Fast forward to January 2006 and todays NHL offer will seem generous

[AM]

what a joke

The longer this crap goes on, the more team's values will lower. Columbus which is worth 147 Million today will be lucky to stay above the expansion price of 80 million.

The new building in Pittsburgh will become an after thought since there is not a NBA team in Pittsburgh

Teams like Nashville and Tampa will lose the fans they aquired during their playoff runs.

Fox Sports will unless its settled before fall of 2006, will start showing the arena football league again.

Ya the players will lose more than the owners....ya right


This is the reason why there are 2 camps for the owners, and eventually the camp with the big market teams will start pushing the issue

I still think its "cute" when "fans" of hockey are sticking up for billionaire owners who could care LESS if you ever see another professional hockey game again

Yah these people dont care if they have product to sell!

They just like buying multimillion dollar properties to send them to bankruptcy court.

 

[GKJ]

Fact is, the owners have no reason to go back till they can make money and market their teams. The only way that happens is if they get cost certainty and competative balance.

ITs too bad for the players that they are against that.

Since you blindly put your faith in the hand of an incompitent person, perhaps you can explain why, essentially not playing hockey, and not being able to run a business properly, and needing to be stopped from spending is good for the game? I'll take the lesser of two evils.

 

[The Fuhr*]

Yah these people dont care if they have product to sell!

They just like buying multimillion dollar properties to send them to bankruptcy court.

:lol

 

[Jaded-Fan]

The longer this crap goes on, the more team's values will lower. Columbus which is worth 147 Million today will be lucky to stay above the expansion price of 80 million.

The new building in Pittsburgh will become an after thought since there is not a NBA team in Pittsburgh

Teams like Nashville and Tampa will lose the fans they aquired during their playoff runs.

Fox Sports will unless its settled before fall of 2006, will start showing the arena football league again.

Ya the players will lose more than the owners....ya right


This is the reason why there are 2 camps for the owners, and eventually the camp with the big market teams will start pushing the issue

I still think its "cute" when "fans" of hockey are sticking up for billionaire owners who could care LESS if you ever see another professional hockey game again

If the league gets a hard cap, why would franchise values do anything but climb through the roof? Is that not incentive enough for owners to hold out, even for a couple of years?

And owners can not split into camps, Bettman took that away from them with the powers granted him in these negotiations.

 

[GKJ]

Someone mentioned FOX Sports. One of their guys was on the FAN the other day, he said when the NHL comes back they have to be ready to do some things differently or else when it's time they're going to drop their regional coverage, they probably are prepared to do it for the 2005-06 season. They will already have trouble scheduling They'll go to arena football, and college basketball and NBA basketball. You cannot lose the only regional cable network that carries sports. Can't happen. This will have nothing to do with the players it will have to do with the business and the on-ice product and FOX knows what people want to see, they have the NFL, they have the BCS now, they have half of NASCAR. Just like ESPN did a favor bringing back the NHL (the NHL needs ESPN more than ESPN needs the NHL), FOX would be doing the same thing. FOX does not need the NHL. They make enough off of their NFL deal that they could put on paid programming coulpled with the NBA on their sports networks all day and still turn a profit. A TV deal has nothing to do with a collective bargaining agreement either.

 

[rwilson99]

Why? If we put league revenues at $2.1 Billion, then 60% of revenue translates to $42 Mil per team for player costs. This leaves $28 Mil for the owners to pay 100+ team employees (including coaches and GM's), MARKETING COSTS, Referees, Rink Rentals/upkeep, Travel Expenses, etc. Some of these costs are ESSENTIAL to a team functioning (and I would guess teams non-player payrolls exceed $10 Mil dollars), and some like Marketing are CRITICAL to the long term viability of the league (and future increases of revenues to the players). .

Forget the rinks... off ice officials... GM salaries etc.

Got any idea what the interest is on an arena that costs $200 Million?

Probably between 16-20 Million dollars, before the team pays a dime towards the principal.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

As an aside, in Pittsburgh they have been showing 'Classic' penguins rebroadcasts once a week. So there remains a pretty good market it would seem despite the strike/lockout or they would not be taking broadcast time with those.

 

[rekrul]

Someone mentioned FOX Sports. One of their guys was on the FAN the other day, he said when the NHL comes back they have to be ready to do some things differently or else when it's time they're going to drop their regional coverage, they probably are prepared to do it for the 2005-06 season. They will already have trouble scheduling They'll go to arena football, and college basketball and NBA basketball. You cannot lose the only regional cable network that carries sports. Can't happen. This will have nothing to do with the players it will have to do with the business and the on-ice product and FOX knows what people want to see, they have the NFL, they have the BCS now, they have half of NASCAR. Just like ESPN did a favor bringing back the NHL (the NHL needs ESPN more than ESPN needs the NHL), FOX would be doing the same thing. FOX does not need the NHL. They make enough off of their NFL deal that they could put on paid programming coulpled with the NBA on their sports networks all day and still turn a profit. A TV deal has nothing to do with a collective bargaining agreement either.

actually FOX like the rest of the networks are taking a good size hit from the price they paid in the NFL deal, but even NBC will conceed its worth the risk because its still a great rating draw plus the demographic is pretty solid. the NFL is simply the best place to draw the male 18-45 crowd to preview their programming ( how many times do I see their new doctor show ).

cable sports are tiny compared to even regular shows like spongebob and trading spaces but at least the NBA can draw a desent audiance. once espn was desparte for live programming now taped poker shows, which are dirt cheap draw about the same as even most college BB games. I doubt fox sports gives a rats behind if the NHL goes away or not.

 

[rekrul]

though if you looking at the big picture ( huge pun ) HDTV programming is the latest draw to cable tv, and comcast and or direct tv wants you to be interested in HDTV programming, to a lesser exptent FOX too so instead of watching say yet another lousy card game show what about a sport in HD it like way cool, try this one out its called "hockey" kiddies... anyway HD was bettman's technologies to help the game to bad we never got there...

 

[buce]

The players are the product. Damn straight a player can and should have a say in what kind of system they play under.

Wrong! The game is the product. The players are the employees...and employees don't dictate the business. hey if the players don't like the deal...look somewhere else. But if they do decide to go somewhere else, they better not start complaining about replacement players taking the owners offer.

 

[leaflover]

They could conceivably wait 2 or 3 years or longer if necessary and know that once the NHL starts up again they will recover their franchise values and their losses in a very short time.

They wait two or three years to ice a product again and there wont be anybody losing money anymore,or playing or watching or drafting or doing anything else because the NHL would be dead dead dead.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

They wait two or three years to ice a product again and there wont be anybody losing money anymore,or playing or watching or drafting or doing anything else because the NHL would be dead dead dead.

Why, why, why? How much further could the market shrink?

 

[Russian Fan]

even NBC will conceed its worth the risk because its still a great rating draw plus the demographic is pretty solid.

How much they paid : 0$

How much they will give to the NHL : they will split the profit if they have any.

Worth the risk when it cost you less than producing Big Brother 24.

 

[GKJ]

Forget the rinks... off ice officials... GM salaries etc.

Got any idea what the interest is on an arena that costs $200 Million?

Probably between 16-20 Million dollars, before the team pays a dime towards the principal.

Also, does anyone have any idea to have an empty arena sit there?

 

[Da Game]

Forget the rinks... off ice officials... GM salaries etc.

Got any idea what the interest is on an arena that costs $200 Million?

Probably between 16-20 Million dollars, before the team pays a dime towards the principal.

Let's not kid ourselves. The Arena's hold shows, and lease the building out for concerts, or the Arena might also have a Basketball team that plays in it which by itself, pays for that.

 

[shakes]

Wrong! The game is the product. The players are the employees...and employees don't dictate the business. hey if the players don't like the deal...look somewhere else. But if they do decide to go somewhere else, they better not start complaining about replacement players taking the owners offer.

Really.. so you would spend 80 - 200 bucks to watch my 11 year old son play hockey then? Face it, the players aren't line workers at GM (no disrespect to line workers at GM) that can be replaced. You aren't paying an exorbitant amount of money to watch the game, you are paying to watch the game be played at a very high level. The players are the product.

 

[AM]

whats the first step in starting a company?

Since you blindly put your faith in the hand of an incompitent person, perhaps you can explain why, essentially not playing hockey, and not being able to run a business properly, and needing to be stopped from spending is good for the game? I'll take the lesser of two evils.

Make a business proposal!

1/2 of that proposal is costs.

The NHL was only half of a business, after the new CBA they'll be a whole business.

 

[Da Game]

Really.. so you would spend 80 - 200 bucks to watch my 11 year old son play hockey then? Face it, the players aren't line workers at GM (no disrespect to line workers at GM) that can be replaced. You aren't paying an exorbitant amount of money to watch the game, you are paying to watch the game be played at a very high level. The players are the product.

Good post.

 

[CarlRacki]

Let's not kid ourselves. The Arena's hold shows, and lease the building out for concerts, or the Arena might also have a Basketball team that plays in it which by itself, pays for that.

Exactly. These buildings aren't sitting dark generating zero revenue because there's a lockout.
Some questions the doomsayers might want to ask themselves:

1. How many NHL teams own 100 percent of an arena?
2. How many have a $200 million mortgage on said areana?
3. How many have zero revenue pouring into said arena when hockey is not being played?

 

[GKJ]

SOme of these arenas don't generate nearly as much revenue as they would from a hockey game pending on what exactly is going on.

 

[Trottier]

Find it amazing that the economic PhDs on this thread are absolutely, positively certain that the players "MUST!" accept the owner's offer "RIGHT NOW!"...or else they are "DOOMED!"

These same folks apparently double as psychics, too. As in: laying out the scenario that will unfold over the next 6, 12, 24 months.

Very instructive for this reader and I'm sure we are all grateful for this insight, these "facts". Who needs to follow the negotiations? We already know who is "WRONG!" and how it will turn out, thanks to these highly-confident clairvoyants.

Of course, one saw the same declarations back in September-December, with predictions that the players would cave in/be doomed by January. But never mind....

Most fascinating is that "THE IDIOT!" Bob Goodenow and the "GREEDY!" union members whom he represents have not dialed into the sage advice of HF's self-assured economic geniuses/fortune tellers.

I mean, it's sooooo plain for all to see, isn't it?

 

[GKJ]

Find it amazing that the economic PhDs on this thread are absolutely, positively certain that the players "MUST!" accept the owner's offer "RIGHT NOW!"...or else they are "DOOMED!"

These same folks apparently double as psychics, too. As in: laying out the scenario that will unfold over the next 6, 12, 24 months.

Very instructive for this reader and I'm sure we are all grateful for this insight, these "facts". Who needs to follow the negotiations? We already know who is "WRONG!" and how it will turn out, thanks to these highly-confident clairvoyants.

Of course, one saw the same declarations back in September-December, with predictions that the players would cave in/be doomed by January. But never mind....

Most fascinating is that "the idiot" Bob Goodenow and the "greedy" union members whom he represents have not dialed into the sage advice of HF's self-assured economic geniuses/fortune tellers.

I mean, it's sooooo plain for all to see, isn't it?

 

[ScottyBowman]

Find it amazing that the economic PhDs on this thread are absolutely, positively certain that the players "MUST!" accept the owner's offer "RIGHT NOW!"...or else they are "DOOMED!"

These same folks apparently double as psychics, too. As in: laying out the scenario that will unfold over the next 6, 12, 24 months.

Very instructive for this reader and I'm sure we are all grateful for this insight, these "facts". Who needs to follow the negotiations? We already know who is "WRONG!" and how it will turn out, thanks to these highly-confident clairvoyants.

Of course, one saw the same declarations back in September-December, with predictions that the players would cave in/be doomed by January. But never mind....

Most fascinating is that "the idiot" Bob Goodenow and the "greedy" union members whom he represents have not dialed into the sage advice of HF's self-assured economic geniuses/fortune tellers.

I mean, it's sooooo plain for all to see, isn't it?

Great post. You can tell when people are completely brainwashed when they keep using the word "greedy" over and over to describe the players. To me it looks like desperation from them. They can't live without hockey so they are making crazy ultimatums to the players. They live their life through the players and it shows.

 

[417]

Find it amazing that the economic PhDs on this thread are absolutely, positively certain that the players "MUST!" accept the owner's offer "RIGHT NOW!"...or else they are "DOOMED!"

These same folks apparently double as psychics, too. As in: laying out the scenario that will unfold over the next 6, 12, 24 months.

Very instructive for this reader and I'm sure we are all grateful for this insight, these "facts". Who needs to follow the negotiations? We already know who is "WRONG!" and how it will turn out, thanks to these highly-confident clairvoyants.

Of course, one saw the same declarations back in September-December, with predictions that the players would cave in/be doomed by January. But never mind....

Most fascinating is that "THE IDIOT!" Bob Goodenow and the "GREEDY!" union members whom he represents have not dialed into the sage advice of HF's self-assured economic geniuses/fortune tellers.

I mean, it's sooooo plain for all to see, isn't it?

I don't think they'll be DOOMED if they don't accept the offer, I just think they'll go BROKE

and being BROKE and having a heavy car/house note to pay, ain't funny, it's not like these guys can jsut pick up a paper route to tide them over in the summer

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Absent a divided ownership, such as baseball has, what leverage does the NHLPA have at all? The owners can outlast the players, can even afford to lose two years. That is half the average players' career. How much howling will you hear from the players' side if this goes into next year? Do you genuinely believe that much pressure is on the owners who if they stick can recoup that money and then some in subsequent years through increased franchise values once they have cost certainty built in? How much leverage is on Owners who make their real money elsewhere?

Get real.