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 VI:ve la Revolution!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2013, 02:01 AM
  #976
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Yes, they don't want the whole Season to be lost, that's what they want. And they're going to end up giving up enough concessions that it won't hardly have been worth missing even half the Season and then having to live with still an extremely malfunctioning CBA for another 7 to 8 years.
That's actually my point. Giving up an extra 150m won't affect the nuts and bolts of the CBA. They give up 150m, and get their contract term (say 7 years), and the variance they can live with (20-25%). Those things are worth a LOT more long term than 100-150m - especially when you get the CBA term (8-10 years) that you're looking for.

__________________
"Its not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, its as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."

Last edited by Riptide: 01-04-2013 at 02:31 AM. Reason: edited for clairity
Riptide is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:05 AM
  #977
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
So effectively you're saying we have two years of delinkage.
No, not at all. You can say the cap will be X, but still make sure that each side will only get 50% + make whole. What it does though is ensure that the players are not getting a massive hit to escrow - which would happen if the cap was too high for revenues. However if revenues are too high for the cap, then the owners all have to chip in to top it off (which has been done twice before).

Really there's no lose here. If the PA wants 65m, then give them 65m. Depending on how the floor is determined, it'll mean small clubs have to pony up a tad, but it's not the end of the world. The 50% split still protects everyone.

Eg: Year 1, cap is 70.2m. Revenue in a shortened season is 2B. PA gets 50% plus 200m in make whole (am just guessing).
Year 2. They have an artificial cap of 64m. Revenue is 3B. PA gets 50% plus 130m in make whole (still guessing - based off the 400m comment).
Year 3 - now based off of year 2 they have a pretty good idea where the yearly revenue should land - so they base the cap off of reality - 3B+growth (say 3-4% to be conservative)+72m in make whole (still guessing). That puts the midpoint around the 53-54m mark (and the cap around the low 60m range depending on how it's determined).

So the cap itself doesn't really matter too much... as long as teams don't spend right to the max between years 2 and 3 - at least until they get an idea where things are revenue wise. The split protects both sides from it rising or falling too much. But the lower the cap, the less of an impact the PA will feel in escrow.


Last edited by Riptide: 01-04-2013 at 02:15 AM. Reason: added example
Riptide is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:07 AM
  #978
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
At a minimum you need to subtract the amount of another team making the finals. Using your NJ example that would mean a Leafs run to the cup finals would generate an extra $28m or less than $500k per team on the cap.
Not sure why you're subtracting what the other team made? All of that money is considered HRR. But regardless of the amounts, I think we can all agree that the overall affect of the cap is insignificant.

Riptide is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:15 AM
  #979
NugentHopkinsfan
Registered User
 
NugentHopkinsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,087
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Most fans cheer for the emblem on the front of the jersey not the name on the back. The team is the product, the players come and go.
Most fans? maybe in some markets but there are many markets where fans only show up when the team is good and the quality of the product is good.

I remember sitting in my own empty section at Rogers Arena at Canucks games from 1998-2001 and the logo on the front didn't magically change in 2002 the players were better, the hockey was better, the team was better and we've sold out every game since.

People aren't going to pay money to watch crap players and bad teams. Leafs and Rangers are pretty much the only exceptions. But from reading your posts you seem to have an incredibly unrealistic view of the popularity of the NHL in most markets and overrate the quality of the product a great deal.

NugentHopkinsfan is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:26 AM
  #980
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
Revenue sharing percentages mean Jack. What matters is revenue redistribution. The NBA deal shares 50% but only redistributes 180m out of 5b ie just 3.6%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyisforeveryone View Post
The NFL is at 60%....how about more than 4.5% !!!!
It took me a while to realize this. In fact made up a pretty spreadsheet with average capacity and average tickets then split it 50/50 (50% of gate was redistributed 30 ways). What I found was that unless the league AVERAGE ticket price was $330+, the NHL redistributes MORE money with 6.5% (~200m) than they would if they split the gate 50/50 30 ways.

What I mean is that when you consider what Phoenix (and everyone else) contributes (from 50% of their gate) and what they get in return from RS (1/30th of the RS pot, 50% of everyone elses gate), it's actually less than what the NHL is giving them now... Unless the average ticket price works out to be $330, in which case its about the same.

Really when they say that the NBA/NFL/MLB all share 35-60%, and the NHL only shares 4.5%, that's not a completely true statement. Yes they do "share" that much, but everyone contributes. Except the NHL only shares what's actually re-distributed, while the other teams count a TON more, but do not necessarily re-distribute as much (I do not know - the first number I've heard on them is the 3.6% above).

It's a matter of optic's nothing more. Something I've yet to see almost ANYONE on this board acknowledge.


Last edited by Riptide: 01-04-2013 at 02:33 AM.
Riptide is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:48 AM
  #981
BlueChip01
Registered User
 
BlueChip01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,935
vCash: 500
Anybody know these guys?...

Josh Rimer ‏@JoshRimerHockey

From an NHL Sponsor. "We're pretty confident we'll be playing Hockey on Jan 19th."

BlueChip01 is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:48 AM
  #982
BlueChip01
Registered User
 
BlueChip01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,935
vCash: 500
Chris Stevenson ‏@CJ_Stevenson

Hearing rumours NHL teams are reaching out to their coaches and telling them to be ready. Some are booking flites to their cities.

BlueChip01 is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 02:51 AM
  #983
BlueChip01
Registered User
 
BlueChip01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 2,935
vCash: 500
last guy is an event specialist with only 54 followers

Faizzal Fatehali ‏@FaizzalFatehali

@HarryHabs: CBC confirming the #NHL contacted them to get ready for a January 19th start. Habs-Leafs at 7pm, Flames-Oilers 10pm.

BlueChip01 is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 03:19 AM
  #984
madhi19
Registered User
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueChip01 View Post
last guy is an event specialist with only 54 followers

Faizzal Fatehali ‏@FaizzalFatehali

@HarryHabs: CBC confirming the #NHL contacted them to get ready for a January 19th start. Habs-Leafs at 7pm, Flames-Oilers 10pm.
For frack sake let it be in Montreal am sick and tired of the Habs starting their season in freaking Toronto.

madhi19 is online now  
Old
01-04-2013, 04:41 AM
  #985
FakeKidPoker*
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madhi19 View Post
For frack sake let it be in Montreal am sick and tired of the Habs starting their season in freaking Toronto.
Are all Habs vs Leafs games going to be on hockey night in canada again?

FakeKidPoker* is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 05:04 AM
  #986
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,419
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeKidPoker View Post
Are all Habs vs Leafs games going to be on hockey night in canada again?
I can't see any circumstance where they wouldn't be. Like them or hate them, they're Canada's two biggest teams.

Riptide is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 05:21 AM
  #987
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 3,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Z baby View Post
The players are not the product? They are the skill, they are the people the fans pay money to come see. No fan in the history of the NHL has ever paid money to come see an owner or ownership group sit in their box.
Isn't this indirectly the case every wheres? I don't get this argument tbh. With every product, without employees, the business can not exist. I goto McYucks to get a burger, not to see the owner. Who is in there slaving to get me my burger?

While McYucks makes record setting quarterly profits, the employees slave away for minimum wage, which isn't even close to being enough to live off of. IMO the whole capitalistic system is a complete mess. Sure these guys aren't the most skilled, but they are working their tails off, surely that is worth being able to sustain yourself.

Big corps are greedy to no end.

habsfanatics is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 05:31 AM
  #988
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JordanStaal#1Fan View Post
Well, that's pure jealousy... The players should give back because they make a lot of money? THEY are the product. Without them, the owners WOULDN'T make money AT ALL! They deserve their fair share. I agree with 50/50 and I think that the player should be renumerated what the owners can pay them without losing money, but I also believe that there are other avenues to fixing the league's problem than to always cut into the players' share.

We are not talking about a factory that can replace pretty much all of their non-educated workers without even losing a dime. Hockey players have a rare skill and they are paid accordingly. Expecting them to give back 7% of their share because they make 2,3M$ on average is ludicrous. They shouldn't give in simply because they will still make millions. If they have to agree to some cuts, and I think they do, it is because the business is suffering, not because they are SOOOOO rich that it shouldn't matter to them...

They are the best 1% of the best 1% in their field, people who are the best 1% of the best 1% IN ANY FIELD are filthy rich. I can understand why people are mad at them because they are millionaire, but outside of pure envy, there is no rational reasons to. It is all emotional.
Well here's a reason, I think overall NHL players makes too much for what they generate, it has always been that way and it was worse in the mid 90s when you had guys getting 10 million a year. As good as they are, for market value, NHL players just cannot command NFL/MLB players' money, not even NBA players money.

Now as far as having a softer cap with a luxury tax, I would not be opposed to it but we presume that only wealthy teams would do this, while I think a lot of teams would go to 70 million(just look at Nashville being able to give Shea Weber even though they are supposed to be poor) and it would screw up the salary structure.

I agree that the players should not all the brunt of the financial problems of the NHL, though. But my solution would be to cut around 6 to 10 teams first trying to put other measures in place. But it's strange to think that just by reducing the part of the players' pie will fix everything.

Kimota is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 05:39 AM
  #989
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,652
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Sure, there was speculation about rollbacks like in 2005 but you also knew that NHLPA was dead set against rollbacks which is the biggest evil for the players, so there was a good chance of not seeing rollbacks.

For no actual reason?? The only reason some teams are crippled are because they GAMBLED and got burned.

They didn't have to ignore free agency, they simply should have signed deals that won't take them to cap hell.



Again, don't blame the NHL, blame the GMs. NHL didn't make them sign those bloated deals.

You can't blame league for Sather being idiot and giving Gomez that stupid deal and you can't blame the league for Habs making one of the dumbest trades in NHL's history.

The signs were all there, smart GMs saw them, the other GMs didn't.

Blame the GMs.
Indeed. It's blind owners who don't know much about hockey putting their trust into stupid guys known as GM that should be more competent and should know more about all this stuff but are not. GMs are screwing up the league.

Kimota is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:25 AM
  #990
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 67,853
vCash: 50
Didn't they say all that stuff about coming back to start the season in early December? Look what happened.

Shrimper is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:48 AM
  #991
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Not sure why you're subtracting what the other team made? All of that money is considered HRR. But regardless of the amounts, I think we can all agree that the overall affect of the cap is insignificant.
Because if you replace the Devils with Leafs, you have to take out Devils' revenues (rumored 32M) from the equation and add Leafs' speculated revenues.

Pepper is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:53 AM
  #992
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,662
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Didn't they say all that stuff about coming back to start the season in early December? Look what happened.
Until the puck actually drops. I am not buying anything Twitter says about the season coming soon.

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
01-04-2013, 07:57 AM
  #993
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
Until the puck actually drops. I am not buying anything Twitter says about the season coming soon.
Bang on...don't believe a thing...until you see Bettman and Fehr at the podium, TOGETHER, then there is no deal...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:14 AM
  #994
Jackpot
Registered Abuser
 
Jackpot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Syracuse, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 648
vCash: 500
As much as I miss hockey, at this point I would be much happier seeing both parties lose fan generated money FOREVER. I would love to see the collapse of the NHL and rebirth of a whole new league in a year or two. The current NHL has become an embarrassment to professional sports. Time to start over...

Jackpot is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:21 AM
  #995
wal11682
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 34
vCash: 500
As much as i despise Joe Haggerty from Boston, he said it best on an interview last night. They are going to drag this out to the last possible minute so each side can suck the last bit of leverage and benefits out of the other side until it is absolutely necessary to play, and we should all feel nieve for thinking that any deal would happen anytime before january 11th, so you can all get off twitter until january 12th at 12:01 when they'll announce the season.


http://www.csnne.com/01/04/13/Hagger...59&feedID=3352

wal11682 is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:37 AM
  #996
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,546
vCash: 500
My only concern is that the PA decides to test that deadline next week and the season is gone because they wanted to milk and stall a little longer.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:43 AM
  #997
Davebo
beep beep
 
Davebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueChip01 View Post
Anybody know these guys?...

Josh Rimer ‏@JoshRimerHockey

From an NHL Sponsor. "We're pretty confident we'll be playing Hockey on Jan 19th."
Yes, but were they before the NHL pulled a fast one? Because it looks like things are headed south since Thursday.

Davebo is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:46 AM
  #998
Davebo
beep beep
 
Davebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,818
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackpot View Post
As much as I miss hockey, at this point I would be much happier seeing both parties lose fan generated money FOREVER. I would love to see the collapse of the NHL and rebirth of a whole new league in a year or two. The current NHL has become an embarrassment to professional sports. Time to start over...
Well said, and my position as well. Let the profitable teams rise from the ashes of the old corrupt nhl, and let's get some decent hockey going again.

These 'billionaire' owners have been ****ing with our sport for too long - time for a change.

Davebo is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 08:48 AM
  #999
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,546
vCash: 500
Really?

I consider the aspect of greed to be the one killing the league and both parties have done a fine job of demonstrating it thus far.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
01-04-2013, 09:00 AM
  #1000
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,290
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FakeKidPoker View Post
Are all Habs vs Leafs games going to be on hockey night in canada again?
Actually, I doubt it. Over the past few years. with only 6 Leafs-Habs games in a 82 game season, some of the games have aired on TSN's national package and a few have aired as regional games (Sportsnet Ontario for Leafs, TSN's Montreal regional channel for Habs). So, with the likelihood of 7 Leafs-Habs games in a 48 game season, I don't see them all being on HNIC.

rojac 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 02:36 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.