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
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Lockout II - Moderated: Talk about your plenty, Talk about your ills...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-02-2012, 04:40 PM
  #301
Some Other Flame
Registered User
 
Some Other Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jet View Post
Who the hell cares what the real number is. Does it matter if its 14 or 22 or 17???
Sure it does. It speaks to unreliability of those touting the need for a drastic change.

Quote:
If half a companies franchises operate at a loss, it is a serious serious problem.
Supposedly.

Quote:
Can you imagine for a second if half of Burger King's franchises were operating at a loss and the staff were making over half of the gross revenue? What do you think would happen?

I know I am oversimplifying and there are of course factors such as owners not being in the league specifically to make money and players being exceptionally specialized workers but the stark reality is it cannot work long term. Can you imagine Burger King being so desperate to fix the problem that they locked their workers out for months to fix the problem?
And in the real business world, if a franchise is struggling, it's either shut down or relocated. But a comparison to a fast food franchise is so hilariously off base that there's no point even getting into it.

Quote:
Player supporters can rant as much as they want but the black and white of it is players are taking too much. Owners have all the risk and are losing too much. Until this is fixed there will be no hockey.
Yes, and that's why the league is looking to fix the system once and for all by changing the linkage system, how the cap floor is calculated and by drastically increasing revenue sharing. They're also not bothering with unnecessary contract restrictions other than removing back-diving deals.

Oh wait, none of that's true. What the league is purporting is nothing more than a short-term money grab from the players and it's hilariously naive to think otherwise.

Quote:
The ONLY card the PA holds is decertification. So, either sign the deal or get on with the process already ffs.
This I agree with. The PA needs to hurry up and decertify to get the script moving again.

Some Other Flame is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 04:42 PM
  #302
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 32,579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
I don't think I have the imagination to connect the dots between Eagleson or previous owners... This is where you have to help me. Explain the link to us.
The poster to whom your responding in a continuation of our earlier conversation is pointing to examples of corruption & malfeasance within the corridors of the NHLPA, the NHL & team ownership that goes back to 1917. You are perfectly entitled to your opinions & beliefs that the NHL is an honourable & honest cabal of munificent & benevolent Lords & Ladies who's only interests lie in whats best for the game and their own franchises, Honest Abe's one and all. Your perfectly welcome to ignore the obfuscations & deliberately misleading statements, outright lies & propaganda delivered from the mouths of Bettman & Daly, be it an announced sale price thats double or treble what was actually laid down on the table; that Phoenix was just doing Hunky Dory, nothing to see here folks, move along; that the league isnt involved in municipal & tax payer funded extortion; that they wouldnt dream of hiding or shifting revenue streams and a single sou from the NHLPA when serving up the soup from their HRR cauldron and so on & so forth. Believe what you will. .

Killion is online now  
Old
12-02-2012, 05:13 PM
  #303
Timmy
Registered User
 
Timmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,690
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Aaron Ward ‏@aaronward_nhl
Source,Meeting involving NHL Owners and Players to take place Tuesday with 6 Owners and approximately same number of players. #TSN
...and the fans bring the weapons.

Timmy is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 05:18 PM
  #304
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 24,425
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Some Other Flame View Post
Sure it does. It speaks to unreliability of those touting the need for a drastic change.


Supposedly.


And in the real business world, if a franchise is struggling, it's either shut down or relocated. But a comparison to a fast food franchise is so hilariously off base that there's no point even getting into it.


Yes, and that's why the league is looking to fix the system once and for all by changing the linkage system, how the cap floor is calculated and by drastically increasing revenue sharing. They're also not bothering with unnecessary contract restrictions other than removing back-diving deals.

Oh wait, none of that's true. What the league is purporting is nothing more than a short-term money grab from the players and it's hilariously naive to think otherwise.


This I agree with. The PA needs to hurry up and decertify to get the script moving again.
I wasn't aware that the PA was looking to fix a system either, unless guaranteeing that you can't lose money from year to year being a system fixer.

And owners wouldn't sacrifice all of their mythical income, since you say that they are making so much, with a lost season if they were really making that much money. Money grab? They have 0 right now compared to the "supposed" amount they are. Makes sense as a businessman.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 05:22 PM
  #305
Made Dan
Registered User
 
Made Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 14,394
vCash: 500
Jacobs? Wonderful.

Made Dan is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 05:45 PM
  #306
Lshap
Global Moderator
 
Lshap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,788
vCash: 500
If Jeremy Jacobs is part of this player/owner meeting, there will be no deal. The owners picked to be there look to be the most intransigent, which makes me wonder when the moderate owners will become fed up.

Lshap is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:18 PM
  #307
OneSharpMarble
Registered User
 
OneSharpMarble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
If Jeremy Jacobs is part of this player/owner meeting, there will be no deal. The owners picked to be there look to be the most intransigent, which makes me wonder when the moderate owners will become fed up.
If this is true then is Bettman and the owners really pushing for decertification? That is where this endgame seems to be headed. Not a good place for either side honestly and the moderate owners will regret not wresting control away from Jacobs.

OneSharpMarble is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:18 PM
  #308
FakeKidPoker*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,657
vCash: 500
I think a Bill Wirtz brought back from the dead would give you a better chance than with Jacobs in this meeting.

FakeKidPoker* is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:24 PM
  #309
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
The Eternal Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
If Jeremy Jacobs is part of this player/owner meeting, there will be no deal. The owners picked to be there look to be the most intransigent, which makes me wonder when the moderate owners will become fed up.
You mean to tell me Mark Chipman is among the most intransigent, when his organization was cited as the one in the report standing up to Jacobs at the owners meeting pushing for a resolution?

Looks like a diverse group covering all the bases, IMO. Large markets teams (TOR, BOS), mid markets (CGY, WPG, PIT), small markets (TB), those that stand to lose alot from a lockout (TOR, WPG, PIT), those likely looking for a readjustment to help longterm (TB, CGY, WPG), teams that are known to be hardliners (BOS), some that have apparently spoken against lockout looking for resolution (WPG), and some moderates we don't hear much about (CGY). Seems good to me.

Holden Caulfield is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:38 PM
  #310
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 11,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lshap View Post
If Jeremy Jacobs is part of this player/owner meeting, there will be no deal. The owners picked to be there look to be the most intransigent, which makes me wonder when the moderate owners will become fed up.
Or maybe it's wishful thinking on your part to assume that every owner you don't hear something from somehow strongly differs with the leadership group represented. Is there any evidence of who the "moderates" are and what they believe? I'm inclined to think that silence is consent.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:46 PM
  #311
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,636
vCash: 500
If the NHLPA suspected HRR under-reporting, they would have exercised their auditing rights already.

I'm tired of this 'the teams are all making money and the greedy owners are trying to break the union so they can profit' argument. It's just not a very compelling stance considering the amount of revenue lost.

Leaf's 2011 net operating income (yeah yeah it's from Forbes, deal with it): $82M

Costs = OpRev - OpInc = $200M - $81M = $118M

Leafs Salary Cap Cost, 2011 = $68M

Rollback on cap (assume no Make Whole) = $68M * 0.12 = $8.5M

% off rollback on total team cost = $8.5M/$118M = 7%

Time required to make up $82M in OpInc = $82M/$8.5M = 9.9 years

If you keep your tinfoil hat on, if the Leafs are under-reporting their HRR, then the actual profit they are making is even bigger - thus the $8.5M savings is an even smaller fraction of their 'true' profit. This gives them even less incentive to miss an entire season.

Not only that, but the Make Whole amount put into here as well as the already agreed to increase in revenue sharing would further cut into the Leaf's pie. So it should take considerably longer to make up the missing profit the Leafs would potentially make this year.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 07:46 PM
  #312
Bologna 1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,886
vCash: 500
Sucks that not one of illitch, dolan or Snider are in on this.

Bologna 1 is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 07:51 PM
  #313
mikelvl
Registered User
 
mikelvl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,397
vCash: 500
Just another pathetic league gimmick. Jacobs is a cancer that preys on hockey and its fans every seven years. Nothing will change until his reign of terror is over. He has no place in any negotiations.

No doubt that Bettman is drilling into Chipman that he owns his ass and he wouldn't even be in the NHL if not for him.

Decertify and take the owners to the limit. Make them suffer.

mikelvl is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 07:55 PM
  #314
objectiveposter
Registered User
 
objectiveposter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 788
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
If the NHLPA suspected HRR under-reporting, they would have exercised their auditing rights already.

I'm tired of this 'the teams are all making money and the greedy owners are trying to break the union so they can profit' argument. It's just not a very compelling stance considering the amount of revenue lost.

Leaf's 2011 net operating income (yeah yeah it's from Forbes, deal with it): $82M

Costs = OpRev - OpInc = $200M - $81M = $118M

Leafs Salary Cap Cost, 2011 = $68M

Rollback on cap (assume no Make Whole) = $68M * 0.12 = $8.5M

% off rollback on total team cost = $8.5M/$118M = 7%

Time required to make up $82M in OpInc = $82M/$8.5M = 9.9 years

If you keep your tinfoil hat on, if the Leafs are under-reporting their HRR, then the actual profit they are making is even bigger - thus the $8.5M savings is an even smaller fraction of their 'true' profit. This gives them even less incentive to miss an entire season.

Not only that, but the Make Whole amount put into here as well as the already agreed to increase in revenue sharing would further cut into the Leaf's pie. So it should take considerably longer to make up the missing profit the Leafs would potentially make this year.
you are missing the point... the leafs ownership wants to start the season asap...they arent one of the hardline owners..... the ones holding this deal up are mostly in lousy hockey markets where they simply cant generate enough revenue....

besides..its not like the players are saying they want to keep 57%... they are wiling to eventually adjust to a 50/50 split as long as their contracts are honored....and thats more than reasonable.

objectiveposter is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 08:20 PM
  #315
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by objectiveposter View Post
you are missing the point... the leafs ownership wants to start the season asap...they arent one of the hardline owners..... the ones holding this deal up are mostly in lousy hockey markets where they simply cant generate enough revenue....

besides..its not like the players are saying they want to keep 57%... they are wiling to eventually adjust to a 50/50 split as long as their contracts are honored....and thats more than reasonable.
The players have made a new offer why haven't I heard anything? Do you have a link?

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 08:31 PM
  #316
BowieSabresFan
Registered User
 
BowieSabresFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,928
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Or maybe it's wishful thinking on your part to assume that every owner you don't hear something from somehow strongly differs with the leadership group represented. Is there any evidence of who the "moderates" are and what they believe? I'm inclined to think that silence is consent.
Except for that gag order...

And the fact that the NHL has a habit of punishing owners that do not tow the company line.

In other words, owner silence means very little.

BowieSabresFan is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 08:37 PM
  #317
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,870
vCash: 500
I suspect Fehr is happy enough that Jacobs will be there.

Ernie is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 08:45 PM
  #318
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 5,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by objectiveposter View Post
you are missing the point... the leafs ownership wants to start the season asap...they arent one of the hardline owners..... the ones holding this deal up are mostly in lousy hockey markets where they simply cant generate enough revenue....

besides..its not like the players are saying they want to keep 57%... they are wiling to eventually adjust to a 50/50 split as long as their contracts are honored....and thats more than reasonable.
I was addressing the idea that all the markets are secretly making money. If they are, why lock the players out?

The problem I have with the NHLPA is that they have a mechanism to honour their contract face values .... right in front of their faces. If they concentrated on negotiating that instead of putting in ridiculous clauses that ensure their share never goes down, they would have what they've claimed they wanted this whole time.

Either that, or come up with your own idea of how to get to a soft landing besides 'ok, you owners go pay for it'. If we had seen even a half-baked idea from the NHLPA I'd be singing a different tune.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 09:41 PM
  #319
Big McLargehuge
Global Moderator
You Must Be Tired
 
Big McLargehuge's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: S. Pasadena, CA
Country: Iceland
Posts: 67,382
vCash: 2626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Holden Caulfield View Post
You mean to tell me Mark Chipman is among the most intransigent, when his organization was cited as the one in the report standing up to Jacobs at the owners meeting pushing for a resolution?

Looks like a diverse group covering all the bases, IMO. Large markets teams (TOR, BOS), mid markets (CGY, WPG, PIT), small markets (TB), those that stand to lose alot from a lockout (TOR, WPG, PIT), those likely looking for a readjustment to help longterm (TB, CGY, WPG), teams that are known to be hardliners (BOS), some that have apparently spoken against lockout looking for resolution (WPG), and some moderates we don't hear much about (CGY). Seems good to me.
It's definitely an interesting group that spans just about every niche.

I'd still prefer if Jacobs weren't there...but there's a few guys there who are very likely to want games to be played this year. Chipman is obvious, but I doubt Burkle is too far behind him.

__________________
“The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile, but that it is indifferent. If we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death, our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.” - Stanley Kubrick
Big McLargehuge is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 09:43 PM
  #320
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Thank you Mr. I, RIP
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 28,774
vCash: 704
Quote:
Originally Posted by AirheadPete View Post
Sucks that not one of illitch, dolan or Snider are in on this.
Ilitch is in failing health. He also doesn't like Jacobs all that much anyway. Dolan sued the league he is going to have to live with the outcome of where that places him on things like this. With that said would love to see some of the owners send someone or showup themselves anyway. What is the worst that happens, they get fined, we might be to the point where that money is worth it for some of these guys.

The Zetterberg Era is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 09:56 PM
  #321
PanthersHockey1
South by Southeast
 
PanthersHockey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Palm Trees
Country: United States
Posts: 8,902
vCash: 500
what is there to talk about? Regardless of who's in the room you can only spin the issues so many different ways until you turn blue in the face. Until someone cracks and compromise they might as well communicate and curse at each other in two different languages.

PanthersHockey1 is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 10:06 PM
  #322
NewBoysClub97*
All-Star
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,755
vCash: 50
Did anybody here follow the NBA lockout? How did the players react to the owners first proposal? What was their reaction when the owners put a first proposal together that was less than 40% of HRR? I know the NHL players have been irate.


Last edited by NewBoysClub97*: 12-02-2012 at 10:14 PM.
NewBoysClub97* is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 10:17 PM
  #323
Greyhounds
Registered User
 
Greyhounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nashua
Country: United States
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PanthersHockey1 View Post
what is there to talk about? Regardless of who's in the room you can only spin the issues so many different ways until you turn blue in the face. Until someone cracks and compromise they might as well communicate and curse at each other in two different languages.
I think they are just looking to build trust between the 2 sides. I doubt this meeting will have final decisions. They will probably talk, then go back to their bunkers to think about it.

Greyhounds is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 10:19 PM
  #324
Greyhounds
Registered User
 
Greyhounds's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nashua
Country: United States
Posts: 11,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueChip01 View Post
Did anybody here follow the NBA lockout? How did the players react to the owners first proposal? What was their reaction when the owners put a first proposal together that was less than 40% of HRR? I know the NHL players have been irate.
When I heard about the first proposal, I mentioned to someone that the nhl was just setting the parameters. Take the average of the original cba and that proposal, and that is more or less where the nhl wanted to end up.

Give me a call if that doesn't turn out to be the case.

Greyhounds is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 10:21 PM
  #325
Do Make Say Think
& Yet & Yet
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 36,634
vCash: 50
Jacobs is the senior of the Board of Governors is he not?

There is no way to keep him at bay from such a meeting: he's basically the boss of the BoG in terms of influence.

Do Make Say Think 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 08:01 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.