Meeting over--nhlpa statement may 26

Status
Not open for further replies.

SENSible1*

Guest
NHLPA STATEMENT FOLLOWING MEETINGS IN CHICAGO

CHICAGO (May 26, 2005): At the conclusion of today's meeting in Chicago, National Hockey League Players' Association (NHLPA) Senior Director Ted Saskin released the following statement:

“We just completed two days of meetings focused on revenue measurement and reporting issues.There is a lot more information to be exchanged between the parties and I expect Bob and Gary will be scheduling further meetings shortly.â€

link
 

SENSible1*

Guest
I'm hoping the early ending today suggests they hashed out a basic understanding of possible revenue for all the clubs and can now get down to the tougher business of negotiating a definition of what is to be included and what % goes to each group.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,660
37,454
I really hope this meeting started it like 8 am
 

RangerBoy

Dolan sucks!!!
Mar 3, 2002
44,912
21,237
New York
www.youtube.com
How many small group meetings have they had on figuring what is revenue and what is not revenue?Three meetings two weeks ago,two meetings last week and two meetings this week.All on financial and accounting issues
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,660
37,454
Thunderstruck said:
I'm hoping the early ending today suggests they hashed out a basic understanding of possible revenue for all the clubs and can now get down to the tougher business of negotiating a definition of what is to be included and what % goes to each group.


I would think so. It's amazing that it's only taken 10 months to do this
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
go kim johnsson said:
um...?

ok


Sounds like nothing got done.
What are you expecting to get done ??

These are financial fact finding meetings they are not collective bargaining sessions ..

They are simply reviewing the way each team is reporting revenue, what is included and perhaps what constitutes Hockey Revenue from both sides .. They are not trying to hammer out a CBA at these meetings ?? They are getting information for future proposals ..
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,660
37,454
The Messenger said:
What are you expecting to get done ??

These are financial fact finding meetings they are not collective bargaining sessions ..

They are simply reviewing the way each team is reporting revenue, what is included and perhaps what constitutes Hockey Revenue from both sides .. They are not trying to hammer out a CBA at these meetings ?? They are getting information for future proposals ..


I understand all this, but it's taken 10 months to decide what's to be included in revenue findings? What the hell has been going on during this time, and why didn't anyone decide to do this back in July?
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
go kim johnsson said:
I understand all this, but it's taken 10 months to decide what's to be included in revenue findings? What the hell has been going on during this time, and why didn't anyone decide to do this back in July?
From the TSN release

NHL, NHLPA wrap up talks; more planned
TSN.ca Staff
5/26/2005 1:14:24 PM
CHICAGO - The NHL and NHL Players' Association concluded two days of meetings on Thursday, discussing financial and accounting issues affecting the league's 30 teams.

"We just completed two days of meetings focused on revenue measurement and reporting issues," said NNL Players' Association Senior Director Ted Saskin in a statement.

"There is a lot more information to be exchanged between the parties and I expect Bob and Gary will be scheduling further meetings shortly."

The two sides have met four straight weeks and 15 times overall since the NHL announced the cancellation of the season Feb. 15. They plan to meet every week until a collective bargaining agreement is finally agreed upon.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=126088&hubName=nhl
The answer to your question is easy .. The NHLPA has always taken the stance from day 1 that they are not interested in becoming partners with the owners ..

Revenue is an issue that Owners and Bettman are controlling .. The NHLPA approach has been reducing player costs to the teams to make them profitable, and that approach is not based on league revenue ..

However the latest NHLPA ideas and concepts thrown on the table are now a team by team Salary range and scale that shifts based on easily defined revenue, for that procedure they now needs to define that ..
 
Last edited:

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,660
37,454
What other information is there to include? This is absolutely ludocrous.
 

Jarqui

Registered User
Jul 8, 2003
1,966
83
Visit site
Darcy Tucker's agent was on Leafs Lunch. He said the cap floor is at $22 mil and the cap ceiling is at $34 mil and they're discussing linkage. If true, it doesn't make Goodenow's decision to turn down the NHL February offer look too hot.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
go kim johnsson said:
What other information is there to include? This is absolutely ludocrous.
Note :

Goodenow and Bettman are not at these meetings .. So blaming either for more information needed, further talks required or stalling or holding up an new CBA based on these meetings would also be ludicrous.. IMO

 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
cleduc said:
Darcy Tucker's agent was on Leafs Lunch. He said the cap floor is at $22 mil and the cap ceiling is at $34 mil and they're discussing linkage. If true, it doesn't make Goodenow's decision to turn down the NHL February offer look too hot.

Damn.

That's the first word that came into my head when I read that.

That is harsh. To be honest, I'd be shocked to see the #'s go that low and still be agreed to by the PA.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,660
37,454
The Messenger said:
Note :

Goodenow and Bettman are not at these meetings .. So blaming either for more information needed, further talks required or stalling or holding up an new CBA based on these meetings would also be ludicrous.. IMO


What makes it ludicrous is that this wasn't done 10 months ago.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,660
37,454
cleduc said:
Darcy Tucker's agent was on Leafs Lunch. He said the cap floor is at $22 mil and the cap ceiling is at $34 mil and they're discussing linkage. If true, it doesn't make Goodenow's decision to turn down the NHL February offer look too hot.


It sure doesn't. I may be more in favor of the players than the owners, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that February is when the deal should have been done. If Goodenow just wait out for a deadline (June 15), that should raise up a little bit, the number will be closer to $40M
 

Levitate

Registered User
Jul 29, 2004
30,947
7,653
If true, it doesn't make Goodenow's decision to turn down the NHL February offer look too hot.

too simplistic an interpretation. First, what scale is this based off of? if that's off of $2.1 billion in revenues, then yeah that's a complete ripoff for the players. if that's a projection for next year based on assumptions of declining revenues because of the lockout, it could be more reasonable.

Second, the $42.5 mill cap offer from the NHL in February apparently wasn't too friendly to the players in other areas of importance, like the other usual major issues such as arbitration, free agency, qualifying offers, etc. And who knows what else was thrown into it as well that might have made it very unattractive once you get past the initial $$ figure.

It's hard to say for certain if a deal now is really worse than a deal in February...especially if it ends up with some kind of moving cap that can end up going higher with more revenues
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
cleduc said:
Darcy Tucker's agent was on Leafs Lunch. He said the cap floor is at $22 mil and the cap ceiling is at $34 mil and they're discussing linkage. If true, it doesn't make Goodenow's decision to turn down the NHL February offer look too hot.
Those are basically the numbers that Stan Fischler floated in his article last week ..

http://www.msgnetwork.com/content_news.jsp?articleID=v0000msgn20050513T012809750&newsgroup=columnist.article&team=&sports=ice-hockey

The NHL made a proposal to the NHLPA based on those figures ..

How are your getting from here BEING DISCUSSED to AGREED UPON by the NHLPA in the new CBA ??

That might be quite a heap of faith on your part without a safety net ..

Even if its accepted .. How do you know the NHL didn't have to agree to UFA at age 26 or agree to pay last wages by extending all contracts one year at old rates??
 
Last edited:

Jarqui

Registered User
Jul 8, 2003
1,966
83
Visit site
Digger12 said:
Damn.

That's the first word that came into my head when I read that.

That is harsh. To be honest, I'd be shocked to see the #'s go that low and still be agreed to by the PA.

I'm not surprised. They're Levitt's numbers with a 10-20% drop due to revenue loss from the lockout. They needed to hit $33 mil or so average with Levitt's numbers before the lockout (even according to the NHLPA's Dec 9 24% rollback on $44 mil). So they were bound to fall from there 10-20% and they did. They make plenty of sense to me. Goodenow's position taken throughout doesn't.
 

Sammy*

Guest
The Messenger said:
Those are basically the numbers that Stan Fischler floated in his article last week ..

http://www.msgnetwork.com/content_news.jsp?articleID=v0000msgn20050513T012809750&newsgroup=columnist.article&team=&sports=ice-hockey

The NHL made a proposal to the NHLPA based on those figures ..

How are your getting from here BEING DISCUSSED to AGREED UPON by the NHLPA in the new CBA ??

That might be quite a heap of faith on your part without a safety net ..
I suspect that no matter what happens, you are never going to say that Bobby screwed up big time, because after all, we never saw all the particulars of all the offers that were on the table at various points in time.
 

Jarqui

Registered User
Jul 8, 2003
1,966
83
Visit site
The Messenger said:
Those are basically the numbers that Stan Fischler floated in his article last week ..

http://www.msgnetwork.com/content_news.jsp?articleID=v0000msgn20050513T012809750&newsgroup=columnist.article&team=&sports=ice-hockey

The NHL made a proposal to the NHLPA based on those figures ..

How are your getting from here BEING DISCUSSED to AGREED UPON by the NHLPA in the new CBA ??

That might be quite a heap of faith on your part without a safety net ..

Average payroll in NHL 2003-4 = around $44 mil
Dec 9th PA proposal = 24% off = around $33 mil
===============================
10-20% off from revenue loss due to lockout = $27-30 mil average payroll required now.

A floor of $22 mil and a ceiling of $34 mil gets close to those average payroll numbers without having to read a single article !! :)
 
Last edited:

WC Handy*

Guest
The fact that the meeting got done early and it was followed by a message stating that a meeting w/ the big boys will happening soon tells me that they completed whatever it was they were trying to accomplish over the last two days. Hopefully that means the negotiating can get moving now.
 

Hockeyfan02

Registered User
Oct 10, 2002
14,755
0
Pistivity
Visit site
WC Handy said:
The fact that the meeting got done early and it was followed by a message stating that a meeting w/ the big boys will happening soon tells me that they completed whatever it was they were trying to accomplish over the last two days. Hopefully that means the negotiating can get moving now.

That's what I'm getting out of it too. If they were going over accounting issues, they completed most of what they wanted to get done this week yesterday and only had to talk about a few items today. Like GKJ has been saying in this thread, all this crap should have been done 10 months ago.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->