And No One Dared Disturb the Sound of Silence (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XXII

Status
Not open for further replies.

SK13

non torsii subligarium
Jul 23, 2007
32,762
6,382
Edmonton
Why is this good news? Leave revenue sharing between teams upto the NHL, not the PA.

It smells like a long-term agenda. Propose a situation where the league "takes care" of it's hardluck teams, thereby removing the ability for the league to claim economic peril as a reason for the players to cede revenue during the next CBA negotiation.

Ultimately, I don't see the league accepting a three year decline with make-whole. I don't know why the damn PA keeps proposing a gradual decline, the league is clearly not interested in anything but year 1 50-50. Get creative.
 

billybudd

Registered User
Feb 1, 2012
22,049
2,249
If the Canadian dollar tanks or economy goes down the drain, then it would be catastrophic for those small market teams on "welfare".

If Escrow is preserved, the economy or the Canadian dollar doesn't matter.

well, that's not true. If the Canadian dollar RISES against the US dollar and revenue sharing is a flat number of US dollars, THEN it would be catastrophic for them.

But the Canadian dollar falling means nothing bad for the Islanders. Probably means some good, tbh.
 

UsernameWasTaken

Let's Go Hawks!
Feb 11, 2012
26,148
217
Toronto
Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
NHLPA's offered concept to NHL on Make Whole would see players go down to 50-50 of HRR by Year 3. So there's a phase-in element to it
 

ColdSteel2

Registered User
Aug 27, 2010
34,759
3,578
It's a means to an end. If the revenue split is lowered in favour of the owners, the lower teams stop losing money and the richer teams just get richer. In a revenue sharing scenario, the richer teams get less rich, to prop up the poorer teams.

Sounds like a mug's game...which by the way, where does that come from?
 

Boltsfan2029

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
6,264
0
In deleted threads
I get all that, but why not Nov 30 as a start date (assuming a deal was agreed to in the next 3 days)? Why Dec 1?

I understand that Nov games have been cancelled, but with a new schedule, is there any reason why they couldn't book new games for the end of Nov?

For the reasons I listed, I find it hard to believe they can even start on 12/1, much less anytime in November.
 

bleedblue94

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
8,802
9,188
Disagree. The owners have invested/risked millions and millions of dollars and have other businesses. The players are employees and, unlike many employees in other business ventures, get guaranteed salaries.

I dunno, I've just always figured that the owners of businesses take all the financial risk and are entitled to what their businesses earn (net) because of that.

and i disagree bc i always have viewed a sports league different than a traditional business.

the players can go and do a charity game and sell it out in 20 mins. the players could do a nation wide tour and probably sell out all the games. if the owners tried to use replacement players in the nhl, they would be laughed at. THIS league is driven by the players. the owners that loose money in "risks" are owners who have made terrible business decisions, deals, or are operating stubbornly in bad markets
 

Orrthebest

Registered User
May 25, 2012
869
0
Here's an interesting perspective too:
http://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/10tsrg/so_lets_clear_some_things_up_about_the_lockout/

As a Bruins fan, what's your take on this?


As a Bruins fan I find it to be absolute trash. It just proof hockey fans are hypocrites. The same guy that wrote that article is probably one of the fans who blame the owners for creating their own problems by signing players to more than their worth. JJ has always treated his business as a business and the NHL needs more owners like him.
 

Bubba Thudd

is getting banned
Jul 19, 2005
24,571
4,666
Avaland
Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
NHL went from $180 mil (1st proposal) to $200 mil in rev. sharing. NHLPA went from $240 mil to $260 mil.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
So, at least in terms of dollars, sides are not getting closer on revenue sharing , which is an important issue to players.


Bruce Garrioch ‏@SunGarrioch
@KatieStrangESPN Gary Bettman doesn't respond well to anything the NHLPA sees as a "good idea" and his mandate is to deliver 50-50.

But then at the same time you get this....

You've gotta be kidding me. :shakehead
 

CerebralGenesis

Registered User
Jul 23, 2009
24,429
2
Why is the NHLPA's number going from 240 to 260? That makes no sense. Unless...they made a give on that 57% thing. That would be a fair trade. Owners don't pay the whole make whole provision but they increase revenue sharing to 260ish.
 

Ace Rimmer

Stoke me a clipper.
7-8 days is apparently all the time they need based on the previous oct25th/26th deadline and Nov 2 start date.

Provided at least some arenas haven't completely filled their Nov schedule(they haven't), an agreement any time before Nov 22 COULD very easily lead to a start date before Dec 1

Maybe wait for a deal to be done before worrying yourself over when the season would start... ;)
 

Hanklite*

Guest
3 hours and still meeting:

are they actually discussing the offers or side issues and fluff
 

5 Minute Major

Sabres Fan
Sponsor
Dec 4, 2010
7,266
4,285
Vestal, NY
If the NHL agrees to revenue share, why would the PA agree to go to 50/50 so easy?

Isn't this all about a handful of teams not making money?

Revenue sharing would cure that with the contracts going to 50/50, right?
 

Hanklite*

Guest
Why is the NHLPA's number going from 240 to 260? That makes no sense. Unless...they made a give on that 57% thing. That would be a fair trade. Owners don't pay the whole make whole provision but they increase revenue sharing to 260ish.

Bingo!

Their mindset is that if they give in on HRR split, that money has to go to revenue sharing and not lining the rich owners pockets.
 

bleedblue94

Registered User
Jun 8, 2004
8,802
9,188
I will knock the owners as soon as the players are willing to take on the operating costs of running an NHL team.

copied my post from another response

and i disagree bc i always have viewed a sports league different than a traditional business.

the players can go and do a charity game and sell it out in 20 mins. the players could do a nation wide tour and probably sell out all the games. if the owners tried to use replacement players in the nhl, they would be laughed at. THIS league is driven by the players. the owners that loose money in "risks" are owners who have made terrible business decisions, deals, or are operating stubbornly in bad markets
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad