thinkwild said:
Daly was asked about his comments that Cablevision runs the Rangers at a loss to keep its share value high elsewhere. I never said anything like that Daly says. "What I said is, owners in the National Hockey League make decisions on players and payroll for various reasons"
Ha ha Bill. You're such a terrible liar. He really seemed to be getting peeved with the impudence of these broadcasters questioning him non these things.
Both Saskins and Daly seemed to be sweating it out. Do you know what he said on ESPN radio,
Then he says regarding Rangers UROs. "It doesn't just capture what the New York Rangers want to report as revenues, it doesn't."
Well Bill that seems to be the problem now doesnt it. It doesnt count the revenues the way NYR and Philadelphia value them themselves. Its phony. Artificial. No possible way to base an agreement on revenues on when the owners actions dont even agree with those numbers.
It's not phony. Not in the slightest. What it means is that whatever cablevision reports as the revenues for the Rangers, aren't necessarily what the league reports, and there are reasons for that. Cablevision has options to move revenue around throughout the various aspects of their company to balance the books. The URO's however, are not for tax (or tax-evading) purposes. They are to get a handle on the league's finances. Of course these numbers are going to be different... they are for different purposes.
I don't understand your argument though... the league URO's are probably a lot better for the players than the numbers cablevision uses for the Rangers...
Regarding Levitt, Daly says, "And verified the fact that-took his own independent look at this business and said, "what's a fair view of this business?" And he said that the unified report of operations captures it."
Levitts job was to determine whether the UROs fairly represented the business. Levitt said it did. IF we got the big 8 (are there still 8?) to prepare independent versions of UROs, would they all be different and also found a fair way of capturing the business of hockey by Levitt? Did Levitt say the UROs are the only possible way of preparing UROs to capture the businees, or just the ones that best make owners lots of money now.
Levitt's job was as follows:
A. Whether the instructions governing the report of financial information requested by the League's URO adequately and appropriately account for and captures the relevant revenues and expenses associated with operating a professional hockey franchise in the NHL.
B. Whether, based on the use of such verification and other procedures as I deemed appropriate, the member clubs of the NHL have accurately reported the financial information requested by the League's UROs.
C. Whether the treatment of affiliated or related company income in the URO is: (a) reasonable for the purposes of measuring the relevant revenues and expenses associated with operating a professional hockey franchise in the NHL; (b) similar to the treatment of affiliated or related company income in the calculation of Basketball Related Income ("BRI"), as that term is defined in the NBA/NBPA collective bargaining agreement; and (c) similar to the treatment of affiliated or related company income in the calculation of Defined Gross Revenue ("DGR"), as that term is defined in the NFL/NFLPA collective bargaining agreement.
D. Whether the current relationship between League-wide player costs and League-wide revenues is consistent with reasonable and sound business practices in this industry.
His conclusion was that:
A. The instructions governing the report of financial information by the teams through the URO, adequately and appropriately account for and capture all revenues and expenses associated with operating a professional hockey franchise in the NHL.
B. Based upon the verification and other procedures as set forth below, it is my opinion that the teams of the NHL have, in all material respects, accurately reported the financial information requested by the League's UROs. The combined URO presents a comprehensive and accurate statement, in all material respects, of the combined financial results of the entire League, its teams and affiliated and related-parties with respect to all hockey and hockey-related businesses of the League and its member teams. For the 2002-2003 season, the NHL has reported combined operating revenues of $1.996 billion and a combined operating loss of $273 million before accounting for interest and depreciation expenses.
C. The treatment of affiliated or related-party income in the combined URO reasonably measures the relevant revenues and expenses associated with operating a professional hockey franchise in the NHL in all material respects and is similar to the agreed-upon measures used in the NBA collective bargaining agreement in calculating the related-party revenues that it shares with the players.
D. The current relationship between League-wide player costs and League-wide revenues is inconsistent with reasonable and sound business practices. Player costs of $1.494 billion or 75% of revenues substantially exceed such relationships in both the NBA and the NFL as those relationships are set forth in their collective bargaining agreements
You asked and answered your own question...
Is it fair? Yes
Is it the only way? No... but it's fair, what is the problem?
Here was a great Daly quote. Bob asks if Daly would just tell the players, yes we made mistakes, its our fault, we need your help.
Daly:
Well, I'm not saying any-I mean, I don't think it's true to say nobody-I mean, everybody makes mistakes at times. So I'm not going to say that the league office is not guilty of having made mistakes, I'm not going to say our owners are not guilty of having made mistakes, and I'm not going to say our general managers at times are not guilty of making mistakes. But the problem is, we're a league that's lost almost $500 million in the last 2 years and $1.8 billion over the term of this collective bargaining agreement, and that's a joint problem, that's all of our problems, and we should work together to try to solve it.
Cant say it can you Bill? We should work together to try and solve it? lol
So you are mad he didn't roast his bosses for making mistakes? How many times have you pointed out the errors your boss made?
He acknowledged that there were mistakes made by members, which we know... but he also points out that while there were mistakes, there was also a system in place that didn't allow for either the correction of the mistakes, or have preventative measures in place to keep those mistakes from compounding.
And as for the Atlanta owners comments, he says he has only been here a few months and been to one board meeting. Gary has talked to him and he now regrets what he said. Daly actually tries to discredit him. I thought that was pretty funny. Uncalled for, unauthorized and dont represent our views. He is a junior owner with no attendance, a rookie, and doesnt really know whats going on. Presumably he is just going to follow the rich owners who have the real power.
You mean like the PA "getting to" guys like Madden and Thomas? What's the problem? If the players are retracting statements all the time, why can't the league? The Atlanta owner, who isn't even a majority owner, so he doesn't even speak for his team, may feel replacement players are the way to go, but it doesn't mean the board of governors feels that way, which is probably why he was chastized for it. It's not that he is expected to toe the company line, but if the NHL board of governors has decided that they will not be using replacement players, he is certainly out of line hinting that is what they will do.
We want to negotiate a deal witjh the players association, not break the union. Thats why we're here on TV refusing to bargain. The sooner they accept our way, the sooner we can negotiate
Or the sooner the players realize that the current system doesn't work, or that their salaries eat too much of league revenues, the sooner they can negotiate. Hell up until last night, when Saskins finally admitted the old system didn't work, most of the players were talking about how fine the system was... The owners aren't expecting the players to work for peanuts, and the PA has finally acknowleged that the old system was seriously flawed.
Daly: They dont want to believe our numbers thats their problem, not ours.
Little hot under the collar bill?
Why shouldn't he be? The PA does nothing but accuse the owners of lying about revenues, while at the same time refusing every single offer the owners have made to look at the books. Why do you think they hired Levitt? It's because they were sick and tired of the PA whining about them lying about it, so they hired an impartial 3rd party (like most companies do), to go and do it, and naturally the players don't beleive it either.
Daly suggests if the union want to stand behind their numbers, thats something were willing to do. Its all fine and well I guess to say lowering the rookie cap, changing bonuses and instituting revenue sharing through payroll taxes will saves so much money, but prove it. Hold back part of your salaries, and if we foolishly overspend thiniing we can get it back from the escrow fund, we can recover our losses.
Stupid I know, but maybe its a path.
One intersting thing from Daly was when he suggested the NFL didnt really break the union. Well they did, but then the NFLPA won anti trust suits which left the owners in so much liability they agreed to a cap.
Ah yes... that horrible cap thing... the one the players agreed to despite having the owners by their short curleys. What a terrible thing! So terrible, that despite having all kinds of leverage, the players still willingly accepted it!
Is this his plan? Turn the league into a minor league, lower its revenues, lose all the court cases, and then say well you have to negoitiate with us now?
Turn it into a minor league?
Newsflash, it is a minor league!
Bill Daly: Well, there's a lot of reasonable ways of addressing the revenue disparity and we think we have better ways of addressing them
Well lets hear them Bill. IF there lots of ways, why is it cap or the highway?
When the players give assurances that their proposal will save the money it proposes, maybe the league will put forth better ideas... until then, neither side has put forth a very good offer for both sides... and I don't expect that to change for a while... it's called negotiating.
Well why wouldnt they? Its like he really doesnt know. Hockeys revenue have grown faster than any other league, EVEN THE MAJOR ONES!
Hey, I don't know either... except that it means a little less money than they are making right now. And that's the issue. The players don't want to have their salaries tied to revenues, because their salaries out-grow revenues by a substantial amount, meaning they would take a hit financially. But it means a more profitable league, where the opportunity to make more money is sitting right there.
You dont want to be a major league any more Bill? This is good marketing? At least we know from the horses mouth, or one side of the horse anyway, its not a revenue generation problem. We fans can stop with ways of trying to make them more money.
They aren't major league... they haven't been for a long time. Much like Basketball in the early 80's, hockey is struggling. Of course it isn't a revenue generationg problem... it's a $2+ bil industry here... which is enough for 750 players to make enough money to have successful financial careers, but at the same time, they shouldn't be in the same pay scale as players in leagues with 4 and 5 times the amount of revenue. It's common sense. The league, outside of a T.V. deal, has essentially maxed out it's incoming revenue potential. Ticket prices in most cities are at the level where they maximize revenue. But there is still enough money to keep 750 players, and 30 owners very happy.
I love this answer, what a lawyer. Gord asks if it 6 teams losing 75% of the money.
Ha ha ha So lets get Dalys math down. 75% of the $224mil in losses DO conme from 6 teams, and $130mil from the other 14 teams. Let me get out my calculator. Oops,.my fault, losses are back up to $300mil. this week. Because in this case we arent looking at a league overall number but the individual losses. We then take those individual losses to come up with a general league wide number that also applies to the teams making money.
Unless of course he simply made a mistake, and gave the $130 mil as the 2 year total (which in most cases, he was referring to the past 2 years as opposed to just the last year). A fairly simple error, which can be taken either way.
Bill Daly: I'm not saying anything-I'm saying we're going to negotiate until we have an agreement
Saskin calls it : Concessionary bargaining. An interesting term. Does Daly agree?
Bob asked Sakin: are fans wrong?
Saskin cant say yes. But thats the answer. We havent been provided with accurate enough information to be right
When Gord reminded how the public rose up in arms against the idea of tax money going to millionaire hockey players. It was going to billionaire owners.
In order to subsidize the money the difference between Canadian and American dollars, which went to the players.
Here was an impressive statemtnt from Saskin:
Certainly I would invest my money in the Edmonton Oilers. Especially with cdn dollar now.
Of course he would... but lets look at that... with a $0.75 Canadian dollar, and the Oilers getting swept in the 1st round, the team will make about $3mil profit on a $32mil payroll.
Guess what? The dollar isn't always at $0.75...
Yankess and Red Sox an example of something not working. Yet, what are the ratings for this series.
It's playoffs... with the 2 most popular teams... that's like if Detroit and Philly or Detroit and Toronto were in the finals, the ratings would go through the roof.
Why even bother with the 10 teams in the American League who are simply nothing more than doormats, only there to inflate the win total of about 4 or 5 teams. How about Oakland, who have done nothing put develop players for other teams.
How sick would Oakland be with Giambi and Tejada still in the lineup? They barely missed this past season, despite once again losing a top player.
Well hey, if you convert everyone to a Yankee or Red Sox fan, you are fine, but I don't think that will happen. Do you think baseball is healthy because the Bosox and Yanks are in the ALCS and are getting good ratings? How about the ratings from the World Series 2 years ago?
Any sport gets good ratings when you put the 2 most popular teams against one another...
WHy should Cinderalla win against Det. Bob? Is it to be expected to happen often? IS the run itself not success enough for a cinderella?
Why should Detroit be one of the select teams who can keep their players? Why should Detroit have so much power, that when they negotiate a contract, it effects 29 other franchises, some of who so much that they then need to rely on being a cinderella team to have any kind of success.
There is nothing wrong with having a cinderella story... but it's the same thing over and over again. You have your top 6, who are always at the top (and who always will be based on the current market), and then you have your Sabres, or Ducks, or Caps who have a nice run, then are gone from the upper echelon.
If we didnt have an impotent bunch of mindless sycophants in the NHL Fan association, season ticket holders would start demanding their money back now in an organized display of power. And then make them beg us to renew. Obviously our demands will be for lower ticket prices too when they get their heads out of their butts.
How on earth are fans going to get lower ticket prices when revenues are maxed and the players won't accept a paycut?
Not very bright are you? I mean in order for the owners to lower ticket prices, and acheive the cost certainty they are looking for, the players would have to take a big time dip in salaries... it ain't gonna happen.
The numbers they are throwing out now are based on current revenues, and if current revenues drop, guess what?
The players will have to take that financial hit!
