Who's going to win the labor-management war?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jean Beliveau

Registered User
Jul 5, 2004
282
0
Listen up to Brian Burke's analysis: "The owners will lose $240 million (in a lockout season) instead of the $300 million they'd lose (over the course of a normal season). Players will lose $1.2 billion if they don't play."

It seems pretty obvious to me that the players have much more to lose if this lockout wipes out the entire year.
 

hockeytown9321

Registered User
Jun 18, 2004
2,358
0
Jean Beliveau said:
Listen up to Brian Burke's analysis: "The owners will lose $240 million (in a lockout season) instead of the $300 million they'd lose (over the course of a normal season). Players will lose $1.2 billion if they don't play."

It seems pretty obvious to me that the players have much more to lose if this lockout wipes out the entire year.

Well, since the league lost a collective $224 million according to its own figures last year, and salaries have gone down since then, and if Burke's $240 million figure is correct(and thats a big if) it looks like the league will lose $16 million more by not playing.

You're also not looking at it corrrectly, because the vast majority of those losses come from a small pocket of teams. Teams that actually generate revenue are going to get sick of not making any money soon enough, and the owners will divide and fold.
 

Motown Beatdown

Need a slump buster
Mar 5, 2002
8,572
0
Indianapolis
Visit site
Jean Beliveau said:
Listen up to Brian Burke's analysis: "The owners will lose $240 million (in a lockout season) instead of the $300 million they'd lose (over the course of a normal season). Players will lose $1.2 billion if they don't play."

It seems pretty obvious to me that the players have much more to lose if this lockout wipes out the entire year.


Your looking at it the wrong way. The Blues might only lose 8 million instead of 20 million by not playing. But the Canucks instead of making 20 million will lose 8 million because of the lockout.

As for the players alot of that money lost will come from players who have so much money in the bank they wouldn't need to work another day in thier life. Sure it will hurt alot of the younger players. But still the vast majority can wait this thing out. I dont think were gonna find any NHL player working at Home Depot during the lockout.
 

Chili

En boca cerrada no entran moscas
Jun 10, 2004
8,440
4,269
Jean Beliveau said:
Listen up to Brian Burke's analysis: "The owners will lose $240 million (in a lockout season) instead of the $300 million they'd lose (over the course of a normal season). Players will lose $1.2 billion if they don't play."

It seems pretty obvious to me that the players have much more to lose if this lockout wipes out the entire year.

Your statement explains it...i.e. they both lose it's just a question of how much. And if teams start going bankrupt, again, both sides lose.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->