NHL's projections of the NBC deal

[John Flyers Fan]

Why is it that the PA set thinks its okay for businesses and corporations to lose money on sports? I don't understand this mentality. Should these ventures not be self sustaining or cease to exist? Shouldn't the creation of environment where all can make money (player, owner, sponsor, broadcaster, etc.) be the prime directive of the governing bodies? This whole attitude of "its okay that the players demand more money than the industry can support because its okay that the businesses bleed huge amounts of money, its a tax write off" drives me up the wall. Guess who gets it in the keister when the "tax write off" takes effect? All of us. The goal should be to make these enterprises self sustaining or run them out of business once and for all. Millionaires should not be getting a handout from the general public. Corporations should not be getting a handout either. This mentality is what is killing our society. I wish people would wake up!

I didn't suggest that networks lose millions of dollars on NHL hockey, and lose money becuase it doesn't make good business sense.

My post was directly related to the NFL and the NFL only. Sometimes it actually makes sense to LOSE money. Networks realize that they lose tens of millions a year on the NFL, but they feel they make it up and more in regards of lead-ins to prime-time programming, as well as using the NFL games as huge promotional tools for the netowrk.

This has nothing to do with the PA ... and if you could take your antiPA blinders off for a second or two you'd see that.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

All employees are dispensable

No they're not.

 

[Hunter74]

This has nothing to do with the PA ... and if you could take your antiPA blinders off for a second or two you'd see that.

The Iconoclast imo is a rather unbiased poster in regards to the CBA. Not his fault if what he says makes sense which goes against the PA. If the PA made sense Im sure they would have more people on there side.

Of course both sides do have there blind following but I do not think The Iconoclast is one of them.

 

[SuperUnknown]

I didn't suggest that networks lose millions of dollars on NHL hockey, and lose money becuase it doesn't make good business sense.

My post was directly related to the NFL and the NFL only. Sometimes it actually makes sense to LOSE money. Networks realize that they lose tens of millions a year on the NFL, but they feel they make it up and more in regards of lead-ins to prime-time programming, as well as using the NFL games as huge promotional tools for the netowrk.

This has nothing to do with the PA ... and if you could take your antiPA blinders off for a second or two you'd see that.

In the NFL that works only becauce football is a big draw. You can't apply the same to the NHL since it's a terrible draw (on TV).

 

[Weary]

The Iconoclast imo is a rather unbiased poster in regards to the CBA. Not his fault if what he says makes sense which goes against the PA. If the PA made sense Im sure they would have more people on there side.

No. Appeal to Popularity is a logical fallacy.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

In the NFL that works only becauce football is a big draw. You can't apply the same to the NHL since it's a terrible draw (on TV).

Couldn't agree more. Again I wasn't advocating a netowrk lose millions on the NHL, but was pointing out the fact that netowrks do lose millions on the NFL.

 

[davemess]

Gotta think it wasnt an easy sell for the NHL when the TV contracts where being negotiated while the whole world knew a CBA meltdown was inevitable.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

I didn't suggest that networks lose millions of dollars on NHL hockey, and lose money becuase it doesn't make good business sense.

It seems to me like you did.

"Networks routinely lose money on sports programming."

Then you followed it up with the NFL cavet, but you did start out by saying that networks routinely lose money on sports programming like it is something expected and something acceptable. I strongly disagree with this and stated so. I also stated that many of the Pro-PA people seem to think that its okay the teams are forced to bleed themselves dry to pay a bunch of players that are grossly over-paid. Your comment seemed to support that stance, which you have supported in the past as well. I just wanted to point out how this mindset needs to change and change damn fast or the game we love will not survive this lockout and the NHL AND the NHL players will not be back.

 

[nyrmessier011]

Only difference is the owners dont need money... the players do.

Face it, NHL teams are a luxury to have for any owner, a leisure to call their own. Name an owner who sees the NHL has his BIGGEST cash crop.

You'll also see an owner who's out of business

I think that ideal is a huge misconception of the lockout brought to you by the owners and Bettmans rhetoric. No owner owns a team for the year to year profits. Instead, they buy the franchise as investment. For example, Anaheim just sold for 75M to a rich owner. If you knew him personally, I can alsmot guarantee he did not buy the Ducks at 75M to make the few million a year he is going to be capable of making at the max. Instead, he brought the franchise so hopefully in 7 years it will be worth 200M and he can make a cool 125M in 7 years.

It is not being recongnized by anyone in the media or on HF that if the owners don't open up with real players in October, there values will be shot to hell even worse then they are now. Franchise values are #1 to an owner. As long as they can prevent from losing money year to year (either of the last proposals by either side does this), chances are with some changes to the game, franchise values will increase. Staying out of the red and growing your franchise value is the name of the game. Not even a rich owner can afford to see his re-sell value drop from $250M to 55M and never recover.

Opening the arenas without the real players in October is almost a guaranteed way for the owners to never even regain the value they purchased their franchises for, let alone grow there value down the road. More pressure is on the owners and they will make a huge mistake if this replacement thing isn't a bluff.

 

[labatt50]

No they're not.

They are and if they aren't your business is in big trouble. I am not saying you won't feel the effect if certain employees leave, but as a business owner you have to make all employess dispensible.. If not, they can hold you hostage so to speak, and you will have the "inmates running the assylum" snydrom.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

They are and if they aren't your business is in big trouble. I am not saying you won't feel the effect if certain employees leave, but as a business owner you have to make all employess dispensible.. If not, they can hold you hostage so to speak, and you will have the "inmates running the assylum" snydrom.

In some industries/businesses employees are very dispensible. That isn't the case in all businesses/industries.

If the polayers were all replaceble we would have had hockey last year .... and buildings would be filled with "replacement hockey" for the exact same ticket prices as they were getting for the current players.

The entertainment/sports world is different there is a big difference between watching: Springsteen, U2, Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Derek Jeter, Brett Favre, LeBron James, Joe Sakic et. al. than Clay Aiken, Reuben Sttudard, Frank Stallone, Danny Baldwin, Anderson Machado, Jesse Palmer, Willie Green and Boyd Kane and their like.

 

[RangerBoy]

NHL Network, the actual channel was supposed to be carried by Directv a couple seasons back (free with NHL CI), but for some reason it never showed up.

BTW, how much money did the NHL get from network TV in US 10 years ago? Zero. When it first did get back on Network TV, the NHL BOUGHT the time, IE paid programming.

Bettman has gotten better TV deals than any of the primates that came before him. There are many areas to bash Bettman this isn't one of them.

The NHL did not buy time on FOX or on ABC.The NHL received rights fees from those networks.The ABC money was included with the ESPN deal since they are both owned by Disney

The current NBC deal is for 7 NHL regular season games(weekends)and up to 11 playoff games.In this TV deal,the NHL did not receive any rights fee but they are 50/50 partners with NBC on the profits

 

[labatt50]

[QUOTE=John Flyers Fan]In some industries/businesses employees are very dispensible. That isn't the case in all businesses/industries.

I agree, but in most industries/businesses employees are dispensible. All to different degrees.


The entertainment/sports world is different there is a big difference between watching: Springsteen, U2, Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Derek Jeter, Brett Favre, LeBron James, Joe Sakic et. al. than Clay Aiken, Reuben Sttudard, Frank Stallone, Danny Baldwin, Anderson Machado, Jesse Palmer, Willie Green and Boyd Kane and their like.[/QUOTE]

These are not good comparisions. You can't compare Springsteen, U2, Cruise and Hanks to Jeter, Favre, James and Sakic because the entertainers are entities themselves, the athletes are part of a team. You lose one, you will still survive. In a different fashion maybe, but no one player is above the team.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

These are not good comparisions. You can't compare Springsteen, U2, Cruise and Hanks to Jeter, Favre, James and Sakic because the entertainers are entities themselves, the athletes are part of a team. You lose one, you will still survive. In a different fashion maybe, but no one player is above the team.

We're not talking about losing one player. The Flyers and/or the NHL would be fine if it was just Keith Primeau not playing.

Problem is that it isn't just Primeau, it's all the best players There is a reason why it's cheaper to watch the AHL, AAA baseball or high school football than the NHL, MLB and NFL.

You're gettting a premium product ... a Chevy and a BMW can both get you from home to work, one cost $20K and another $40K .... there is a difference.

 

[mackdogs*]

In some industries/businesses employees are very dispensible. That isn't the case in all businesses/industries.

When Gretzky was traded from the Oilers to the Kings did it destroy the Oilers franchise? No. Conclusion - all players are dispensable.

If the polayers were all replaceble we would have had hockey last year .... and buildings would be filled with "replacement hockey" for the exact same ticket prices as they were getting for the current players.

Really? They could have just snapped their fingers and brought in replacement players? Lol, ya sure.
Next year we'll test your theory because there will be replacement player hockey.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

I think that ideal is a huge misconception of the lockout brought to you by the owners and Bettmans rhetoric. No owner owns a team for the year to year profits. Instead, they buy the franchise as investment. For example, Anaheim just sold for 75M to a rich owner. If you knew him personally, I can alsmot guarantee he did not buy the Ducks at 75M to make the few million a year he is going to be capable of making at the max. Instead, he brought the franchise so hopefully in 7 years it will be worth 200M and he can make a cool 125M in 7 years.

Seems like you've bought Goodenow's rhetoric as well. What you say is very much true, that franchise value is the big pay-off, but that value only appreciates as the franchise proves it can make money. Without a positive income stream the franchise value does not appreciate. That is the double edged sword that an owner faces and this is why Anaheim sold for $75 million to the group that owns the Arrowhead Pond (they had to buy or risk losing their only tennant, payed a chunck so as not to assume the team debt, so that value is a little misconstrued).

Something you also don't take into consideration is operational loses during the years the owner has control of the team. So the Disney sells the Ducks for $75 million and assumes all losses and debt the team has encured to that point. YOU see a $25 million profit based on simple math (team sold at $75 million less the original $50 million expansion fee = $25 million profit). What you fail to acknowledge is the operational losses and debt the team has taken over the past decade. That $25 million drofit is long gone and will be used to cover the debit the team is in from those operating losses. You miss that real basic point.

It is not being recongnized by anyone in the media or on HF that if the owners don't open up with real players in October, there values will be shot to hell even worse then they are now. Franchise values are #1 to an owner. As long as they can prevent from losing money year to year (either of the last proposals by either side does this), chances are with some changes to the game, franchise values will increase. Staying out of the red and growing your franchise value is the name of the game. Not even a rich owner can afford to see his re-sell value drop from $250M to 55M and never recover.

More PA rhetoric. You say on one hand that the owners are in for the long haul then assume that the owners are going to sell out immediately after the CBA is signed. If they wanted a quick profit they would have sold the whole league and washed their hands of the mess. So employing who ever they do is going to have zero impact on franchise values until a long term ternd can be established. All the owners know this and are in it for the long haul (or so they say) so what happen in the next five to ten years will mark the value of the franchises, not what happens in the first few weeks after the next move.

Opening the arenas without the real players in October is almost a guaranteed way for the owners to never even regain the value they purchased their franchises for, let alone grow there value down the road. More pressure is on the owners and they will make a huge mistake if this replacement thing isn't a bluff.

"The Real Players". Come on. As has been proven in every single league on this planet, "The Real Players" are completely replaceable and are no where near the level that the "fans" have tried to build them up to. If anything their lack of performance has been proof positive that they are grossly over-paid and are replaceable by players from numerous sources. I suspect that with the lack of systems that will be in place coming out of the gate that there will be an increase in scoring as more mistakes are made, strictly from a systematic approach.

"The Real Players" better get something through their heads and get it through damn fast. They were no bodies at one time as well, being an unknown to the vast majority of fans out there. Only through the adoration of the local fans and the loyalty that the local fans showed towards them did they become a "star". Without that adminarion they are nothing but a guy who can skate and shoot a puck. In other words, completely replaceable. The "fans" will decide who the stars are and will elevate them to the same levels the other "stars" are at right now. The "fans" will make or break the "replacements", and based on what we have seen to date, the fans hunger for the game will likely make the "replacements" a viable solution in many cities making the decision of "the real players" pretty easy if they want to maintain their jobs.

 

[Mess]

Guess what Sparky, the NHL has openned the books for the NHLPA and the NHLPA has refused to believe them. The champion of the NHLPA set around here, Wetcoaster, acknowledged this fact repeatedly, that the NHL and the NHLPA did indeed go over the books of four teams in detail and the NHLPA was not happy because they did not like the fact that "hockey revenues" (in the NHLPA's eyes anyways) were not calculated the same way by each franchise. They wanted to see all sunsidiary income included which the franchises in question said no, which is correct and would likely stand a legal challenge, which is why the NHLPA backed away from any further exploration. The NHLPA knows that the less they admit they know, the better their chances of a legal challenge are. This is why the NHLPA refuses to wish to explore the books any further than they have. Their claims hold more weight when they have ignorance backing them up. If they can claim they don't know how hockey related revenues are arrived at, then they can easily claim that the NHL is not on the up and up about sharing that information. Its a negotiation ploy that has back fired.

Its also in the NHLPA best interest if its the Courts that are asking for an independent audit of the Owners books , because then the Owners have no way of saying No to anyone ...

The audit team will make its assessment and come back with a ruling .. At that time the NHLPA will have its trust answer firmly in hand and someone else has done the work and this Court Audit will hold up in any court and the Levitt report will just be considered a REVIEW not AUDIT and not be able to be used by the Owners to prove REVENUE or TEAM LOSSES any longer in the Future..

All the NHLPA has to do is wait until LINKAGE is the only option on the table and the NHL imposes its own CBA and opens the doors to replacements and then the fireworks will fly as fast as the Auditors Calculators to determine which side is right.

Even if the NHLPA did their own review it would be a useless expense to incur as the courts would also not except their findings and do their own again anyways.

 

[SuperUnknown]

Its also in the NHLPA best interest if its the Courts that are asking for an independent audit of the Owners books , because then the Owners have no way of saying No to anyone ...

The audit team will make its assessment and come back with a ruling .. At that time the NHLPA will have its trust answer firmly in hand and someone else has done the work and this Court Audit will hold up in any court and the Levitt report will just be considered a REVIEW not AUDIT and not be able to be used by the Owners to prove REVENUE or TEAM LOSSES any longer in the Future..

All the NHLPA has to do is wait until LINKAGE is the only option on the table and the NHL imposes its own CBA and opens the doors to replacements and then the fireworks will fly as fast as the Auditors Calculators to determine which side is right.

Even if the NHLPA did their own review it would be a useless expense to incur as the courts would also not except their findings and do their own again anyways.

I doubt the NHLPA will ask for the court to audit all the teams. This would take a long time (3-6 months) and would delay a ruling while replacement players would be playing. Also, the court would probably accept each team's audited statements (and not redo an audit). Since the teams may have used different methods based on their situation, the court would probably ask for a review where methods would be standardized.

Anyway, like I said, I would really be surprised if it did get there.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Its also in the NHLPA best interest if its the Courts that are asking for an independent audit of the Owners books , because then the Owners have no way of saying No to anyone ...

And how is it going to look when it was the NHLPA that disengaged on the auditting of the books? They were the ones that walked away, not the NHL. Sorry, that is going to come into play once they get into the legal battle and the court is not just going to make the owners open the books because the players say so. The NHL has tried repeatedly to open up the books, but the PA has walked away because the numbers didn't fit the targets they were hoping for. The court is going to have an interesting decision to make there, and I think that one will go the NHL's way. The NHL offered repeatedly. The NHLPA refused to look.

The audit team will make its assessment and come back with a ruling .. At that time the NHLPA will have its trust answer firmly in hand and someone else has done the work and this Court Audit will hold up in any court and the Levitt report will just be considered a REVIEW not AUDIT and not be able to be used by the Owners to prove REVENUE or TEAM LOSSES any longer in the Future..

Wow, thanks for the statement of the obvious. But at this point, its the best we have to work with, is the most reputable, and one that the PA just happen to submit their only proposal to meet those numbers. Do we think another auditor will find anything else? Possibly, but not likely.

All the NHLPA has to do is wait until LINKAGE is the only option on the table and the NHL imposes its own CBA and opens the doors to replacements and then the fireworks will fly as fast as the Auditors Calculators to determine which side is right.

Even if the NHLPA did their own review it would be a useless expense to incur as the courts would also not except their findings and do their own again anyways.

So this is the NHLPA strategy? Piss away $2 billion in salaries and hope that an audit goes your way so you will get a better deal than one imposed and accepted by non-unionized employees? Wow. If that's what they have to hold on to, they're dead. They better hope and pray that the replacements flop because if there is any level of success the union and every player involved will be screwed and their futures unsecured.

 

[Trizent]

Bob Goodenow is no idiot. Although he hides it very well.

 

[Mess]

I doubt the NHLPA will ask for the court to audit all the teams. This would take a long time (3-6 months) and would delay a ruling while replacement players would be playing. Also, the court would probably accept each team's audited statements (and not redo an audit). Since the teams may have used different methods based on their situation, the court would probably ask for a review where methods would be standardized.

Anyway, like I said, I would really be surprised if it did get there.

It has to get there .. If the NHL wants a CBA with a Hard Cap based on Revenue and Linkage based on defining what makes up Revenue and how it is recorded and audited .. Then there is no way around this even if it takes 3-6 months to do .. The Courts will never rule on a Valid CBA unless it is 100% sure the Financial figures are correct and reported similarly for 30 teams..

Not sure how replacement players effects this .. We are talking long term CBA issues here and not present day 3 - 6 month Work Stoppage disputes and tactics used .. IMO ..

 

[SuperUnknown]

It has to get there .. If the NHL wants a CBA with a Hard Cap based on Revenue and Linkage based on defining what makes up Revenue and how it is recorded and audited .. Then there is no way around this even if it takes 3-6 months to do .. The Courts will never rule on a Valid CBA unless it is 100% sure the Financial figures are correct and reported similarly for 30 teams..

Not sure how replacement players effects this .. We are talking long term CBA issues here and not present day 3 - 6 month Work Stoppage disputes and tactics used .. IMO ..

If the NHLPA's plan is to wait a full season of replacements for a ruling based on an audit, then they're even bigger fools than I thought. If the replacement players have any success, how long will the NHLPA stick together? The union will crumble if this is going to happen.

As to the offer with linkage, the revenues can be counted and calculated after a percentage has been set. Regardless of what it's been set at, if the NHL is recognized as bargaining in good faith, that % will be upheld.

Anyway, Bob Goodenow has said publicly that he knows the numbers and that they are good and that there isn't any trust issue. Looks to me like he won't dispute the numbers when it gets to the court, but rather that the NHL isn't negociating in good faith.

 

[Mess]

And how is it going to look when it was the NHLPA that disengaged on the auditting of the books? They were the ones that walked away, not the NHL. Sorry, that is going to come into play once they get into the legal battle and the court is not just going to make the owners open the books because the players say so. The NHL has tried repeatedly to open up the books, but the PA has walked away because the numbers didn't fit the targets they were hoping for. The court is going to have an interesting decision to make there, and I think that one will go the NHL's way. The NHL offered repeatedly. The NHLPA refused to look.

Judging by your response you are clearly not an accountant .. If the NHL wants to implement its CBA and base it on its Financial figures then the burden of proof is in their hands to prove the figures are correct .. The NHLPA will simply file a claim disputing the Levitt report and say we did an independent review of 4 teams books and our findings and results are different. At which time the court will order its own audit and we move forward.

The bigger problem is the system in which its reported .. The Owners have their books closed and own many Companies at the same time .. An simple accountant can make a entry in the books one day when the NHLPA is reviewing the books and then the next day transfer Costs or Expense or Revenue to a connected company .. The NHLPA would have to review the book every day ..

I think the Court case will rule that all revenue collected by the 30 independent NHL terms must be reported to and information stored by a 3rd Party Accounting Firm .. So that at any time the NHLPA or NHL can request that info to determine if the future Cap and Revenue in this quarter or year is going up or down .. This is the only way to guarantee trust and accuracy .. The NHLPA will never tie itself to the honour of the 30 owners telling them what the figures are and they are not in the accounting business to constantly have to be concerned if Revenue is being reported correctly, as it effects their livelihood and wages ..

You either have to have a CBA with Un-linked Hard Cap not based on Revenue figures and linkage .. for the owners reporting of revenue to not be an issue. The minute the NHL wants linkage a 3rd party has to be involved for the protection on both sides .. and if the NHL owners are reporting correctly then they would have no problem with a 3rd party maintaining the ACTUAL LEAGUE REVENUE...

 

[Mess]

If the NHLPA's plan is to wait a full season of replacements for a ruling based on an audit, then they're even bigger fools than I thought. If the replacement players have any success, how long will the NHLPA stick together? The union will crumble if this is going to happen.

As to the offer with linkage, the revenues can be counted and calculated after a percentage has been set. Regardless of what it's been set at, if the NHL is recognized as bargaining in good faith, that % will be upheld.

Anyway, Bob Goodenow has said publicly that he knows the numbers and that they are good and that there isn't any trust issue. Looks to me like he won't dispute the numbers when it gets to the court, but rather that the NHL isn't negociating in good faith.

Bob Goodenow has never said anything close to that claim of yours .. You will need to provide a link in order to show that claim, I certainly have never heard it before and the fact that the NHLPA did a review of 4 owners books and found misreported Revenue would suggest that your claim is totally false ..

Also the court audit of the books will continue despite what is happening .. If the owners implement their own CBA and players decide to cross a picket line ..that does not stop the Court audit from not continuing .. If 6 months down the road the Courts find that the CBA in place is not based on accurate figures it will have it removed and that is the whole purpose of the claim by the NHLPA in the first place .. In baseball the court re-installed the old expired CBA until and new one could be negotiated between the 2 sides .. The NHL can't just do what it wants and not be accountable for the accuracy of the information it intends to use as its CBA ..

 

[SuperUnknown]

Judging by your response you are clearly not an accountant .. If the NHL wants to implement its CBA and base it on its Financial figures then the burden of proof is in their hands to prove the figures are correct .. The NHLPA will simply file a claim disputing the Levitt report and say we did an independent review of 4 teams books and our findings and results are different. At which time the court will order its own audit and we move forward.

The bigger problem is the system in which its reported .. The Owners have their books closed and own many Companies at the same time .. An simple accountant can make a entry in the books one day when the NHLPA is reviewing the books and then the next day transfer Costs or Expense or Revenue to a connected company .. The NHLPA would have to review the book every day ..

I think the Court case will rule that all revenue collected by the 30 independent NHL terms must be reported to and information stored by a 3rd Party Accounting Firm .. So that at any time the NHLPA or NHL can request that info to determine if the future Cap and Revenue in this quarter or year is going up or down .. This is the only way to guarantee trust and accuracy .. The NHLPA will never tie itself to the honour of the 30 owners telling them what the figures are and they are not in the accounting business to constantly have to be concerned if Revenue is being reported correctly, as it effects their livelihood and wages ..

You either have to have a CBA with Un-linked Hard Cap not based on Revenue figures and linkage .. for the owners reporting of revenue to not be an issue. The minute the NHL wants linkage a 3rd party has to be involved for the protection on both sides .. and if the NHL owners are reporting correctly then they would have no problem with a 3rd party maintaining the ACTUAL LEAGUE REVENUE...

I hope you're not an accountant either because what you describe isn't accounting, it's fraud...

An accountant can't "transfer" costs or expenses. Also, since the decisions you're talking about would involve looking at past financial data, the "accountants" as you say (aka: fraudsters) couldn't just change the numbers, they would be there already.

As to the "3rd party", well that was in the NHL's last proposal. You're actually validating the NHL's offer, which would mean that it was done in good faith, which in turn would mean it would validate the impasse.