Little fella says no to luxury tax

[FLYLine27*]

How can one individual so consistently miss the point?

Replacement hockey isn't about trying to generate revenue or maintain current attendance levels. Over the long run, IF the NHLPA refuses to cross, then the NHL would have to make the product marketable and profitable and the odds are decent they could do so. Over the short run, the owners are willing to absorb significant losses to bring the union into a more realistic understanding of their role and gain a long term advantage.

You mean the Owners are willing to try just about anything to get there way?

 

[FLYLine27*]

I believe the proposed hard cap by the league cut back the salaries by 27-28% not 33%.

Nope, its 33%. Average Team Salary is 45 Million right now and they want it to be 30 million with there hard cap.

 

[FLYLine27*]

Well, I thought there were some interesting ideas in the 6 offers that could have been worked on. The fact that the PA dismissed them all with a blanket statement (they're all a cap) shows that they are not willing to negotiate.

I saw one offer that was a distinct cap. The other 5 offers had at least some merit. If the PA chose to either incorporate some of them into their own offer, or dismiss each one specifically and explain why, then it would show a willingness to cooperate.

Did you read all 6 offers? There was about 2 paragraphs each (not 1 sentence each, as was the rumor around here a few weeks ago)

No they ALL had to do with a hard cap. Like someone else said..each just had its own little road to get to it.

 

[gerbilanium]

'There are tons of owners and GM's who got the same treatment from players, agents and Goodenow in the last decade, ramping up their offers but never getting a firm answer as to what might get a deal done, so its interesting to see the tables turned.' -cp

 

[Cawz]

yes, i've read them. In the end, they all put a concrete limit on what players can make, be it individually or collectively.

But they each have their points that could be worked on. One of those 6 proposals is a better starting point than the PA's offer.

The fact is if you asked the players what their ideal solution would be, they would say keep the current CBA. If you asked the owners what their's would be, they would tell you salary cap. Who has moved off their ideal solution more?

But which side should move more? The side that says "we cannot continue like this and have a viable league" or the side that said "we've been reaping the benifits of the CBA for the last 10 years"? (Yes, thats a quote I heard from a player.)

Look at your 2 ideal solutions. In one, the owners feel comfortable with their investment and the players make millions for their talents. In the other, we will continue to see the problems have have dogged the league. Which side do we have to move further away from?

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

If this is the case now why wasn't it in 1999 when the league first approached the PA, and again in 2000, and again in 2001, and again in 2002, and again in 2003, and again last year. The fact is the union wanted to get what they could and not care about down the road. If the PA would have agreed to a tax system 2 years ago which the league was looking for we wouldn't be in the lockout today. I understand the league renewed the last CBA a couple of times, and Bettman tried to get this resolved during the last lockout but the owners caved, I don't think you are going to get 23 of them to cave now. The recently proposed 5% rollback by players yes a compensation but when the league as a whole last summer had salaries increase by 16% because of arbitration/FA's etc what does the 5% really mean almost nothing. Even with a 10% rollback the salaries would have increased this year by 1% (not much I know) but with the league in trouble I have a hard time with any increase. I believe the proposed hard cap by the league cut back the salaries by 27-28% not 33%. Offering the players greater than half of generated revenues is more then fair. I agree though there would have to be some serious sitdowns with lawyers and cpa's to work what is revenue and what are the expenses. The league should come back with a increase to 55%-45% share of revenue share with players getting the better part. Tell me how this isn't fair if the union and league could honestly sitdown and work the particulars to the revenue and expense breakouts. From what I read the owners offered to negotiate the revenues and expenses questions with the union to make sure the trust was there only to be turned down by the union.

The longer the lockout the lower the revenues I would rather have 55% of $2B then 55% of $1B?

Go to news.google.com
Type in this: NHL Blue Fin

Follow link to Globe and Mail site.
Read.

In 03, the NHL killed talks on a luxury tax. Bettman in particular killed talks between Saskins and Daly.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

But they each have their points that could be worked on. One of those 6 proposals is a better starting point than the PA's offer.

Which one? Why do you say it's better?

 

[eye]

Question to hockeytown. Do you think it's healthy that the Detroit Red Wings need to make it to the 3rd round of the playoffs each year just to break even? You sell the Joe out and tickets go for a premium there and still your owner risks losing money each year. The NHL is broken and in need of serious repair and compromise just won't get that done. The damage is too severe. This is a ticket sales driven league that doesn't sell enough tickets or generate any TV revenue so players should be paid less than other major sports - not more. Players should be more willing to consider the good of the game and it's future and remember who pays for their rich and famous lifestyle. hockeytown, do you even consider the views of small market clubs, their fans and franchise stability or are you only concerned about your might red wings?

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

We'll see how many do, though I'm sure there will be quite a few. But how many are going to be the guys even somewhat recognizable to the average person? Those are the guys who make the most, and the ones who won't cross. And whatever happens, replacement players will have the stigma of being replacment players, no matter if they crossed or not. Perception is reality.

Do you even remember what the talk was like during Spring training of 1995 when baseball used replacement players? Fan support, like the product, was not good.

Just FYI - you've got guys like Brendan Morrison who left home to play for 10% or less than what he would of earned this year if the NHL was playing. If he had to take a 30% paycut to play in the NHL, he still would be making approx $2M more than he is currently playing for in Europe. You have even bigger differences for the star players. Jagr is playing for $2M in Russia. If he had to take a 30% paycut, he would be making $6M more in the NHL than he's making this year in Russia. I think that most players would come back and play.

You have to remember that in 1995 80+% of the baseball fans weren't behind the owners. I think that attendance would be poor, but if ticket prices were dropped I bet that the owners could definetely outlast the players that wouldn't cross.

I'm pretty much behind the owners in this (although I hate them as well!), but I do have to wonder why Bettman is so dead set against a luxury tax. If they came up with a system with a substantial tax (something like 50% for the first $5M, and 100% for any spending over that) wouldn't that work very similiar to a hard cap? And if a team was willing to spend the $'s, they would be compensating the rest of the teams in the league to do it. I don't know why that wouldn't work. Or at least start having a serious discussion with that as the baseline.

 

[GKJ]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=106456

Anybody still want to beleive the owners are willing to compromise?

This is my favorite part:

"Bettman, who met with the 38-member Edmonton Oilers Investors Group before visiting Calgary on Wednesday, said it isn't any fun for the fans of small-market teams that don't believe their teams have a chance at making the playoffs, let alone have a shot at winning the Stanley Cup."


It's one thing to have a complete utter assclown for a commishioner. It's another thing if he doesn't even watch hockey to begin with. What a ******* idiot. Ever hear of the New Jersey Devils? Calgary Flames? Carolina Hurricanes?

 

[FLYLine27*]

This is my favorite part:

"Bettman, who met with the 38-member Edmonton Oilers Investors Group before visiting Calgary on Wednesday, said it isn't any fun for the fans of small-market teams that don't believe their teams have a chance at making the playoffs, let alone have a shot at winning the Stanley Cup."


It's one thing to have a complete utter assclown for a commishioner. It's another thing if he doesn't even watch hockey to begin with. What a ******* idiot. Ever hear of the New Jersey Devils? Calgary Flames? Carolina Hurricanes?

:lol :lol

 

[hockeytown9321]

Question to hockeytown. Do you think it's healthy that the Detroit Red Wings need to make it to the 3rd round of the playoffs each year just to break even? You sell the Joe out and tickets go for a premium there and still your owner risks losing money each year. The NHL is broken and in need of serious repair and compromise just won't get that done. The damage is too severe. This is a ticket sales driven league that doesn't sell enough tickets or generate any TV revenue so players should be paid less than other major sports - not more. Players should be more willing to consider the good of the game and it's future and remember who pays for their rich and famous lifestyle. hockeytown, do you even consider the views of small market clubs, their fans and franchise stability or are you only concerned about your might red wings?

yup all I care about is the Red Wings. Thats why my solution is to have all the teams share revenue equally. Yup, that'll help the Red Wings alot.

The NHl is a gate driven sport. Who is the best road draw in the league? Why?

I don't care if the Red Wings make a profit or not. They decide what they can afford and pay it. They know the risks. And for the small market teams, wouldn't it be better if the Red Wings continued to "buy" their teams and fail?

 

[Winger98]

"I believe more than ever that without our Canadian franchises there is no National Hockey League. This is where hockey works. This is where hockey is important."

"I promise we will get you what you need and most importantly, what you deserve

Such as a Canadian dollar that has a value consistantly similar to the American dollar? Because that is what is damaging to the Canadian franchises more than anything, their dollar being worth solittle for so long. If the Canadian dollar was worth an American dollar, the Oilers would have easily been able to hang onto the majority of its talant. While it sucks to have these teams hindered by something they have no control over, I'm not sold that it's the league's job to make corrections for how a government decides to run its economy.

"A lot has been said and speculated about how we managed to achieve this level of unity," he said. "It wasn't by me putting a trance on the owners. It wasn't by me mixing up a potion of Kool-Aid that I got all the owners to drink."

Maybe not kool-aid, but I think those big fines you can throw down have certainly helped in keeping the owners quiet, Gary. Take away those fines and we'll see how many owners wouldn't be in support of a decent luxury tax system.

 

[Vomiting Kermit*]

"No longer should we have to go through drives to save the Oilers. No longer do we have to go through competitive droughts."

Bettman said the right economic system will give the Oilers their rightful place in the league they dominated in the 1980s until player salaries went through the roof.

"I promise we will get you what you need and most importantly, what you deserve," Bettman told the applauding business owners.

 

[no13matssundin]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=106456

Anybody still want to beleive the owners are willing to compromise?

Compromise? Who said anything about "compromise"? I dont want "compromise... I want Hockey. Screw the NHLPA. Lock 'em out for 5 years and use replacement players for the next 10, if need be. They dont give two hoots about the health and future of the game, or me as a fan. The time for compromise came and went. Break the PA and restart the league with a cap, even if it takes 15 years... Ive got the CHL/CFL/NFL/NBA. Im doing fine.

Compromise?

Please.

 

[FLYLine27*]

Bettman said the right economic system will give the Oilers their rightful place in the league they dominated in the 1980s until player salaries went through the roof.

R u ******* kidding me Gary? What the hell is your agenda? To keeps teams from losing money and folding like youve been SAYING or to LEVEL the playing field...just come out and say it you idiot...you dont care about the teams losing money or folding or whatever ...that just your cover story, Lowe probably gave you a few million and told you to lockout the players out until they agree to the evening playing field..AKA the HARD HARD HARD HARD Salary Cap. This guy needs to be SHOT(GARY)..or at least beat up VERY BAD so he quits his job. We will never have our hockey back.

PS- I have NOTHING against oiler fans or the oilers organazition..it just upset me when Lowe came out and said he would resign if a cap wasnt put into place.

 

[Toonces]

You know, while I think both sides are acting like little children, I'm starting to resent the owners a bit. It seems to me that the PA has blinked quite a bit, and it's now up to the owners to move a little.

If the NHL won't negotiate any, it's time to just cancel the season. Don't leave us hanging more.

I've leaned twards the owners side prior to this little development, but the pendulum is starting to swing a bit.

 

[Seachd]

PS- I have NOTHING against oiler fans or the oilers organazition..it just upset me when Lowe came out and said he would resign if a cap wasnt put into place.

Well, I imagine it's pretty frustrating being stuck in a position like that. I wouldn't blame him in the least. There wouldn't be a team anymore, so why would there be a GM?

 

[Seachd]

Those are concessions. That's movement. That's a start.
The owners should have come back and proposed a very strict luxury tax.

Then you have one joke followed by another, and you're still stuck with no end in sight. Each side would balk at the offers, and they'd be just as far apart as ever. And the NHL firmly believes a luxury tax won't work, so why would they propose it?

 

[shadoz19]

Well one is trying..but its hard to do when one side is acting like a little spoiled kid.

Which one??? One side has offered nothing close to a permanent fix. The other has said "My way or the highway".

 

[garry1221]

yup all I care about is the Red Wings. Thats why my solution is to have all the teams share revenue equally. Yup, that'll help the Red Wings alot.

The NHl is a gate driven sport. Who is the best road draw in the league? Why?

I don't care if the Red Wings make a profit or not. They decide what they can afford and pay it. They know the risks. And for the small market teams, wouldn't it be better if the Red Wings continued to "buy" their teams and fail?

if the wings continued to ''buy'' their team, then wouldn't that drive up prices such as the average player salary? i'd think it would, so how does this help small market teams? I understand if revenue was completely shared to the penny that it'd help small market teams, but 'buying' a team suggests overspending, which in turn drives up the average player salary, end result more money that small market teams have to shell out to keep players who are making under the aps.

granted i could be wrong, but it's a vicious cycle one way or another.

 

[hockeytown9321]

if the wings continued to ''buy'' their team, then wouldn't that drive up prices such as the average player salary? i'd think it would, so how does this help small market teams? I understand if revenue was completely shared to the penny that it'd help small market teams, but 'buying' a team suggests overspending, which in turn drives up the average player salary, end result more money that small market teams have to shell out to keep players who are making under the aps.

granted i could be wrong, but it's a vicious cycle one way or another.

It helps becuase then no one has a financial advantage over another. Set a cap at whatever 1/30 of revenue is. Nobody could *****.

 

[FLYLine27*]

Which one??? One side has offered nothing close to a permanent fix. The other has said "My way or the highway".

Ummm your talking like Bettman when you say..."Offerend nothing close to a permanent fix" It is a direction to a fix Gary WONT admit it but it is.

 

[Seachd]

Ummm your talking like Bettman when you say..."Offerend nothing close to a permanent fix" It is a direction to a fix Gary WONT admit it but it is.

The league (who would know) doesn't think it will work, but you do, so it will?

 

[thinkwild]

It took years of neglect for Rome to crumble.
It's even more negligent now for our Ceaser to completely rip it down and try to rebuild it in a day.

Heh. Little Ceaser. Illitch is missing out a great marketing opportunity