Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

NHL makes 50-50 revenue split offer


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
84 replies to this topic

#61 Jaimito

Jaimito

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,913 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 03

Posted 17 October 2012 - 04:03 AM

time to cut the deal.

let's get the season started

i like how it is still a full 82 gm
Posted Image

#62 Canuck Surfer

Canuck Surfer

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,480 posts
  • Joined: 27-December 10

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:51 AM

Nope, its not.

You can counter; or u can tender a completely independent offer. Then the original is on the table till withdrawn.

But people can talk as much as they want in the interim...


No, it is. That's why this is an Offer, and not negotiations. They can sit down all day over coffee and donuts and talk about where they'd like to be and it isn't legally binding. This is a contract offer. The second the NHLPA asks for anything else, it's a counter-offer. This is also literally how all negotiations with all Unions work all the time everywhere. Negotiations to understand positions and where the other party is willing to go, and then an official offer. If the NHLPA says boo, the Owners go to the press. I'm not trying to talk down or be a douche, and I will hold off until this is confirmed, and come eat crow if I'm wrong, but there are only 2 conclusions here. The NHLPA unilaterally agrees to accept it. Or they reject the offer. There won't be words like 'sat down to negotiate' in the heading. The word they'll use is reject, and that offer will no longer be available, and in a few days the NHLPA will file a formal counter-proposal. There's not a new offer given every day during these things. There's a lot of talk, and then lawyers draft up these complicated 200 page proposals only once they understand what they can and can not get away with. It's either Accept or Reject, is all I'm saying. There won't be a situation where this is amended and signed within a few hours. It's completely impossible.



#63 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,022 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:10 AM

Players won't accept this one for sure. But hopefully they only make some minor tweaks here and there and submit a reasonable counter offer. Let's get this deal done! 82 games would be awesome.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#64 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,022 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:22 AM

NHL proposal not met with great enthusiasm:

The first official NHLPA reaction to the NHL offer is in -- NHLPA executive director Don Fehr sent a letter to all players and agents last night -- and not unexpectedly the league's proposal wasn't met with great enthusiasm.

In the letter, which breaks down a summary of the NHL offer, Fehr writes the following:

- "Simply put, the owners' new proposal, while not quite as Draconian as their previous proposals, still represents enormous reductions in player salaries and individual contracting rights. As you will see, at the 5 per cent industry growth rate the owners predict, the salary reduction over six years exceeds $1.6 billion. What do the owners offer in return?"

- "The proposal does represent movement from their last negotiating position, but still represents very large, immediate and continuing concessions by players to owners, in salary and benefits (the Players' Share) and in individual player contracting rules."

On some of the specific aspects of the NHL proposal:

- "They want to "clarify" HRR definition and rules. It is not immediately clear what this means, but so far all of their ideas in this regard have had the effect of reducing HRR, and thereby lowering salaries."

- "The Players' Share is reduced to 50 per cent from 57 per cent immediately -- this season. This is a reduction in the share of 12.3 per cent. On last year's revenue numbers, this would mean that players' salaries would be cut by about $231 million."

- "The proposal includes a "Make Whole" provision, to compensate players for the anticipated reduction in absolute dollars from last year (2011-12), to this year and next year. However, it would work like this. The Players Share in subsequent years would be reduced so that this "Make Whole" payment would be made. It is players paying players, not owners paying players. That is, players are "made whole" for reduced salaries in one year by reducing their salaries in later years."

- "Finally, they also proposed that the players could appeal supplemental or commissioner discipline to a neutral arbitration, on a "clearly erroneous" standard, which, as a practical manner, makes it very unlikely that any decision would be overturned."

The final two paragraphs of the letter sums up where Fehr believes the process is at and reinforces the players' position on all issues:

- "We do not yet know whether this proposal is a serious attempt to negotiate an agreement, or just another step down the road. The next several days will be, in large part, an effort to discover the answer to that question."

- "Bear in mind the approach that the Players have taken to these negotiations. It is:

- Given the enormous concessions players made in the last round, plus 7 years of record revenue reaching $3.3 billion last season, there is no reason for a reduction in the amount the players receive.

- Players are willing to take reduced share going forward so that the NHL can grow out of whatever problems some franchises face.

- The player contracting rights secured in the last negotiations should be, at minimum, maintained.

- Revenue sharing needs to be enhanced and structured so as to encourage revenue growth by the receiving teams.

- The overall agreement has to be fair and equitable for both parties. Bargaining is both give and take."
Posted Image
Posted Image

#65 canucks_dynasty

canucks_dynasty

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:42 AM

The problem is that the Owners are coming to the Players with what the Players asked for. With minor changes. The Players making a counter of any kind makes them look greedy, because this is, by all rights and by every opinion expressed since the offer came out, an extremely reasonable offer. It's such a reasonable offer that there's not enough places you could argue that it would be worth fighting for. Which means that the Players would be rejecting an offer, knowing it can't get significantly better, and postponing the season further. To try and tweak an offer that very, very few fans or media writers seem to oppose. If there isn't NHL hockey on November 3rd, then the NHLPA has done something unreasonable and they should be vilified.


Looks like I'm right in saying the NHLPA won't accept the NHL offer as-is. Seen many tweets and columns saying that the NHL offer is a good starting point. I think we'll see a counter-offer in the next couple of days from the NHLPA.

There will be a season starting on Nov 2nd. Pressure from NBC is apparantly the driving force to get the deal done. And you know how Bettman is always wanting that US TV revenue to grow/expand. It's just a matter of fine-tuning the contract that both parties can live with.

#66 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,022 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 08:51 AM

Fehr doesn't seem like he's content to get a contract that the players can live with. He wants to win every little thing. If he is that stubborn he could cost everyone this season. Hope that's not the case but that's how he comes across to me.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#67 RTG

RTG

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 4 posts
  • Joined: 21-January 09

Posted 17 October 2012 - 09:54 AM

I don't think I'm alone in saying that, if this goes bad, I'm pretty much ready to quit with the NHL. If this goes so bad that they ruin the chance of a season, I'm done.

You're not alone.
The dollar figures being bandied about are mind boggling. Neither side will ever recoup the money if the entire season is lost.
Both sides have to be sensible and not stand on ego or saving face to force a continuation of the lockout.

The union must accept this offer (or a slightly tweaked version) in order to get the season started. They'll have to confirm what constitutes hockey related revenue and length of term, free agency and so on, but this is the blueprint. Let's get it signed.

#68 GoodBadUgly

GoodBadUgly

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 625 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 09

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:21 AM

So if the NHLPA accepts the deal all of the players that went to Russia and Europe will come back to the NHL?

#69 canucks_dynasty

canucks_dynasty

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 11:28 AM

So if the NHLPA accepts the deal all of the players that went to Russia and Europe will come back to the NHL?


Pretty sure players that went overseas to Russia and Europe have an out clause for when NHL resumes.

#70 panelguy

panelguy

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 612 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:10 PM

The Bettman makes this sound like an owners concession.
It's a huge players concession fact.

#71 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,394 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 12:49 PM

Fehr doesn't seem like he's content to get a contract that the players can live with. He wants to win every little thing. If he is that stubborn he could cost everyone this season. Hope that's not the case but that's how he comes across to me.


Based on what? The NHL's previous offers not only slashed the players' share but also reduce what qualified for HRR to begin with, denied players arbitration, limited contract lengths but lengthening RFA service requirements and all while owners offered to give nothing. Even this latest offer requires players to give in every regard - reduced salaries, reduced cap limiting future pay increases, limited contract lengths and lengthened amount of service required to become UFAs.

In fact, from what I can see, the owners have simply shorted their laundry list of demands, not given anything. The ONLY thing the players can even begin to call a "win" is the NHL's proposal including a commonsense expansion of league revenue sharing to help the poorer teams. Yep, that's what the players asked for that this offer gives them, and it actually helps the owners most of all.

And then there's that murky matter of requiring minor league contracts to be counted against a team's cap. Sure, the NHL website says it shouldn't be counted against the players' share, but the players' share IS the cap. That's what determines the cap, that's what determines who's owed money from the portion of salaries held back in escrow each year. And that's what determines how much salary teams can offer players. How could that not limit the players' share?

So, I don't understand your point that "Fehr wants to win every little thing." when the reality is they haven't won anything or gotten anything. It wasn't the players who gave a proposal with a ultimatum (remember the NHL's first proposal?) and the players have said all along they will take a lowered percentage, but that doesn't mean they should be required to give up everything else too while the owners yet again give nothing and just demand more and more.
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#72 Gady

Gady

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 209 posts
  • Joined: 14-May 03

Posted 17 October 2012 - 01:19 PM

The problem is that the Owners are coming to the Players with what the Players asked for. With minor changes.


it is not true. The Players asked not to take any money from them (meaning, existing contracts) + not to reduce HRR.

Both these elements still unclear in current NHL offer
Love your enemies - it will drive them crazy ...

#73 NHLFan33

NHLFan33

    K-Wing Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined: 16-October 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 04:31 PM

Hey folks. It looks like there might be some traction in negotiations right now and perhaps more than ever, I think fans can make a difference.

This dispute is basically about money, and one of the main facts that has allowed both the NHL and NHLPA to be so bold about fighting over a few % points of revenue is a lack of fear that losing games or the season will cost them any meaningful amount of fans or revenue when play resumes.

I think both sides might take negotiatiosn a little more seriosuly if they start to have their doubts about whehter HRR will take a hit or not. And here's where I think fans can apply some pressure. There seem to be a variety of fan sites arisign online giving fans a voice. There's twitters like NHKLFanBoycott and NHLFanBoycott1 and NHLFA. There's facebook pages like NHL Fan Boycott and NHL Fan Lockout Pledge. There's websites like the Fan letter posted on this forum, NHLFanBoycott.com, and NHLFansArmy.com.

I know its hard to get fans motivated and organized and the impact of any of these sites is a function of how many peopel get involved. But, as Gretzky said - 100% of the shots you dont take dont score, so I for one am all for trying at least. for every digruntled fan that takes the time to let the NHL/NHLPA know, they can probably bank on 50 pissed off fans that arent online saying something, so even a few 1000 fans shoudl be enough to get their attention.

I guess my rant is just to say that in the next few days, if you want the Lockout to end, it migth be worth tryign to make your voice heard and the internet makes it easier than ever before. If there are other good online fan spots, it migth be helpful to post them in thsi thread too.

#74 bobopan

bobopan

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,530 posts
  • Joined: 02-August 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:10 PM

If im a Canucks fan i don't want the players to sign this deal.. Say goodbye to Edler.

#75 mbal23

mbal23

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,717 posts
  • Joined: 02-May 11

Posted 17 October 2012 - 05:31 PM

I don't think I'm alone in saying that, if this goes bad, I'm pretty much ready to quit with the NHL. If this goes so bad that they ruin the chance of a season, I'm done.


I hate people who talk big but keep coming back. Leave or stay. One or the other. There is no middle ground.

#76 DunCanuck

DunCanuck

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 30 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 06:21 PM

"100% of the shots you dont take dont score"

-Wayne Gretzky

Are you sure that's what he said? Doesn't sound familiar

#77 Dirt Nasty

Dirt Nasty

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 201 posts
  • Joined: 06-August 12

Posted 17 October 2012 - 06:24 PM

"100% of the shots you dont take dont score"

-Wayne Gretzky

Are you sure that's what he said? Doesn't sound familiar

hahahaha, that was good!

Edited by Dirt Nasty, 17 October 2012 - 06:25 PM.

Posted Image

#78 ccc44

ccc44

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 09

Posted 17 October 2012 - 07:07 PM

Take it, you chump millionaires.

Take it, you chump millionaires.

Dont take it ,screw the chump billionaires
Posted Image
SHOTS ! SHOTS ! SHOTS !

#79 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,022 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 17 October 2012 - 07:49 PM

Based on what? The NHL's previous offers not only slashed the players' share but also reduce what qualified for HRR to begin with, denied players arbitration, limited contract lengths but lengthening RFA service requirements and all while owners offered to give nothing. Even this latest offer requires players to give in every regard - reduced salaries, reduced cap limiting future pay increases, limited contract lengths and lengthened amount of service required to become UFAs.

In fact, from what I can see, the owners have simply shorted their laundry list of demands, not given anything. The ONLY thing the players can even begin to call a "win" is the NHL's proposal including a commonsense expansion of league revenue sharing to help the poorer teams. Yep, that's what the players asked for that this offer gives them, and it actually helps the owners most of all.

And then there's that murky matter of requiring minor league contracts to be counted against a team's cap. Sure, the NHL website says it shouldn't be counted against the players' share, but the players' share IS the cap. That's what determines the cap, that's what determines who's owed money from the portion of salaries held back in escrow each year. And that's what determines how much salary teams can offer players. How could that not limit the players' share?

So, I don't understand your point that "Fehr wants to win every little thing." when the reality is they haven't won anything or gotten anything. It wasn't the players who gave a proposal with a ultimatum (remember the NHL's first proposal?) and the players have said all along they will take a lowered percentage, but that doesn't mean they should be required to give up everything else too while the owners yet again give nothing and just demand more and more.

As I said..."based on how he comes across to me" when I listen to him talk or read his comments. No doubt the players are the ones who are going to have to give, since they had 57% of the HRR this past season. 50-50 is too much of a reduction for the first year no doubt but it's a huge step by the owners so hopefully the players would be willing to go around 52-48 or something for the first year. Both sides are going to have to make concessions to get a deal done.

My point was that we shouldn't blame the whole lock out on Bettman...if the season is lost it will be both their faults. Fehr seems like he's happy to just sit back and watch the owners squirm as opposed to making an offer. Now that Bettman has made one hopefully real negotiations can take place.
Posted Image
Posted Image

#80 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,394 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 10:53 AM

As I said..."based on how he comes across to me" when I listen to him talk or read his comments. No doubt the players are the ones who are going to have to give, since they had 57% of the HRR this past season. 50-50 is too much of a reduction for the first year no doubt but it's a huge step by the owners so hopefully the players would be willing to go around 52-48 or something for the first year. Both sides are going to have to make concessions to get a deal done.

My point was that we shouldn't blame the whole lock out on Bettman...if the season is lost it will be both their faults. Fehr seems like he's happy to just sit back and watch the owners squirm as opposed to making an offer. Now that Bettman has made one hopefully real negotiations can take place.


Of course it's fair to blame Bettman for the lockout he ordered. Remember he delivered the owners' first offer (which amounted to nothing more than highway robbery) with the ultimatum that if the players didn't sign it all future deals would be worse and then imposed the lockout without having undertaken a good faith effort to even begin negotiating. And with that move, he set the stage and the tone of these negotiations. How is that not on him? Now, blaming both sides for failing to get a deal done and salvage at least some of the season with the starting point they have now is a different matter. But the lockout is still all on him.

I don't understand your point about Fehr sitting back and watching them squirm. The players made an actual offer that should have offered as much of a starting point as the owners' latest offer does, but Bettman choose not to use it as such. He choose to reject it outright, not to say "let's meet and hash out these points we disagree with." So, why blame Fehr for not trying to negotiate from the owners' first unrealistic, insulting offer that didn't address any of the players' concerns but not Bettman for not trying to negotiate from a reasonable offer that actually addressed at least some of the owners' concerns?

And if you mean that Fehr has yet to respond to the latest offer, well, he just got it a few days ago and even Bettman said he assumed it would take days for Fehr to look it over and get back to him. Plus, Fehr had to have time to talk to and involve the player representatives in the discussion. And since they are meeting today, it makes sense that he wouldn't have made an offer and would instead just prefer to talk about the individual points of contention in person. Hopefully doing so they will be able to strike a compromise. I absolutely agree with you that that is a process that should have started a while ago. I just disagree that the players who were already offering to give up stuff are the ones being blamed but not also the owners who never offered to give up anything, only demand slightly less. From my point of view, offering to give something IS negotiating. Making lists of new demands while offering to give up nothing is not.

And that's my big concern, and frankly should be the concern of every fan. Owners aren't making any compromises though they and some fans want to pretend they are. They got record revenues league wide and now will get even more as players are forced to give up even more than last time while being under even more restrictions. With that kind of positive reinforcement for lockouts, why wouldn't owners lockout players each and every time the CBA expires? It seems they just get everything they want and face no consequences. If the owners aren't made to pay for this lockout either by the players or the fans through a wallet lockout, I can guarantee you we'll be right back here yet again when this CBA expires.
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#81 Canada Hockey Place

Canada Hockey Place

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,619 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 18 October 2012 - 10:57 AM

My point was that we shouldn't blame the whole lock out on Bettman...if the season is lost it will be both their faults. Fehr seems like he's happy to just sit back and watch the owners squirm as opposed to making an offer. Now that Bettman has made one hopefully real negotiations can take place.


People tend to forget that it's up to the league to get the players to sign the agreement. Not up to the NHLPA to get the owners to sign a contract. It's a lock-out. Not a walk-out.

Bettman was in charge the last negotiations, got the owners to agree to the terms up until they expired this summer. Obviously the owners were not happy with those terms, thus the huge gap that they are trying to cover now.

You can blame the players for not signing but the blame for the delay is on Bettman for not doing his job which is to get this sorted out without the players or owners losing revenue and fan support. Which a negotiating tactic he has used twice before.

NHL Constitution, Article VI, section 6.1:
6.1 Office of Commissioner, Election and Term of Office The League shall employ a Commissioner selected by the Board of Governors. The Commissioner shall serve as the Chief Executive Officer of the League and is charged with protecting the integrity of the game of professional hockey and preserving public confidence in the League.


Quando omni flunkus moritati

#82 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,022 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:02 AM

But both sides sat around for so long no? They had all summer and both sides failed to negotiate a deal. Both sides seemed content to sit back and let it get to this point.

edit
I'm not saying Bettman shouldn't take the majority of the blame; just that he's not the only one who should shoulder some of it.

Edited by Nevlach, 18 October 2012 - 11:03 AM.

Posted Image
Posted Image

#83 coleman26

coleman26

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,520 posts
  • Joined: 09-August 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 02:20 PM

I hate people who talk big but keep coming back. Leave or stay. One or the other. There is no middle ground.


:) Yeah, show me where i've said that anywhere else, kthx. OMG I'M TIRED OF THE LOCKOUT AND RICH PEOPLE BEING GREEDY AND I COMPLAINED ABOUT IT ONCE. /huge eyeroll

I am here to eat a bit of crow though, since the Owners have left the offer on the table. I still don't think they''re legally required to, and I'm even more confident now that talks will break down and there won't be a season and the NHLPA will look like monsters, but I definitely underestimated how they were going to handle negotiations. Crow eaten.

Edited by coleman26, 18 October 2012 - 02:21 PM.


#84 The Wizard of AZ

The Wizard of AZ

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,701 posts
  • Joined: 27-January 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 03:33 PM

Smooth move by the owners. Making the Players look greedy.

Posted Image


#85 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 04:50 PM

NHL = Joke.

Thanks for nothing. All fans should not even watch IF it comes back next year.



Posted Image




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.