Deadline feb 14/15

[leaflover]

According to this L.A Times report.


http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp...y?coll=la-headlines-sports&ctrack=1&cset=true

Also says they plan on one more round of negotiating first.They better hurry!!!

Click to read more...

 

[futurcorerock]

great read...

if i were a member

 

[RangerBoy]

great read...

if i were a member

http://www.latimes.com/sports/printedition/

scroll to the 5th story and click on the story.Sometimes they allow a non-member to read one or two stories before signing in

 

[RangerBoy]

Monday or Tuesday deadline.An agreement must be in place by Tuesday to start the season on February 25.A NEW NHL proposal will be submitted today or tomorrow

Another proposal?Can't wait.Gary Bettman will just re-paint the house with a new color

 

[RangerBoy]

Gary Bettman has already won this lockout.Does Bettman want to pitch a shutout?Bettman not only wants to hit a home run.Bettman wants to hit a grand slam.However,hitting the ball over the fence is not enough.He wants to hit the ball out of the stadium.If the NHLPA agreed to accept a salary but not linked to revenue,would the NHL accept it?If all of the big spenders were capped at $48 million,would the cap band of 8 and Bettman be satisfied?Bettman gets his hard cap

 

[Isles72]

Gary Bettman has already won this lockout.Does Bettman want to pitch a shutout?Bettman not only wants to hit a home run.Bettman wants to hit a grand slam.However,hitting the ball over the fence is not enough.He wants to hit the ball out of the stadium.If the NHLPA agreed to accept a salary but not linked to revenue,would the NHL accept it?If all of the big spenders were capped at $48 million,would the cap band of 8 and Bettman be satisfied?Bettman gets his hard cap

I think the better deal is to have a cap linked to revenues , not one locked in at say 42 for 6 years

if rev's go up , the cap goes up , rev's go down , the cap goes down .

this would put the burden of loss on both players and owners and when rev's go up they both share in the payday

 

[chiavsfan]

Article Link (Subscription)

By Helene Elliott
Tribune Newspapers: Los Angeles Times

February 9, 2005


LOS ANGELES -- The NHL is poised to issue a deadline of Monday or Tuesday for the players' association to agree to a labor deal and will initiate a final round of talks before it becomes the first major professional sports league to cancel an entire season.

With schedules of 28, 30 and 32 games in hand, NHL executives calculated that they must have a general agreement by next Tuesday and start the season around Feb. 25. The league will set a "drop-dead" date and present a proposal either Wednesday or Thursday, sources said.

 

[Russian Fan]

"Financially, the Coyotes lose less money not playing, but we lose a lot of credibility in the community with fan support, corporate sponsorship, just community fan base. How long it's going to take us to rebuild that, I'm not sure."

This is one of the main reasons why the owners got more pressure. Sure some of them lose less $$$$ by not playing but it's only an annual budget while the risk of losing more than that is very critical.

For the Phoenix example, they just got a new arena, it's not only about losing money this year. It affects the future of this franchise. Also they got plans to build condos & mall around the arena to create something that his OUTSIDE of hockey revenue but so related.

 

[MojoJojo]

I think the better deal is to have a cap linked to revenues , not one locked in at say 42 for 6 years

if rev's go up , the cap goes up , rev's go down , the cap goes down .

this would put the burden of loss on both players and owners and when rev's go up they both share in the payday

The problem with this is that the owners are pretty shady about declaring all of their revenue. If they were more forthright about their finances I could see such a system working.

 

[Russian Fan]

The problem with this is that the owners are pretty shady about declaring all of their revenue. If they were more forthright about their finances I could see such a system working.

This is the exact concern that most pro-pa have & I understand them.

Gary Bettman is giving more importance about appearance (PR) than substance.

He took the best out of the NHLPA proposal & he said thank you but we also want this.

He wants an NFL-Type of cap but without what is succesfull with it : MEANINGFUL REVENU SHARING.

There's no depth in everything he said so far.

About those teams who are under 30M$ in payroll & if there's a floor of 32M$ what the CBA NEWS SAID ? We will make sure that every team can pay their players accordingly ? WOW !! That's a statement.

It's like going to the bank asking for a loan to consolidate your debts & telling the banker ''I will pay you accordingly don't worry.

It works for fans in hockey but it does not work with the banker or the NHLPA.

It's not up to the PA to prove a CAP or ''COST CERTAINTY'' can work, it's up to the owners to show that every teams will be there in 5-10 years.

If I was in the PA, I would make sure to put Bettman's word into paper ! He says he got no intention to contract teams , put it as he can't contract teams without the approval of the NHLPA.

That's why so far the NHL owners can't be trust so far. More appearance than substance.

 

[X0ssbar]

The problem with this is that the owners are pretty shady about declaring all of their revenue. If they were more forthright about their finances I could see such a system working.

That argument doesn't fly anymore when this was included in the owner's last proposal:

"JOINT AUDIT CONTROLS FOR CALCULATION OF CLUB REVENUES

-- Each year's accounting will be performed by an independent accounting firm jointly selected by the NHL and the NHLPA.

-- Mandatory $2 million fine and loss of 1st Round Draft Pick for first Club offense for failure to disclose required financial information.

-- Mandatory $5 million fine and loss of three (3) 1st Round Draft Picks for second Club offense for failure to disclosed required financial information. "

Link

 

[chiavsfan]

Plus if the books are so "shady" as many pro-PA people say. Why, when the PA was given the option to look at the books, THEY DECLINED!!!

Plus they based the cheap smoke screen 24% rollback on the SAME "shady books"

Sorry, the argument dosen't fly

 

[dakota]

The problem with this is that the owners are pretty shady about declaring all of their revenue. If they were more forthright about their finances I could see such a system working.

If they agreee to a fixed cap now, no linkage... and revenues will go up eventually... What would the PA do in 10 years when they are negotiating the next CBA? they will cry that they want linkage...

 

[RangerBoy]

I think the better deal is to have a cap linked to revenues , not one locked in at say 42 for 6 years

if rev's go up , the cap goes up , rev's go down , the cap goes down .

this would put the burden of loss on both players and owners and when rev's go up they both share in the payday

Only problem with the linkage is the prices for tickets will not decrease.If the league revenue decreases and the cap decreases,some of these big market teams which will make a ton of money.Their salary expenses decrease but the ticket revenue money increases.The NHL will not have revenue sharing based on regular season revenue.I don't think James Dolan is going to lower ticket prices or any other big market team will lower prices.The overall league revenue may decrease but some teams revenue will not decrease.Really looking forward to the $31 million cap.

 

[Icey]

This is one of the main reasons why the owners got more pressure. Sure some of them lose less $$$$ by not playing but it's only an annual budget while the risk of losing more than that is very critical.

For the Phoenix example, they just got a new arena, it's not only about losing money this year. It affects the future of this franchise. Also they got plans to build condos & mall around the arena to create something that his OUTSIDE of hockey revenue but so related.

Except the Phoenix Coyotes do not own the arena, the city of Glendale owns the arena. As for the building around it, that was scheduled to start over 6 months ago and nothing........... But how are condos built around the arena going to benefit the Phoenix Coyotes? They may attend a game or two, but thats about it. The Coyotes screwed the city of Phoenix with this new arena and they are about to reap the benefits.

If the Coyotes were concerned with revenues they probably wouldn't have spent 106% of their revenues last season on player costs. Great Management.

And the longer teams like Phoenix sit out, the less chance they have of success. Their fan base was badly damaged with the new arena by the location and now the lock-out, many will not return, especially now that there is a hockey team playing at America West Arena. Teams are losing corporate sponsorship and that will be damaging for many years to come and that will be the deciding factor if they survive or not, not a cap.

 

[X0ssbar]

Only problem with the linkage is the prices for tickets will not decrease.If the league revenue decreases and the cap decreases,some of these big market teams which will make a ton of money.Their salary expenses decrease but the ticket revenue money increases.The NHL will not have revenue sharing based on regular season revenue.I don't think James Dolan is going to lower ticket prices or any other big market team will lower prices.The overall league revenue may decrease but some teams revenue will not decrease.Really looking forward to the $31 million cap.

What exactly is so wrong about the owners wanting to make money? The NHL is a business, the owners are in it to make money - not break even and certainly not to lose dough.

I am certainly not going to apologize to the players if I were an owner and we are offering them 55% of total revenues plus revenue sharing - all of which could be negotiated upwards if the players would buy into this system.

 

[Schlep Rock]

What was NHL revenue last year? $2.2 billion?

53% of that is $38.9 million per team in a salary cap.

Of that $2.2 billion, approximately $120 million of that was from the TV deal which is now gone so, now we're down to $2.08 billion in revenues and now down to a $36.7 hard cap.

I'll estimate the NHL's revenue stream will see a 3.5% hit for every month the lockout goes on (approximately 5 months for a 17.5% drop) which will be good for about a $364 million dollar hit bringing the revenues to $1.72 billion. We are now down to (using 53% again) a $30.32 salary cap/team.

While it might make sense that this is what needs to happen for the game to survive, there is no way (unless it is phased in over an extended period of time), this can work. Don't make an arguement back it only losers the NHL average salary to $1.32/player, the average number now is greatly inflated by guys like Pavel Bure, etc. The median NHL salary last year was $850,000.

A hard cap of $45 million for the first 3 years of the deal, then phasing in a 57% of revenues cap could work. It would give hockey 3 years to recover and hope to be brought to levels of last year (approximately $2.2 billion). At $2.2, 57% will equal a $41.8 hard cap with a floor (hopefuly) at 42% ($30.8).

 

[gottaluvdabolts]

What exactly is so wrong about the owners wanting to make money? The NHL is a business, the owners are in it to make money - not break even and certainly not to lose dough.

I am certainly not going to apologize to the players if I were an owner and we are offering them 55% of total revenues plus revenue sharing - all of which could be negotiated upwards if the players would buy into this system.

A lot of business owners are willing to lose money in the short term if it means greater profits long term. That is why a team owner may spend more than he is bringing in. Because He believes that spending more will give his team a better chance of winning and if he is successful, then the profits will increase down the road.

the problem is that it is not always successful. players get injured, or don't play up to expectations, or another team gets better too and beats you in the first round of the playoffs. That is part of owning a business. There is always a risk of losing money. It takes most private businesses several years of operation to see a profit.

The difference is that while the teams in the NHL compete against each other on the ice, they still need each other. If one hockey team fails, it hurts the league (unlike the private sector when you are made stronger when a competitor fails).

I don't think either side of this mess is looking at what will make the league stronger. both sides want what will be good for them right now. a strong league will bennefit both sides long term

 

[rekrul]

more from the 'fantasy camp' : http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3385130

"Being part of an ownership team now, Gretzky's comments on the lockout tended to side with the league. He said he'd "absolutely" like to see a salary cap instituted in the NHL. He said his days of being a player are in the past and how he's management.

"That's the business side of it. You always take care of the business side of it," Gretzky said. "That's always been part of professional sports. At this point in time, obviously I'm on the other side. That doesn't make my friendship or relationship with current players any different."


Ok the Great One gets ungagged is this one last card to play by Bettman and Co? me thinks Gretz might be getting played if the NHL does not throw the players something to build on. and I'm mostly with the owners but their proposals have been just plain silly.

 

[chiavsfan]

.....with the owners but their proposals have been just plain silly.

But not nearly as silly, and a LOT less of a joke than the PA's one, count them ONE proposal.

 

[rekrul]

But not nearly as silly, and a LOT less of a joke than the PA's one, count them ONE proposal.

when you hear about the 'dispersal draft' to relocate overcompensated players or setting a cap that slides down if revenues fall which everyone knows they will they are tring to squezze the players not get to an agreement.

NHLPA responces like the other teenager by just staring them down in the hallway, no talkie just lookie- sad

 

[chiavsfan]

I am not saying that the owners proposals were the greatest end-all be-all of everything good...and yes there was quite a bit of Idiocy there.

I am just saying the PA is doing all of the complaining, and all they talk about is their 24 percent rollback. They can come up with something new once in awhile, it might help

 

[waffledave]

According to Team 990 in Montreal a DDD is comming today or tommorow.

They are never right though.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Plus they based the cheap smoke screen 24% rollback on the SAME "shady books"

Sorry, the argument dosen't fly

Speaking of not flying, mr. cement shoes, what are you getting at?
Are you suggesting that the players are using different books when it comes to their salaries?
Because, uh, that makes no sense.

 

[chiavsfan]

Not suggesting that at all...I am saying if they are as shady as the PA suggests, why would they decline the opportunity to look at them? It makes no sense