OK we are now allowing lockout talk on the NHL Talk forum. If you would like to voice your opinions of the negotiations and those involved you may do so here.
A few ground rules before we get started:
All site rules will still apply, obviously
You may post links to news stories, but we will not have a separate thread for that. If you only want news without the discussion there is a thread on the BoH
This will be the ONLY Lockout discussion thread on the NHL Talk forum. Do not post new threads for the purpose of discussing the lockout.
People are entitled to their opinions. If you have an issue with a post and you feel it breaks a rule, report it and let us handle it. Otherwise your options are to reply in a respectful manner to correct the perceived error, or simply ignore the user. Vigilante troll hunting will result in infractions.
No, I see the business taking a big hit and stagnating.
I could see stagnation, but eventually revenues will start to grow again. However if it stagnates or grows, the no gross dollar amount decrease after year 2 is meaningless. It only matters if there is significant decline of revenue after year 2, which I don't see happening.
Legal precedence may be there, doesn't mean its law. The decert may be proven to be illegal, or the lockout might, either based on past precedence, but not without a potentially lengthy legal case.
I could see stagnation, but eventually revenues will start to grow again. However if it stagnates or grows, the no gross dollar amount decrease after year 2 is meaningless. It only matters if there is significant decline of revenue after year 2, which I don't see happening.
It after the 2nd year though, I think revenues would take a hit for the shortened season and maybe the backlash might effect the next year, but I'd imagine it'll start growing after that again.
I think the fans/sponsors who are not going to come back will do that right away and then slowly more fans will come back and new fans will take interest. I don't think people who come back will stop watching/buying tickets/merchandise after year due to this lockout.
I can only speak for myself, but i'm pretty sure this lockout will have a deeper impact then just next year. For myself, I spent way too much money on the NHL last year, thousands of dollars(we just got back the jets, and I may have gone a little spending crazy). As a consumer I feel like I got a giant slap in the face by the owners after they have their "best ever business year"(http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=559630), and then not only lock the players out, they lock the fans out. Personally as a consumer I feel the only way I can have my voice heard, even if it isn't, is to withhold my money. It seems to be the only language the owners understand. And not for just 1 year, because that would do nothing but welcome more lockouts. Of course I would be willing to put that aside if they could come to some sort of deal before another season is lost, but if they can't, they can kiss my ass goodbye as a consumer of NHL product, possibly forever.
The NHL should issue an ultimatum, the PA accepts their final offer or the whole season is cancelled. I'm sick of the back and forth games and you all know damn well the season is lost anyway.
According to the Washington Post, Troy Brouwer, one of the Capitals' two player representatives to the union, was frustrated by the recent comments made by his teammates about the NHLPA and the current lockout.
Within a two-day span, defenceman Roman Hamrlik spoke out against the NHLPA's negotiations and goaltender Michal Neuvirth stated that the lockout was more about "several superstars with big contracts," than the rest of the players.
Neuvirth really struck a nerve with that comment. Probably because it's bang on.
Of course I would be willing to put that aside if they could come to some sort of deal before another season is lost, but if they can't, they can kiss my ass goodbye as a consumer of NHL product, possibly forever.
But the point (missed by me too ) is that fans aren't going to come back and then leave, they'll either not come back or slowly come back. That might mean no growth but it isn't likely to mean less revenue, so all this talk about guaranteed raises is silly.
I can only speak for myself, but i'm pretty sure this lockout will have a deeper impact then just next year. For myself, I spent way too much money on the NHL last year, thousands of dollars(we just got back the jets, and I may have gone a little spending crazy). As a consumer I feel like I got a giant slap in the face by the owners after they have their "best ever business year"(http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=559630), and then not only lock the players out, they lock the fans out. Personally as a consumer I feel the only way I can have my voice heard, even if it isn't, is to withhold my money. It seems to be the only language the owners understand. And not for just 1 year, because that would do nothing but welcome more lockouts. Of course I would be willing to put that aside if they could come to some sort of deal before another season is lost, but if they can't, they can kiss my ass goodbye as a consumer of NHL product, possibly forever.
Right, but you'll do that right away, you won't watch for a year, then stop watching.
Most who will stop will do it right away, so the revenue hit will be immediate, not gradual.
The NHL should issue an ultimatum, the PA accepts their final offer or the whole season is cancelled. I'm sick of the back and forth games and you all know damn well the season is lost anyway.
Us fans deserve better.
Definitely. Would make it far easier for the PA to illustrate how the league wasn't interested in bargaining in good faith.
The Fehr comment is so misleading. The NHL is losing $18-20 million in potential revenues, not profits. You cant just come out and say the NHL would have been better off accepting the NHLPA's proposal because it is less than the lost revenue. From an opportunity cost point of view, the league is better off locking the players out.
No wonder there has been no deal yet with the rhetoric flying around. I still question whether the NHLPA understands the difference between revenue and profits, as well as opportunity cost.
Neuvirth really struck a nerve with that comment. Probably because it's bang on.
Exactly.
Consider that about 12% of the NHLPA has a contract term over 5 years (and 6% has a contract longer than 6 years). Tell me why a 5 year contract limit would matter to the remaining 88% of the player membership, who may never see such a term?
The Fehr comment is so misleading. The NHL is losing $18-20 million in potential revenues, not profits. You cant just come out and say the NHL would have been better off accepting the NHLPA's proposal because it is less than the lost revenue. From an opportunity cost point of view, the league is better off locking the players out.
No wonder there has been no deal yet with the rhetoric flying around. I still question whether the NHLPA understands the difference between revenue and profits, as well as opportunity cost.
The NHLPA most certainly understands. They phrase it in that way so the casual fan may not understand.
Henrik Lundqvist showing the less smart players how you do it.
Henrik Lundqvist @HLundqvist30
Big part of my life is missing.. I don't think I ever felt this frustrated over anything... Hope to see you all at the Garden very soon!!
i really hate henrik lundqvist...for obvious reasons.
but the dude got it right. Says the right things, always does the right thing, class act, super star talent...great dude. I'd let Joel sleep with my daughter if it meant my son had Henriks skill set.
The NHLPA and BOG should both stop talking to the press. Every statement is the same exact pile of steaming stinky manure that we have heard from them the past 70 or so days. Give it a break. Fehr, you wont come off your de-linked proposals. We all know it. NHL, they wont budge on contracts til you do it. We all know that. How can you two sides, full of "educated" people who have the "best interests" of everyone involved(minus the fans) not see it?
Very interesting article, Friedman has become my favorite hockey writer. After reading that article its clear that neither side would want to find out what happens if the players proceed with legitimate decertification and anti trust lawsuits. And by that I mean none of the "big 4" would want to find out the result.
) is that fans aren't going to come back and then leave, they'll either not come back or slowly come back. That might mean no growth but it isn't likely to mean less revenue, so all this talk about guaranteed raises is silly.
