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

#871 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 01:39 AM

So how much do the owners pay you to come on fan boards and try to talk up their side of things?


The same amount the Players Union pays to those who come on fan boards and try to talk up their side of things.
  • 0

#872 Mr. Ambien

Mr. Ambien

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,797 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 16 September 2012 - 02:29 AM

Please fix cap circumvention. No more front loaded contracts. Term limits on contracts and a higher age before UFA are really important. Teams spend a lot of time and effort on developing their draft picks only to lose them at 27 years of age when they become stars, ie Suter and Parise. This needs to be upped to 10 seasons or 30 years. Since there is a lockout might as well fix all these things.

This Fehr guy is quite the character, I wouldn't be surprised if he caused the NHL to lose the entire season.

.. because Fehr is the guy repeatedly writing cheques and contracts out to players and then, in same repeated fashion, wanting them to take a pay cut of a fourth of what they are supposed to be paid at the next CBA. Oh wait, that's the owners. Damn that Fehr. :rolleyes:

Players aren't innocent at all here, 53-57% is a bit heavy (i.e. greed factor), nonetheless, with the major growth the NHL had since last lockout, teams who are still in the red (hello Phoenix) should be contracted. The league's owners and especially the commissioner are their own enemy with the stupid decisions they've been making, and they're chasing away fans like me who have other options of what to watch besides the NHL.

Edited by zaibatsu, 16 September 2012 - 02:32 AM.

  • 0

#873 Monteeun

Monteeun

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,207 posts
  • Joined: 15-February 03

Posted 16 September 2012 - 03:44 AM

The same amount the Players Union pays to those who come on fan boards and try to talk up their side of things.


Oh really? :frantic:
  • 0

BAD MOVE!!!

BAD FING MOVE

HAHAHA ANOTHER INJURED MORON ON OUR TEAM

HE WILL JOIN US IN 2019

Benning will be fired next year. Hope he enjoys screwing around for a few months. I just cant believe this. Another injured BC player. We just got rid of garrison. Seems like the canucks and linden just wanted any BC born player. Doesn't matter if hes good or not. We don't need another Linden to get us to game 7 of the Stanley cup and lose. We need someone to win us a cup.

5 million a year for Vrbata? 6 million for Miller? Kesler for Bonino and 24th instead of 10th pick or one of their top prospects? Garrison for scraps?

ive already lost faith in JB. Ive never EVER had this bad of a feeling about management.

 


#874 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,513 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 04:29 AM

You'd figure if Bettman had any brains he's tell his owners "Look, I am trying to convince the suckers who pay the freight that we can't afford to keep paying these salaries, so for the time being, knock it off with the ridiculous contracts because YOU'RE NOT HELPING"
  • 0
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#875 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 12

Posted 16 September 2012 - 05:37 AM

The NHLPA claims the game is going to grow 7% a year for next few years. If they were to drop to a 50/50 split then in 2 years according to their numbers the are going to be at the rate they are at right now. If they miss 16 games this years they lose 20% instead of the 7% and then it will take them 3 years just to break even. What happens when the CDN dollar drops, what happens when oil goes though the ceiling, the players don't have to worry about that because they have guarenteed contracts.

Revenue - expenses=profit Sure the league made 3.3B take out 1.87B for player salaries, 1.43 B is left to cover water, gas, hydro,heat, arena staff, equipment, flights, hotels, concessions and the list goes on and on. Yes I understand teams also get merch money, concession money, TV money and I'm sure there is a lot more. Out of that 1.43B that averges out to 47M a team and there is no way every team is profitable. The players are telling the owners to revenue share, why don't the players kick in an equal amount then to help revenue share. The league has been paying PHX bills for some time now and not to many people are stepping up to buy the team. If a team clears 6M a year how much are they suppose to give to other teams? Are the owners not allowed to make a profit or are they just suppost to break even. The players have no expenses except for paying their agents. One thing for sure is every single player in the league makes a profit, same can't be said for the owners yet they still put a team on the ice knowing that they are going to lose money.

Edited by canuckelhead70, 16 September 2012 - 05:40 AM.

  • 1

#876 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,513 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 06:42 AM

The NHLPA claims the game is going to grow 7% a year for next few years. If they were to drop to a 50/50 split then in 2 years according to their numbers the are going to be at the rate they are at right now. If they miss 16 games this years they lose 20% instead of the 7% and then it will take them 3 years just to break even. What happens when the CDN dollar drops, what happens when oil goes though the ceiling, the players don't have to worry about that because they have guarenteed contracts.

Revenue - expenses=profit Sure the league made 3.3B take out 1.87B for player salaries, 1.43 B is left to cover water, gas, hydro,heat, arena staff, equipment, flights, hotels, concessions and the list goes on and on. Yes I understand teams also get merch money, concession money, TV money and I'm sure there is a lot more. Out of that 1.43B that averges out to 47M a team and there is no way every team is profitable. The players are telling the owners to revenue share, why don't the players kick in an equal amount then to help revenue share. The league has been paying PHX bills for some time now and not to many people are stepping up to buy the team. If a team clears 6M a year how much are they suppose to give to other teams? Are the owners not allowed to make a profit or are they just suppost to break even. The players have no expenses except for paying their agents. One thing for sure is every single player in the league makes a profit, same can't be said for the owners yet they still put a team on the ice knowing that they are going to lose money.

Why should the players have to play for idiotic business decisions of the owners? The owners decided to block a sale and relocation of a bad decision in Phoenix to the tune of $170 million+, the owners wrote the current CBA themselves and forced the players to take it at gunpoint and now they want to do the same thing, you want to make a profit? Here's a thought, DON'T SPEND MONEY YOU DON'T HAVE, here's another, GO WHERE THE MARKET IS. The owners insist on keeping teams in bad markets let the owners pay for it. This whole mess is due to greed and stupidity of the owners, I have no sympathy for hypocrites.

Craig Leopold: Wah, wah, I can't make any money under these condition wah wah, oh here Mr Parise, here $98 million and heres another $98 for you Mr. Suter, .... now where was I, oh yeah, wah wah I can't afford these salaries. :picard:
  • 2
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#877 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 12

Posted 16 September 2012 - 07:21 AM

Craig Leopold: Wah, wah, I can't make any money under these condition wah wah, oh here Mr Parise, here $98 million and heres another $98 for you Mr. Suter, .... now where was I, oh yeah, wah wah I can't afford these salaries. :picard:


Surely if Leopold said, hey Ryan and Zach, will you come play for us, we will give you a 10 year contract for $30m each, average $3M a year they would have jumped all over it and signed for that right? Players are far more greedy then the owners. Players generally go to the highest bidder. Owners have to keep 23 players under a cap, where players can make as much as they want a year.

Edited by canuckelhead70, 16 September 2012 - 07:22 AM.

  • 0

#878 Sergei Shirokov

Sergei Shirokov

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,544 posts
  • Joined: 29-March 08

Posted 16 September 2012 - 07:50 AM

Why should the players have to play for idiotic business decisions of the owners? The owners decided to block a sale and relocation of a bad decision in Phoenix to the tune of $170 million+, the owners wrote the current CBA themselves and forced the players to take it at gunpoint and now they want to do the same thing, you want to make a profit? Here's a thought, DON'T SPEND MONEY YOU DON'T HAVE, here's another, GO WHERE THE MARKET IS. The owners insist on keeping teams in bad markets let the owners pay for it. This whole mess is due to greed and stupidity of the owners, I have no sympathy for hypocrites.

Craig Leopold: Wah, wah, I can't make any money under these condition wah wah, oh here Mr Parise, here $98 million and heres another $98 for you Mr. Suter, .... now where was I, oh yeah, wah wah I can't afford these salaries. :picard:


About 1/3 of the teams lose money, and about 1/3 break even. Being an owner isnt all fun and games. It's not really bout greed considering 2/3s of the league hardly make any money.

The NHLPA should help support the NHL in growing the game and taking a bit of a cut. Growing the game creates MORE jobs for the PA
  • 0

#879 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,169 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 16 September 2012 - 08:25 AM

The NHLPA claims the game is going to grow 7% a year for next few years. If they were to drop to a 50/50 split then in 2 years according to their numbers the are going to be at the rate they are at right now. If they miss 16 games this years they lose 20% instead of the 7% and then it will take them 3 years just to break even. What happens when the CDN dollar drops, what happens when oil goes though the ceiling, the players don't have to worry about that because they have guarenteed contracts.

Revenue - expenses=profit Sure the league made 3.3B take out 1.87B for player salaries, 1.43 B is left to cover water, gas, hydro,heat, arena staff, equipment, flights, hotels, concessions and the list goes on and on. Yes I understand teams also get merch money, concession money, TV money and I'm sure there is a lot more. Out of that 1.43B that averges out to 47M a team and there is no way every team is profitable. The players are telling the owners to revenue share, why don't the players kick in an equal amount then to help revenue share. The league has been paying PHX bills for some time now and not to many people are stepping up to buy the team. If a team clears 6M a year how much are they suppose to give to other teams? Are the owners not allowed to make a profit or are they just suppost to break even. The players have no expenses except for paying their agents. One thing for sure is every single player in the league makes a profit, same can't be said for the owners yet they still put a team on the ice knowing that they are going to lose money.

There are a goodly number of posters on here who seem to take comfort in ignoring the simple economics of running a business. Not once have I seen a comment on what a fair return would be for invested capital in this business. The contridiction of the typical Canadian response to a situation is damn the 'billionaire owners' and let's forget about the 600 NHLers who are carving up $1.8 billion in salaries every year. As per typical union fare their operating costs are nil as the teams pick up all their day to day costs. Fair enough to point out the time and even money they spent to get to the NHL as they learnt their craft in taxpayer subsidized arenas across Canada.

What is also laughable is this ranting about teams who spend to the CBA max on salaries. The max/min levels were created to protect both the players and teams. Canadian fans have very short memories as it was not that long ago when every team in Canada other than the TO Laffers were going broke (that includes MOntreal). If the CBA was in place back then the Jets and Nords might have survived. Why don't blind player supporters call out Canuck ownership and those sob's the Acquillini brothers. You know them. They were the guys who plopped down about $300 m to McCaw for a franchise that was going nowhere. The guys who spent $2 M on a new training center at GM place for their millionaire employees. The guys who beefed up all aspects of the Canuck org to the tune of $3 - 4 M a year because Mike Gillis said they needed it. More scouts, goalie coach, fitness trainers, diet specialists, sleep specialist, oxygen chamber, charter flights not just for the Canucks but for the Moose/Wolves, player contracts to the max 50 contracts, bumping up the endowment of the Canuck Community foundation. And yes the same guys who have spent to the max CBA level to pay players who might win Van a CUP. Why should we care if these guys are making money or not? If they weren't making money I guess they could flip this team to, I know, McCaw, who wanted to move it to Seattle all along!

The union mentality never surprises me. It inevitably lowers all endeavor to the lowest common denominator. If the NHLPA was seriously concerned about the health of the game and not solely the amount of $s they were taking from it their demands would be much clearer. All they did was freeze the bottom line on their take and simply cut their take of 'anticipated' revenue increases.
IMHO if they were serious partners they would have negociated form a budget basis which would have included a ROI figure for ownership. The only negociated varibles would be players % take and owners ROI % take. Even at that the ROI varible could not be as flexible as salaries as businesses that don't make money ultimately disappear. At the end of the day wages are a cost of doing business just like the cost of maintaining ice in an arena.

The ultimate irony is the anticipated exodus of these union stallwarts to Euroland to take jobs from other hockey players. Let's see another WHA or a player owned league start up to show those greedy owners how to do things right. No it won't happen becuase they couldn't make it work before and quite frankly don't know how.
  • 1

#880 Stefan

Stefan

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,403 posts
  • Joined: 18-September 03

Posted 16 September 2012 - 08:48 AM

A
  • 0

gallery_9059_470_12899.jpg


(1 Peter 2:18)

Slaves, be subject to your masters with all reverence, not only to those who are good and equitable but also to those who are perverse.



 

#881 d.joh91

d.joh91

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 199 posts
  • Joined: 20-July 09

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:01 AM

does anyone know if Sportsnet will be broadcasting Swedish Elite League games this coming season like they did during the '04-'05 Lockout?
I know that NHL players are not allowed to play overseas unless they've already signed a 1-year contract, but I'd still enjoy watching SEL games regardless. :)
  • 0

Posted Image


#19 Markus Näslund

Forever a Canuck


#882 boxiebrown

boxiebrown

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 640 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 08

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:25 AM

The NHLPA claims the game is going to grow 7% a year for next few years. If they were to drop to a 50/50 split then in 2 years according to their numbers the are going to be at the rate they are at right now. If they miss 16 games this years they lose 20% instead of the 7% and then it will take them 3 years just to break even. What happens when the CDN dollar drops, what happens when oil goes though the ceiling, the players don't have to worry about that because they have guarenteed contracts.

Revenue - expenses=profit Sure the league made 3.3B take out 1.87B for player salaries, 1.43 B is left to cover water, gas, hydro,heat, arena staff, equipment, flights, hotels, concessions and the list goes on and on. Yes I understand teams also get merch money, concession money, TV money and I'm sure there is a lot more. Out of that 1.43B that averges out to 47M a team and there is no way every team is profitable. The players are telling the owners to revenue share, why don't the players kick in an equal amount then to help revenue share. The league has been paying PHX bills for some time now and not to many people are stepping up to buy the team. If a team clears 6M a year how much are they suppose to give to other teams? Are the owners not allowed to make a profit or are they just suppost to break even. The players have no expenses except for paying their agents. One thing for sure is every single player in the league makes a profit, same can't be said for the owners yet they still put a team on the ice knowing that they are going to lose money.


Except that they know they'll make that all back and more if they choose to sell the team.

Also, a ten million annual operating loss is a drop in the frigging bucket for most of these owners. And that's the price they pay for having a shiny toy to play with.
  • 0

#883 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,029 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:27 AM

Canucks Sports & Entertainment statement regarding CBA:

Vancouver, B.C. – As you are aware the NHL and NHLPA were unable to agree on a successor Collective Bargaining Agreement before September 15th. The Vancouver Canucks remain hopeful that a new Collective Bargaining Agreement will be reached as soon as possible.


In the interim, we will continue to focus the efforts and talent of our entire staff and coaches on the values of grassroots hockey in British Columbia. We also will continue with our ongoing community initiatives, including children’s health and wellness through Canucks Autism Network, Canuck Place Children’s Hospice and BC Children’s Hospital -- as well as the support of literacy at the Canucks Family Education Centre.


As always, we appreciate your patience and loyalty. We want to say again how much we appreciate your support and passion for your Canucks. We look forward to returning to the ice at Rogers Arena as soon as possible. Our staff and coaches have worked hard over the summer months to make sure we will be ready to play at a moment’s notice.


http://canucks.nhl.c...s.htm?id=641585
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#884 boxiebrown

boxiebrown

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 640 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 08

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:38 AM

About 1/3 of the teams lose money, and about 1/3 break even. Being an owner isnt all fun and games. It's not really bout greed considering 2/3s of the league hardly make any money.

The NHLPA should help support the NHL in growing the game and taking a bit of a cut. Growing the game creates MORE jobs for the PA


I completely agree, the focus should be on growing the game. As it happens, the Union is the only side trying to do that.

Drastically lowering the cap in the name of parity will not grow the game. It will create a mediocre product where there are a lot of half-decent teams and no truly great teams.

The union's proposal would grow the game. The removal of the salary cap and floor and the institution of a luxury tax and revenue sharing would allow the marquee teams to consistently spend and be competitive, while still allowing small market teams to be profitable.

Small market teams do not want to admit it, but the reality is that it is bad for the league if teams like Phoenix, Nashville, Florida or Columbus do well in the playoffs. Look at what happened between 2008-2011. You had Pittsburgh, Detroit, Chicago, Philly, Vancouver and Boston make the Cup finals. All marquee teams stacked with stars. Ratings and revenues sky-rocketed. And then last year you had two teams seriously lacking star power, and ratings plummeted. That is reality, and the sooner small market owners accept it, the better.

Removing the salary cap would allow the marquee teams to consistently be competitive. This is what draws in casual fans and drives TV numbers, and that's what grows the game. A good revenue sharing system would still let small market teams be profitable. The owners, though, are too stupid or stubborn to understand this. Instead they're union-busting for completely spurious reasons, even as the union is showing them the way forward.

It's ridiculous.
  • 0

#885 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,029 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:45 AM

Posted Image
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#886 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,513 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:46 AM

Surely if Leopold said, hey Ryan and Zach, will you come play for us, we will give you a 10 year contract for $30m each, average $3M a year they would have jumped all over it and signed for that right? Players are far more greedy then the owners. Players generally go to the highest bidder. Owners have to keep 23 players under a cap, where players can make as much as they want a year.

Completely ignoring the fact that Parise and Suter COMBINED aren't even worth HALF that. Someone else wants to spend $200 million on two slightly above average players let them there is only so much room on the Rangers and Flyers Rosters. DON"T SPEND MONEY YOU DON'T HAVE, is that such a difficult concept for you to understand? NHL owners obviously have a problem with this philosophy.
  • 0
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#887 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,513 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:49 AM

About 1/3 of the teams lose money, and about 1/3 break even. Being an owner isnt all fun and games. It's not really bout greed considering 2/3s of the league hardly make any money.

The NHLPA should help support the NHL in growing the game and taking a bit of a cut. Growing the game creates MORE jobs for the PA

The owners aren't interested in growing the game, most of the recent expansions were about reloading their war chest with expansion fee's that they don't have to share with the players. Just like the "relocation fee" for moving the Thrashers, what was the fee for moving the Jets and Nordiques? $0
  • 1
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#888 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,029 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 10:52 AM

Pretty powerful video:


  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#889 chisoxin12

chisoxin12

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,610 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 09

Posted 16 September 2012 - 11:54 AM

The owners aren't interested in growing the game, most of the recent expansions were about reloading their war chest with expansion fee's that they don't have to share with the players. Just like the "relocation fee" for moving the Thrashers, what was the fee for moving the Jets and Nordiques? $0


The Canadian owners in the NHL, I'm sure to a man are totally *issed with this lockout. They get face value for their ticket prices, usually sell their buildings out, and have a fan base that gives a damn about the game. Bettmans foray into those Southern markets have done nothing as far as growing the game is concerned. How many prospective owners have stepped up to the plate in Phoenix now? Is this deal done? If all this lockout is about is protecting these owners from themselves, then folks, guess what? In 5 or 6 or 10 years from now, Gary Bettman will make a case for another lockout, because this business method is NOT working?
Revenues mean Zero, if 18 teams are losing money, and give tickets away for the sake of growing the game in places like, Phoenix, Columbus, Anaheim, Florida, and Tampa Bay. Everyone is saying how successful San Jose is, well apparently they lost money last season. Sellouts, smell outs, if this is growing the game, Bettman you need to go!
  • 0

#890 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,513 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 12:15 PM

The Canadian owners in the NHL, I'm sure to a man are totally *issed with this lockout. They get face value for their ticket prices, usually sell their buildings out, and have a fan base that gives a damn about the game. Bettmans foray into those Southern markets have done nothing as far as growing the game is concerned. How many prospective owners have stepped up to the plate in Phoenix now? Is this deal done? If all this lockout is about is protecting these owners from themselves, then folks, guess what? In 5 or 6 or 10 years from now, Gary Bettman will make a case for another lockout, because this business method is NOT working?
Revenues mean Zero, if 18 teams are losing money, and give tickets away for the sake of growing the game in places like, Phoenix, Columbus, Anaheim, Florida, and Tampa Bay. Everyone is saying how successful San Jose is, well apparently they lost money last season. Sellouts, smell outs, if this is growing the game, Bettman you need to go!

The root of the problem is that Bettman, in turning the NHL into the corporate America Hockey league, has opened up a colossal gap between large and small markets, taking back from the players is a temporary band-aid solution. Until an adequite system of revenue sharing (like the players want and the NFL has) is part of the equation, we will be right back here AGAIN next CBA. Problem is the owners are too arrogant, greedy, short sighted and incompetent to see this.

Edited by Norman Clegg, 16 September 2012 - 12:16 PM.

  • 1
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#891 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,749 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 12:50 PM

NHL complaints department: look up hockeyyinsiderr ... Apparently posted buttmans email

Edited by Here's Johnny, 16 September 2012 - 12:50 PM.

  • 0

#892 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 16 September 2012 - 12:56 PM

About 1/3 of the teams lose money, and about 1/3 break even. Being an owner isnt all fun and games. It's not really bout greed considering 2/3s of the league hardly make any money.

The NHLPA should help support the NHL in growing the game and taking a bit of a cut. Growing the game creates MORE jobs for the PA


Except they got this new guy at the helm of the NHLPA who has a huge reputation to protect. I hope he can put it aside and offer the owners at least 50% of their own revenue.

There is no way the players should be making more than the people they work for. Its ridiculous . If they want more, they should start up their own WHA and run the team themselves.
  • 1
Posted Image

#893 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,513 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 01:11 PM

Except they got this new guy at the helm of the NHLPA who has a huge reputation to protect. I hope he can put it aside and offer the owners at least 50% of their own revenue.

There is no way the players should be making more than the people they work for. Its ridiculous . If they want more, they should start up their own WHA and run the team themselves.

Problem is the players aren't just labour, they are also the product and the marking campaign.
  • 0
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#894 chisoxin12

chisoxin12

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,610 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 09

Posted 16 September 2012 - 01:12 PM

Except they got this new guy at the helm of the NHLPA who has a huge reputation to protect. I hope he can put it aside and offer the owners at least 50% of their own revenue.

There is no way the players should be making more than the people they work for. Its ridiculous . If they want more, they should start up their own WHA and run the team themselves.



Bettman doesn't have an ego? Coulda fooled me. Remember this past CBA that Bettman himself signed off on, is another reason why some of these owners should be protected from themselves. Yeah players make huge amounts of money, but they aren't making more than their owners, don't be silly.
This lockout was going to happen no matter what. NO scheduled meetings until a month before the past CBA expired, get serious, we're talking nonsense, and this isn't going to get solved any time soon.
  • 2

#895 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,775 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 16 September 2012 - 01:24 PM

*
POPULAR

Except that they know they'll make that all back and more if they choose to sell the team.

Also, a ten million annual operating loss is a drop in the frigging bucket for most of these owners. And that's the price they pay for having a shiny toy to play with.


This lockout has simply divided people into two groups, those who understand business and those who don't. Those who do understand a bit of business know two things:

1) You don't promise money you don't have to employees. You certainly don't then try to rewrite their contracts by coercion. No other industry honours contracts less than pro hockey. You fielded the contract to the player, you signed it, you pay what it says. To claim that you shouldn't have to is pure greed. (This goes for the current CBA as well, which was written entirely by the owners. It's the same behaviour: making an offer, then ignoring it when it suits them.) The only reason the owners can do this is exclusivity. Players don't really have a proper alternative to the NHL. There aren't lots of leagues out there competing. That's why no one tries this crap if they own a law firm. There are lots of law firms out there. Employees will just go "Haha. What a dick" and get a job at a rival firm.

2) You don't make money on a team due to annual profits unless you're in a really, REALLY good market. You make money by running the team, growing the fanbase, getting more advertising, selling more merch and then selling the more developed franchise for way more than you bought it for. The owners are essentially flipping houses. They buy the house, pay to improve it, then sell it for a wad of profit. Operating costs are ALWAYS negative in this case unless you bought an apartment building which is raking in tons of rent. As it is, owners are complaining that the renters (players) aren't paying for the house. Of course they're not. Why would they? The renters are there to cover costs, not buy the house.

If you don't agree with the above, consider yourself ignorant. These are simple facts of economics. Anything else being talked about is a distraction. The lockout is simply a matter of owner greed and the players, with no other viable options, having to an agreement with them if they want to continue playing.
  • 5

#896 Islandboss

Islandboss

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 504 posts
  • Joined: 16-April 06

Posted 16 September 2012 - 02:02 PM

So leading up to this point in time.Previously during the free agent frenzy this summer,owners signed players to some unreal contracts.Probably thinking that they were gonna play hardball and would roll back the players percentage so they would never have to pay the complete wage they negotiated under the old CBA.The Wild took that route. The owners knew when they offered those contracts what Gary weasel was gonna bring to the table as demands.They players of course would have had no Knowledge of those demands.Wonder what those fella's think of the wild organization now and would you call that negotiating in bad faith?
  • 0
A statistician is a person who draws a mathematically precise line from an unwarranted assumption to a foregone conclusion.

Kelly is a great gal

#897 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,362 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 02:33 PM

This is an old, but very applicable video. It's also hilarious.


  • 1

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#898 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,749 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 16 September 2012 - 03:31 PM

Rick mercer should do an update in this NHL neogitating has 22 seconds
  • 0

#899 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,951 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 03:45 PM

So leading up to this point in time.Previously during the free agent frenzy this summer,owners signed players to some unreal contracts.Probably thinking that they were gonna play hardball and would roll back the players percentage so they would never have to pay the complete wage they negotiated under the old CBA.The Wild took that route. The owners knew when they offered those contracts what Gary weasel was gonna bring to the table as demands.They players of course would have had no Knowledge of those demands.Wonder what those fella's think of the wild organization now and would you call that negotiating in bad faith?

Absolutely a valid point, but to say the players had no idea what to expect is naive. In the very least, the players like Parise, Suter and Weber who signed this summer knew full well the general idea of what the league wanted for the next CBA. They still signed those massive contracts knowing full well the league had issue with similar ones in the past, even if they didn't know everything the league was going to propose.

June 29
The NHL and NHL Players' Association meet for the first time to begin their talk on a new collective bargaining agreement. The league delivers a financial presentation and identifies issues it wants to discuss in the CBA.

July 5 - 6
Negotiating teams from both sides meet in New York. On the first day, the union responds to the NHL's June 29 presentation with its own views. The next day, both sides talk about other issues such as player health, supplemental discipline and retirement benefits.

July 10
CBA talks continue in Toronto. The Players' Association puts forth noneconomic issues such as training camp and player travel/road accomodation.

July 13
The NHL makes its first proposal to the NHL Players' Association in Toronto. The NHL wants the players' share of hockey-related revenue (HRR) reduced from 57 percent to 43 percent and include new definitions for HRR.

July 18 - 20
Boths sides hold three days of talks in New York, discussion continues regarding the NHL's July 13 proposal as well as where the system should be headed.

LINK

Suter and Parise signed twin 13 year, $98M deals on July 4th, after having already heard the financial presentation and issues of concern from the league.

Weber signs his 14 year, $110M offer sheet on July 19th, in the middle of the three days of talks in New York.

Both the Wild and the Flyers were immensely stupid to offer what they did. For the players, being short-sighted by taking the largest possible contracts prior to the CBA expiring was not in the best interests of anyone but themselves.

Edited by elvis15, 16 September 2012 - 03:47 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#900 Garrison

Garrison

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 851 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 12

Posted 16 September 2012 - 04:37 PM

Blaming this Lock out on the Wild. Parise and Suter contracts were just ridiculous.
  • 1




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.