Potential CBA negotiation issues (was: Is a lockout actually inevitable?)

[Butch 19]

For every lockout I withhold my money for a year.

Fans have the power to stop this nonsense, they just refuse to exercise it.

Truth.

No more for me, I will be exercising it next time

errr..... would you guys be protesting owners or the NHLPA?

 

[jj cale]

errr..... would you guys be protesting owners or the NHLPA?

For me both.

A sport can't have a lockout every single time a new C.B.A comes up, they do it this time and I am out with the N.H.L for at least a year and will keep my hockey watching to International tournaments.

 

[YEM]

For every lockout I withhold my money for a year.

Fans have the power to stop this nonsense, they just refuse to exercise it.

Yep
I dropped my season ticket package after the last one, a great decision

 

[Tawnos]

For every lockout I withhold my money for a year.

Fans have the power to stop this nonsense, they just refuse to exercise it.

The league gambled that most fans don’t get upset by this stuff as much as you do and they were right. I think there’s a fan that sits between the casual fan and the diehard fan... these are the people who whose main teams are in other sports. That type of fan isn’t bothered by lockouts all that much. And when you combine them with the casual fans and corporate sponsors, they make up the majority of revenue generation in all sports. The diehards like us, on the other hand, don’t all even want to protest with our wallets. Some are just happy to have it come back. For me, I just think boycotting the league doesn’t hurt anyone but myself, considering what I just laid out.

 

[Tawnos]

Yep
I dropped my season ticket package after the last one, a great decision

Most likely, your team didn’t even miss you.

 

[YEM]

Most likely, your team didn’t even miss you.

Probably so
But I still get a half-dozen calls a year from the ticket reps so maybe not

 

[Sensung]

errr..... would you guys be protesting owners or the NHLPA?

Both

The first time the fans empty the arena for a season following a lockout is the last time we have a lockout.

 

[Bookie21]

The lockouts have actually created more fans. They were necessary in bringing in cost certainty for the owners and hard caps for the players. It allowed for small market teams to come back in the fold like Winnipeg. The competitive balance that the cap has brought in has definitely made it easier for teams to attract new fans

 

[mouser]

I did not know that the escrow accrues interest, Mouser. Can you quote the section of the CBA which affirms this? Thanks. I always enjoy the input from people more knowledgeable than myself.

It's mentioned in 50.4(d)(iv)(D)(vi) "The funds deposited into the Escrow Account shall be invested by the Escrow Agent in an interest-bearing account selected within the sole discretion of the Escrow Agent." The escrow agent is JP Morgan.

There's also empirical evidence to support this as I've seen reports show the escrow refund %'s for some years with both the pre and post interest % figures. In my experience the reported escrow refund %'s in the media are almost always after interest has been included.

 

[Sensung]

The league gambled that most fans don’t get upset by this stuff as much as you do and they were right. I think there’s a fan that sits between the casual fan and the diehard fan... these are the people who whose main teams are in other sports. That type of fan isn’t bothered by lockouts all that much. And when you combine them with the casual fans and corporate sponsors, they make up the majority of revenue generation in all sports. The diehards like us, on the other hand, don’t all even want to protest with our wallets. Some are just happy to have it come back. For me, I just think boycotting the league doesn’t hurt anyone but myself, considering what I just laid out.

How exactly does it hurt me to have more money in my wallet and cheer on my team from home on TV?

I know the league has correctly predicted that the fans will continue to bend over. Doesn't change the fact that the 1st time fans stop handing over their money after a lockout, we won't have anymore lockouts.

 

[Tawnos]

How exactly does it hurt me to have more money in my wallet and cheer on my team from home on TV?

I know the league has correctly predicted that the fans will continue to bend over. Doesn't change the fact that the 1st time fans stop handing over their money after a lockout, we won't have anymore lockouts.

I just explained why that will never happen.

Watching at home is giving a team your money (unless you solely stream illegally). It’s not really a boycott.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

The lockouts have actually created more fans. They were necessary in bringing in cost certainty for the owners and hard caps for the players. It allowed for small market teams to come back in the fold like Winnipeg. The competitive balance that the cap has brought in has definitely made it easier for teams to attract new fans

The 2005 lockout was necessary. The 2013 one was not.

 

[Sensung]

I just explained why that will never happen.

Watching at home is giving a team your money (unless you solely stream illegally). It’s not really a boycott.

Stating why it never has happened in the past does not preclude the possibility that it will in the future.

If fans refused to buy tickets or merchandise it would have a huge and immediate impact on revenues. TV ratings might rise, but TV deals are already in place so the increase in viewership would not equate to more revenue in the short term.

As both owners and players are tied to year over year revenue, the fans COULD choose to hit them where it counts by not going to the arena or purchasing merchandise.

The odds of a "fans union" getting enough support to create a league wide boycott are astronomical, but if they could get a significant number of people involved, then just the threat of the movement spreading could give both sides reason to come to an agreement without further stoppages.

 

[Tawnos]

Stating why it never has happened in the past does not preclude the possibility that it will in the future.

If fans refused to buy tickets or merchandise it would have a huge and immediate impact on revenues. TV ratings might rise, but TV deals are already in place so the increase in viewership would not equate to more revenue in the short term.

As both owners and players are tied to year over year revenue, the fans COULD choose to hit them where it counts by not going to the arena or purchasing merchandise.

The odds of a "fans union" getting enough support to create a league wide boycott are astronomical, but if they could get a significant number of people involved, then just the threat of the movement spreading could give both sides reason to come to an agreement without further stoppages.

I would say that what happened after losing an entire season and another partial season is a fairly good predictor of what will happen in the future. The fact is that there are too many entertainment options for fans to become angry over missing time. This isn’t the 90s anymore.

 

[rojac]

For every lockout I withhold my money for a year.

Fans have the power to stop this nonsense, they just refuse to exercise it.

I would think the only fans who would be really upset over a lockout would be pathetic hockey-obsessed losers with no or few other interests in their life. Most people would just spend the time they normally use to follow hockey on their other interests.

 

[Tawnos]

I would think the only fans who would be really upset over a lockout would be pathetic hockey-obsessed losers with no or few other interests in their life. Most people would just spend the time they normally use to follow hockey on their other interests.

I wouldn’t call them losers, but on that last sentence... exactly. And then pick up hockey as soon as it was back. Without blinking.

 

[Warden of the North]

I hate that its a foregone conclusion that its going to happen.

 

[karnige]

I have a feeling they will work it out this time. revenue and attendance are healthy

 

[Voight]

 

[Nalens Oga]

I have a feeling they will work it out this time. revenue and attendance are healthy

It was healthy last time too in 2012 especially considering the economy was recovering from a really bad recession, owners just wanted more $$$.

Same shit this time, they'll want a bigger slice of the pie, players will try to keep their half, we'll lose at least half a season.

 

[Sabretooth]

The players have been maneuvering to "lockout proof" their contracts with signing bonuses in the lockout year. I wonder how that will play into the negotiations. How do signing bonuses work with escrow and HRR anyways. Is some of the signing bonus held in escrow as a %? If a full season is cancelled does a player have to give back their full signing bonus if there is no HRR? Is the signing bonus not even paid out without an active CBA in place?

 

[Tawnos]

It was healthy last time too in 2012 especially considering the economy was recovering from a really bad recession, owners just wanted more $$$.

Same **** this time, they'll want a bigger slice of the pie, players will try to keep their half, we'll lose at least half a season.

Don't think so. To date, the league seems content with the 50/50 split. They even offered to extend this particular deal not a year ago.

 

[No Fun Shogun]

I would think the only fans who would be really upset over a lockout would be pathetic hockey-obsessed losers with no or few other interests in their life. Most people would just spend the time they normally use to follow hockey on their other interests.

This is one of the most inane hot takes I've ever read, especially given the fact that there are plenty that would think that posting thousands of messages on an internet forum was a waste of time and therefore we as a whole are pathetic with few other interests.

Spoiler alert, if you like something, you have every right to be upset when business decisions that are completely out of your control prevent you from enjoying it, be that in sports lockouts or developers refusing to port a game you like to your console of choice or region or really just about anything. And as a consumer, if you fundamentally don't like the business decisions of the people behind that, your only really avenue to display your disdain is by withholding money.

There's a reason why Major League Baseball went from being the most unstable labor situation in major pro sports to going decades without even remotely sniffing a lockout, and that's because their fans had a backbone and told owners and players to **** off after the last strike, and both sides have been scared to their wits at attempting to do so again. Meanwhile, hockey fans just keep coming back and there's no reason to think that owners are remotely afraid of fan backlash.

 

[S E P H]

Bill Daly saying that Seattle will not play until 2021 is a really bad sign for a lockout in 2020

Them delaying it has nothing to do with a lockout actually happening and more about them being on the side of caution. Nice fearmongering post though.

I don't really see major issues which should trigger a half-season or even full-season lockout for that matter. Escrow, other money, contract bonuses, and player safety along with other topics should be able to be ironed out quite quickly if both sides do not act like impertinent children....oh wait they have...expect a two season lockout putting the game back into the dark ages.

(Semi-)Jokes aside, it's not like they have to majorly restructure the league to introduce a hard-cap or anything similar. It isn't like the NFL who the players union are rumoured about wanting guaranteed money (now that's as much of a lockout ability than anything in the NHL/NHLPA's agenda).

 

[ottawah]

The players have been maneuvering to "lockout proof" their contracts with signing bonuses in the lockout year. I wonder how that will play into the negotiations. How do signing bonuses work with escrow and HRR anyways. Is some of the signing bonus held in escrow as a %? If a full season is cancelled does a player have to give back their full signing bonus if there is no HRR? Is the signing bonus not even paid out without an active CBA in place?

This is actually one of the interesting aspects of the next lockout. Assuming it does not go for a full year (which no one can see happening), these signing bonus will serve to only massively increase escrow. So yes those with the signing bonuses will be giving a lot back, but the 95% of players without those bonuses will be giving back the same percentage without the luxury of the signing bonus. So some players will get a full years salary, and some will be getting a half years salary, but they pay back the same percentage. If those 95% of players realized that they are the ones paying the signing bonuses in this instance (as every dollar spent above the cap comes from the players escrow, not the owners pockets), we might see a different tack in negotiations. But as with the last two lockouts, its mostly about protecting the elite players than the average player.