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, and NHL revenues.

LeBrun: NHL made new offer to NHLPA on Thursday (12/27)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2012, 09:17 PM
  #476
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xref View Post
So how many season do you suppose it would take to get a new CBA done while playing under the old CBA? 1? 2? 27? I would say close to 100. In other words, continuing to play under the framework of the expired CBA gives the PA exactly ZERO reason to negotiate. Surely you all understand why this was a non-starter for the owners, right?
It's funny.
You say that the players would just keeping playing in perpetuity.
Others say that the evil Fehr would strike and force the cancelation of the playoffs.

I think the others are Fehr mongering while you are stating a rational argument.


However, I think the league should have taken the PA up on their offer and then negotiated throughout the season... and locked the players out after the Cup was hoisted if no deal was done.

I think the NHL's case would be much better... and their hand stronger... if you lockout players before they've collected off-season awards, signed off-season contracts etc.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:18 PM
  #477
SympathyForTheDevils
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Quebec City
Posts: 327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
This is a partnership, employees don't get a guaranteed 50% of revenues in any normal business.

Players are not simply "employees" and players have enjoyed record salaries for the last 7 years.

How anyone can claim that players are forced to bear consequenses of mismanagement is beyond me. Players are the biggest beneficiaries of the last CBA.
They do if their union has good leverage. Payroll taking up 50% of revenues is nothing particularly special, depending on the kind of business. The players have no control over how the league is managed, and have no capital invested in the business. They're only "partners" in a bigger, more general sense of the term.

As to the players being beneficiaries of the last CBA, the elements introduced in the last CBA weren't exactly player-friendly. The players saw a growth in salaries in tune with the growth in revenues that they themselves generate, which seems fair to me.

SympathyForTheDevils is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:23 PM
  #478
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leesmith View Post
The question we SHOULD be talking about is this:
if the deal goes through with minor NHLPA tweaks to the owners last proposal, is the business model truly fixed?
No. it's not.

The owners have NO desire to fix the model.

Why do you think that is?

Because the truth is the owners don't care about losing 3-4 million. It's a nice tax shelter.

Being able to cry poor, however, helps the owners' case when they demand concessions. So having useful idiots like the Coyotes and company helps teams like Toronto, Detroit and NYR make more money in the long run.

And showing you can hammer your PA whenever you want is a nice way to improve your across-the-board franchise value.

However, the bad press and damage that these lockouts do... might have something to do with the terrible franchise values of the league's most miserable franchises.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:26 PM
  #479
Xref
Registered User
 
Xref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
It's funny.
You say that the players would just keeping playing in perpetuity.
Others say that the evil Fehr would strike and force the cancelation of the playoffs.

I think the others are Fehr mongering while you are stating a rational argument.


However, I think the league should have taken the PA up on their offer and then negotiated throughout the season... and locked the players out after the Cup was hoisted if no deal was done.

I think the NHL's case would be much better... and their hand stronger... if you lockout players before they've collected off-season awards, signed off-season contracts etc.
They did this last season, Bob. How much negotiating did the PA do? Nada. What do they say about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Xref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:28 PM
  #480
Xref
Registered User
 
Xref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
"K" as in "okay" or k as in the symbol for strikeout?
Finally, someone got it!

Xref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:33 PM
  #481
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xref View Post
They did this last season, Bob. How much negotiating did the PA do? Nada. What do they say about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
But when did the lockout start? After everyone got their big signing bonuses and everyone knew where they would play.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:38 PM
  #482
Xref
Registered User
 
Xref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
But when did the lockout start? After everyone got their big signing bonuses and everyone knew where they would play.
So are you saying that the only way to get negotiations started is for one side to initiate a work stoppage? Mod..... grabbing their monster bonuses before the PA pushed the owners' backs to the wall?


Last edited by Killion: 12-31-2012 at 09:48 PM. Reason: not reqd...
Xref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:52 PM
  #483
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xref View Post
So are you saying that the only way to get negotiations started is for one side to initiate a work stoppage?.... grabbing their monster bonuses before the PA pushed the owners' backs to the wall?
No, I am saying that a contract expires Sept. 15. You're playing with a dangerous timetable.

If you don't give a **** about your customers or your product, then you might behave like the NHL did, by offering a ****-you deal that was sure to raise the dander of the players and unite them against the owners.

So maybe you make a more reasonable offer to start negotiations... since everyone basically knew what they wanted anyway,.

And maybe you see how its going... and if the PA seems willing to move, you agree to play under the old CBA as a show of good faith.

Maybe something gets done early. Something that would take effect the next season.
Maybe you don't
Maybe you get your Winter Classic in and then you lockout then-- if things are way far apart.
Or if things are reasonable close and productive, you play right through.
If no deal is reached, you lock out the players before July 1 so nobody can sign anyone.
Now you've got a couple hundred NHLers who have no security whatsoever.
and a whole summer to bargain.

And maybe you haven't missed a game. Maybe you're fairly close to a deal and you get it done by October or earlier.

And maybe you haven't made the league look like an utter disaster and turned off all your customers.

The NHL's scorched earth policy of the last 18 years is indefensible. And I can't take anyone who supports it seriously.


Last edited by Killion: 12-31-2012 at 10:08 PM.
RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 09:59 PM
  #484
Xref
Registered User
 
Xref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
No, I am saying that a contract expires Sept. 15. You're playing with a dangerous timetable.

If you don't give a **** about your customers or your product, then you might behave like the NHL did, by offering a ****-you deal that was sure to raise the dander of the players and unite them against the owners.

So maybe you make a more reasonable offer to start negotiations... since everyone basically knew what they wanted anyway,.

And maybe you see how its going... and if the PA seems willing to move, you agree to play under the old CBA as a show of good faith.

Maybe something gets done early. Something that would take effect the next season.
Maybe you don't
Maybe you get your Winter Classic in and then you lockout then-- if things are way far apart.
Or if things are reasonable close and productive, you play right through.
If no deal is reached, you lock out the players before July 1 so nobody can sign anyone.
Now you've got a couple hundred NHLers who have no security whatsoever.
and a whole summer to bargain.

And maybe you haven't missed a game. Maybe you're fairly close to a deal and you get it done by October or earlier.

And maybe you haven't made the league look like an utter disaster and turned off all your customers.

The NHL's scorched earth policy of the last 18 years is indefensible. And I can't take anyone who supports it seriously.
So you completely absolve the PA for refusing to negotiate earlier, when the owners asked them to, and you completely absolve them for stalling to begin negotiations til it was too late to get the season started on time? But are surprised when the owners ask to turn the tables on the players? Why is it OK for the players to get 57% of HRR for 7 years, but when the owners ask for 57%, it's looked at as distasteful and outrageous?

I support the NHL's position, so I guess you can't take me seriously.

Xref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:34 PM
  #485
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xref View Post
So you completely absolve the PA for refusing to negotiate earlier, when the owners asked them to, and you completely absolve them for stalling to begin negotiations til it was too late to get the season started on time? But are surprised when the owners ask to turn the tables on the players? Why is it OK for the players to get 57% of HRR for 7 years, but when the owners ask for 57%, it's looked at as distasteful and outrageous?

I support the NHL's position, so I guess you can't take me seriously.
1.) I don't absolve the PA. But I understand how this has turned out. The owners were going on the NBA script. It is what it is.

2.) "Why is it OK for the players to get 57% of HRR for 7 years, but when the owners ask for 57%, it's looked at as distasteful and outrageous?"

That's hard to take seriously.

So at my old job, I should go in and say, hey, I get 1`percent of the company's revenue and you get 99. I propose I get 99 percent?

That's really, really hard to take seriously.

The owners demanded linkage and won it in 2005-06.. even though linkage has cost the owners a ton of money. The owners could have a greed to a $45M cap with maybe 2 percent raises... and no salary floor... and they'd have been SOOOO much better off.

But what is linkage? Who cares about 57-43 and 43-57 and 50-50.
What is that in real money. 1,9 out of 3.3B?

So here's our offer. We're offering you $1.4B... a .5B wage reduction.
That was the owners saying--- we're not just tweaking the CBA. We're out for major wins.
And that surprised everyone... including broadcasting partners at NBC.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 10:47 PM
  #486
Xref
Registered User
 
Xref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
1.) I don't absolve the PA. But I understand how this has turned out. The owners were going on the NBA script. It is what it is.

2.) "Why is it OK for the players to get 57% of HRR for 7 years, but when the owners ask for 57%, it's looked at as distasteful and outrageous?"

That's hard to take seriously.

So at my old job, I should go in and say, hey, I get 1`percent of the company's revenue and you get 99. I propose I get 99 percent?

That's really, really hard to take seriously.


The owners demanded linkage and won it in 2005-06.. even though linkage has cost the owners a ton of money. The owners could have a greed to a $45M cap with maybe 2 percent raises... and no salary floor... and they'd have been SOOOO much better off.

But what is linkage? Who cares about 57-43 and 43-57 and 50-50.
What is that in real money. 1,9 out of 3.3B?

So here's our offer. We're offering you $1.4B... a .5B wage reduction.
That was the owners saying--- we're not just tweaking the CBA. We're out for major wins.
And that surprised everyone... including broadcasting partners at NBC.
No, that's not the same. Not even close.

Xref is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 11:17 PM
  #487
du5566*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
No, it's not.

Not even a little bit.

The owners LOCKED OUT the players to try and force concessions from the PA.

This is their lockout. For their benefit.

You can say it's justified. Fine. But don't deny the truth.

If you support it... support it. Don't run from it because of "optics."

If the owners had agreed to play through the CBA and Fehr went on strike in February... then all you player-haters could say this is the "Players' Strike."

And anyone who was pro-pa would have to own it.

I'm just sick and tired of the BS spin doctoring by the player haters on HFboards.
I see your point Bob, this is the owners doing and it is player concessions they are seeking.

I stand by the owners in regards to acquiring a CBA that includes max player contacts, a 10 year CBA, a 50/50 revenue share, and a hard cap; as I truly believe that this is not only fair for both the owners and the players but is also what’s best for the league.

What drives me crazy about the owners is the dysfunction that exists amongst them as a group. It is clear to me that they are not all on the same page and this was never more evident than when teams gave out 10 year contacts right before the CBA expired and then Bill Daly claimed that 5 year max contracts are “the hill we die on.”

I stand by the players in regards to getting a fair deal that will allow them to obtain their share of revenue and I truly believe that share is 50/50. I also stand by the players in fighting for a higher cap floor because if every team is not spending to the cap then they are not really getting their fair share of revenue. I support player salaries increasing as revenue increases (within the 50/50 share model) because the players are unable to seek a competitive salary elsewhere so as the league grows that growth must be reflected in player salaries.

What drives me crazy about the players is their hiring of Donald Fehr. I feel like the only reason they hired Fehr is because they didn’t want to give into the above concessions and Fehr gave them the best opportunity to fight the owners on it. This frustrates me because I know the players realize how bad off the league truly is financially and how important of a time this is for the league right now. I find it hard to believe that they (or anyone for that matter) could truly believe that moving forward on the old CBA was anything but detrimental for the league. So when they hired Donald Fehr; which I thought cemented a work stoppage, I was disappointed. And Fehr got off to a great start refusing to negotiate in the winter and rejecting the NHL’s realignment proposal.


Last edited by du5566*: 12-31-2012 at 11:26 PM.
du5566* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-31-2012, 11:26 PM
  #488
stuffradio
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,277
vCash: 424
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
1.) I don't absolve the PA. But I understand how this has turned out. The owners were going on the NBA script. It is what it is.

2.) "Why is it OK for the players to get 57% of HRR for 7 years, but when the owners ask for 57%, it's looked at as distasteful and outrageous?"

That's hard to take seriously.

So at my old job, I should go in and say, hey, I get 1`percent of the company's revenue and you get 99. I propose I get 99 percent?

That's really, really hard to take seriously.

The owners demanded linkage and won it in 2005-06.. even though linkage has cost the owners a ton of money. The owners could have a greed to a $45M cap with maybe 2 percent raises... and no salary floor... and they'd have been SOOOO much better off.

But what is linkage? Who cares about 57-43 and 43-57 and 50-50.
What is that in real money. 1,9 out of 3.3B?

So here's our offer. We're offering you $1.4B... a .5B wage reduction.
That was the owners saying--- we're not just tweaking the CBA. We're out for major wins.
And that surprised everyone... including broadcasting partners at NBC.
The owners were getting 1%. The employees were getting 99%. It's a joke and doesn't work for small market teams. The big market teams were fine. Your Phoenix's, Florida's, etc. couldn't deal with 1%, so they wanted 99% instead of the players getting 99%.

Your example didn't and doesn't work at all.

stuffradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:35 AM
  #489
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by du5566 View Post
I see your point Bob, this is the owners doing and it is player concessions they are seeking.

I stand by the owners in regards to acquiring a CBA that includes max player contacts, a 10 year CBA, a 50/50 revenue share, and a hard cap; as I truly believe that this is not only fair for both the owners and the players but is also whatís best for the league.

What drives me crazy about the owners is the dysfunction that exists amongst them as a group. It is clear to me that they are not all on the same page and this was never more evident than when teams gave out 10 year contacts right before the CBA expired and then Bill Daly claimed that 5 year max contracts are ďthe hill we die on.Ē

I stand by the players in regards to getting a fair deal that will allow them to obtain their share of revenue and I truly believe that share is 50/50. I also stand by the players in fighting for a higher cap floor because if every team is not spending to the cap then they are not really getting their fair share of revenue. I support player salaries increasing as revenue increases (within the 50/50 share model) because the players are unable to seek a competitive salary elsewhere so as the league grows that growth must be reflected in player salaries.

What drives me crazy about the players is their hiring of Donald Fehr. I feel like the only reason they hired Fehr is because they didnít want to give into the above concessions and Fehr gave them the best opportunity to fight the owners on it. This frustrates me because I know the players realize how bad off the league truly is financially and how important of a time this is for the league right now. I find it hard to believe that they (or anyone for that matter) could truly believe that moving forward on the old CBA was anything but detrimental for the league. So when they hired Donald Fehr; which I thought cemented a work stoppage, I was disappointed. And Fehr got off to a great start refusing to negotiate in the winter and rejecting the NHLís realignment proposal.
At some point... a salary cap, linkage, reduction of contract legnth...

All this stuff is just pure bullying... it's not for the health of the league.

The owners haven't proposed anything that fixes the leagues systemic problems.

So I can't understand why anyone expects the players to line up and take concessions.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:36 AM
  #490
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuffradio View Post
The owners were getting 1%. The employees were getting 99%. It's a joke and doesn't work for small market teams. The big market teams were fine. Your Phoenix's, Florida's, etc. couldn't deal with 1%, so they wanted 99% instead of the players getting 99%.

Your example didn't and doesn't work at all.
Whoooosh

Sorry you didn't get it.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 01:45 AM
  #491
du5566*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
At some point... a salary cap, linkage, reduction of contract legnth...

All this stuff is just pure bullying... it's not for the health of the league.

The owners haven't proposed anything that fixes the leagues systemic problems.

So I can't understand why anyone expects the players to line up and take concessions.
Haha, well then Bob here is the billion dollar question; how would you propose the league fix the problems?

Also I am interested in why exactly you don't think this system will work for the NHL? I mean the NBA and NFL have similar systems and it works well for them. Now I understand the NHL doesn't have a TV contract that compares to the ones those leagues have but that's the end goal right? So why not walk the path paved by the other successful leagues in North America?

du5566* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 03:00 AM
  #492
leaffansince1961
Registered User
 
leaffansince1961's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by du5566 View Post
Haha, well then Bob here is the billion dollar question; how would you propose the league fix the problems?

Also I am interested in why exactly you don't think this system will work for the NHL? I mean the NBA and NFL have similar systems and it works well for them. Now I understand the NHL doesn't have a TV contract that compares to the ones those leagues have but that's the end goal right? So why not walk the path paved by the other successful leagues in North America?
If the owners are crying poor....let the union dissolve and the owners can do what they want....oh, but they don't want that....they are fighting that in court now.

leaffansince1961 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 03:29 AM
  #493
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smackdaddy View Post
Oh, I'm a big fan as well. My point was that to cap, say, player salary at $2M for example in spite of revenue would be unfair. The cap is in place to regulate the owners, while the HRR split is there to incentivize the players.

As of right now, the players have an exploded ego where they feel they are owed more money then they could ever bring in. It'd be comical if it wasn't so sad. The level of greed these players are at to the point of destroying the league to get what they want astounds me.
Especially since several of them have not encountered the fight of the last Lockout. What is Sid fighting about to go through all this?

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 03:31 AM
  #494
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 22,299
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
At some point... a salary cap, linkage, reduction of contract legnth...

All this stuff is just pure bullying... it's not for the health of the league.

The owners haven't proposed anything that fixes the leagues systemic problems.

So I can't understand why anyone expects the players to line up and take concessions.
Well I think the NHL players make too much for what they generate.

But you're right in that the owners have not proposed real measures to fix the league.

Kimota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 03:36 AM
  #495
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by du5566 View Post
Haha, well then Bob here is the billion dollar question; how would you propose the league fix the problems?

Also I am interested in why exactly you don't think this system will work for the NHL? I mean the NBA and NFL have similar systems and it works well for them. Now I understand the NHL doesn't have a TV contract that compares to the ones those leagues have but that's the end goal right? So why not walk the path paved by the other successful leagues in North America?
I've proposed ideas.
50 percent of all home gates goes to the road team.

50 percent of TV revenue -- including local, goes into into a pool that is then divided equally and sent back into the teams.

Let's see built-in revenue sharing. So that Phoenix feels the love when they visit Toronto.
And Toronto feels the pain when they visit Phoenix.

It will make teams more concerned about each other's markets.

I also think that all expansion fees need to go into a fund that does NOTHING except help keep new teams afloat.

I think it's obscene that new owners come in, pay a huge fee that the other owners pocket... and then we shut down the game every 7 years because these teams are broke. That expansion fee money could be used to keep teams afloat and somewhat competitive.

These are the kinds of things that would make me think the owners cared about fixing the "economics" of the game.

Instead we get a bandaid that will fall off in 4 years.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 04:54 AM
  #496
Imlach a cup
Registered User
 
Imlach a cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
I've proposed ideas.
50 percent of all home gates goes to the road team.
Dear Mr Bettman
Can we play in the North East more often? Edmonton won't buy me a new arena and then pay all the operating costs so I need to leach off of successful franchises. Maybe we could play 20 games a year vs the rangers. Then I could afford an owners box so big that I wouldn't have to see my servants except when they rub the tears of virgins into my feet.
Sincerly der Katz

So your solution is to allow teams to take half the home teams gate revenue. First, owners like Katz will take advantage of that rule for personal gain. Second, Phoenix doesn't exactly play in a division known for consistently high attendance across the board. Third, teams that barely stay afloat now have to fork over their dough to the bottom feeders, which isn't replaced in turn because the bottom feeders don't draw a crowd. Fourth, who exactly is showing up for a wednesday night matchup of Phoenix v Columbus? Nobody gains anything except a joint suffering.

If the NHL insists on running franchises in miserable locations then as an organization they need to dictate to the Tor, NYR, Bos of the league that it will be their responsibility to keep the Fla, Clb, Pho type teams afloat. If you want to fix the NHLs problems you have to start with the 5 worst performing teams financially and those resources need to come from the wealthiest teams not the 22 teams that manage to break even at the end of the season. Or just scrap those teams entirely and start over after contraction.

Imlach a cup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 05:38 AM
  #497
ichabod13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Baltimore Maryland
Posts: 2,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
and then we shut down the game every 7 years because these teams are broke.
when did the league shut down because a team went broke?

ichabod13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 05:55 AM
  #498
ichabod13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Baltimore Maryland
Posts: 2,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
So at my old job, I should go in and say, hey, I get 1`percent of the company's revenue and you get 99. I propose I get 99 percent?
no bob, that would leap over the boundries of idiocy.
but if the owner of your company offered you a 50/50 split.......what would you do?
you would jump on that offer with both feet........now if your company offered you that split and then told you that half of the companys expences will be paid by you...i doubt you would be all that happy.
team--or company--owners are the ones footing the bills...not the employees.

ichabod13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 06:14 AM
  #499
ichabod13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Baltimore Maryland
Posts: 2,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
"Why is it OK for the players to get 57% of HRR for 7 years, but when the owners ask for 57%, it's looked at as distasteful and outrageous?"

That's hard to take seriously.
no its not.
when im the one putting up all the money--including YOUR "guarenteed contract" without a guarentee that ill make ANY money off of it--and might lose millions--why should i not get a bigger piece of the action?

ichabod13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-01-2013, 06:30 AM
  #500
ichabod13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Baltimore Maryland
Posts: 2,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
So having useful idiots like the Coyotes and company helps teams like Toronto, Detroit and NYR make more money in the long run.
how in gods name does a money losing franchise help the big money makers? the top money makers have to GIVE money to the money losers. if i bought toronto--the biggest money maker-- and you bought phoenix---the biggest money LOSER--and i have to write YOU a check every year, how am i making money "in the long run"?

ichabod13 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 09:34 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.