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.

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-03-2012, 11:51 AM
  #351
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,693
vCash: 350
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Why is Mark Chipman involved? Winnipeg has been back in the NHL for 19 months.
Having Chipman ( Winnipeg ) involved does make some sense IMO.

Chipman has stated that he sees his franchise as always being a mid-cap team which to me is where the majority of the teams are or want to be. This means that if you can come up with a CBA that satisfies his requirements than you have a good idea what the mid-point of your league is and may satisfy most of your teams.

You are always going to have the extremes of the scale, but if you can solve the majority of the teams issues, that is a good start.

cbcwpg is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 11:58 AM
  #352
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Safe to say the NHL would never choose owners that aren't 100% behind the league stance on the lockout.

Iggy77 is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 12:09 PM
  #353
Hanklite*
Bettman's Bro
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: TO
Country: Canada
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
"We are still far apart"

Guaranteed that will be tomorrows headline after the meetings...

Hanklite* is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 12:21 PM
  #354
Gentle Ben Kenobi
That's no moon......
 
Gentle Ben Kenobi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Tatooine
Posts: 18,817
vCash: 863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanklite View Post
"We are still far apart"

Guaranteed that will be tomorrows headline after the meetings...
That or "No progress"

Gentle Ben Kenobi is online now  
Old
12-03-2012, 12:43 PM
  #355
WinterEmpire
Unregistered User
 
WinterEmpire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,386
vCash: 500
What are the odds Daly uses the word "Disappointed" at least once post-meeting

WinterEmpire is online now  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:00 PM
  #356
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterEmpire View Post
What are the odds Daly uses the word "Disappointed" at least once post-meeting
Hell, the word "disappointed" could be the entire NHL lockout drinking game.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:06 PM
  #357
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,224
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77 View Post
Safe to say the NHL would never choose owners that aren't 100% behind the league stance on the lockout.
Really? Because Toronto is in there. You think they are 100% in favour of the lockout?

mossey3535 is online now  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:14 PM
  #358
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by albatross View Post
So you're willing to dismiss all of the investments and work Vinik has already done and continues to do under the mantle of the Lightning and speculate that he's going to be next in line for the hardliners willing to dismantle the next CBA (whenever that may be and whatever it might consist of)? You're entitled to your opinion, but what makes you think that's going to happen? What about anything Vinik has done as owner of the Lightning, makes you think that he's doomed to failure and will want to sell out? For that matter, what makes you so convinced he's going to lose an ass ton of money?
I'm using Vinik as a present model of past owners to try and understand Jacobs motivations. I don't have any idea if Vinik will do that for sure. But I do expect it has been done in the past.

1) Shiny new owner.
2) Invests big time into his new toy.
3) Tells all the other owners.. Let's play some friggin hockey I just bought my new toy. Efectively endorsing a cba that everyone here craps on the owners for messing up.
4) Loses his frigging shirt after a few years.
5) Sells his team for peanuts or goes to the BOG saying holy crap this CBA is killing me.

I have absolutely no doubts the Lightning are currently losing money.
Do I think he's guaranteed to lose money in the future? Nope. I can say with confidence that I believe if he spends to the cap to try and ice a winner and doesn't succeed.. He's going to lose his shirt. Put a losing team there and I don't care how big the t.v is in the arena.. the fans won't show up.

Tampa and teams in markets like Tampa have a problem that needs to be addressed in the cba. They don't have the fans that will support a losing team. And only 16 teams make the playoffs.

Now some posters here will say "Well.. they should lose money because they aren't well run." That statement just says 14 teams should lose money each year. Which to me is asinine.

So that being said. "Yes" I can see Vinik pulling a holy crap I'm losing a ton of money and I'm tired of it in the future. Mostly because it's rare to find an owner that doesn't mind. The Sharks are the only ones I know who's ownership has come out and said such and from my understanding the loses are absorbed by 3 people rather than 1.

Lacaar is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:15 PM
  #359
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 8,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
When the NHL was a 6 team league. It was a good product. Then it became a 21 team league. There were tonnes of players who didn't deserve to be there. They weren't comparable to the players in the NHL when there was only 6 teams
Were you alive to watch them? (I wasn't)

I've seen plenty of NHL games from the '40s - '60s (NHLn and YT), and the level of play was pretty low. In fact, I would say that very few players could play in today's NHL.

Of course I imagine the players from decades ago would be better players today based on better coaching, conditioning and equipment, but to say that original 6 level of play was just INCREDIBLE, is just patently false.

You thought the '80s had some weak goaltending? Watch some games or highlights from the '50s - the goalies were just brutal.

Butch 19 is online now  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:16 PM
  #360
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterEmpire View Post
What are the odds Daly uses the word "Disappointed" at least once post-meeting
very high. At the least he can say they were disappointed.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:18 PM
  #361
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77 View Post
Safe to say the NHL would never choose owners that aren't 100% behind the league stance on the lockout.
If Toronto isn't one then there's none. Which is probably the case.

I don't think T.O has anything to gain by this lockout but they have lots to lose. When you're one of 3 teams that made any significant money last year and you see revenue sharing going up near 100 million it's kind of obvious where that's going to have to come from.

Lacaar is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:21 PM
  #362
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
Really? Because Toronto is in there. You think they are 100% in favour of the lockout?
Leafs could lose out big time if the NHL agrees to Fehr's ever increasing demands for RS.

Fehr may see the Leafs as the equivalent of the Yankees, that one big money printing team that could fund a good chunk of the league through RS and/or luxury tax.

Iggy77 is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:28 PM
  #363
PanthersHockey1
Avs Bandwagon
 
PanthersHockey1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UF & Boca Raton
Country: United States
Posts: 5,467
vCash: 500
IIRC I dont remember 04-05 lockout having 30 team profit/losses and contraction as a main point of discord the way it is now. Whats the difference between now and then?

If anything the NHL had bigger losses and less profit from the top end teams back then im guessing?

PanthersHockey1 is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:49 PM
  #364
Benders Lindyhop
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 4,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
I'm using Vinik as a present model of past owners to try and understand Jacobs motivations. I don't have any idea if Vinik will do that for sure. But I do expect it has been done in the past.

1) Shiny new owner.
2) Invests big time into his new toy.
3) Tells all the other owners.. Let's play some friggin hockey I just bought my new toy. Efectively endorsing a cba that everyone here craps on the owners for messing up.
4) Loses his frigging shirt after a few years.
5) Sells his team for peanuts or goes to the BOG saying holy crap this CBA is killing me.

I have absolutely no doubts the Lightning are currently losing money.
Do I think he's guaranteed to lose money in the future? Nope. I can say with confidence that I believe if he spends to the cap to try and ice a winner and doesn't succeed.. He's going to lose his shirt. Put a losing team there and I don't care how big the t.v is in the arena.. the fans won't show up.

Tampa and teams in markets like Tampa have a problem that needs to be addressed in the cba. They don't have the fans that will support a losing team. And only 16 teams make the playoffs.

Now some posters here will say "Well.. they should lose money because they aren't well run." That statement just says 14 teams should lose money each year. Which to me is asinine.

So that being said. "Yes" I can see Vinik pulling a holy crap I'm losing a ton of money and I'm tired of it in the future. Mostly because it's rare to find an owner that doesn't mind. The Sharks are the only ones I know who's ownership has come out and said such and from my understanding the loses are absorbed by 3 people rather than 1.
Thanks for responding.

I disagree with the bit about the fan support. I'm willing to say that at least some of my disagreement is bias based. However, the Lightning really don't have much problems with attendance. And even with the ST price increase this year, sales were going pretty well, at least up to the point when the lockout chatter really got going. It remains to be seen how much harm this lockout will do, but Vinik has earned himself a massive amount of goodwill and respect in Tampa Bay.

As far as Vinik being totally behind Bettman and the lockout, well who really knows? Garrioch says he is, Friedman says he's a moderate who wants some changes, but wants hockey being played on his ice. Several of the Lightning players have said they think he just wants to get back to playing, ditto the local beat reporters. All speculation at this point, but all of his actions thus far tend more towards the moderate stance.

Benders Lindyhop is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 01:59 PM
  #365
BoltSTH
Registered User
 
BoltSTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
I'm using Vinik as a present model of past owners to try and understand Jacobs motivations. I don't have any idea if Vinik will do that for sure. But I do expect it has been done in the past.

1) Shiny new owner.
2) Invests big time into his new toy.
3) Tells all the other owners.. Let's play some friggin hockey I just bought my new toy. Efectively endorsing a cba that everyone here craps on the owners for messing up.
4) Loses his frigging shirt after a few years.
5) Sells his team for peanuts or goes to the BOG saying holy crap this CBA is killing me.

I have absolutely no doubts the Lightning are currently losing money.
Do I think he's guaranteed to lose money in the future? Nope. I can say with confidence that I believe if he spends to the cap to try and ice a winner and doesn't succeed.. He's going to lose his shirt. Put a losing team there and I don't care how big the t.v is in the arena.. the fans won't show up.

Tampa and teams in markets like Tampa have a problem that needs to be addressed in the cba. They don't have the fans that will support a losing team. And only 16 teams make the playoffs.

Now some posters here will say "Well.. they should lose money because they aren't well run." That statement just says 14 teams should lose money each year. Which to me is asinine.

So that being said. "Yes" I can see Vinik pulling a holy crap I'm losing a ton of money and I'm tired of it in the future. Mostly because it's rare to find an owner that doesn't mind. The Sharks are the only ones I know who's ownership has come out and said such and from my understanding the loses are absorbed by 3 people rather than 1.
1. Vinik moved his family, his business (and hired 50 more people) to Tampa.
2. The Bolts hold the lease to the arena which is 10 in the world for an indoor facility ticket sales. The overhead falls to the Lightning, so on paper they be losing, but they holding company that get the $ for the concerts/circus/RNC/AFL etc. is probably in a lot better shape.
3. He makes 5x to 10x a year of the reported losses, that's without touching his estimated $500-800m.
4. There is no dept. He paid cash, upgrades, cash, land around the arena cash.

Does Jacobs donate $50K a home game to a local charity/community hero, even when they are not playing? If you knew anything about Jeff Vinik you would know he is the direct opposite of Jacobs

BoltSTH is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 02:04 PM
  #366
YogiCanucks
Registered User
 
YogiCanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,445
vCash: 500
I had a day dream that Jacobs was alone in the meeting point because everyone agree'd to meet somewhere else. Announced a deal has been struck and you take the power away from Jacobs, Bettman and Fehr.

YogiCanucks is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 02:30 PM
  #367
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YogiCanucks View Post
I had a day dream that Jacobs was alone in the meeting point because everyone agree'd to meet somewhere else. Announced a deal has been struck and you take the power away from Jacobs, Bettman and Fehr.
You were inceptioned by Fehr.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 02:52 PM
  #368
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,397
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
Really? Because Toronto is in there. You think they are 100% in favour of the lockout?
Why not? They benefit more from the current system and what the NHL is proposing than any other team.

Scurr is online now  
Old
12-03-2012, 02:55 PM
  #369
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterEmpire View Post
What are the odds Daly uses the word "Disappointed" at least once post-meeting
The real question is, would he be disappointed if he didn't have a reason to be disappointed and would he say that to media?

So the odds are pretty much zero.

Then again, Ryan Miller coming out of the meeting and saying "they want it all!" atleast once is slam-dunk 100% certain.

Pepper is online now  
Old
12-03-2012, 03:19 PM
  #370
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 55,251
vCash: 500
FWIW, got a letter from the Blackhawks today in response to my letter. (I've written the 30 NHL Governors. With this letter, I've had responses from three teams: Sharks, Devils and now Hawks)

Rocky delegated to VP to respond.

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 03:28 PM
  #371
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoltSTH View Post
1. Vinik moved his family, his business (and hired 50 more people) to Tampa.
2. The Bolts hold the lease to the arena which is 10 in the world for an indoor facility ticket sales. The overhead falls to the Lightning, so on paper they be losing, but they holding company that get the $ for the concerts/circus/RNC/AFL etc. is probably in a lot better shape.
3. He makes 5x to 10x a year of the reported losses, that's without touching his estimated $500-800m.
4. There is no dept. He paid cash, upgrades, cash, land around the arena cash.

Does Jacobs donate $50K a home game to a local charity/community hero, even when they are not playing? If you knew anything about Jeff Vinik you would know he is the direct opposite of Jacobs
I honestly don't know what you're getting at. The point I was saying is that Jacobs has been around long enough to see what's happening in Tampa Bay before. Now do I know If Vinnik is going to bail out? Nope. Has it happend before? Yes.

Has Jacobs had to pay for this? Yes. See Pheonix.

I'm only trying to understand Jacob's motivations for being a hard liner. It may be more than this. "He's a big greedy *******." stuff that's spewed but this mob mentality that's turned into a bloody witch hunt.

I'll take the belief Jacobs is an owner that is in this for the long haul and in so doing has a vested interest in protecting the league and hense himself from the failure of small markets.

Lacaar is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 03:39 PM
  #372
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77 View Post
Leafs could lose out big time if the NHL agrees to Fehr's ever increasing demands for RS.

Fehr may see the Leafs as the equivalent of the Yankees, that one big money printing team that could fund a good chunk of the league through RS and/or luxury tax.
The math shows that the Leafs make more money with a salary cap and giving out RS than they did with an unlimited budget and spending more on player costs. This will be even more so once the Leafs are capable of making the playoffs.

__________________
"Itís not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, itís as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 03:41 PM
  #373
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
FWIW, got a letter from the Blackhawks today in response to my letter. (I've written the 30 NHL Governors. With this letter, I've had responses from three teams: Sharks, Devils and now Hawks)

Rocky delegated to VP to respond.
Do you have a copy of the letter you sent out?

Riptide is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 03:48 PM
  #374
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
FWIW, got a letter from the Blackhawks today in response to my letter. (I've written the 30 NHL Governors. With this letter, I've had responses from three teams: Sharks, Devils and now Hawks)

Rocky delegated to VP to respond.
what did the letter say?

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 03:55 PM
  #375
BoltSTH
Registered User
 
BoltSTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa
Country: United States
Posts: 948
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lacaar View Post
I honestly don't know what you're getting at. The point I was saying is that Jacobs has been around long enough to see what's happening in Tampa Bay before. Now do I know If Vinnik is going to bail out? Nope. Has it happend before? Yes.

Has Jacobs had to pay for this? Yes. See Pheonix.

I'm only trying to understand Jacob's motivations for being a hard liner. It may be more than this. "He's a big greedy *******." stuff that's spewed but this mob mentality that's turned into a bloody witch hunt.

I'll take the belief Jacobs is an owner that is in this for the long haul and in so doing has a vested interest in protecting the league and hense himself from the failure of small markets.
FYI. The Lightning have received revenue sharing/league $ exactly 1 time, and that was when the cowboys owned the club. Koules/Barrie should never had been allowed to own the club, it was done as Bill Davidson's widow wanted to sell ASAP, and PS&E lent 50% of the $ to buy it from themselves, but K/B never had the money to run it.
So Tampa may be a smaller hockey market (at least for now), but it is not a drain on anyone else like you are suggesting.
Also Vinik is in it for the long haul as well, with plans to redevelop the channelside district of Tampa

BoltSTH 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 05:08 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.