cire2222 Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 idn what to do without Canucks games. its usually a better day when i can come home and watch hockey. Ive been a canucks fan for like 10 years now. So, In my english class my argumentative speech is about this stupid lockout and i must say after reading that i can't watch hockey because a bunch of greedy billionaires can't even seem to deal with the fact that they might lose a few million dollars, but in comparison they have billions of dollars. Im shocked by there greed.sure they might not make as much as they want to but who cares. you own a hockey team for the purpose of people being able to watch hockey and let millions of people watch them. All these owners or the NHLPA, or gerry betman need to forget about money and remember about the game. its1300 games of hockey won't be played, watched or enjoyed by ANYONE because they are looking like there not going to happen. figure it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehamburglar Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Your math is flawed. HRR = Hockey Related Revenue. Revenue does not equal profit. Revenue is just the amount of money that comes in and does not take expenses into account. As for the last bit about owners and their greedy hands; if they were so greedy, they wouldn't have purchased a hockey team. Do you really think that Aquilini is in it for the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuck nit Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Wtf is with you and all these other people that think its all the owners fault? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Maybe because it is the NHL hierarchy and franchise owners that live in Billionaire la la land? These guys will circumvent any rules that attempt to govern them to one up their competition. In the end the NHLPA has to police the owner?Pathetic ,grubby owner nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Commentator Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 Good points, but I think the money is a big reason why Aqulini is in it; there's no way there isn't. If he just wanted to be a rich fan, why wouldn't he just get season tickets, own a box, and do something else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edlerberry Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 The Players essentially make 57% of the total revenues with no costs other than their own taxes, while the owners incurr ALL the running costs with only 43% to cover it, as well as paying their taxes, hence the reason they're asking for more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-a-Million Posted September 20, 2012 Author Share Posted September 20, 2012 THN posted that the Montreal Canadien's owner, Geoff Molsen commented on "100% support by the owners for Gary Bettman and his tactics". Of course, there is an imposed $1,000,000 fine for any owner that speaks up against the NHL. Molsen goes on to say he hopes the lockout is short lived. Since the owners have imposed the lockout, it would seem they are the ones in control of how long the work stoppage lasts. I don't believe the union has even mentioned the word strike once. With all pre-season games now cancelled and players heading off to Europe, it seems they are at a stalemate and, while giving lip service to the public, are determined to stand their ground. The NFL is looking more and more attractive each week as we chip away at the hockey season. This is not good for hockey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thehamburglar Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Which do you think sounds most impressive: 1. I own the rights to sit in these seats/a box for a season and watch Canucks games. 2. I own the Canucks organization and the arena they play in. Those 2 aren't really in the same realm. Certainly he would prefer to have a franchise that actually earns money rather than losing it, just like anyone else would. But as goalie13 said, there are much easier ways to make money. If something other than money wasn't the main motivation behind wanting to own a hockey team, I'm pretty sure Jamison wouldn't be attempting to acquire the Coyotes right now (and promising to keep the team in Phoenix for 20 more years). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 The Players essentially make 57% of the total revenues with no costs other than their own taxes, while the owners incurr ALL the running costs with only 43% to cover it, as well as paying their taxes, hence the reason they're asking for more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanuckinEdm Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 Is the 57% the upper cap or the lower? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.