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.

Forbes: NHL damaging revenue by disappearing from sports scene

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-24-2012, 11:11 PM
  #1
Howard Chuck
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Howard Chuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,386
vCash: 50
Great article

http://www.forbes.com/sites/leighste...s-anyone-care/

Howard Chuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 11:24 PM
  #2
Hanklite*
Bettman's Bro
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: TO
Country: Canada
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howard Chuck View Post
Pro player bias engage

Hanklite* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 10:36 AM
  #3
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,227
vCash: 500
Pulled into new thread.

Quote:
I wrote a book on negotiation, “Winning With Integrity”, which emphasized a constructive process based on mutual interest, which would insure a “win-win” outcome. One of the important concepts was not to get so caught in the detail as to forget the ultimate goal of the negotiation—in this case maximizing NHL player and owner economics. What was needed here was a deadline, a willingness to commit to solution before the very length of the discussions led to economic self-destructiveness. PT Barnum’s maxim “The Show Must Go On” is relevant here. The NHL has never had the US exposure and popularity to provide maximum national or local television revenue or equal status with the other three high profile professional team sports. Every time hockey gains in popularity and geographical reach in this country, a harmful negotiating process comes along to stunt its growth by keeping the games from being played.
...
Another corollary of “Winning With Integrity” is that when there is a deadlock and parties think things can’t get worse–things can always get worse. The Players Association is contemplating decertification, just as the NFLPA did. This removes the forum from NLRB jurisdiction and moves the battle into the courtroom. Management cannot declare an “impasse” and institute their own rules and systems. The attorneys for the union can still negotiate. But the process will dramatically slow down and imperil the chance for a 2012-2013.
While the above poster indicated this was a "pro-player" bias, I disagree. The author does have an "agent"-type background, but the points he makes from his book matter regardless of which side you're on. (Unless you're looking for a scorched earth result.)

I do agree with his assertion that the NHL's revenue is discretionary income and the competitors are the other sports/college leagues, amusement parks, movies, theatres, performance organizations.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 10:40 AM
  #4
RogerRoeper*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 21,694
vCash: 500
Of course it's damaging the revenues. This lockout is insane. It's not the least bit necessarry at all. I find it incredibly arrogant of them they are pulling this stunt.

RogerRoeper* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 10:48 AM
  #5
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,539
vCash: 500
Tell me that captain obvious wrote this article?

The NHL knows they're losing revenue.

They also know that the average fan isn't that bright and will be back, even if it takes them a couple years to forget.

Wingsfan2965* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 10:52 AM
  #6
Suntouchable13
Registered User
 
Suntouchable13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Thornhill, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,418
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Tell me that captain obvious wrote this article?

The NHL knows they're losing revenue.

They also know that the average fan isn't that bright and will be back, even if it takes them a couple years to forget.
But how come they can't understand that they have to work together in order to insure maximum profitability for themselves? Why does it have to be about beating each other? From the get go, both sides created a toxic environment between themselves instead of trying to work together. I don't think they will have $3.3 billion business during their next full season. This time they will lose money.

Suntouchable13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 10:56 AM
  #7
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,539
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntouchable13 View Post
But how come they can't understand that they have to work together in order to insure maximum profitability for themselves? Why does it have to be about beating each other? From the get go, both sides created a toxic environment between themselves instead of trying to work together. I don't think they will have $3.3 billion business during their next full season. This time they will lose money.
The owners (Most of them) are legitimately losing money (Whether it's their own stupid faults or not) and the players are still pissed that the owners took them to the cleaners eight years ago, which is funny, because their salaries have doubled since then.

Both sides are clearly at fault, but what pisses me off is that the players know they're going to lose, and they continue to hold out anyways despite multiple warnings from guys like Recchi and Modano.

Wingsfan2965* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 11:14 AM
  #8
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Both sides are clearly at fault, but what pisses me off is that the players know they're going to lose, and they continue to hold out anyways
If they gave up that easily in life they never would have made it to the NHL in the first place. Weak.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 11:23 AM
  #9
middletoe
Why am I me?
 
middletoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Northern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,787
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntouchable13 View Post
But how come they can't understand that they have to work together in order to insure maximum profitability for themselves? Why does it have to be about beating each other? From the get go, both sides created a toxic environment between themselves instead of trying to work together. I don't think they will have $3.3 billion business during their next full season. This time they will lose money.
The owners do. That's why Bettman has been preaching about having a partnership with the players. Oh wait, that was last time when they wanted the cap. My mistake.

You include the players here but do you really believe they had a choice?

middletoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 11:43 AM
  #10
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Possible but the attendance after the last lockout was virtually the same wasnt it? Players objective should be to get the best possible deal while minimizing loss of games, not trying to get their way. Take the owner's deal structure and minimize the rollback effect by recouping money later should have been their focus all along.

DuklaNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 12:15 PM
  #11
ScottyBowman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Detroit
Country: United States
Posts: 1,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
Possible but the attendance after the last lockout was virtually the same wasnt it? Players objective should be to get the best possible deal while minimizing loss of games, not trying to get their way. Take the owner's deal structure and minimize the rollback effect by recouping money later should have been their focus all along.

The NHL roped people in with lower ticket prices in a lot of markets and having players start in PSA's telling the fans how much they appreciate them. Fans believed with this new cap that tickets would be affordable. They were for all of 1 year in some markets then it went back to status quo.

ScottyBowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:42 PM
  #12
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Tell me that captain obvious wrote this article?

The NHL knows they're losing revenue.

They also know that the average fan isn't that bright and will be back, even if it takes them a couple years to forget.
We aren't stupid. We just enjoy sports. Just because we don't pout and boycott when the game comes back, doesn't mean we're stupid. It means we aren't going to punish ourselves by boycotting what we enjoy.

aqib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 01:49 PM
  #13
Jet
Moderator
Chevel-takesadayoff
 
Jet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: New Glasgow
Country: Scotland
Posts: 16,714
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Pulled into new thread.



While the above poster indicated this was a "pro-player" bias, I disagree. The author does have an "agent"-type background, but the points he makes from his book matter regardless of which side you're on. (Unless you're looking for a scorched earth result.)

I do agree with his assertion that the NHL's revenue is discretionary income and the competitors are the other sports/college leagues, amusement parks, movies, theatres, performance organizations.
Totally agree. I am absolutely pro owner but what is said in this article makes complete sense.

The NHL and PA have to enter into a real agreement where the health of the league is paramount. Where both sides aren't suspicious of getting screwed by the other, and realize that league health is imperative if BOTH sides are to profit from this business. A sick league hurts the players bottom lines, and as soon as they realize that the better.

__________________
The farts have just started and thankfully the boyfriend has already headed home. -LadyJet
Jet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 02:11 PM
  #14
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyBowman View Post
The NHL roped people in with lower ticket prices in a lot of markets and having players start in PSA's telling the fans how much they appreciate them. Fans believed with this new cap that tickets would be affordable. They were for all of 1 year in some markets then it went back to status quo.
If fans didn't notice tickets prices are almost exclusively dictated by demand for them, then it's their own fault. Operation costs hardly matter in that decision, if people can't figure out why they pay $100+ for nosebleeders in Toronto but get free hotdogs and parking for $20 in Phoenix they're hopeless.

VinnyC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 05:16 PM
  #15
sawchuk1971
Registered User
 
sawchuk1971's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 597
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet View Post
Totally agree. I am absolutely pro owner but what is said in this article makes complete sense.

The NHL and PA have to enter into a real agreement where the health of the league is paramount. Where both sides aren't suspicious of getting screwed by the other, and realize that league health is imperative if BOTH sides are to profit from this business. A sick league hurts the players bottom lines, and as soon as they realize that the better.
they had that chance when paul kelly was leading the PA........

sawchuk1971 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 05:38 PM
  #16
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
The owners (Most of them) are legitimately losing money (Whether it's their own stupid faults or not) and the players are still pissed that the owners took them to the cleaners eight years ago, which is funny, because their salaries have doubled since then.

Both sides are clearly at fault, but what pisses me off is that the players know they're going to lose, and they continue to hold out anyways despite multiple warnings from guys like Recchi and Modano.
I tend to believe the owners are making money, maybe not through the team but through the arena and spinoff companies they may control, solely because they own the team. Certainly they have been making a killing by reselling their teams and probably have gotten huge tax breaks as well.

Confucius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 06:34 PM
  #17
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
If they gave up that easily in life they never would have made it to the NHL in the first place. Weak.
That's why the players are so heavily criticized: they look on the cba negotiations not as a business negotiation but a struggle of the proletariat against the evil owners.

I find it ridiculous that players (a) make millions and will still make millions with the new cba (b) are doing a job they supposedly love and (c) are in a situation where their percentage of the pie clearly should be reduced for the health of the league, and yet (d) the working relations between the pa and league is worse than any other labour relationship I know of.

Is there any other business in the league is on the brink of its second year long lockout in 7 years?

CpatainCanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 07:09 PM
  #18
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 6,886
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyBowman View Post
The NHL roped people in with lower ticket prices in a lot of markets and having players start in PSA's telling the fans how much they appreciate them. Fans believed with this new cap that tickets would be affordable. They were for all of 1 year in some markets then it went back to status quo.
Bingo. Within 2 years, the ticket prices were more than before the lockout, and they have skyrocketed since. They will try this again.....rope the dopes and be back where they were quickly. I wish the WHA would come back. These clowns need some competition.

ThisYearsModel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 08:13 PM
  #19
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Both sides are clearly at fault, but what pisses me off is that the players know they're going to lose, and they continue to hold out anyways despite multiple warnings from guys like Recchi and Modano.
Just because they know they're going to lose, shouldn't mean they should just drop their pants and bend over. If they allowed that, in 5-7yrs time, there would be another lockout until they accepted 40% and one after that, and after that etc... at some point, fighting does make sense.

That being said, players need to accept a "reasonable" deal and just get on with it. The owners need to understand it's not the players responsibility to create a perfect system for the owners.

Surprisingly, I haven't missed hockey at all this year and I usually watch 150 games a year.

Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 08:35 PM
  #20
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
Just because they know they're going to lose, shouldn't mean they should just drop their pants and bend over. If they allowed that, in 5-7yrs time, there would be another lockout until they accepted 40% and one after that, and after that etc... at some point, fighting does make sense.

That being said, players need to accept a "reasonable" deal and just get on with it. The owners need to understand it's not the players responsibility to create a perfect system for the owners.

Surprisingly, I haven't missed hockey at all this year and I usually watch 150 games a year.
If the owners pushed for 40%, I would then be on the players side. Not going to happen. Hypotheticals.

DuklaNation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-25-2012, 08:53 PM
  #21
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
If the owners pushed for 40%, I would then be on the players side. Not going to happen. Hypotheticals.
True it is a hypothetical however, I was replying to someone who suggested they just follow along with their offer and what Modano/Recchi suggested. If the players moved from 74% and took a cap (I heard 74% from Doug MacLean) to 57% (started at 54 but went up to 57) and if they didn't fight about it. Then accepted 50% and didn't fight about that either... if you were an owner, would you push for 45% or less the next time you could? I'm pretty sure I would.

I think a deal is there and needs to be done ASAP but I think just taking whatever you're offered when it's clear a lot of the terms are one sided, I think you have to fight back a bit.

Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 12:09 AM
  #22
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
If the owners pushed for 40%, I would then be on the players side. Not going to happen. Hypotheticals.
So if they go 50/50 and in seven years the weak sisters are still moaning about cost certainty and propose 45, and ge it why wouldnt they lock the players out and demand 40% ? After all this was 3 percent off of the leagues initial offer this time.

If the owners thought they could screw over the pa, you think they pause one second? Threelockouts in 8 years, with the pa caving ( so far) the owners know they can run their teams into the ground, then cry poor and demand that the players cover their markers (again) and if they players fil to capitulate then lock out a gogo.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 12:30 AM
  #23
The Zetterberg Era
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,195
vCash: 515
I am pretty pro owner at least in this current dispute. But if they dip anything below 47% for the players now or in the future I am not supporting that. I didn't like the initial owner proposal but never believed it would come in near that. However, for future negotiations they better not coming asking for anything lower than that 47%. Why that number, I don't know seems close to the numbers I have seen thrown out for other sports and it gives the owners their share for investing the money. Any lower than that and I agree with the players sitting on principle.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 12:38 AM
  #24
aqib
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 2,356
vCash: 500
The one thing the NHL has going for it is that its the only major league game in town in 8 of its markets and a 9th is Toronto

aqib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 12:47 AM
  #25
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,544
vCash: 500
I hope there is a sound argument in the book because the article was just vague fluff. I'll wait for more reviews before I pick that up, too tough to project his line of thought from one league to the others without some real strong analysis.

hockeydoug 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 09:02 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.