Lanny MacDonald*
Guest
BlackRedGold said:Why can't the NHL implement extensive revenue sharing, since that's something they don't need to bargain with the PA, and then later on, if revenue sharing doesn't work, try to implement their cap?
And what revenue sharing model do you suggest? There is no huge national broadcast revenue so it isn't like you are going to see a lot of funds switch hands there. The big miney in the game is in gate and concessions. It doesn't make sense to share those revenues as the teams that work hard to attract their local fans get shafted in the long run. It would actually hurt some of those teams that are trying to survive like Edmonton by making them share their hard earned gate revenues with those that aren't getting it done like Carolina. Revenue sharing is a great concept if you have a huge pool of revenue to share from.
Next question is why should the owners be expected to share their revenue, and distribute the wealth earned from the risk they take in owning teams, employing people and building arenas, and the players assume no responsibility in sharing revenue. Every successful business that has fought off hard times has done so through a partnership between ownership and the employees. The players are employees. If they feel that there is so much money to be made in the game, why doesn't Pronger, Forsberg, Jagr, Guerin, Holik, etc. get together and buy a franchise and pay the players what THEY feel is fair? Because they know there is not the cash cow in ownership because of the risk associated. The place to be is on the ice with a guaranteed contract.