Bettman to get bonus if he puts a salary cap?

[me2]

$1m? Bettman gets what, $3m/y? Goodenow gets something similar (he'll make a killing by the end of the contract, no salary during the lockout or not). A bonus of $1m isn't much of bonus. $1m would barely feed Modano's dog for a year.

 

[djhn579]

Wasn't there a thread similar to this about a month ago?

Anyway, what does that matter? If he was hired specifically to get a cap, why shouldn't he have some kind of bonus contingent on him getting that? No matter how you look at it, the owners had to hire him, had to tell him that they want a cap, and had to agree to give him a bonus if he does get one.

I'm also fairly certain that if he was not doing what the owners hired him to do, he would be fired. He can't do anything without a majority of owners supporting him, including getting them to agree that he only needs 8 votes to turn down a CBA that he does not approve...

 

[nyr7andcounting]

Well, that's not something to worry about either. Bettman got an extension to 2007 before this whole thing began. He's pretty safe.

That was more for PR than anything. The owners wanted to show faith in their guy and didn't want a lame duck to lead them through this process.

Bottom line is, if the league wins a cap, like the one they are trying to get, Bettman will be able to name his price and stay as long as he wants.

 

[leaflover]

Of course, the average joe in NHL offices is useless to the league during a lockout. Bettman is still needed.

Is he?
Looks to me like you could have wrote "hard cap or nothing" on a rock,set it in Bettmans chair and accomplished exactly what the man himself has.

 

[ChemiseBleuHonnete]

Dany Dubé, a very reliable source, said that Bettman's bonus is 20 millions if he gets a hard cap.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Dany Dubé, a very reliable source, said that Bettman's bonus is 20 millions if he gets a hard cap.

thats more like it.

if its true, there will be a cap. who here would pass up 20m when all you have to do to earn it is to simply not change your mind.

dr

 

[me2]

thats more like it.

if its true, there will be a cap. who here would pass up 20m when all you have to do to earn it is to simply not change your mind.

dr

The players because they've got integrity. :lol

 

[grego]

I have never loved Bettman that much, but at the same time I don't consider him worse then Goodenow.

If anything I would say his current bargaining is just pulling a page out of the Book of Goodenow Bargaining.

Essentially to sit there and say no and wait for ever for the other side to break is all Goodenow ever does. So now we see Bettman doing it back on him, interesting to know how it turns out.

I really can not think of any other way that you can negotiate with a guy like Goodenow on the other side then to appear stubborn and like you won't move at all.

The NHL looks mean with all it proposes but it is often because the union refuses the concept. The could have come back with an insanely high cap and negotiated from there. But I have never heard even a rumour that they tried that back at the NHL.

 

[Epsilon]

$1m? Bettman gets what, $3m/y? Goodenow gets something similar (he'll make a killing by the end of the contract, no salary during the lockout or not). A bonus of $1m isn't much of bonus. $1m would barely feed Modano's dog for a year.

Goodenow's salary, if I remember correctly, is determined by the average NHL salary each season.

 

[djhn579]

Goodenow's salary, if I remember correctly, is determined by the average NHL salary each season.

There was an article a while ago that stated Goodenow would not be accepting his $3M salary while the players were locked out.

 

[barnburner]

wrong...bob goodenow is working for free during the lockout. he gave up his salary and is getting NOTHING

He may not be drawing his salary - DURING the lockout - but does anyone think that at the end of the process, that he will end up losing any money??

 

[vanlady]

Goodenow's salary, if I remember correctly, is determined by the average NHL salary each season.

You are correct there was a business article about 2 years ago that discussed NHL management salaries. Bob Goodenows salary is the only one in the NHL that is performanced bases, the more money the players make the more he makes, that is his job, like it or not, and he gets paid accordingly. This is also why he doesn't get paid during the lockout.

Gary Bettman on the other hand when he extended his contract was awarded 6 million a year. However, Bettman's pay is not performance based.

So the question is, why if the management of teams and the coaches are the ones that control the business and marketing focus, why are there paycheques not performance bases. If the goal is to drive revenue is it not stronger business sense to tie there paycheques directly to revenue?

An example of this is Darren Entwistle of Telus, his pay is reported to be 300,000 but he takes home millions after bonuses. All bonuses are based on corportate performance.

 

[ChemiseBleuHonnete]

If Bettman earns 6 millions a year, then he's the most overpaid single person in the nhl.

 

[wazee]

Gary Bettman on the other hand when he extended his contract was awarded 6 million a year. However, Bettman's pay is not performance based.

So the question is, why if the management of teams and the coaches are the ones that control the business and marketing focus, why are there paycheques not performance bases. If the goal is to drive revenue is it not stronger business sense to tie there paycheques directly to revenue?

An example of this is Darren Entwistle of Telus, his pay is reported to be 300,000 but he takes home millions after bonuses. All bonuses are based on corportate performance.

Well...lets see. This thread is all about Bettman getting a bonus IF he negotiates a salary cap. That sounds performance based to me.

GMs and coaches are fired every year because they do not produce winning teams. Perhaps you would like to tell the fired ones their salary isn't performance based.

The idea that most management salaries are not performance based is laughable.

 

[LordHelmet]

Anyway, what does that matter? If he was hired specifically to get a cap, why shouldn't he have some kind of bonus contingent on him getting that?

Because it would create a situation where he could/would put his personal interests over the well-being of the league.

For instance, he could manufacture the need for a salary cap by putting forward a virtually non-existant marketing campaign, ignoring obstruction, and expanding into markets that display little support for the game - all while continually claiming that the game is in better shape than ever.

Now we all know that he'd never do any of that, but a sizeable bonus might make it tempting..

 

[vanlady]

Well...lets see. This thread is all about Bettman getting a bonus IF he negotiates a salary cap. That sounds performance based to me.

GMs and coaches are fired every year because they do not produce winning teams. Perhaps you would like to tell the fired ones their salary isn't performance based.

The idea that most management salaries are not performance based is laughable.

To say that Bettman getting a base salary of 6 million and a bonus of 1 million is performanced based is laughable. If his salary was performanced based his entire pay structure minus a very minimul base salary would all be directly linked to revenue. No different than commision sales.

No coach has a performanced based salary, as per the definition that any businessman would use. Getting fired for lack of production is not a performance based salary.

My guess you have never owned a business right?

 

[djhn579]

Because it would create a situation where he could/would put his personal interests over the well-being of the league.

For instance, he could manufacture the need for a salary cap by putting forward a virtually non-existant marketing campaign, ignoring obstruction, and expanding into markets that display little support for the game - all while continually claiming that the game is in better shape than ever.

Now we all know that he'd never do any of that, but a sizeable bonus might make it tempting..

And the owners that hired him would still need to agree to go along with this, or are the owners collectively to ignorant to figure out if Bettman is doing something against their wishes?

 

[wazee]

To say that Bettman getting a base salary of 6 million and a bonus of 1 million is performanced based is laughable. If his salary was performanced based his entire pay structure minus a very minimul base salary would all be directly linked to revenue. No different than commision sales.

No coach has a performanced based salary, as per the definition that any businessman would use. Getting fired for lack of production is not a performance based salary.

My guess you have never owned a business right?

You are using a very narrow definition of 'performance based'. My examples do not fit your definition. But they do fit the larger concept of a person being rewarded based on his performance.

And I fail to see what my 'owning a business' has to do with this discussion so I dismiss it as a transparent and rather silly attempt to make yourself feel more mportant. I can understand why you would feel the need to do so.

 

[vanlady]

You are using a very narrow definition of 'performance based'. My examples do not fit your definition. But they do fit the larger concept of a person being rewarded based on his performance.

And I fail to see what my 'owning a business' has to do with this discussion so I dismiss it as a transparent and rather silly attempt to make yourself feel more mportant. I can understand why you would feel the need to do so.

Anyone who has owned a business will tell you that fiscal rewards for performance are the standard in any perfomance base salary.

Getting fired is not a salary. Performance based yes, but not a performance based salary.

Example,your salary is 100,000 your boss tells you that you must make 20 million in sales or get fired, job performance criteria. Or your paid 10,000 your boss tells you that you make 20 million in sales and he gives you a 10% bonus, performance based salary. Huge difference.

 

[wazee]

Anyone who has owned a business will tell you that fiscal rewards for performance are the standard in any perfomance base salary.

Getting fired is not a salary. Performance based yes, but not a performance based salary.

Example,your salary is 100,000 your boss tells you that you must make 20 million in sales or get fired, job performance criteria. Or your paid 10,000 your boss tells you that you make 20 million in sales and he gives you a 10% bonus, performance based salary. Huge difference.

Makes a huge difference to the people involved, but, conceptually, both outcomes are performance based. As is Bettman's bonus and coaches and GM getting fired. If you care to read my earlier post, you will notice I used the phase 'performance based' not 'performance based salaries'...but obviously, the ability to read carefully and think conceptually are not your stronger suits. Nor, for that matter, is your knowledge of the Colorado Avalanche, the Minnesota North Stars/Dallas Stars, and the Pittsburgh Steelers.

 

[kerrly]

If Bettman earns 6 millions a year, then he's the most overpaid single person in the nhl.

Actually he's married, so that isn't true.

 

[me2]

Gary Bettman on the other hand when he extended his contract was awarded 6 million a year. However, Bettman's pay is not performance based.

Goodenow is reported to have signed a six-year $20 million contract extension in 2002. I've also seen $15m and others.
http://wzzm13.com/sports/hockeysports_article.aspx?storyid=33109


I've seen reports of Bettman's salary but never as high as that
"Bettman's salary was not made public, but insiders tell The Eagle-Tribune his deal is worth $18 million, an average of $3 million a year gradually scaled on annual increases over six years"

 

[Wetcoaster]

there is no defense for the players position on a cap-

There are any number of reasons, some systemic and others relating to the specific facts and history of the NHL collective bargaining history and the issue of exactly how much money the owners have made or lost. They have yet to open the books for the teams and related corporate entities.

Every study of salary caps I have seen conclude they will not accomplish what Bettman claims and will have numerous unintended consequences.

See Post #14 in the following thread for details:
http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=126587

Also see post #95 in the following thread:
http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=126524&page=7&pp=15

Defense is not the problem - what is missing is a rational reason why Bettman's version of a hard cap is the only solution.

 

[Wetcoaster]

$1m? Bettman gets what, $3m/y? Goodenow gets something similar (he'll make a killing by the end of the contract, no salary during the lockout or not). A bonus of $1m isn't much of bonus. $1m would barely feed Modano's dog for a year.

Bettman's salary has been reported as $6 million per year.

Gooodeneow earns about half that amount.

Based on performance over the last decade those figures should be reversed.

 

[me2]

Bettman's salary has been reported as $6 million per year.

Gooodeneow earns about half that amount.

Based on performance over the last decade those figures should be reversed.

Got any links to the $6m figure?