Meeting over--nhlpa statement may 26

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
cleduc said:
If that were true re Goodenow. it doesn't stop the owners from making the players sit another year nor does it stop the players from throwing Goodenow out - which is far more likely.

The cap has aleady been on the table. If the union doesn't want linkage based on principle, the owners have to low ball the cap to cover their asses on uncertain revenues. Linkage makes the most sense now with the uncertain revenues from the lockout.

If the PA don't settle this by June 15th or so, they're looking at about 50 cents on the 2003-4 dollar when play resumes. They're at about 65 cents now. They've been stupid before so there's nothing stopping them from being stupid again.
You keep posting this same thing over and over in hopes of convincing who ?? Its not going to make true by repetition ..

You seem like an intellectual person so I can't figure out why you are so infatuated with what will happen next week in the form of income ONLY.

This is a 6 year CBA they are talking about not a 1 year. Sure they may lose a few sponsors in this upcoming year as a result but what about years 2-6 ?? Short term loss for long term gain remember .. We all know year 1 is going to be bad and filled with healing and recover .. What is a few more millions now really matter .The owners have been giving us that BS for a while that they intend to lockout the players until they get the deal they want well that same knife cuts both ways ..

If you are planning a 6 year budget for your family .. Are you only concerned what income you are expecting next week and planning all your spending for 6 years on that?? .. I certainly hope not ..

I can also see Goodenow's motive .. This is payback plain and simple for the NHL cancelling the season and his players lost 1.2-1.4 bil in wages .. Now he is going to give them a little taste of their own medicine and if they lose a few sponsors so be it. Prove it, how serious you are.. The owners have just as much opportunity to end this nonsense. Put something on the table the NHLPA can work with and live with and we are in business.

The NHL will not admit Goodenow has has leverage at this time so he is going to prove it to them . NO season ticket drives, no sponsors, not TV deal to live off of and the financial stress hits the NHL Owners. Without linkage no skin off the NHLPA back. However the NHL is in control rather then forcing the NHLPA to take a deal it doesn't like then just like the players did and forfeited wages they can now in turn show their Owner solidarity and it will be required in dealing with Goodenow. A large portion of Renenue comes from other sources, gate receipts, luxury boxes, etc etc outside of sonsors.. The NHLPA just took the last two weeks to find out exactly what that is per team, and measure the damage by each day.

Pro-owners supportors keep using the loss of wages against the players last year as a bad move by Goodenow not looking after their best interest .. Will they be so quick to Blame Bettman for loss of sponsors and other revenue now that the shoe is on the other foot ?? Its the same thing in reverse now .. Players only lose money during the regular season, this is the off season and now its Owners time ..

Goodenow has been in the business a long time and Sponsors and others are just as much his friends then the Owners .. Its the players the sponsors want to promote not the owners or their buildings, because if the players are not the game then sponsors would be flowing in .. We have no way of knowing how many Goodenow has in his pocket that he is using as leverage against the Owners. Players have endorsement deals remember, some of the very same that sponsor the NHL so its a two-way street.. They will come back, or others will take their place..

Endless supply of Sponsors and a lifetime of players still to ahead for years to come ..

One big game of Cat and Mouse to see who cracks first ..

That's just my take on things .. Just my own opinion ..
 
Last edited:

GSC2k2*

Guest
The Messenger said:
You keep posting this same thing over and over in hopes of convincing who ?? Its not going to make true by repetition ..

You seem like an intellectual person so I can't figure out why you are so infatuated with what will happen next week in the form of income ONLY.

This is a 6 year CBA they are talking about not a 1 year. Sure they may lose a few sponsors in this upcoming year as a result but what about years 2-6 ?? Short term loss for long term gain remember .. The owners have been giving us that BS for a while that they intend to lockout the players until they get the deal they want well that same knife cuts both ways ..

If you are planning a 6 year budget for your family .. Are you only concerned what income you are expecting next week and planning all your spending for 6 years on that?? .. I certainly hope not ..

I can also see Goodenow's motive .. This is payback plain and simple for the NHL cancelling the season and his players lost 1.2-1.4 bil in wages .. Now he is going to give them a little taste of their own medicine and if they lose a few sponsors so be it. Prove it, how serious you are...

The NHL will not admit he has leverage at this time so is going to prove it. NO season ticket drives, no sponsors, not TV deal to live off of and the financial stress hits the NHL Owners. Without linkage no skin off the NHLPA back. However the NHL is in control rather then forcing the NHLPA to take a deal it doesn't like then just like the players did and forfeited wages they can now in turn show their Owner solidarity and it will be required in dealing with Goodenow. A large portion of Renenue comes from other sources ,gate receipts, luxury boxes, etc etc outside of sonsors.. The NHLPA just took the last two weeks to find out exactly what that is per team..

Pro-owners supportors keep using the loss of wages against the players last year as a bad move .. Will they be so quick to Blame Bettman for loss of sponsors and other revenue now that the show is on the other foot ??

Goodenow has been in the business a long time and Sponsors and others are just as much his friends then the Owners .. Its the players the sponsors want to promote not the owners or their buildings .. We have no way of knowing how many Goodenow has in his pocket that he is using as leverage against the Owners. Players have endorsement deal remember, some of the very same that sponsor the NHL so its a two-way street.. They will come back, or others will take their place.. Endless supply of Sponsors and a lifetime of players still to ahead for years to come ..

One big game of Cat and Mouse to see who cracks first ..

For once, a fair point on the six-year issue. You are correct; people often forget to look at things over the full duration of a deal.

As for the rest, though? Sheesh! You continue to set the bar at new levels every day. Take that however you want.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
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?

Because once you start talking numbers you can't get away from them. You start talking revenue and it becomes obvious that the teams need X amount to survive and that leaves Y amount for the players. Goodenow didn't want to get caught in a situation where he couldn't deny he knew it was bad or was going to turn bad. Stick your head in the sand like an Ostrich when anyone mentions the numbers and just maybe you can get a new CBA without a cap/linkage.
 

Jarqui

Registered User
Jul 8, 2003
1,966
83
Visit site
The Messenger said:
You keep posting this same thing over and over in hopes of convincing who ?? Its not going to make true by repetition ..

You seem like an intellectual person so I can't figure out why you are so infatuated with what will happen next week in the form of income ONLY.

This is a 6 year CBA they are talking about not a 1 year. Sure they may lose a few sponsors in this upcoming year as a result but what about years 2-6 ?? Short term loss for long term gain remember .. We all know year 1 is going to be bad and filled with healing and recover .. What is a few more millions now really matter .The owners have been giving us that BS for a while that they intend to lockout the players until they get the deal they want well that same knife cuts both ways ..

If you are planning a 6 year budget for your family .. Are you only concerned what income you are expecting next week and planning all your spending for 6 years on that?? .. I certainly hope not ..

I can also see Goodenow's motive .. This is payback plain and simple for the NHL cancelling the season and his players lost 1.2-1.4 bil in wages .. Now he is going to give them a little taste of their own medicine and if they lose a few sponsors so be it. Prove it, how serious you are.. The owners have just as much opportunity to end this nonsense. Put something on the table the NHLPA can work with and live with and we are in business.

The NHL will not admit Goodenow has has leverage at this time so he is going to prove it to them . NO season ticket drives, no sponsors, not TV deal to live off of and the financial stress hits the NHL Owners. Without linkage no skin off the NHLPA back. However the NHL is in control rather then forcing the NHLPA to take a deal it doesn't like then just like the players did and forfeited wages they can now in turn show their Owner solidarity and it will be required in dealing with Goodenow. A large portion of Renenue comes from other sources, gate receipts, luxury boxes, etc etc outside of sonsors.. The NHLPA just took the last two weeks to find out exactly what that is per team, and measure the damage by each day.

Pro-owners supportors keep using the loss of wages against the players last year as a bad move by Goodenow not looking after their best interest .. Will they be so quick to Blame Bettman for loss of sponsors and other revenue now that the shoe is on the other foot ?? Its the same thing in reverse now .. Players only lose money during the regular season, this is the off season and now its Owners time ..

Goodenow has been in the business a long time and Sponsors and others are just as much his friends then the Owners .. Its the players the sponsors want to promote not the owners or their buildings, because if the players are not the game then sponsors would be flowing in .. We have no way of knowing how many Goodenow has in his pocket that he is using as leverage against the Owners. Players have endorsement deals remember, some of the very same that sponsor the NHL so its a two-way street.. They will come back, or others will take their place..

Endless supply of Sponsors and a lifetime of players still to ahead for years to come ..

One big game of Cat and Mouse to see who cracks first ..

That's just my take on things .. Just my own opinion ..

Hopefully, this saves me some typing:
showimg.gif


It is a graph showing the NHL revenues without a lockout compared to what they might be after the lockout. It assumes a first year revenue loss of 15% (midpoint of the 10-20% guess). It assumes without the lockout, revenue growth of 5% per season (conservative). It assumes after the 15% drop due to the lockout a spring back of 10% per season revenue growth.

EDIT (my calculation missed one year - it's worse for the players):

The precision of the assumptions is not as important. The concept is. If the players get 54% of the revenues, due to revenue loss from the lockout going forward - having reset the NHL revenue bar, that graph estimates a further $1,134 mil loss to the players (54% of $2.1 Billion lost future revenues) - beyond the lost season. If the players get 57% instead of 54% through tougher negotiations, that only makes up $380 mil of that $1,134 mil loss. If the league catches up in 4 years (15% recovery vs 10% assumed vs 5% growth with no lockout), the players still lose $540 mil due to the lost revenues.

We could bicker over the actual number or that the recovery would be more exponential. But no matter how one slices it, the loss of 54% of future revenues to the players is in the order of hundreds of millions of dollars - no matter what Bob Goodenow negotiates going forward. The pie isn't just smaller next season. The pie will be smaller than what it should have been for some years to come. And they may never catch up or fully recover - the graph assumes that they do.

If Goodenow is still screwing around after June 15th, those numbers get worse. The NHLPA position in this fight for the future of young players coming down the line is so fiscally flawed. There is no way, in my opinion, that the NHLPA can make up that lost revenue compared to the deal offered by the NHL last February when league revenue losses would have been minimized with a salvaged season.

And don't kid yourself about the $1.134 bil loss to the players. That may well be a conservative number = it could be significantly worse now that some sponsors and fans have found better ways to spend their money. These two parties are kicking the crap out of each other financially such that there will be no winners. The longer this goes on, the bigger the losses no matter what deal gets cut.

Going forward, assuming 10% profit for the owners, instead of 10% of 2.2 bil = 220 million, they'll take 10% of 1.8 billion = $180 million - a $40 mil difference. The owners lose $1.33 mil each in profit declining per year - peanuts to them. The NHLPA loses 54% of the difference in revenue = $216 mil = $308,000 per player declining per year = another 22.5% in salary loss in the first year on top of the 24% cut. I don't see how the players can possibly "win" or get ahead of the February offer. All they can do now is minimize their losses with a smaller revenue pie.
 
Last edited:

SENSible1*

Guest
Sorry Messenger but once Goody and the PA put a form of linkage on the table they tied their asses to the revenue streams. Any damage Bobby does to the NHL's finances at this point comes out of the players pockets too. Unfortunately for Bobby, his membership has taken note of this fact and will make sure he doesn't waste any more of thier money.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
Thunderstruck said:
Sorry Messenger but once Goody and the PA put a form of linkage on the table they tied their asses to the revenue streams. Any damage Bobby does to the NHL's finances at this point comes out of the players pockets too. Unfortunately for Bobby, his membership has taken note of this fact and will make sure he doesn't waste any more of thier money.
Sorry to steal your thunder but ....

The NHLPA presented the NHL with latest team by team floating scale payroll .. They have never called anything linkage and they never ever have said that 54% is acceptable .. They call it indexing and they are trying to address this differently .. They want to find a way to determine how the HOCKEY industry is doing, not cost certainty like the the Owners want.

Also you are mistaken in the CBA bargaining process nothing that is offered in proposals is permanent .. The NHLPA can pull that 24% rollback at any time they want, in fact they may have already.. The NHL has tossed linkage on the table, then off, and back on again .. They offered the players $42.5 mil ceiling and with drew that .. The NHLPA is just as evenly allowed to do the same .. The only thing that prevents it is a accepted proposal by either side. The NHLPA can break off talks say this isn't working and present a different concept, anything said previously is water under the bridge ..

Absolutely the players face some damages the longer the process goes .. When Bettman cancelled the season the players lost their wages but the OWNERS lost their profit and money as well. They had to return season ticket money and pay Arena leases out of their own pockets etc.

The NHL used the cancelling of the season and lost wages as leverage to try and break the NHLPA resolve and that failed.. Bettman underestimated his opponent and thought the players would cave, however they threw 1.4 Bil back at the owners and said the deal is not good enough.

Now the NHLPA is testing the Owners.. Goodenow is threatening cancelling the money collecting season by ticket drives and sponsors money drive for owners.. All money if you think about is irrelevant to the players if this goes a 2nd year .. If the players are locked again/still etc then that money collected is only used by owners to pay their bills, the players do not see 1 red cent of it. The NHLPA also knows if the dispute is resolved in September then the season ticket holders will send in their money immediately .. So don't think of it as lost just postponed revenue to the Owners at this time ..

There is a reason for that as well if you go to court, the Owners have to show lost revenue .. Without season ticket drives how do the owners know how many fans are going to stay away at this point .. So lowering their Cap offer based on a guess is not good enough for court where accuracy is the key ..

It all strategy ..
 
Last edited:

Jarqui

Registered User
Jul 8, 2003
1,966
83
Visit site
The Messenger said:
Sorry to steal your thunder but ....

The NHLPA presented the NHL with latest team by team floating scale payroll .. They have never called anything linkage and they never ever have said that 54% is acceptable .. They call it indexing and they are trying to address this differently .. They want to find a way to determine how the HOCKEY industry is doing, not cost certainty like the the Owners want.

"Indexing" to what ? Revenues ? Cute term but a similar fiscal function to linkage.

The Messenger said:
Now the NHLPA is testing the Owners.. Goodenow is threatening cancelling the money collecting season by ticket drives and sponsors money drive for owners.. All money if you think about is irrelevant to the players if this goes a 2nd year .. If the players are locked again/still etc then that money collected is only used by owners to pay their bills, the players do not see 1 red cent of it. The NHLPA also knows if the dispute is resolved in September then the season ticket holders will send in their money immediately .. So don't think of it as lost just postponed revenue to the Owners at this time ..

A percentage of fans won't pay up. A percentage of sponsors won't spend with the NHL - they'll spend elsewhere committing those dollars this summer. ESPN $60 mil deal in the toilet. Etc. There will be losses of revenue that they cannot recover. Or when they do, they won't get as much revenue for whatever it is that they are selling.

The Messenger said:
There is a reason for that as well if you go to court, the Owners have to show lost revenue .. Without season ticket drives how do the owners know how many fans are going to stay away at this point .. So lowering their Cap offer based on a guess is not good enough for court where accuracy is the key ..

Go to court ? For what ?
 
Last edited:

SENSible1*

Guest
The Messenger said:
The NHLPA presented the NHL with latest team by team floating scale payroll .. They have never called anything linkage and they never ever have said that 54% is acceptable .. They call it indexing and they are trying to address this differently .. They want to find a way to determine how the HOCKEY industry is doing, not cost certainty like the the Owners want.
And WHAT do they use to decide how much to adjust the "floating scale payroll"....oh ya, the very same revenue you are suggesting Goodenow and the players want to damage. Even if they take this modified form of linkage off the table the damage they do will still be reflected in their paychecks as the teams will have less money to pay out.

Also you are mistaken in the CBA bargaining process nothing that is offered in proposals is permanent .. The NHLPA can pull that 24% rollback at any time they want, in fact they may have already.. The NHL has tossed linkage on the table, then off, and back on again .. They offered the players $42.5 mil ceiling and with drew that .. The NHLPA is just as evenly allowed to do the same .. The only thing that prevents it is a accepted proposal by either side. The NHLPA can break off talks say this isn't working and present a different concept, anything said previously is water under the bridge ..
I never said that the current structure being negotiated was permenantly on the table. However, the PA will have a difficult time explaning why they refused to make thier framework work once they have the league numbers if this goes before the NLRB.

Absolutely the players face some damages the longer the process goes .. When Bettman cancelled the season the players lost their wages but the OWNERS lost their profit and money as well. They had to return season ticket money and pay Arena leases out of their own pockets etc.
Nice to see a touch of realism occassionaly enters your thought process.

What you fail to address and is consistently pointed out by Cleduc is that the losses are not shared equally.

The NHL used the cancelling of the season and lost wages as leverage to try and break the NHLPA resolve and that failed.. Bettman underestimated his opponent and thought the players would cave, however they threw 1.4 Bil back at the owners and said the deal is not good enough.
The owners used the cancellation to prove to the PA membership that Bob's tactics were flawed and to break their resolve over the long haul. Early indications suggest that this tactic is already paying off. If you want to continue to believe that the membership will continue to follow Bobby down his road to ruin, knock yourself out. The rest of us will continue to deal in reality. The players have lost their stomach for this fight and want back on the ice, even if it means giving the owners most of what they want.

Now the NHLPA is testing the Owners.. Goodenow is threatening cancelling the money collecting season by ticket drives and sponsors money drive for owners.. All money if you think about is irrelevant to the players if this goes a 2nd year .. If the players are locked again/still etc then that money collected is only used by owners to pay their bills players do not see 1 red cent .. The NHLPA also knows if the dispute is resolved in September then the season ticket holders will send in their money immediately .. So don't think of it as lost just postponed to the Owners at this time ..
The corportations that buy a large portion of the season tickets in most markets will simply move their entertainment budget to other areas. This kind of naive thought process seems to go hand in hand with support for the PA's tactics. The PA can do further damage to the NHL by stalling the process right now, but your suggestion that things will bounce back immediately after a deal is signed is laughable.

There is a reason for that as well if you go to court, the Owners have to show lost revenue .. Without season ticket drives how do the owners know how many fans are going to stay away at this point .. So lowering their Cap based on a guess is not good enough for court where accuracy is the key ..

The level of absurdity you'll reach to try and spin is always entertaining. Thanks for that laugh. If they get ZERO money, how hard do you think they'll have to work to show LOST revenue. The league can cite historical precedent of lost revenues from the MLB labour dispute as well as the surveys of their season ticket base. (I know I've already answered my team's survey) Business projections are common and will be accepted by the court. Of course the PA will have a chance to challenge the projections. What basis will they have for their challenge????

It all strategy ..
A failed strategy....but strategy nonetheless. I hope it helps Bobby land his next job.
 

HockeyCritter

Registered User
Dec 10, 2004
5,656
0
the messenger said:
Now the NHLPA is testing the Owners.. Goodenow is threatening cancelling the money collecting season by ticket drives and sponsors money drive for owners.. All money if you think about is irrelevant to the players if this goes a 2nd year .. If the players are locked again/still etc then that money collected is only used by owners to pay their bills, the players do not see 1 red cent of it. The NHLPA also knows if the dispute is resolved in September then the season ticket holders will send in their money immediately .. So don't think of it as lost just postponed revenue to the Owners at this time ..

How does Goodenow have that power to withhold season ticket/sponsorship monies? By not negotiating?

Does the fact that sponsorship outside of the sphere of NHL influence (Ford, Molsen) can be lost mean anything? Those companies have to make a decision whether or not to spend their sponsorship dollars on the NHL sooner rather than later. Furthermore, once those dollars are committed elsewhere they cannot be redistributed to the NHL. These monies are used to create revenue streams which in turn are used for player costs . . . . how does the loss of these revenue streams not affect the players?

How does the fact that the majority of teams lost significantly less money in a locked out season factor into this? Some teams have had their best year (financially speaking) during the locked out 04/05 season. That fact (coupled with the willingness to lose an entire season) should hammer the point to the PA leadership (I think the membership "gets it") that the owners are serious about their desire for major changes in the way the NHL does business.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
HockeyCritter said:
How does Goodenow have that power to withhold season ticket/sponsorship monies? By not negotiating?

Does the fact that sponsorship outside of the sphere of NHL influence (Ford, Molsen) can be lost mean anything? Those companies have to make a decision whether or not to spend their sponsorship dollars on the NHL sooner rather than later. Furthermore, once those dollars are committed elsewhere they cannot be redistributed to the NHL. These monies are used to create revenue streams which in turn are used for player costs . . . . how does the loss of these revenue streams not affect the players?

How does the fact that the majority of teams lost significantly less money in a locked out season factor into this? Some teams have had their best year (financially speaking) during the locked out 04/05 season. That fact (coupled with the willingness to lose an entire season) should hammer the point to the PA leadership (I think the membership "gets it") that the owners are serious about their desire for major changes in the way the NHL does business.
All true within reason as well just presented from the other point of view ... There are two sides to each story and both sides are effected by all actions .. Cancelling the season by the owners may have saved them contract money to players .. It wasn't their money though .. The players never received a wage but the fans got reimbursed for the cash outlay with interest in some cases .. The owners did not gain from this process either. All sides lost .. Fans, owners and players by that action.

Damage to fan interest also occurred when the season was cancelled .. That damage is still not known how bad it is and how long recovery will take .. How is loss of sponsor money really any different then loss of gate receipt money by fan indifference post lockout.. Both could and would hopefully come back in the future with the proper damage control ..

Sponsors are squarely on the Owners shoulders though .. Sponsors are saying give us a product to promote and you get our money .. The owners have the buildings locked down, and are not broadcasting NHL games. The NHLPA plays no direct part in sponsor recruitment and nothing the NHLPA can do but accept an offer they don't like to end the dispute. Again from the other side, is it also not the responsibility of Ownership to get the game back on the ice??. However lost sponsors is just a Owner and player loss, no effect on Fans other then indirectly by no game to watch .. If Molson and Ford pull funding, then I guess I have to watch Downey paper towel and KFC commercials instead during my game in the future.

Fans should not care what sponsor money is lost, if you are on the side of ownership and take the position the greedy players are over paid then this supports your case as that lowers their salary expectations in the future, not really any different then a heavily favoured owner CBA though based on an artificial 54% number from a players point of view.

What are the Owners doing to help end the dispute?? They have taken a hard-line position and continue to tow that line, which has financial Consequences. Their CBA proposals and their actions going forward play a big part and if damage to some sponsors occur then they are just as much to blame then the NHLPA. Players make less money and owners earn less profit its all relative and connected..
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->