You Never Give Me Your Money.. (CBA & Lockout Discussion) - Part XII

[mouser]

..You only give me your funny paper
And in the middle of negotiations
You break down


Prior thread here:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1272747

Click to read more...

 

[Positive]

He told them to take the nhls last offer

Really interesting what Roenick had to say back on August (Josh Rimer interview):

“Split [revenue] 50-50, and protect the owners and the GMs from themselves, make it five-year maximum contracts so they don’t have these stupid, ridiculous, idiotic 13, 14-year deals that are worth $120 million that we haven’t seen anyone live up to yet. Let’s stop being stupid and start being reasonable and put the one thing that’s important in this whole thing in front, and that’s the game of hockey.”

Also interesting what he had to say about the 04/05 lockout:

“That lockout needed to happen. I really think that the players, they were making their money, the owners were struggling to make money. The owners were in a position where they wanted to be better suited to make more of the revenue. And I really think that the owners really laid down a deal that they had to lay down. They had to play strong ball, and we did a deal that put a cap on the table when [ex-NHLPA head Bob] Goodenow said there was no way we would ever have a cap, and we put a cap on. We gave back 24 percent of our contracts for the next year, which was the stupidest thing in the history of negotiating, but we did it. And the owners won the battle. And now they're coming in seven years later and they're pushing again and they're pushing for the 24 percent and they're pushing for the higher percentage of revenue stream. You know what, It's not a greed thing; I definitely believe that the owners need to make their money, but it can't be a bullying system in order to get that money. It has to be good negotiating tactics."

 

[EC09]

Loving all the creative titles. Can you keep it up for an entire season though?

 

[wilty00]

Also misinformed.

The current NHL offer, looks fair on its own, but compared to the previous CBA, shows that only one side is making all the concessions: the players.

And? It's a negotiation. I don't think alot of people around here are dissapointed the NHL's offer was rejected, they're pissed off that the NHLPA chose to completely ignore what was clearly a significant and meaningful offer from the other side regardless of how you view who's making what "concessions".

Like it or not, 50/50 is the industry standard for a reason. The NHL had it in their pocket for as long as they did because they know that and there's no way the PA didn't see it coming. They will not leave this labour stoppage with any more than that. They had a choice to acknowledge that and try to work out how the rest of the deal would shake out... instead, they chose to **** all over the offer and unless the NHL is feeling mighty charitable I wouldn't be suprised if they don't regret that decision come 9 months from now.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Bold statement

Allan Walsh ‏@walsha
If Bettman put the NHLPA proposals today before ALL NHL owners for a vote, we would be heading to training camps tomorrow.

The idiocy of this speaks volumes. The owners are aware of today's proceedings. If there was any legitimacy to Walsh's rhetoric. The owners would be telling Bettman to agree.

 

[Hullois]

The players are right, the contracts signed should be paid in full, find a way to have the share go down to 50% gradually while these contracts expire.

 

[Top 6 Spaling]

The idiocy of this speaks volumes. The owners are aware of today's proceedings. If there was any legitimacy to Walsh's rhetoric. The owners would be telling Bettman to agree.

Agree. Saw that on twitter and did a double take.

Still on the owner's side. Tired of the NHLPA playing the victim card

 

[Brodie]

Loving all the creative titles. Can you keep it up for an entire season though?

Have you seen the number of Phoenix threads?

 

[BoHorvat53]

Anyone want to give me a run down on the PA's offer?

 

[mossey3535]

Quick question: If the infamous "PROPOSAL NUMBER THREE" were accepted. What would you guys expect that percentage to look like by years two, three, four, and five? Obviously year one will be very, very close to 57% and year six will be very, very close to 50%. What would those middle four years look like? More or less, of course?

The 12% off the top the NHLPA proposed doesn't make a lick of sense. You can tell they didn't run the numbers.

I have, and I recalculated the yearly top-off to take into account the amount of UFA $ coming off the 'old CBA' salary number each year. I took 12% the first year, then prorated that amount by the % remaining of 'old CBA' dollars still left from a $1.8B payroll.

Owner split looks like 44%, 45%, 47%, 48%, 49%, 51%. So it should take 5,6 years to get to 50/50.

Also, you really don't want to be a UFA in the first three years. Again, $400M of UFA money coming off is automatically devalued by 85%-ish, divided by the UFAs AND incoming players.

 

[Ari91]

Like I said, obviously the players are responsible for the contracts they signed. I believe they're mistaken in trying to collect money that was never promised for them in the first place.

However, the owners are guilty of deceiving the players.

How are they deceiving the players? I'm just a fan but I know

1. Individual player contracts are subject to the terms of the existing CBA and subject to change in future negotiated CBA's.

2. Regardless of the salary specified in a player's contract, the monies paid out is directly correlated to revenues earn with players receiving no more than their entitled percentage - which is where escrow comes into play.

2. Owners signed players this off season using the CBA available in order to improve their team knowing that the next CBA could be different. Players signed contracts this off season under the CBA available knowing that the next CBA could be different.

If I can understand all of these things as a fan, how can the players not understand these things when they pay lawyers and agents to explain it to them and help negotiate on their behalf? If that's the case, the players shouldn't have any existing contracts honoured in full because I don't think it sends a good message to society when you reward stupidity, lol.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Have you seen the number of Phoenix threads?

Or Luongo threads. If there is one things, besides arguing, HF is good for. It's silly, yet awesome thread titles.

 

[mossey3535]

Here are the numbers for the players' share under the 3rd proposal assuming a 5% growth rate:

12-13: 57% of $3.2 billion
13-14: 55% of $3.36 billion
14-15: 53% of $3.53 billion
15-16: 52% of $3.71 billion
16-17: 51% of $3.9 billion
17-18: 51% of $4.09 billion


That's an effective rate of 53% over the life of a 6 year CBA.

THat's pretty close to my numbers, nice work opendoor

 

[IslesBeBack*]

The idiocy of this speaks volumes. The owners are aware of today's proceedings. If there was any legitimacy to Walsh's rhetoric. The owners would be telling Bettman to agree.

Once again this loser floats into twitterspace with a special statement. I bet this was Toews thinking and he took it.

 

[Crows*]

I do think Bettman went in with the intention to create a **** show and dismiss the pa. Bettman seems like a guy who demands control.

 

[Aqualung]

And? It's a negotiation. I don't think alot of people around here are dissapointed the NHL's offer was rejected, they're pissed off that the NHLPA chose to completely ignore what was clearly a significant and meaningful offer from the other side regardless of how you view who's making what "concessions".

Like it or not, 50/50 is the industry standard for a reason. The NHL had it in their pocket for as long as they did because they know that and there's no way the PA didn't see it coming. They will not leave this labour stoppage with any more than that. They had a choice to acknowledge that and try to work out how the rest of the deal would shake out... instead, they chose to **** all over the offer and unless the NHL is feeling mighty charitable I wouldn't be suprised if they don't regret that decision come 9 months from now.

You're still misunderstanding. On it's face the deal looks fair but there are problems.

The owners want 50/50 immediately and with the "make whole" portion, players pay for players to make themselves whole. In full, it's less than 50/50.

In the player's version of 50/50, the effect is gradual, conditional, and player's initially earn greater than 50/50 early on.

It's about how 50/50 is defined. The NHL proposal had a lot of issues in it. I never said that the players are right, but to think that their offer wasn't a step forward is misinformed.

The fact that the NHL wasn't planning on listening to how the NHLPA defined 50/50 favorably for them (instead of how it was favorable for the owners) and wanted the NHLPA to tweak their offer, shows that the owners want this deal on their terms. There needs to be a middle ground. And I do see one (the two sides are not as far off as one thinks), just need to remove the smoke and mirrors.

 

[IslesBeBack*]

I do think Bettman went in with the intention to create a **** show and dismiss the pa. Bettman seems like a guy who demands control.

Bettman has always had control. What nobody realizes is that, one way or another, the players MOVED in the owners direction. The problem, they keep saying they are losing money based on an expired CBA.

Bettman will likely cancel more games, set a new deadline, and a way to get to 50-50 immediately will be established.

Even though all the players seem like they are on stupid pills, I think they are... deeeeeeep down........ somewhat genius enough to realize losing the season loses then more money then any CBA going forward.

Morons.

 

[Hammer Time]

Anyone want to give me a run down on the PA's offer?

From my understanding -

PA Offer 1:

If HRR increases to higher than $3.6 billion, we get 50%.
Otherwise, we get $1.8 billion (which would currently be 57%).

PA Offer 2:

All existing contracts become guaranteed.
If league revenues go down or stay the same, we keep our $1.8 billion (which would be 57% or higher).
For every dollar that league revenues go up, we get 25 cents, so our share gradually decreases until we're at 50%.

PA Offer 3:

All existing contracts become guaranteed.
All free agents and new players will sign for less than market value, until our share gradually decreases to 50% (if mossey3535's math is right that would take 6+ years).

 

[IslesBeBack*]

You're still misunderstanding. On it's face the deal looks fair but there are problems.

The owners want 50/50 immediately and with the "make whole" portion, players pay for players to make themselves whole. In full, it's less than 50/50.

In the player's version of 50/50, the effect is gradual, conditional, and player's initially earn greater than 50/50 early on.

It's about how 50/50 is defined. The NHL proposal had a lot of issues in it. I never said that the players are right, but to think that their offer wasn't a step forward is misinformed.

The fact that the NHL wasn't planning on listening to how the NHLPA defined 50/50 favorably for them (instead of how it was favorable for the owners) and wanted the NHLPA to tweak their offer, shows that the owners want this deal on their terms. There needs to be a middle ground. And I do see one (the two sides are not as far off as one thinks), just need to remove the smoke and mirrors.

it shows that the owners don't think the NHL is profitable enough to hold the terms under the old Cba. What about this is so difficult for you to understand?

Since Fehr loves to compare leagues, this guy even said he would have accepted a "baseball deal with no cap", maybe he should actually sit down and crunch the numbers on the profits of these leagues. The NHL players are paid too much based on what the finished product, the NHL, provides and takes in.

It couldn't be more simple then this. I understand players like fighting over percentages, but the owners do not have to, at ANY POINT IN TIME, maintain those old percentages.

The players will come down to 50% immediately or they will never play professional hockey again unless they head to Russia. How could you make a statement that dispels this as fact? You can't.

That shows you the owners are 150% in control. They always were, and they always will be. Stop trying to reinvent what's happening.

And you know what, outside of the absolute sheer stupidity the players are showing in their trek to take all they can, they receive no paychecks unless they come to an agreement with the owners. All the owners need to do is wait. And wait. And wait. and they'll want their million dollar paychecks back.

That is sooooo not debatable, so don't try.

 

[Bourne Endeavor]

Anyone want to give me a run down on the PA's offer?

First two proposals were essentially, 50% in five years but included an increase to 1.91B. The third was a fallacy, wherein the PA claimed it was 50/50 but stipulated the NHL had to honor existing contracts. Fehr admitted to not crunching the numbers. Daly opted to do so and pointed out (as many had already done so here on HF beforehand.) That the 50/50 alleged split is mathematically impossible.

In short, the PA offered three proposals based on variations of their original proposal and rejected everything the NHL offered. The response had the NHL rejected the PA's new offers in little more than ten minutes. And now the PA is pissed.

 

[mossey3535]

You're still misunderstanding. On it's face the deal looks fair but there are problems.

The owners want 50/50 immediately and with the "make whole" portion, players pay for players to make themselves whole. In full, it's less than 50/50.

In the player's version of 50/50, the effect is gradual, conditional, and player's initially earn greater than 50/50 early on.

It's about how 50/50 is defined. The NHL proposal had a lot of issues in it. I never said that the players are right, but to think that their offer wasn't a step forward is misinformed.

The fact that the NHL wasn't planning on listening to how the NHLPA defined 50/50 favorably for them (instead of how it was favorable for the owners) and wanted the NHLPA to tweak their offer, shows that the owners want this deal on their terms. There needs to be a middle ground. And I do see one (the two sides are not as far off as one thinks), just need to remove the smoke and mirrors.

Yeah but players are always 'paying for themselves'. Even under their 50/50 system, revenues generated that pay for 'old contracts' could be paying for new contracts instead. NHLPA union dues don't go entirely into paying the pension for current players, they go to old players.

And the player's 50/50 system takes 5 years to get to 50%, and that's WITH a 5% growth rate. Check the numbers opendoor and I posted.

The NHL is deferring numbers so that the transition won't be as hard for UFA's and incoming players. Also, every escrow payment the players have ever received has included interest. So they should be getting back the full amount.

 

[Ari91]

Anyone want to give me a run down on the PA's offer?

All three proposals are five year proposals.

First two proposals are basically the players taking a raise in Year 1 and then freezing their salaries until a 50/50 split can be achieved. Based on a projected 7.1% growth, the NHL gets to 50/50 split in Year 3 of 5. Based on a 5% projection, the NHL gets to 50/50 in the last year of the CBA.

The third proposal was not an official proposal and the PA didn't even do the calculations to see how the proposal would work. But their proposal was that they would take the immediate 50/50 split so long as all existing contracts are honoured. The immediate split would result in about 650M coming off of existing contracts. What the PA proposes that the league pay that 650M PLUS the players get their 50% share (and that share would include any league growth).

 

[HockeyAddict]

Today's meeting was to be expected... I'm pretty sure Bettman/Daly had planned all along to cut the meeting short and state the NHLPA's counter-offer was unacceptable if they were not prepared to sign the NHL latest offer. Its just a tactic in the negotiations game.

I'm the most optomistic I've been since they started negotiating that we will have NHL games in 2012.

 

[void]

Richard Labbé @Richardlabbe:
Am told D.Fehr, on conference call with players tonite, insisted on trying to get a deal done. This is not over yet, folks.

https://twitter.com/richardlabbe/status/259097509480251393

 

[Luigi Habs]

I agree with the players with only one thing, the contracts already signed should be fully honoured.