Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
6226 replies to this topic

#3511 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,327 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 28 November 2012 - 09:51 AM

How is speaking out in a way that could weaken your union's bargaining position for all of the players the same as playing in another league to mitigate your personal financial and physical losses during the lockout?

My question for Hamrlik and Neuvirth would be the same as I'm sure some of the other players had, namely did you try talking to your union or the players on the bargaining committee about what's going on and your concerns, or did you just complain to the press? They are certainly entitled to their opinions, but publicly offering a dissenting opinion while never trying to actually do anything with it accomplishes nothing other than providing ammunition to be used against the union.

Everyone's got an opinion, it's action that's needed to get the deal done.

You didn't like Hamrlik speaking out because by doing so it threatened union solidarity. On the otherhand you had no trouble calling out individual owners for not speaking up during this dispute. Both players and owners have negociating committees who are supposed to do the talking. The dif appears to be that the PA does invite individual players to sit in on discussions which is a smart move.

The NHL is a closed shop and if Hamrlik had a problem belonging to a union (which he doesn't appear to have) he could not play in the NHL.
  • 0

#3512 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,373 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:07 AM

Wrong.  Ovie might not come back.  Joe Consumer might not renew his Centre Ice package and instead follow the KHL from now on...


Many people say that, few actually do. And besides, him cancelling Centre Ice has little to do with the KHL. It's not like he's attending KHL games, or switching to "KHL Centre Ice".

If anything, the meagre streams and highlights of KHL hockey remind people of how great hockey is, and whet their appetite for the NHL to get this done and back on the ice. It's in the league's interest for people to notice these.

However, if the players could simply sign to the AHL, people could get a taste for a product they could substitute for NHL hockey. They can get a broadcast AHL game package, and they can attend those games, and build new allegiances. As such, the NHL will not allow locked out players to play there (other than the prospects already assigned there as per normal rules).
  • 3
Posted Image

#3513 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,746 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:12 AM

What about these NHL players taking the jobs of those in other leagues?

From another thread, "Looks like Schneider (signing with Ambri Piotta) will replace Nolan Schaefer as starter. "

But as soon as the NHL restarts, these players will leave those teams...so look at what it has done.
Players get displaced as they are not good enough to be the starter, then they are asked to be the starter...teams that benefited have inflated stats...they may make the playoffs when another team should have....it's a huge snowball effect...

IMHO, if a player goes and plays elsewhere, their contract should be null and void in the NHL..

Yes...I know...the NHL bends over backwards for these players so they have made allowances for players to do this...


I would agree with you...if the players were the ones on strike. In this case though the players were locked out of playing while they are under contract.

The solidarity argument is a bit of a cop out in itself. These players have no intention of leaving for good. As soon as they aren't being locked out from their job they will come back.

If Ovie chooses not to do that that is his choice. In that situation I would agree he is acting on his behalf but most if not all players will be returning to their regular jobs when they are allowed to do so.

Anytime in situations like this people speak out of turn. Players have done it and so have owners. It doesn't necessarily mean they are not still behind their particular side it just means they are frustrated and human.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#3514 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,424 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:15 AM

You didn't like Hamrlik speaking out because by doing so it threatened union solidarity. On the otherhand you had no trouble calling out individual owners for not speaking up during this dispute. Both players and owners have negociating committees who are supposed to do the talking. The dif appears to be that the PA does invite individual players to sit in on discussions which is a smart move.

The NHL is a closed shop and if Hamrlik had a problem belonging to a union (which he doesn't appear to have) he could not play in the NHL.


You may be confusing me with someone else, because the post yours was in response to is the only opinion I've offered about Hamrlik and I don't remember calling out individual owners for not speaking up. But okay.

There's a huge difference between a union member not involved in the process by choice speaking out against his union's interest and an owner shut out of the process speaking out in the interest of their business which they feel isn't being represented by the league. Ideally, they would both be able to speak to their bargaining committees and have their opinions heard and needs considered. There difference is, we have no reason to assume Hamrlik couldn't have had his voice heard by his bargaining committee if he'd only chosen to speak to them instead of the media. He offered the talk, but not the walk. Owners, on the other hand, are told how to walk and not allowed to talk. Owners are threatened with huge fines (and possibly reprisals, according to some sports writers) to keep their opinions to themselves. HUGE difference.

I'm not sure what that last bit is supposed to mean, but all pro sports have a players' union, not just the NHL. Also, I don't see any reason to assume he has a problem belonging to the union in general, only that he's frustrated with this CBA process and behaved, I believe, inappropriately and unhelpfully in response. Rather than speaking out against his union he should have at least first trying to speak to his union.

Edited by poetica, 28 November 2012 - 01:42 PM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#3515 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,129 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:25 AM

I doubt that the NHLPA would decertify....because of all the effort that has gone on so far and the players have lost games and money trying to stick it the Mighty owners. It would be a huge fail and slap in the face of those who believed in the NHLPA and stuck with them. But in the end to have it all go to decertification....most will see it as a waste when it comes down to everyman for himself...lol

Chants begin to moan out of the NHLPA crowds: cave cavE caVE cAVE CAVE CAVE~!


Holy crap, you sound like a holy person preaching about the end of the world. Is this actually happening anytime soon because you've been saying this for a long time now.
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#3516 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,129 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:50 AM

Re: the removal of mediator Serota.


Source: http://www.fmcs.gov/...39&itemID=23889


Also, according to tweets by PIerre LeBrun @ TSN, Serota says (via email) that his Twitter account was hacked. It seems he had the account closed, but an imposter opened a new one under the same name right after. I have no idea if that one has been closed or not.

I still have no idea what the tweets in question said, though.


Ha ha, now entire Billion dollar business' can be messed with by the childern's version of email. Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, sounds like a great way to pick your jury.
  • 0

Canuckslogo160x160.jpg


#3517 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,853 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 November 2012 - 11:54 AM

...
Yeah if we had the Grizzlies that would be different, I would actually like to go attend games and see it all live for myself.

You make a great on Basketball bringing the most plays and action and things, but to me the reason it isn't as entertaining as hockey (Or even Football which I don't mind watching) is that while there are alot of dunks and baskets and things, there not all as important as a touchdown or interception in football, or a goal or big save in Hockey, you know what I mean? Just because it happens so often, it makes it less important to me as a casual fan (unless I have an association with that team), so it just takes away from the entertainment of those plays.

Man... dissecting the entertainment value of other sports really makes me miss canucks hockey :(

I can see that point of it, where scoring happens so frequently that it becomes a lesser event. Glass half full or half empty I guess - it's still the same glass.

I don't think the NHL will be cooperative. The mediator isn't going to be brining offers to the table, or siding one way or the other. The *only* reason the NHL is attending this mediation is to appear to try and say "hey, we tried". If decertification should happen "refusing mediation" would look bad in court I'd think. In fact, this is a sign that the NHL is suddenly taking decertification more seriously as a possible outcome. I expect 3-5 days of mediation followed by a fail.

I did misspeak and wasn't quite on the mark with the mediator presenting a deal, as that's more to do with arbitration. You're right that the NHL doesn't have to 'do' anything with the mediators recommendations, but I'd think if there are good points and the NHLPA is willing to move in that direction to get a CBA done but the NHL refuses, then it'd come out and reflect poorly on the NHL. If one side or the other has little to no movement towards the recommendations, then that will reflect just as badly should it end up in the courts.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#3518 RAMBUTANS

RAMBUTANS

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,410 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 12:51 PM

Just read an article about Boston's bully owner Jacobs as one of the reason why there is a lockout. Winnipeg doesn't want a prolonged one but was told by Jacobs to sit their ass down.

Faqqing Boston.
  • 1
Mr. Reputable of the HFBoards

#3519 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 01:27 PM

The NHL's Best (And Worst) Fans
(the actual rankings are displayed in a slideshow on the Forbes site)

Think the NHL cannot afford the current lockout without causing irreparable damage to its fans? Think again.
Over the past 8 years, fans proved they have a very short memory of the pain they endured when the last lockout robbed them of an entire season. They paid 39% more for tickets despite Commissioner Gary Bettman’s declaration that the recently expired CBA would result in lower prices. They paid 19% more to park, buy beer, soda and hot dogs, and grab a souvenir.

Think it will be different this time though? Think again, again. Two-thirds of NHL teams reported zero season ticket holder cancellations. Granted, many teams never put that option on the table. But even among the few that did give fans an out, they only reported a handful walked away. To boot, the teams replaced them with fans on their waiting list. The Columbus Blue Jackets even reported that season ticket holders have gone up slightly since the start of the lockout.Last season the hockey faithful filled arenas to 95.6% of capacity while delivering television rating increases to both national and local partners. They spent 25% more on jerseys and 41% more on hats, contributing to a 15% increase in overall merchandise sales. Over 4 million more fans followed their teams on Facebook in the last year for a total of over 14 million fans currently engaged on the social network. On Twitter, 3 million more fans followed their teams in the past year to bring the NHL fan universe there above 4.1 million.
Additionally, teams reported that the overwhelming majority of season ticket holders chose to receive credit towards future payments, rather than receive refunds on games already canceled. On the upper end, some teams reported 99% chose that option. On the low end, the Florida Panthers reported 90 percent of their season ticket holders chose to keep their money with the team.
“Our fans are diehard and the most loyal in all sports,” said an NHL spokesperson. “And they have stuck by us in all our labor disputes.”
With all this in mind we set out to find out the most diehard among them – the ones who will still spend money after a second lockout in 8 years, based on how much money and time they spent since the last one. First, using data from Team Marketing Report, we calculated which fans have willingly shelled out the most in terms of price increases for tickets since the last lockout. We then did the same for concessions, memorabilia and parking over the same time period. Next with team and league data, we looked at home attendance rates since the last lockout, and counted which teams have had the most popular merchandise for the past two years. With the help of Nielsen we then ranked teams by their local market television ratings. Finally, we measured fans social media engagement on Facebook and Twitter. Our final ranking was based on a compilation of those metrics. Since last year was the first after their relocation from Atlanta, The Winnipeg Jets fans were excluded from the final ranking due to a lack of comparable data.
Pittsburgh Penguins fans topped the list, an honor they have previously been awarded by Forbes using a different set of criteria. Blessed with the first round pick in the 2005 draft, the first following the 2004-05 lockout season, the Pens landed Sidney Crosby, now the league’s poster boy and highest paid player, and immediately started a turn-around from their previous financial misfortune. The next season, the addition of the equally talented Evgeni Malkin, the former rookie of the year, two-time league top scorer, Stanley Cup final MVP, and last year’s league MVP, helped. The team began a five-year sellout streak in February 2007 that coincided with a five-year playoff run including a Stanley Cup win in 2009. So energized were fans that when the team moved from the Igloo into the bigger Consol Energy Center in 2010, an 8.1 percent ticket price increase seemed to go unnoticed. Fans have equally devoted time to watching their Pens on TV too. Last year the team had the highest cable ratings in the NHL, pulling a 7.9 on Root Sports.
The Toronto Maple Leafs landed third among the best fans despite having a streak of a different kind – eight years missing the playoffs. Sure, fans booed the team off the ice in late March of this latest season after a loss to the Carolina Hurricanes that mathematically eliminated them from contention. They paid heftily for the right to do so. The average ticket price last year was $123, the highest in the league by 50%, and 151% more than what it was at the start of the 2005-06 season. Even still, and despite being the league’s worst in terms of payroll dollars spent, the team has played to a full capacity crowd at Air Canada Centre all these seasons.
Not to confuse best fans with most foolish fans, but it is fans like the Leafs, whose loyalty helped their team triple in value to $1 billion today to become the most valuable in the NHL, who certainly make it more comfortable for Bettman to sleep at night during the lockout.
They also give a new meaning to fans that fall at the bottom of our ranking, our “worst fans”. Compared to the Leafs, “casual fans” is probably a better description.
The Phoenix Coyotes take top spot in that category. Despite a playoff contending team, Jobing.com Arena was only 72.5% filled last season. The good news is that was slightly higher than the 2010-11 season and fails to reflect how it was packed to capacity during the playoffs; bad news it was less than the past 7 season average of 78%. Seats are a bargain at $36.15 for the fans who want to go – second cheapest in the league behind the Dallas Stars, No. 5 among the worst fans. But all other engagement metrics –merchandise sales, TV ratings, social media involvement – indicate there may not be many ice loving sports fans in the desert. Either that or the team’s bankruptcy and current CBA-occupied league owners have kept management from properly marketing to them.
Two more Sun Belt teams’ fans rank among our worst but seem to have a lifeline not yet available in Glendale, Ariz. After three years of declining attendance, the Tampa Bay Lightning, under new owner Jeffrey Vinik, started to reverse that trend in 2010-11, helping themselves by making the playoffs that season after three previous ones in the toilet. After their first playoff appearance last season since 2000, the Florida Panthers received a boost in the form of a new deal with Fox Sports Florida that included an upfront bonus and is set to nearly double its local television revenue, money that can help keep talent on the ice.
As indicated by the top 5 best fans and top 5 worst fans, it is worth noting that there is a positive correlation between fan engagement and their team value. The better the fans, the better a team’s value. That makes sense since fans are directly responsible for generating over 50% of the NHL’s revenue, which has grown from $2.2 billion the season before the last lockout to a record $3.3 billion last season. A similar fan study among the other three big leagues — the NFL, NBA, and MLB –show different results. Most drastically, in the NFL we found there is no correlation between the top fans and their value.Maybe the best NHL fans should be reserved for the ones that finally demand a seat at the bargaining table.


  • 0

#3520 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,424 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

The NHL's Best (And Worst) Fans
(the actual rankings are displayed in a slideshow on the Forbes site)


Think the NHL cannot afford the current lockout without causing irreparable damage to its fans? Think again.
Over the past 8 years, fans proved they have a very short memory of the pain they endured when the last lockout robbed them of an entire season. They paid 39% more for tickets despite Commissioner Gary Bettman’s declaration that the recently expired CBA would result in lower prices. They paid 19% more to park, buy beer, soda and hot dogs, and grab a souvenir.
...
“Our fans are diehard and the most loyal in all sports,” said an NHL spokesperson. “And they have stuck by us in all our labor disputes.”
...
As indicated by the top 5 best fans and top 5 worst fans, it is worth noting that there is a positive correlation between fan engagement and their team value. The better the fans, the better a team’s value. That makes sense since fans are directly responsible for generating over 50% of the NHL’s revenue, which has grown from $2.2 billion the season before the last lockout to a record $3.3 billion last season. A similar fan study among the other three big leagues — the NFL, NBA, and MLB –show different results. Most drastically, in the NFL we found there is no correlation between the top fans and their value.Maybe the best NHL fans should be reserved for the ones that finally demand a seat at the bargaining table.


Am I the only one that finds that incredibly depressing?
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#3521 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,424 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:07 PM

Haggerty: Jacobs should be held responsible

Want to know why the NHL lockout is creeping into its fourth month of existence, why we’re approaching 80 days of hockey pestilence, hostility and greed?


Here’s a story illustrating the self-interested, tyrannical leadership at play on the NHL’s side:

Winnipeg Jets representation at a recent NHL Board of Governors meeting piped up to say it was opposed to engaging in a long, bloody lockout sure to stymie their franchise’s momentum and hurt the game of hockey.

It wasn’t Winnipeg owner Mark Chipman, but rather one of the alternate governors representing the Jets.

Bruins Principal Owner and Chairman of the Board of Governors Jeremy Jacobs answered by reprimanding the Winnipeg representative as one of the “new kids on the block” and informed him that he would know when he was allowed to speak in the NHL board room.

That’s the kind of hawkish, dismissive, bully mentality that's driving the bus for the NHL lockout that's now cancelled games through the middle of December.

It’s also the reason why Bruins fans should hold Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs personally responsible.

Jacobs was always a lightning rod for local criticism and cynicism during his close to 40 years owning the Bruins, but the Delaware North baron has deservedly won some goodwill in recent years. He has consistently spent up to the NHL salary cap over the last seven years, and the high point of his ownership came two seasons ago when he oversaw a talented Bruins team that won the Stanley Cup.

But even in the midst of his greatest moment as an NHL owner, Jacobs proved tone deaf. He couldn’t help but needle Bruins President Cam Neely during the team's championship parade for never winning his own Cup as a player. It was a cringe-worthy moment on a day that should have featured wall-to-wall grins, and it gave Bruins fans a chance to remember why they held Jacobs in contempt for so long.

Those strange few seconds on that June day put on display the out-of-touch attitude that has helped the NHL become mired in another lengthy work stoppage for the second time in less than a decade.

The NHLPA members and hockey fans alike are waylaying NHL commissioner Gary Bettman for instituting the work stoppage. But at the end of the day Bettman is simply the messenger for the 30 NHL owners. Jacobs and his fellow owners are the reason the NHL can’t function without a war between every new Collective Bargaining Agreement. They are the reason hockey is a mismanaged mess.

When Patriots owner Robert Kraft helped broker an NFL labor deal before regular season games were affected, it appeared as though his love for the game of football and his concern for NFL fans played a role. There is no love of hockey coming from the end chair at NHL Board of Governors meetings. Instead there are quarterly reports, profit margins and calculated formulas telling NHL owners when it makes the most fiscal sense to open the doors to the regular season.

Nothing else matters. Not the fans, the players, the arena employees and those local businesses depending on the $800,000 to $1 million that each Bruins game pumps into the Boston economy.

If the NHL lockout is going to end as soon as Dec. 5 at the NHL Board of Governors meeting, then it’s going to take other hockey-loving hockey owners to overthrow the stone, cold businessmen in the room.

The biggest question of the lockout is, why would a frugal, shrewd businessman like Jacobs seemingly do his own team a disservice by prolonging the lockout? The Bruins have the most money committed in player salaries over the next two seasons, and would be severely affected by a sudden drop in the salary cap. Even if NHL teams are given a one-year transition period to adjust to a plummeting salary cap, the Bruins will be bumping the cap ceiling in 2013-14 without a single proven NHL goaltender signed on for duty.

That’s a horrendous position for Jacobs to leave his franchise when the Bruins have relied so prominently on defense and goaltending for success. But it doesn’t seem to matter a whit to the Bruins owner as he bangs the drum for a lowered salary cap, draconian contract restrictions, and a stodgy desire to turn the NHL clock back at least 30 years.

Because Jacobs is a multi-billionaire used to winning and hearing exactly what he wants to hear at all times. During the 2004-005 lockout Jacobs and the Bruins were in a position of influence within the Board of Governors, but approached it with a horrendously flawed game plan.

The Bruins expected a wide open seller’s market for free agents coming out of that lockout, and famously allowed Mike Knuble, Brian Rolston, Sergei Gonchar and Michael Nylander among others to walk away from Boston. Jacobs never saw the 24 percent salary rollback coming from the NHLPA, and suddenly teams received tremendous discounts for all contracts signed prior to the work stoppage.

Instead of NHL free agent superstars lining up to play in Boston, the Bruins botched things further by inking glue factory FA’s like Brian Leetch and Alex Zhamnov.

The Bruins franchise bottomed out in the two years coming out of the 2004-05 lockout with a glorified expansion team roster, traded away Joe Thornton for a pittance and then cleaned house within the B’s front office before a slow rise to the top under GM Peter Chiarelli and President Cam Neely.

Jacobs turned out to be a giant loser coming out of the last lockout, and now his Buffalo-sized ego is looking for a dramatic, one-sided win against the players coming out of this season’s work stoppage. That one-way, ends-justify-the-means mentality is exactly what’s driving the NHL owners this time around.

But the players have already waived the white flag. They've offered the owners the 50/50 revenue split for which they were hoping, and the NHLPA moderates are ready to further discuss terms of a truce if Bettman and the NHL owners are willing to throw an olive branch or two the players’ way.

"We want to play," Bruins forward Shawn Thornton said recently. "But there hasn’t been one bone thrown our way [by the owners] to where guys would say if it went to a vote right now we could live with it. There are things that have to be addressed.

“If there were a couple of bones thrown in there then there’d be enough moderates to voice their opinions to Don [Fehr]. But it hasn’t been that way at all. We keep giving and [the owners] keep saying ‘Thanks . . . what else have you guys got?’ Until that changes, nothing [about the lockout] is going to change."

The players aren’t responding kindly to being bullied by board room brutes like Jacobs, but there’s little they can do about it if they want to get back on the ice. The only people that speak the kind of voice that Jacobs and Co. will understand is the ticket-purchasing public.

Bruins fans can show their disapproval of the Jacobs-led NHL lockout by canceling season tickets, switching to the AHL or college hockey instead of the local NHL product, or simply changing the channel when the games come back. For business mavens like Jacobs, that is the only language they understand.

But that’s not an easy task so what else could fans do?

Jacobs owns the TD Garden so they could skip the circus, swear off concerts at the Garden, and even victimize the Celtics as innocent bystanders in the House that Jacobs Built.

It’s probably not realistic, but it’s something to think about as those that love the NHL try to come up with a way to clearly illustrate to Jacobs, Bettman and Co. that two lengthy work stoppages in eight years is simply unacceptable. The NHL has taken its customers for granted far too often in recent years, and there should be a lesson learned for those league “fathers” that allowed this to happen on their watch.

Note: Emphasis is mine.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#3522 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:29 PM

oh man, what I wouldn't pay for someone to secretly get a webcam in the room for BOG's meeting on the 5th.
  • 1

#3523 Mauii

Mauii

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:59 PM

You cannot compare the 2004 and today's lockouts as the conditions and circumstances were different then. Significant changes and concessions were necessary to sustain the NHL in the 2004 lockout, hence, more willingness on part of the players to concede and to the fans a necessary evil. In this lockout the NHL is perceived as functioning on greed and bully behavior, especially after such a successful season, a lockout should not have been necessary and especially not to this degree. So, this time there is less willingness on part of the players to concede to the NHL in it's entirety as they've already given up a lot in the first lockout, but even so are still willing to adjust their portion of the HRR which should be a victory for the NHL and then negotiate contracting rights, but still the NHL seems unwilling to negotiate with the NHLPA or lift the lockout, and so to the fans the NHL is not looked on too kindly and angering a lot of fans and maybe will be less forgiving this time around.

The fans should go Egypt (massive protest) on the NHL/Boston, if no one else can influence them.

Edited by Mauii, 28 November 2012 - 03:03 PM.

  • 0
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

#3524 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,581 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:37 PM

Forbes list bolsters NHLPA’s call for increased revenue sharing

As Forbes magazine declared the Toronto Maple Leafs the first NHL franchise to hit $1-billion (all currency U.S.) in value, the league’s players and owners reluctantly sat down in Washington, D.C. with federal labour mediators.
While the accuracy of Forbes’s numbers can be either questioned or cited by NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, the owners and managers depending on the point they are trying to make, the figures generally serve as a ballpark indicator of the NHL’s financial condition. What is important here is not so much the Leafs hitting a magic number - and who knows if that $1-billion value is dead on with the league once again mired in a lockout - but the great disparity in value between the NHL’s richest and poorest teams.
It drives home one of the key points NHL Players’ Association executive Donald Fehr and his negotiators have made throughout the lockout – the path to financial health for all 30 teams is through increased revenue sharing. It is not something the wealthy teams are interested in, although the NHL reportedly is close to an agreement with the union on a revenue-sharing plan that would see around $230-million redistributed annually, an increase of about 53 per cent from the $150-million under the former collective agreement.
However, that represents only about 7 per cent of the $3.3-billion the NHL brought in during the 2011-12 season. Major League Baseball, which found prosperity with greater revenue sharing thanks to the prodding of Fehr when he was head of that sport’s union, sees its rich teams put 31 per cent of their local revenue into a fund shared by the poorer relations.
Since baseball also has sharp differences in revenue between financial powerhouses like the New York Yankees and basket cases like the Florida Marlins, it only makes sense that sharing would work for the NHL as well. But, in addition to refusing to consider compromises on contract issues and splitting revenue with the players, the most influential owners in the NHL don’t want to hear about more revenue sharing either.
The numbers, though, suggest they should take a look. The top five teams in the league (in order, the Maple Leafs, New York Rangers, Montreal Canadiens, Chicago Blackhawks and Boston Bruins) are worth a total of $3.023-billion. The NHL’s bottom five teams – in order, the Carolina Hurricanes, New York Islanders, Columbus Blue Jackets, Phoenix Coyotes and St. Louis Blues – are worth a total of $726-million, a staggering $2.23-billion less.
Maybe Scot Beckenbaugh and John Sweeny of the U.S. Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, an independent government agency, can drag some of the recalcitrant owners toward this position. But few are expecting much, since the last time the warring parties turned to mediation, in February, 2005 during the last NHL lockout, the entire season was cancelled a few days later.
The parties sat down shortly after 1 p.m. Wednesday and the early indication was that the sessions could continue for a second day on Thursday.


  • 0

#3525 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,424 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:41 PM

For anyone interested, here's a link to a story listing each team's value and 2011/12 revenue & operating income. (There's also a link to the Forbes list.)
http://www.hockeybuz...-in-DC-/1/47710
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#3526 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,327 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:25 PM

You cannot compare the 2004 and today's lockouts as the conditions and circumstances were different then. Significant changes and concessions were necessary to sustain the NHL in the 2004 lockout, hence, more willingness on part of the players to concede and to the fans a necessary evil. In this lockout the NHL is perceived as functioning on greed and bully behavior, especially after such a successful season, a lockout should not have been necessary and especially not to this degree. So, this time there is less willingness on part of the players to concede to the NHL in it's entirety as they've already given up a lot in the first lockout, but even so are still willing to adjust their portion of the HRR which should be a victory for the NHL and then negotiate contracting rights, but still the NHL seems unwilling to negotiate with the NHLPA or lift the lockout, and so to the fans the NHL is not looked on too kindly and angering a lot of fans and maybe will be less forgiving this time around.

The fans should go Egypt (massive protest) on the NHL/Boston, if no one else can influence them.

The Haggerty article on Jacobs is probably a more accurate reflection of what is going on behind closed doors. Your assertion that there is more player unity this time around is premature. I suspect Hamrilick's outburst is happening more and more in the PA's phone info sessions.

My memory of 2004 is different from yours. A season was lost and another threatened until the union threw out their Goodanow(?) and Trevor Linden led them back to the table. It was a complete route and the owners pretty much got everything they wanted. I don't see anything else different happening this time either. Even the threat of decertification is a red herring. It would only work if the majority of players supported it and I suspect they won't.

I have lost respect for both sides of this dispute. I don't begrudge the owners making as much as they can in their businesses or the players doing the same. The responsible party in this equation has to be the fan. If fans continue to pay the prices for tickets and all the other BS associated with fandom then that is the way of the world. Neither the players or the owners have ever given two hoots about the amount of money they extract from the industry and how much that cost the fans.

This current dispute is all about players and owners fighting over the spoils of their industry. I guess what I wanted to see was a more sophisticated approach to picking my pocket.
  • 0

#3527 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:35 PM

This article came out on July 9, and I still find this appalling that Leipold could say such things. So, he's defending his spending position of 196m based on better odds of winning and increasing revenue in the process? Sounds like "gambling" to me. Do business owners take risks? Sure, they do it all the time. It doesn't usually involve the entire staff taking a pay cut to pay for it though. Note that the MIN general staff just got bumped down to a 4 day work week starting after Xmas.


On April 12, Wild owner Craig Leipold told the Star Tribune, "We're not making money, and that's one reason we need to fix our system. We need to fix how much we're spending right now."

The national media picked up on the quote and accused Leipold of hypocrisy after his decision to sign Zach Parise and Ryan Suter to $196 million in long-term contracts last week.

Leipold responded Monday, saying, "Listen: We've been losing money and the way we were going, we were going to have another year of 'keep losing more money and more money and more money.' So if I'm going to make the kind of financial commitment to keep this team and move this forward, I'd rather do it growing it.

"Ultimately that was the decision. As a result of this move, it's not going to cause us to be financially stable. I believe it will be within a year or two. This is a move to get us out of the hole that we've been digging. And as I spoke with some other owners in the league as to why I did it, they totally get it. They understand it. At some point you have to make that kind of commitment in order to turn your franchise around. If we didn't, then we would just keep losing more going forward without any plan of changing it."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wild/161866545.html?refer=y
  • 0

#3528 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 28 November 2012 - 05:39 PM

For anyone interested, here's a link to a story listing each team's value and 2011/12 revenue & operating income. (There's also a link to the Forbes list.)
http://www.hockeybuz...-in-DC-/1/47710


Great article as well as the Forbes one!

So 13 teams lost money...some made a few million and then the Leafs @ 81.9, Rangers @ 74 and the Habs at 51.6....so where exactly is this $340 million the players want? When you add up the Operating Income of all teams, the total is only $42.8 million...
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#3529 Mauii

Mauii

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 06:00 PM

The Haggerty article on Jacobs is probably a more accurate reflection of what is going on behind closed doors. Your assertion that there is more player unity this time around is premature. I suspect Hamrilick's outburst is happening more and more in the PA's phone info sessions.

My memory of 2004 is different from yours. A season was lost and another threatened until the union threw out their Goodanow(?) and Trevor Linden led them back to the table. It was a complete route and the owners pretty much got everything they wanted. I don't see anything else different happening this time either. Even the threat of decertification is a red herring. It would only work if the majority of players supported it and I suspect they won't.

I have lost respect for both sides of this dispute. I don't begrudge the owners making as much as they can in their businesses or the players doing the same. The responsible party in this equation has to be the fan. If fans continue to pay the prices for tickets and all the other BS associated with fandom then that is the way of the world. Neither the players or the owners have ever given two hoots about the amount of money they extract from the industry and how much that cost the fans.

This current dispute is all about players and owners fighting over the spoils of their industry. I guess what I wanted to see was a more sophisticated approach to picking my pocket.

From the media it would appear that the players are going to stand strong this time around but of course there will not be without some who are grumbling or becoming impatient. Someone provided a good commentary earlier on the differing circumstances that may influence the player's positions. I suspect because they've seen this before and the NHL is not in dire circumstances warranting the players to give up even more, there is a less likelihood of giving in again or necessity to give in nor would it be in their best interest to set the precedent of giving in. Instead they need to set the stage to put an end to this lockout tactic. If the NHL is unwilling to negotiate, decertification is the only way to move forward, and this system may actually work out better for some teams. The stronger teams will have more leeway to build their team.
  • 0
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

#3530 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,618 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 06:03 PM

Same old stuff, cancel the season and move on. We are all arguing with each other over the stupidest things. The paying customers (us) are so frustrated with this nonsense. If the players feel they aren't being treated right they should go play in other leagues. Either cancel the season or bring in the replacement players.

Edited by WHL rocks, 28 November 2012 - 06:12 PM.

  • 1

#3531 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,424 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 06:32 PM

Great article as well as the Forbes one!

So 13 teams lost money...some made a few million and then the Leafs @ 81.9, Rangers @ 74 and the Habs at 51.6....so where exactly is this $340 million the players want? When you add up the Operating Income of all teams, the total is only $42.8 million...


Remember, the the "make whole" money the players want wouldn't be over and above what the teams spent last season. Their new share will be significantly lower, so even with the additional $340 million (which is to be spread over several years!) teams would still be better off than they were last season.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#3532 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,487 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:02 PM

The NHL's Best (And Worst) Fans
(the actual rankings are displayed in a slideshow on the Forbes site)


I disagree with Pittsburgh as #1.

No issue with them being on the list, but a bit high to me, I think Edmonton should be #1, they have really no success yet they continue to sell out every game. You gotta admire that passion.
  • 0

zackass.png


#3533 Heretic

Heretic

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,271 posts
  • Joined: 08-April 07

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:05 PM

Remember, the the "make whole" money the players want wouldn't be over and above what the teams spent last season. Their new share will be significantly lower, so even with the additional $340 million (which is to be spread over several years!) teams would still be better off than they were last season.


Is it for a 7 year contract? 7 x 42.8 = $299.6 million...that means the owners have to dig into their pockets for another $40? 8 years? Then the owners run a team for 8 years with no profit? Sounds like the business that everyone want to be in...I guess I don't really understand this part...where do they players think the money is coming from? Yes, teams will get more money each year - but they will also spend more.
  • 0

McCoy: We were speculating. Is God really out there?
Kirk: Maybe he's not out there, Bones. Maybe he's right here. [points to his heart]

Posted Image


#3534 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:16 PM

I disagree with Pittsburgh as #1.

No issue with them being on the list, but a bit high to me, I think Edmonton should be #1, they have really no success yet they continue to sell out every game. You gotta admire that passion.

I don't disagree with Edmonton at all. Do they really still sell out, and for how long is the streak?

What about Toronto! A franchise worth 1 billion, haven't made the play-offs since the last lockout 7 years ago, and haven't won the cup in 45 years. However, the current roster looks very promising... undefeated so far this year. I actually feel bad for them. Only a handful of teams might be in worse shape, especially Calgary.
  • 0

#3535 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,487 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:26 PM

I don't disagree with Edmonton at all. Do they really still sell out, and for how long is the streak?


They have sold out every game since the 06-07, and the year prior they had 16,832 out of 16,839. so only 7 less thana sellout on average.

http://www.hockeydb....ph.php?tmi=5632

What about Toronto! A franchise worth 1 billion, haven't made the play-offs since the last lockout 7 years ago, and haven't won the cup in 45 years. However, the current roster looks very promising... undefeated so far this year. I actually feel bad for them. Only a handful of teams might be in worse shape, especially Calgary.


Toronto has been wavering for a long time, they do stay above 19,000 but they still haven't sold out an entire season once since the lockout, atleast according to the capactiy Wikipedia has on there website for the ACC for hockey.

Either way they have wavered by hundreds since the lockoutn and prior, but either way they have a major advantage on Edmonton in the sense that there are way more people in the Greater Toronto Area than in the Greater Edmonton area.

http://www.hockeydb....ph.php?tmi=8490
  • 0

zackass.png


#3536 oldnews

oldnews

    Declining Grinder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,777 posts
  • Joined: 30-March 11

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:39 PM

The thing I find most odd is this (aside from the rash of other contradictions floating around) - the Bruins go out and sign Seguin to a 6 year $35 million deal, they extend Lucic at $6 million a year, they extend Marchand at $4.5 - right before the (allegedly unacceptable) CBA came to an end.

They are hardliner #1, yet were deadline deal making under those terms. The Wild go nuts spending through the roof right before the CBA expired, claiming oddly enough that they were losing money and had no choice but to spend $200 million more!!! in an all-in bid to stop losing money??? They too are reportedly in the hardliner camp - yet no one hurt small franchises more than they did with those moves. The Calgary Flames (the poster boys for misspent money, NTCs, and all around head scratching decision making) - also reportedly in the hardliner camp.

Bizarre stuff. They spent money like it was going out of style - in now in hindsight, it almost appears in a premeditated way - planning to drive a hardline rollback that will bail them out (of their own contradictions?).
Did those midnight CBA signings give them somewhat of an advantage moving forward, relative to the better behaved teams?
How is it that the least responsible fiscal franchises drive the lockout?
  • 2

#3537 vv2

vv2

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,401 posts
  • Joined: 11-November 08

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:41 PM

I disagree with Pittsburgh as #1.

No issue with them being on the list, but a bit high to me, I think Edmonton should be #1, they have really no success yet they continue to sell out every game. You gotta admire that passion.

Leafs should be #1 atleast the oilers fans have something to look forward to
  • 0
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#3538 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,487 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:47 PM

Leafs should be #1 atleast the oilers fans have something to look forward to


Leafs don't sell out consecutively like the Oilers do. and there are way more people in the greater Toronto area than in the greater Edmonton area, plus there team is a bit better. they continuously have chances at the playoffs and fail, whereas Edmonton has had really no chance.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 28 November 2012 - 07:48 PM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#3539 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,754 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 28 November 2012 - 08:47 PM

Yes...and those playing over seas care nothing about themselves neither (for the most part).

I don't care that the driving age is 16, or voting is 18, as I already passed them (long long time ago) - does that make me a selfish old goat?

Oh - I disagree, I believe one person can make a difference:


“I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everthing, but still I can do something; I will not refuse to do something I can do.”
Helen Keller

“Few will have the greatness to bend history itself, but each of us can work to change a small portion of events. It is from numberless diverse acts of courage and belief that human history is shaped. Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.”
Robert F. Kennedy

“In a gentle way, you can shake the world.”
Mahatma Gandhi

“No work is insignificant. All labor that uplifts humanity has dignity and importance and should be undertaken with painstaking excellence.”
Martin Luther King Jr.

Oh..I'm sure I don't have to remind you of what a difference a certain Carpenter did over 2000 years ago. ;)

Those quotes have nothing to do with the conversation, dude.

One person can not make a difference. There is no way. Go ahead and try. It takes an awful lot of situational luck (or misfortune), and help from others to make any sort of an impact. Trying to make a difference does not result in a difference made.

One person making a difference also has nothing to do with even your own point.

You were arguing that a 51% majority is not fair to each individual. Well obviously. But, it is fair to more people than not. Welcome to democracy.

On players playing in different leagues - Why should you have a beef with it when the NHL, NHLPA, and the overseas leagues have no beef? That is like a checker complaining that queens can move in all directions, whereas rooks can only move forward, backward, and side to side. What right do you have to take offense to it? Who are you sticking up for? I am not for it, against it, beside it, or on top of it. I don't care. I have no right to care. All parties that are actually involved are OK with it, and there are a lot of guys that want to stay game ready, so let them go.

And really man, keep the Jesus crap to yourself, or the god thread. A Ghandi quote is one thing, but referencing a book written generations after the death of a man that was supposedly magic is anecdotal at best. Great story though. Mel Gibson should make a movie about it with lots of blood and over acting.
  • 0

V a n c o u v e r C a n u c k s

MirandaKerr.jpg
2 0 1 5 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#3540 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,124 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 28 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

They have sold out every game since the 06-07, and the year prior they had 16,832 out of 16,839. so only 7 less thana sellout on average.

http://www.hockeydb....ph.php?tmi=5632



Toronto has been wavering for a long time, they do stay above 19,000 but they still haven't sold out an entire season once since the lockout, atleast according to the capactiy Wikipedia has on there website for the ACC for hockey.

Either way they have wavered by hundreds since the lockoutn and prior, but either way they have a major advantage on Edmonton in the sense that there are way more people in the Greater Toronto Area than in the Greater Edmonton area.

http://www.hockeydb....ph.php?tmi=8490


I haven't looked it up just yet, but your point is well taken, and I intend to look it up in a bit. Fans that support their team when things are not great... that says something about the fan base.
So, if we compare Canadian teams to American, or original teams to the expansion rest, how might that picture change? Toronto, certainly has been around a while. Edmonton though? Colorado had a good fan base, and has been back in the league twice, and only recently struggled after the "Lindros trade" players retired. Yet, they still seem to do ok (I have yet to check last years numbers, but they did ok the year before)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

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.