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, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Owner-Player meeting only, no Bettman or Fehr (UPD: 12/4 in NYC)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-01-2012, 05:16 PM
  #276
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
Owners have said that neither the hardliners nor the moderates could rally the numbers necessary to make a deal. Owners have said the BOG was deadlocked.

What that means:
The camp Bettman supports, doesn't have 16 owners.
The camp Bettman doesn't support, doesn't have 23 owners.
Which means Bettman is probably doing exactly what he needs to be doing.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 05:23 PM
  #277
Erik Estrada
Registered User
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Link?
"However, more than one governor pointed out it is almost impossible for the moderates to gain control. While Bettman needs only eight of 30 votes to turn down a proposal for a collective agreement from the NHLPA, it would take 23 to force him to accept one. The governors say the opinions in their ranks are so split neither the hardliners nor the moderates could rally 23 votes."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle5415465/

Erik Estrada is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 05:32 PM
  #278
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
"However, more than one governor pointed out it is almost impossible for the moderates to gain control. While Bettman needs only eight of 30 votes to turn down a proposal for a collective agreement from the NHLPA, it would take 23 to force him to accept one. The governors say the opinions in their ranks are so split neither the hardliners nor the moderates could rally 23 votes."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle5415465/
What is the meaning that the hardliners couldn't muster 23 votes? If there was a vote that the hardliners wanted to accept, surely the soft-liners would go along.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 05:39 PM
  #279
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Which means Bettman is probably doing exactly what he needs to be doing.
Nothing?

Confucius is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 05:48 PM
  #280
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
Nothing?
The kind of comment that illuminates nothing except your bias.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 05:52 PM
  #281
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
The kind of comment that illuminates nothing except your bias.
Thought I'd balance out all the anti Fehr one liners....

Confucius is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 05:58 PM
  #282
Langdon Alger*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
What is the meaning that the hardliners couldn't muster 23 votes? If there was a vote that the hardliners wanted to accept, surely the soft-liners would go along.
There likely isn't a deal the hardliners would accept. I'm thinking they want to continue the lockout as long as it takes to completely crush the players.

Langdon Alger* is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:00 PM
  #283
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langdon Alger View Post
There likely isn't a deal the hardliners would accept. I'm thinking they want to continue the lockout as long as it takes to completely crush the players.
They may crush the union, maybe they should be careful.

Confucius is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:08 PM
  #284
AlienLanes82
Registered User
 
AlienLanes82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: South Africa
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
That Globe and Mail article suggests that some owners are more hardline than others. It does not provide support for the proposition that there is a group of owners who would end the lockout for anything close to what the NHLPA has proposed.

AlienLanes82 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:10 PM
  #285
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
They may crush the union, maybe they should be careful.
"Crush" is such a silly term to apply here. They want them to accept core financial aspects that would be tied for the best in NA pro sports, and they want them to accept contracting terms that, functionally, would only serve to shift money around between players (and, I might add, in a way that helps eliminate absurd megadeals that benefit a handful of super lucky players while hurting everyone else).

If the players are so offended by this that they want to decertify and fight the league, they're going to end up hurting even more so than they already are. Sure, there'll be a $250M bidding war for Sidney Crosby, but fourth liners will likely be forced to accept $100K and several small franchises will probably eventually fold, costing everyone jobs.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:24 PM
  #286
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
"However, more than one governor pointed out it is almost impossible for the moderates to gain control. While Bettman needs only eight of 30 votes to turn down a proposal for a collective agreement from the NHLPA, it would take 23 to force him to accept one. The governors say the opinions in their ranks are so split neither the hardliners nor the moderates could rally 23 votes."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle5415465/
Thanks. I overlooked it but still do not give it much credibility as it is Shoalts. It looks more like an opinion piece.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:24 PM
  #287
pepty
Let's win it all
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 11,496
vCash: 395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik Estrada View Post
"However, more than one governor pointed out it is almost impossible for the moderates to gain control. While Bettman needs only eight of 30 votes to turn down a proposal for a collective agreement from the NHLPA, it would take 23 to force him to accept one. The governors say the opinions in their ranks are so split neither the hardliners nor the moderates could rally 23 votes."

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle5415465/
Dave Shoalts sources seem to be mostly from the NHLPA, which he supports wholeheartedly, the last time he claimed to be quoting a source from the BOG is when he wrote an article claiming that the Winter Classic would not be cancelled for two weeks-the day before it was actually canceled.

Its safe to say that there is a range of opinion regarding the lockout amongst the owners but it is also safe to say that if there were 23 owners opposed to the lockout that Bettman would not over rule them.

pepty is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:30 PM
  #288
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
"Crush" is such a silly term to apply here. They want them to accept core financial aspects that would be tied for the best in NA pro sports, and they want them to accept contracting terms that, functionally, would only serve to shift money around between players (and, I might add, in a way that helps eliminate absurd megadeals that benefit a handful of super lucky players while hurting everyone else).

If the players are so offended by this that they want to decertify and fight the league, they're going to end up hurting even more so than they already are. Sure, there'll be a $250M bidding war for Sidney Crosby, but fourth liners will likely be forced to accept $100K and several small franchises will probably eventually fold, costing everyone jobs.
I agree with teh small franchising folding, but I would see a union be put back into place before that were to happen b/c at that time it would be mutually beneficial for get a CBA done here.

You also mentioned the "core financial aspects that would be tied for the best in NA pro sports" Obviously baseball is the best as far as players are concerned. But do NBA and/or NHL have a max of 5 yr terms or 5% movement in year to year etc..? Thanks

Steve is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:39 PM
  #289
LPHabsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LPHabsFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
I agree with teh small franchising folding, but I would see a union be put back into place before that were to happen b/c at that time it would be mutually beneficial for get a CBA done here.

You also mentioned the "core financial aspects that would be tied for the best in NA pro sports" Obviously baseball is the best as far as players are concerned. But do NBA and/or NHL have a max of 5 yr terms or 5% movement in year to year etc..? Thanks
All of these proposals are not just take it or leave it regardless of the idiotic commentary that mentions that. Every aspect of the proposal so far put by the NHL was designed to towards an endgame that people here and in the media have seen in various forms since August. Seriously, if it isn't make whole negotiated with contract rights, it's a small drop to 50/50 in exchange for increased revenue sharing.

But ever since the beginning it's been the same god damn thing from the PA and that's de-linkage versus everything. They are still refusing to accept something that they accepted (or forced to accept depending on your point of view) 7 years ago. The NHL does not expect to get both of those nor do I think they think they need it. But it's designed to negotiate it down to maybe one or the other or both but less restrictive, I don't know.

People are pissed here because of the lack of actual negotiating from the PA. It was the same thing in 04. People said once they accept the cap and linkage everything is up for negotiating. Well apparently we've gone back in time since it's the same damn argument.

edit: Baseball is also the sport where they don't have a cap floor to ensure that teams are spending all that money the owners get through revenue sharing and luxury taxes, and they're also the league that has the worst player health and safety which led to major steroid situations.

LPHabsFan is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:43 PM
  #290
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
I agree with teh small franchising folding, but I would see a union be put back into place before that were to happen b/c at that time it would be mutually beneficial for get a CBA done here.

You also mentioned the "core financial aspects that would be tied for the best in NA pro sports" Obviously baseball is the best as far as players are concerned. But do NBA and/or NHL have a max of 5 yr terms or 5% movement in year to year etc..? Thanks
I don't know anything about your question regarding terms and percentage variance, but: MLB pays its players about 45% of revenue. So functionally they're worse than what the NHL is offering.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:44 PM
  #291
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPHabsFan View Post
All of these proposals are not just take it or leave it regardless of the idiotic commentary that mentions that. Every aspect of the proposal so far put by the NHL was designed to towards an endgame that people here and in the media have seen in various forms since August. Seriously, if it isn't make whole negotiated with contract rights, it's a small drop to 50/50 in exchange for increased revenue sharing.

But ever since the beginning it's been the same god damn thing from the PA and that's de-linkage versus everything. They are still refusing to accept something that they accepted (or forced to accept depending on your point of view) 7 years ago. The NHL does not expect to get both of those nor do I think they think they need it. But it's designed to negotiate it down to maybe one or the other or both but less restrictive, I don't know.

People are pissed here because of the lack of actual negotiating from the PA. It was the same thing in 04. People said once they accept the cap and linkage everything is up for negotiating. Well apparently we've gone back in time since it's the same damn argument.

edit: Baseball is also the sport where they don't have a cap floor to ensure that teams are spending all that money the owners get through revenue sharing and luxury taxes, and they're also the league that has the worst player health and safety which led to major steroid situations.
I'm pretty sure they are willing to accept less than 57%, I think that was a big step. What has the NHL given in these negotiations?

Confucius is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:49 PM
  #292
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
I'm pretty sure they are willing to accept less than 57%, I think that was a big step. What has the NHL given in these negotiations?
When they've given up hundreds of millions of dollars to keep struggling franchises afloat so that the average player salary can double over the last few years, they don't have to give a damn thing up in the negotiations.

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:52 PM
  #293
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
When they've given up hundreds of millions of dollars to keep struggling franchises afloat so that the average player salary can double over the last few years, they don't have to give a damn thing up in the negotiations.
do you mean idiotically dumped money into Phoenix when there are tenable markets that the team could be moved to? Ask the players whether they think the team should be in Phoenix or Quebec City and see what the answer is.

UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:53 PM
  #294
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LPHabsFan View Post
All of these proposals are not just take it or leave it regardless of the idiotic commentary that mentions that. Every aspect of the proposal so far put by the NHL was designed to towards an endgame that people here and in the media have seen in various forms since August. Seriously, if it isn't make whole negotiated with contract rights, it's a small drop to 50/50 in exchange for increased revenue sharing.

But ever since the beginning it's been the same god damn thing from the PA and that's de-linkage versus everything. They are still refusing to accept something that they accepted (or forced to accept depending on your point of view) 7 years ago. The NHL does not expect to get both of those nor do I think they think they need it. But it's designed to negotiate it down to maybe one or the other or both but less restrictive, I don't know.

People are pissed here because of the lack of actual negotiating from the PA. It was the same thing in 04. People said once they accept the cap and linkage everything is up for negotiating. Well apparently we've gone back in time since it's the same damn argument.

edit: Baseball is also the sport where they don't have a cap floor to ensure that teams are spending all that money the owners get through revenue sharing and luxury taxes, and they're also the league that has the worst player health and safety which led to major steroid situations.
Is that really the case though? The NHL says the PA isn't negotiating, the PA says the NHL isn't negotiating. It's not just the PA saying the NHL isn't budging on the contracting rights.

My understanding is 50/50 is on the table if make whole is on the table. I think that's pretty fair. As for revenue sharing, the players asked for it but it equally benefits the owners.

As for the raises/can't go below their current pay etc... its a sticking point for sure and a crappy one. I can see the NHL's argument that it's not beneficial to them in anyway as it breaks the idea of the cap. That being said, the PA's argument is equally adequate, if you're going to keep locking us out, then you should have some consequences also.

Steve is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:54 PM
  #295
JoeCool16
Registered User
 
JoeCool16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
When they've given up hundreds of millions of dollars to keep struggling franchises afloat so that the average player salary can double over the last few years, they don't have to give a damn thing up in the negotiations.
They might have to ease up on some of their demands though, if they want to see hockey again any time soon. Maybe they don't. All I know is that I want to see hockey soon!

JoeCool16 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:58 PM
  #296
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
When they've given up hundreds of millions of dollars to keep struggling franchises afloat so that the average player salary can double over the last few years, they don't have to give a damn thing up in the negotiations.
This team should have been moved, it's a joke that it's still there. I would fight this all the way too. Bettman is the business man and continuously throws money into this pit. I would be pissed if I were a player too that they throw this back in their faces. Move the damn franchise.

Also, I pulled this from the globe and mail
"Consider this: While the average player salary jumped from $1.8-million to about $2.4-million (about 33 per cent) between 2003 and 2012, the owners' share went up from $500-million (as per the league's own Levitt Report) to $1.42-billion in those nine years (185 per cent)."

Steve is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 07:00 PM
  #297
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 18,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
I'm pretty sure they are willing to accept less than 57%, I think that was a big step. What has the NHL given in these negotiations?
This is the line of thinking that is why we're not watching hockey right now.

The league does not HAVE to give anythign up, even tho they have given the players a great deal of minor concessions. Offering the player 50% of a 3B+ business with a min salary of .5M and guaranteed contracts is more than enough.

Ragamuffin Gunner is online now  
Old
12-01-2012, 07:00 PM
  #298
LPHabsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LPHabsFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
I'm pretty sure they are willing to accept less than 57%, I think that was a big step. What has the NHL given in these negotiations?
Show me where the PA has accepted 50/50. Or are you going to show me where the PA has offered to take increases of X% until revenues grow enough that it will equal 50% of HRR. Or they will take 50/50 but with make whole it will actually be a lot more than that and the dollar amount at that percent can't go down.

As far as what the owners have given in these negotations, I'm glad you asked.

The PA has given up........7% of HRR moving forward after 2-3 years.....maybe

The NHL has given up...
Revenue sharing increased from 140 to 220ish million. Good business yes but donít think the owners want it per sey hence why itís a concession
Make whole will eliminate the need for any rollbacks or cutbacks as it defers money instead of taking it away.
Agreeing to have an artificial cap at 70 million off the bat so that it doesnít screw over teams.
Increased standards in hotel room, visitor dressing rooms, ice conditions, medical treatment, extra days off, team paying for external medical treatment/consultations, plus other stuff.

Whatís left is contracting rights. Being asked a lot, too much in my opinion with the 5 years and 5% variance but again, theyíre being asked to negotiate, not blindly accept them. Maybe if they'd actually accept true 50/50 moving forward rathing than taking all of the reward and none of the risk then they'd get somewhere on contracting rights.

LPHabsFan is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 07:02 PM
  #299
LPHabsFan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,501
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LPHabsFan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
This is the line of thinking that is why we're not watching hockey right now.

The league does not HAVE to give anythign up, even tho they have given the players a great deal of minor concessions. Offering the player 50% of a 3B+ business with a min salary of .5M and guaranteed contracts is more than enough.
But it's also this line of thinking that gets people to dig their feet in the sand. They shouldn't just blindly accept things because they already have much more than the average person.

LPHabsFan is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 07:04 PM
  #300
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
This is the line of thinking that is why we're not watching hockey right now.

The league does not HAVE to give anythign up, even tho they have given the players a great deal of minor concessions. Offering the player 50% of a 3B+ business with a min salary of .5M and guaranteed contracts is more than enough.
This is the line of thinking that is why we're not watching hockey right now.

This is a negotiation, you don't just GET because you asked for it. I agree with the owners in getting salaries down, I'm all for it. I want a good league and a competitive league just like everyone else. I don't see why the owners should get everything right now though. honor the contracts you have signed and move along.

Steve 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 02:27 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.