Licensing an effective way around a cap?

[Bicycle Repairman]

If I'm to understand the terms of the NFL Collective Bargaining agreement correctly, individual players are free to market their likenesses for merchandising purposes to either subsiduaries of the NFL (NFL Properties i.e. the "Quarterbacks Club" and team logos) or the NFLPA (in the case of group licensing).

As the NHL CBA has expired, so too does the joint partnership in NHL Enterprises. While the NFL chose the route of bidding for individual likeness licensing as a league (outrageously outbidding the PA in many cases), by no means does the NHL have to follow a similiar template.

A consortium of select, high-spending NHL owners could set themselves up as a separate company, sign marquee players to both playing and merchandizing deals and still come under a league salary cap. Nowhere in the league charter is this prohibited.

Click to read more...

 

[Isles72]

hah , you better believe that whatever system comes into place the nhlpa will find some loopholes to jump through to find ways around .

maybe thats why the nhl wants one of their iron clad 6 proposals in place because they are likely loophole proof !

I really dont know why a stiff lux tax system wouldnt work .Spending big hasnt really proven anything lately, wheras spending wisely has .

negotiate a lux tax so stiff it would make the big spenders really think twice about spending foolishly ,Then , tweak rookie caps , negotiate a rollback of 10 % of current players salaries (they already offered 5%)etc...

if nashville ,pittsburgh and a few others cant make money with payrolls in the 18-22 mil dollar range , how will they make money if theres a stiff cap of 30-35 mil ?

I think lux tax is where they will have to meet if they want to salvage this season .

 

[David Puddy]

I suggest a Goodenow punching bag.

 

[BLONG7]

I suggest a Goodenow punching bag.

Interesting, I would think that even some union members would go for this...

 

[degroat*]

If I'm to understand the terms of the NFL Collective Bargaining agreement correctly, individual players are free to market their likenesses for merchandising purposes to either subsiduaries of the NFL (NFL Properties i.e. the "Quarterbacks Club" and team logos) or the NFLPA (in the case of group licensing).

As the NHL CBA has expired, so too does the joint partnership in NHL Enterprises. While the NFL chose the route of bidding for individual likeness licensing as a league (outrageously outbidding the PA in many cases), by no means does the NHL have to follow a similiar template.

A consortium of select, high-spending NHL owners could set themselves up as a separate company, sign marquee players to both playing and merchandizing deals and still come under a league salary cap. Nowhere in the league charter is this prohibited.

And why exactly would the owners not laugh at this 'proposal'?