is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:33 PM
  #223
Artz19
Registered User
 
Artz19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Based on the assumption of a specific HRR-- as has been reported.

Show me one single report stating that the PA want that no matter what the HRR ends up being.

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...fgPLGAnT5fPrJN
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

Quote:
But I suspect the NHLPA will make this an interesting issue by pointing out that it was the NHL that locked out the players and triggered this lockout. Fehr has set up the league for this moment by repeatedly suggesting since last June that the players would have been willing to play this season while CBA negotiations were ongoing. So yes, another hot potato in the offing, another hurdle to a deal.

Artz19 is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:35 PM
  #224
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Falconone View Post
Maybe its not the present dollars that's at issue?
Undoubtedly present dollars is the foremost issue in this lockout. Money is what makes the world go 'round, as they say.

Quote:
Maybe it's about controlling the players and their opportunity to get market value for their services in any future contract?
Maybe, but then again under a linked cap system every player will have an equal opportunity to make whatever portion of the guaranteed pot that is available, no matter what the restrictions are placed on them collectively. So your argument really has little validity.

Quote:
Because don't most if not all PA members have contracts under the old CBA that would then be made part of any 'new' CBA?
The NHL has already proposed "Make Whole", which would see players retain their current contracts, at least for the first 2 years until revenue catches up to the cap reduction. So what's the issue?

Quote:
Maybe the players are taking the long view of things?
I doubt this, as their major objection a couple of weeks ago was the reduction of current contracts under the new deal. They were willing to throw future players under the bus as long as those currently with a contract could continue to cash in.

Quote:
Maybe the recognize that no matter what they sign for now, the NHL will continue to bring out the Bully Club (lockout and yes I picked bully instead of billy) to get more next time around?
How is this relevant to the current discussions? The fact that the vast majority of current nhl players will have retired by the time of the next CBA 6 or 7 years from now, coupled with their complete lack of care for future generations of players, takes the bite out of this argument.

Quote:
Maybe they believe it's time to fight and perhaps get ownership to use different negotiating tactics in the future?
Care to elaborate? This seems like empty rhetoric to me. Labour vs Management tactics have had the same form for over 100 years...it isn't likely to change because of one stubborn union.

Quote:
Just maybe, baby, just maybe ? ? ?
As explained above, maybe, but probably not.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-13-2012, 01:36 PM
  #225
DPyro
Registered User
 
DPyro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,314
vCash: 500
We will have no season if the PA expects the league to pay for the loss in revenue.

DPyro 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 06:18 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.