Let's play the negotiation game - some of us can be Bob and some of us can be Gary

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by eye, Nov 24, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:
    Gary to Bob - let's start off this negotiation by you explaining to me, the owners, the fans, the corporate sponsors why you stand so strongly against a partnership, cost certainty, revenue sharing system that still allows for guaranteed contracts? The only reason I have been given to date is that it's against your principal so while your at it please explain to me what principals you are referring to in simple terms please. :dunno: :dunno:
     
  2. aj

    aj Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    141
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    London, England
    Gary to Bob: "We need a cap."

    Bob to Gary: "We won't accept a cap."

    *Silence*
     
  3. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    Silence, as league prepares itself to do whatever it takes to get the cap they feel they need.
     
  4. shakes

    shakes Pep City

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2003
    Messages:
    8,511
    Likes Received:
    115
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Home Page:

    Silence as the league prepares to not bargain in good faith.
     
  5. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,746
    Likes Received:
    1,007
    Trophy Points:
    184
    Silence, as a giant rock from space pummels to earth on Christmas Day, 2004... Humans go the way of the dodo bird... and a hush falls over the world...

    Ah, life's ultimate conclusion... ending in a dramatic, unexpected, singular blow... The odd human still alive, albeit slowly dying - and in fear of neighbours who are trying to survive at their expense... CBA negotiations (and other day-to-day trivial 'problems') the farthest thing from a human mind come January 1st, 2005...

    *end of daydream / reality check... humming 'it's the end of the world as we know it... and I feel fine*
     
  6. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:
    I should have figured most of you would respond in a sarcastic manner that adds nothing to what could be a fun and educational exercise. The fact none of you have taken the question seriously and responded as Bob to Gary is an indicator of why Bob should never have used the word "never" when referring to a salary cap. Anyone care to contribute a serious response to Gary's initial question on this thread? Please try to be constuctive otherwise we will just have a repeat of other threads that solved nothing and contributed very little.
     
  7. bling

    bling Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,934
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Your original statement is so biased and dripping with pro-ownership prejudice that it is barely understandable, I am pretty sure that is why you have gotten nothing but sarcastic responses from the NHLPA supporters.

    It is like asking supporters of big game hunting to justify the blatant murder and slaughter of gods gentle creatures....
     
  8. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
     
  9. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    Nothing at all.

    Just have the union decertify and the owners can get down to so good old fashioned "free enterprise and capitalism".
     
    Last edited by moderator : Nov 24, 2004
  10. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:
    I'm not a Political Science or Economics major so I just have to rely on good old common sense.

    Gary to Bob - let's not paint ourselves into a corner where there will be zero room for further talk or a resolution to our noted differences. We have made some mistakes in the past Bob and the owners feel the pendulum has swung way too far in favor of the players. I have made a promise to the owners of 30 teams and the fans of the NHL that we will get it right this time. We need some form of a partnership where player salaries are more closely aligned to that of other major professional sports. We don't have the TV revenue that other sports have but we are still prepared to commit up to 53% of gross revenues towards player salaries. If you like we can sit down and come to an agreement on exactly how we determine what gross revenue is. Bob, I think you realize that about 2/3's of our owners are either barely breaking even or are losing money and we need a system that allows owners an equal opportunity to earn on their investments and also provide a level playing field for organizational development. Do you have any proposals on behalf of your players that fall within our needs and the guidelines I have just discussed with you?
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2004
  11. FlyersFan10*

    FlyersFan10* Guest

    Bob to Gary: Well Gary, we do understand what is going on. However, why is it our responsibility to bear the complete brunt of what your owners have caused? If you are sincere about forming a partnership, then the players shouldn't be held 100% accountable for the mess that your owners are in. While we do recognize the need to drag on salaries, we don't feel that a cap would work. If a luxury tax is implemented properly, it will create the drag on salaries that you are looking for and will also ensure that there is revenue sharing amongst the owners and that players salaries will eventually come in line. We're willing to offer 70 to 75 cents on the dollar over a threshold of 40 to 45 million. We are also willing to offer a 5% roll back on wages and we are also willing to lock entry level salaries. However, you are stuck on this notion that a salary cap is the only thing that is going to work. I am not convinced of this, Forbes magazine is not convinced of this and even Arthur Levitt is not convinced that a hard cap will work.

    Gary, I understand the connendrum that you're in with the owners. This deal will save face for you, save face for the owners, save face for the players and will be fair in that both parties share the costs of losses over the past few years. We'll only make this a three year deal and see how things go a year and half from now and if things are rough, we'll open negotiations early again. Fair?

    ****Addenum****

    One last thing Gary. For all this talk about improving the game financially, why is there no discussion of improving the game for the sake of improving the game? The Olympics and the World Cup were fantastic displays of hockey. This should be the game that is being marketed. Why are we marketing this clutch and grab, hook and hold type game? We need focus to be put back on the product. When the product is improved, the revenue streams will also open up. So please, let's get talking about improving the game, not just improving the financial state of the game.
     
    Last edited by moderator : Nov 24, 2004
  12. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Fine by me. Just stick that stupid salary cap in your ditty bag and we can talk.

    We don't think the pendulum has swung anywhere. If we give you $100 millin plus will you quit whining?

    That was a pretty stupid thing to promise. It wasn't your promise to make. We didn't promise anything.

    We don't want a partnership, thanks. We aren't talking about other sports. We are talking about hockey.

    We're not giving you half a billion dollars. Period. End of story. And we're not interested in anything as gross as revenue sharing.

    We don't like. The Club President and genweral manager can do that for their million dollar salaries. We don't care how they do it. Then they can decide what to pay the players. If teams aren't making enough money talk to them, not us.

    Tell somebody who cares.

    Save the competitive balance BS for the sheeple, okay?

    No.

    Tom
     
  13. ti-vite

    ti-vite Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    This is funny but not quite as much as hockeysockpuppettheatre in the hockey news.

    Some classics in the last few mags.
     
  14. PecaFan

    PecaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,959
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
    Congrats. You've captured the entire essence of the NHLPA.
     
  15. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    :handclap:


    Nothing at all.

    Just have the union decertify and the owners can get down to so good old fashioned "free enterprise and capitalism".

    Until the players do decertify you can stowe the BS about wanting a free market. Operating under a CBA is a completely artificial construct. You're well aware of this fact, so stop pretending otherwise.
     
  16. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    Tell somebody who cares, lol.

    I might ask Gary, What did you mean by this memo then?
    Is the real issue here insurance? Seems you want a lot of management rights and flexibility. You want to raise the money you are losing by fining players more? More rights to hockey cards? What are you after Gary?
     
  17. I in the Eye

    I in the Eye Drop a ball it falls

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2002
    Messages:
    5,746
    Likes Received:
    1,007
    Trophy Points:
    184
    If you make it as much $ as (or more $ than) the owners got in league expansion money the last CBA go around, the owners just might take you up on that... To quote the Million Dollar Man, "Everybody's got a price"... and the owners have put $ ahead of their CBA wants/needs before...

    For the sake of entertainment...

    Gary to Bob: If we gave you $101 million plus, will you quit whining?
     
  18. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    Ha ha, good idea.

    Im sorry, now you have gone out of character.
     
  19. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:

    Is this really Bob Goodenow. Seriously, you sound just as condescending as he does. With negotiation skills like yours no wonder the NHLPA will be coming to an end.
     
  20. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:

    Sorry Bob but the owners want to regain control of the NHL that they each invested hundreds of millions of their dollars into. 40-45 million is basically status quo and keeps players % of revenue at over 70% which is no longer acceptable on the owners part. I'm not looking for a hard cap per say. Call it a flex cap, homegrown cap, cost certainty whatever you prefer but our owners want a system where they know going into each season how much money is needed to budget for player salaries just like most other professional sports and most other business ventures in North America. Your going to have to do better and I would suggest a lot better before I can take your proposals back to the owners for their consideration.

    Regarding your addenum Bob, we held meetings and made several recommendations that we believe can improve the game. It's our goal to fix the game and fix the financial shortcomings of the league all at once, unfortunatley, you decided to put in a grievance against our recommendations, hence, they have been put on hold and again the owners want to regain overall control of the league so the right to make changes now must be part of the new CBA. We to enjoyed the hockey in Salt Lake City but the World Cup was a bit disappointing perhaps because of the looming CBA lockout.
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2004
  21. FlyersFan10*

    FlyersFan10* Guest

    It's funny. If you go with the $40 million threshold, then multiply that by 30, you get 1.2 billion. 1.2 billion in salary divided by 2.1 billion in total revenue = 57.1% of the revenue. Now, if 20 of the teams are at a 40 million threshold and you have ten teams that are over by an average of 20 million, according to the luxury tax, at 70 cents per dollar, that works out to 14 million for tax. Multiply that by ten and you get 140 million to disperse as revenue sharing. Not a bad deal.
     
  22. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:
    The problem is that the revenue will no longer be at over 2 billion. Less TV revenue than prvious CBA, lower ticket prices are anticipated, loss of corporate sponsorship, etc. Missing from your cap money is the hidden costs of player bonus and incentive money that has never been reported as part of the team payroll but will in the next CBA. Luxury tax does not work. Refer to NHL.com for a reasonable explanation by Daly on why it won't work and doesn't work elsewhere.
     
  23. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    Where are you getting this idea that free markets and capitalism dont include collective bargaining of labour rights? Rush Limbaugh?
     
  24. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    Dont be daft. How does this break the union?
     
  25. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,953
    Likes Received:
    213
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    But it would work if revenues were to increase? I wonder what could be done to not have those revenues decrease.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"