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

#1261 gradin123

gradin123

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,093 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:28 AM

It's not like Bryz said anything untrue. The only issue is the KHL isn't a bottomless bank either. If they have to pay bigger money to get the big superstars, they'll feet the strain as well.


The KHL is run by billionaire Oil Tycoons who don't care if they make money on hockey. You are right though in that it can't be sustained without opening up new markets. They are trying to get into Western Europe however and the longer this NHL lockout goes the stronger the KHL could become. The more they can expand and get better TV contracts the more players they will be able to attract and that would all be helped by all the NHL'ers playing abroad. If this NHL lockout lasts over one season don't be surprised to see the KHL playing in Western Europe this time next year with a decent north american TV contract. The next step would be a North Amercian expansion. That is how the players can win this.

The owners went into this lockout thinking they held all the cards and the players would cave. They better realize soon that Donald Fehr isn't the caving type and that they actually could hurt their own product forever! Gary Bettman is leading them all down the wrong path this time. Maybe he will be smart enough to realize it before the season is cancelled and actually comprise instead of just expecting the players to give more and more and using Lockouts as a negotiating tool.

Edited by gradin123, 09 October 2012 - 02:29 AM.

  • 0

#1262 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,166 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:47 AM

Signing and breaking contracts (via clawback) without good reason is bad business - it smacks of being out of control and using the expiry of the CBA as a stopgap doesn't impress.

I agree that the players should not agree unless something is proposed that doesn't inevitably lead to another lookout as soon as this CBA expires. That said they are taking a financial loss on principle here so I hope it works out for them.

The owners I don't understand at all since as a league they are taking a financial loss on a bottom line issue. Locking out when the league is profitable is a bizarre move.

So much of what you advocate is wrong IMO but you first point I can agree with. A contract is a contract. If the NHL has something in the CBA that allows it then this is something the NHLPA should strike about. 100% agree this is wrong.

Suggesting that a lockout be outlawed is no different than not letting the players strike if they wanted too. Bottom line is that the CBA of 2004 was respected by both parties until it expired. If ownership does not want to continue business under that foremat then they should not be forced to.

Your last point seems contradictary as you state the owners are losing money but then say the league is profitable? It appears obvious that ownership does not think it is profitable enough to continue business or we would be watching hockey games.
  • 0

#1263 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,166 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 09 October 2012 - 09:59 AM

The KHL is run by billionaire Oil Tycoons who don't care if they make money on hockey. You are right though in that it can't be sustained without opening up new markets. They are trying to get into Western Europe however and the longer this NHL lockout goes the stronger the KHL could become. The more they can expand and get better TV contracts the more players they will be able to attract and that would all be helped by all the NHL'ers playing abroad. If this NHL lockout lasts over one season don't be surprised to see the KHL playing in Western Europe this time next year with a decent north american TV contract. The next step would be a North Amercian expansion. That is how the players can win this.

The owners went into this lockout thinking they held all the cards and the players would cave. They better realize soon that Donald Fehr isn't the caving type and that they actually could hurt their own product forever! Gary Bettman is leading them all down the wrong path this time. Maybe he will be smart enough to realize it before the season is cancelled and actually comprise instead of just expecting the players to give more and more and using Lockouts as a negotiating tool.

Both parties have the right to with hold their participation in a new CBA unless the terms meet their needs. Lockout or strike. Obviously the owners feel their concerns are enough to warrant a lock out. If ownership can be 'lead' by Bettman then perhaps they deserve a unkindly fate. I suggest they are experienced businessmen and can crunch their own numbers.

I agree that they are risking their businesses in this process but to suggest that weight is only on their shoulders is ignoring the reality that players face. If life was so good in the KHL then the exodus back to the NHL would not have been as great as it was. The NHL players face an equal risk as ownership. If the NHL deteriorates then not only will their compensation ultimately shrink but the possible number of jobs might be reduced significantly.

One might wish that both sides would take a pragmatic approach and an agreement be reached. I suspect there are some who view this dispute as a question of 'gonads' but the bigger group are simply fighting over money. Ownership has the responsibility of delivering certainty to the many constituencies they are accountable to. The ultimate deal here will require that if the NHL business plan has any hope of succeeding.
  • 0

#1264 Snake Doctor

Snake Doctor

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,760 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 08

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:13 AM

It's time to uses SCABs LOL. Bring hockey back.
  • 0
Posted Image


#1265 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,876 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:13 PM

I wonder how they can even run a league when the owners and players clearly have no respect for each other.

I think this league has too many greedy businessmen that are not actually fans of the game. Bettman seems to just install ownership on the basis of having money, and nothing else.

Ballsille was a potential owner that had the money, and was a fan of the game. Yet Bettman just dismissed him for other owners that ended up not having enough money, and eventually the deals fell through.

There's a reason why you don't see lockouts in other sports as often. The players and owners in those leagues have mutual respect for each other and the game. And deals for new CBAs get done in those leagues, because both sides are willing to work together, not against each other.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#1266 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,166 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:42 PM

I wonder how they can even run a league when the owners and players clearly have no respect for each other.

I think this league has too many greedy businessmen that are not actually fans of the game. Bettman seems to just install ownership on the basis of having money, and nothing else.

Ballsille was a potential owner that had the money, and was a fan of the game. Yet Bettman just dismissed him for other owners that ended up not having enough money, and eventually the deals fell through.

There's a reason why you don't see lockouts in other sports as often. The players and owners in those leagues have mutual respect for each other and the game. And deals for new CBAs get done in those leagues, because both sides are willing to work together, not against each other.

It easier to have respect when you are making lots of money. I am talking off the top but I assume that MLB, NBA and NFL are light years ahead of the NHL. As Canadians we want that pump about our favorite sport but the big bucks are not in the NHL yet. In the other leagues I mentioned the players don't come close to 57% of revenues either.

Basillie was shot down because he was buying a NHL team on the cheap and wanting to move it into Southern Ontario. I expect that if the NHL put an expansion team up for bid in that area that the bidding would start at $300 mil. Why would the NHL owners give that kind of dough away? Easy to move a team from Atlanta to Winnipeg, nothing for nothing.
  • 0

#1267 gradin123

gradin123

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,093 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Posted 09 October 2012 - 02:51 PM

Both parties have the right to with hold their participation in a new CBA unless the terms meet their needs. Lockout or strike. Obviously the owners feel their concerns are enough to warrant a lock out. If ownership can be 'lead' by Bettman then perhaps they deserve a unkindly fate. I suggest they are experienced businessmen and can crunch their own numbers.

I agree that they are risking their businesses in this process but to suggest that weight is only on their shoulders is ignoring the reality that players face. If life was so good in the KHL then the exodus back to the NHL would not have been as great as it was. The NHL players face an equal risk as ownership. If the NHL deteriorates then not only will their compensation ultimately shrink but the possible number of jobs might be reduced significantly.

One might wish that both sides would take a pragmatic approach and an agreement be reached. I suspect there are some who view this dispute as a question of 'gonads' but the bigger group are simply fighting over money. Ownership has the responsibility of delivering certainty to the many constituencies they are accountable to. The ultimate deal here will require that if the NHL business plan has any hope of succeeding.


The owners only concern is making more and thinking they can stick it to the players. Yes there are some teams that are losing money but revenue sharing or moving the franchises are the only real ways to address that. Lowering the cap won't make the Coyotes profitable only more league revenue sharing could do that. The Canucks would never disclose what they made last year but it is probably in excess of $50 million after everything is considered. If the cap is lowered the Canucks would make more money and not even consider passing any of that savings onto the fans. The owners don't really want to negotiate they just want the players to cave because they expect them to think in terms of the shortterm money lost. I agree both parties will fair poorly from the lockout in the shortterm but are the players just suppose to cave everytime a CBA ends? When the owners initially suggested a drop from 57% to 43%, I was shocked. That was a brutal way to start the negotiating.

Yes the last CBA has worked out pretty good for the players because of the rising revenues and because of the GM's longterm contracts but the revenues won't keep rising at that pace. I think one of the main reasons thst revenues have gone up so much is because of the Canadian dollar and all the regional Canadian TV contracts. In 2004 the dollar was under 80 cents and now it is over par. But both of these factors are probably maxed out now so the growth rate can't continue

The problem from the players standpoint isn't just signing this collective agreement the problem for them is they have to really stand up to the owners one time or the owners arrogance will never go away.

Think about, imagine you worked for a company that one day signed you to a contract and the next day said give us back 20% and if you don't like it quit. And then said you don't have any good alternatives so take it or leave it. Now even though they may be right in terms of pay do you really want to work for a company that treats you with that much disrespect? Bettman is out of control and the players have to stand up to him at some point. A long work stoppage now may be the best thing in the longterm. Look at baseball, after Fehr beat the owners in 1994 and stood up to them they haven't come close to a work stoppage since and revenues continue to grow and almost everyteam is making money. All sides are happy because now there is a true partnership between players and owners. Hockey is too fractioned. This has to be settled once and for all.

I was a teen during that 1994 baseball lockout and remember hating Donald Fehr with a passion at that the time. I'm sure by the end of the contract he will be hated by most hockey fans too but I think he is the right hire for the players because he is the only guy capable of standing up to Bettman and I think that needs to be done.

Bettman really really needs to go for the good of hockey. The revenues of all the sports have grown substantially since 1994 and hockey's has probably grown the least so I am not sure why he gets so much credit for that.

Edited by gradin123, 09 October 2012 - 03:12 PM.

  • 0

#1268 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

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

Posted 09 October 2012 - 03:04 PM

Think about, imagine you worked for a company that one day signed you to a contract and the next day said give us back 20% and if you don't like it quit. And then said you don't have any good alternatives so take it or leave it. Now even though they may be right in terms of pay do you really want to work for a company that treats you with that much disrespect? Bettman is out of control and the players have to stand up to him at some point. A long work stoppage now may be the best thing in the longterm. Look at baseball, after Fehr beat the owners in 1994 and stood up to them they haven't come close to a work stoppage since and revenues continue to grow and almost everyteam is making money. All sides are happy.



If you are Scott Gomez how can you look at your owner in the face after giving him 3 goals in 2 years and cashing $15M in pay checks over that time. Gomez doesn't care because he has a signed contract. The owner signed a guy that is paid to produce, but he is a bust. Gomez thinks it's a big joke, he is getting paid so why should he care until it's a contract year. Atleast in the NFL you can be cut anytime, maybe that is what the NHL: needs.
  • 1

#1269 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,876 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 09 October 2012 - 03:17 PM

It easier to have respect when you are making lots of money. I am talking off the top but I assume that MLB, NBA and NFL are light years ahead of the NHL. As Canadians we want that pump about our favorite sport but the big bucks are not in the NHL yet. In the other leagues I mentioned the players don't come close to 57% of revenues either.

Basillie was shot down because he was buying a NHL team on the cheap and wanting to move it into Southern Ontario. I expect that if the NHL put an expansion team up for bid in that area that the bidding would start at $300 mil. Why would the NHL owners give that kind of dough away? Easy to move a team from Atlanta to Winnipeg, nothing for nothing.


Maybe the MLB and NFL are bad examples, but it's not like they don't have their fair share of greedy owners too that are always looking to take more from the players. Yet somehow they get deals done.

The NBA actually has quite a few struggling teams much like the NHL. Obviously the NBA makes alot more money, but at the same time, players get paid more. Somehow revenue sharing has seemed to stabilize that league, and deals get done without losing full seasons, for the most part.

Maybe fans of those leagues are just better at putting pressure on these owners. I dunno, the average NHL fan seems to just accept a lockout as an enevitability nowadays without putting up too much fight.

Edited by DeNiro, 09 October 2012 - 03:18 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#1270 sting

sting

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 824 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 11

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:56 PM

Maybe the MLB and NFL are bad examples, but it's not like they don't have their fair share of greedy owners too that are always looking to take more from the players. Yet somehow they get deals done.

The NBA actually has quite a few struggling teams much like the NHL. Obviously the NBA makes alot more money, but at the same time, players get paid more. Somehow revenue sharing has seemed to stabilize that league, and deals get done without losing full seasons, for the most part.

Maybe fans of those leagues are just better at putting pressure on these owners. I dunno, the average NHL fan seems to just accept a lockout as an enevitability nowadays without putting up too much fight.


I think the NBA and NFL are good examples. The NHL owners are looking for equalization just like these forementioned leagues have put in place. The NFL players get 47% and the NBA is 50%. NHL players have seen salaries rise at 7% annually for over a decade and the owners simply want a rollback in salaries that will essentially come back at roughly 50% from 57%.

Donald Fehr is an idiot if he thinks holding out an entire season will change any of this. The notion of NHL players as a whole going to Europe and working for anything remotely close to what they could earn in North America is moronic.

The owners initial proposal of 43% was just that. No one starts a negotiation on a purchase with the exact number they plan to pay
.
Hopefully they can work this out sooner than later. It will really suck when there is no Lions, Whitecaps, MLB playoffs and NFL to watch alternatively.

Edited by sting, 09 October 2012 - 04:58 PM.

  • 0

#1271 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

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

Posted 09 October 2012 - 05:40 PM

I think the NBA and NFL are good examples. The NHL owners are looking for equalization just like these forementioned leagues have put in place. The NFL players get 47% and the NBA is 50%. NHL players have seen salaries rise at 7% annually for over a decade and the owners simply want a rollback in salaries that will essentially come back at roughly 50% from 57%.

Donald Fehr is an idiot if he thinks holding out an entire season will change any of this. The notion of NHL players as a whole going to Europe and working for anything remotely close to what they could earn in North America is moronic.

The owners initial proposal of 43% was just that. No one starts a negotiation on a purchase with the exact number they plan to pay
.
Hopefully they can work this out sooner than later. It will really suck when there is no Lions, Whitecaps, MLB playoffs and NFL to watch alternatively.


The problem with comparing the 4 major sports is that only 3 of them a hugh in the US and hockey is really nothing. College sports get more coverage in NHL American cities then the NHL does. It's the American TV contracts that help the NFL,MLB, and NBA, where hockey has next to nothing in the US.

Is basketball really big in Canada? Not really, don't see to many NBA jerseys in Saskatchewan
Is baseball all that big in Canada? A little more then the basketball, if you were to take the Blue Jays out, well. Even in a city of 4 M they can only get 14 000 to games
Football is a different animal all of it's own. I think mainly because of pools and betting.
Hockey is king in Canada
  • 0

#1272 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 216 posts
  • Joined: 29-January 03

Posted 09 October 2012 - 10:45 PM

Think about, imagine you worked for a company that one day signed you to a contract and the next day said give us back 20% and if you don't like it quit. And then said you don't have any good alternatives so take it or leave it.



I dont think thats a comment to make a point with

I would think that after that happened and I realized that my company was still offering WAY more than ANY one else would dare offer me, Then I would take it and be happy , Maybe thats just me

Also No other league will pay what the NHL will and with 1st class accomadations,travel,medical,benefits etc

Edited by ba;;isticsports, 09 October 2012 - 10:46 PM.

  • 0

#1273 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,751 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:05 AM

Of course that's a comment to make a point with.

If I sign a contract with Telus, and they say that I actually owe them 20% more, then I'd be pissed. If I rent my basement for $1000 a month, then tell my tenant that it's actually going to cost $1200, then he'd be pissed.

How is it even legal for the league to amend all previously signed contracts? I understand changing the rules for new contracts, but not old ones.
  • 1

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

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#1274 King of the ES

King of the ES

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,272 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 12

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:31 AM

I just watched TSN's "Insider Trading" segment from yesterday, and what infuriates is how calmly and how matter-of-factly these guys talk about the whole thing.

I want to hear some ANGER, some PASSION. I want these guys to look directly into the camera and tell both factions that THEY ARE DOING WRONG. Fehr & Bettman need to be locked in a room, and given 48 hours to come up with a deal, or find new jobs. Let Parkinson's Law take effect. The "complexity" that they're talking about with a deal like this is total BS - it's a battle of egos, and it's not acceptable to the fans. HRR is not hard to define, and a fair split should not be difficult whatsoever.

Seriously, I think there's an onus on these media types to play a bigger role in this. Help create ANGER towards these two groups. Far too many fans seem to be accepting of this now as "part of the business", which is crap. These guys have theoretically had 8 years to develop an extension to this deal, and they started talking 2 months before its expiry. That's unacceptable, and there should be a bigger public outcry than what currently exists, for a lockout based ENTIRELY on greed.

We hear it on local radio stations, regularly, as to how foolish this is, but it needs to be spread more publicly. Serious hate/anger by the public will absolutely have an influence on the urgency to get this done. National media has the platform to do this, and it's about time that they started.

Edited by King of the ES, 10 October 2012 - 08:31 AM.

  • 4

#1275 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,166 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 10 October 2012 - 09:15 AM

I think the NBA and NFL are good examples. The NHL owners are looking for equalization just like these forementioned leagues have put in place. The NFL players get 47% and the NBA is 50%. NHL players have seen salaries rise at 7% annually for over a decade and the owners simply want a rollback in salaries that will essentially come back at roughly 50% from 57%.

Donald Fehr is an idiot if he thinks holding out an entire season will change any of this. The notion of NHL players as a whole going to Europe and working for anything remotely close to what they could earn in North America is moronic.

The owners initial proposal of 43% was just that. No one starts a negotiation on a purchase with the exact number they plan to pay
.
Hopefully they can work this out sooner than later. It will really suck when there is no Lions, Whitecaps, MLB playoffs and NFL to watch alternatively.

You nailed it.

As someone previously posted I didn't see Gionta offering any of his contract back to the Habs for non-performance. The only point I can agree with most anti-ownership blogers is the contract rollbacks. I do not agree with this in any form. When someone signs a contract it has to be lived up to. If the NHL had publically stated that franchises would have to honour any contract and that no rollback would happen even if it was allowed in the 2004 CBA then the Weber, Parise and Suter deals wouldn't have happened.

For those that constantly cast this dispute into a labour vs owner scenario then carry it to extreme. Suggesting that ticket prices are simply because of 'greedy' owners when the players are 57% of cost and thusly the ticket price, is farcical. The bitter reality that most don't want to acknowledge is that when you work for someone you are simply selling your time. If you don't like your job move on. Ownership should gain incremental revenues based on efficiences, market penetration and yes control of cost.

I am quite prepared to see the NHL go broke if ownership has misread their businesses. They have no guarantee of success and with looming financial crisis in both the USA and Canada it could happen. If it does I will move on to another interest. Both these parties, the players and owners, run that risk. I am suggesting that ownership answers to far more pressures than do the players. If ownership is to far out of line then another league can take over. Why don't the players form a quasi NHL co-operative and barnstorm North America. If revenue is the determinant of what running the business is all about they should be successful.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the NHL business plan to market the game through media broadcast? Fans dwell on the ticket aspect but that isn't the reality. This will be the biggest incentive to ownership cutting a deal. If media buyers start to right off the NHL then their plan falls apart. The NBA, MLB and NFL do not survive from gate revenue. The NHL has not matured to the point where TV revenue can provide the money enjoyed by the other sports. They may never do that. the NBC contract at $2 billion was a great start. If the NHL aspiration is to follow the senior leagues then similiar contracts are probably their objective. Those leagues have player cost at roughly 50% of revenue. I suspect that is where the NHL will end up. With NHL revenue still dependant on gate receipts I don't know whether that will give the owners enough revenue.

Edited by Boudrias, 10 October 2012 - 09:28 AM.

  • 0

#1276 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,942 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 01:35 PM

Big (or maybe expected) news out of Alberta:

@DarrenDreger Haven't scanned other reports, but, told Alberta Labor Board sides with NHL. Awaiting further details.

Awaiting word from NHLPA, but, sounds like a flat out win for the NHL in Alberta. Will advise as info surfaces.


Edited by elvis15, 10 October 2012 - 01:36 PM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#1277 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

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

Posted 10 October 2012 - 03:53 PM

Big (or maybe expected) news out of Alberta:


If the NHLPA would have won this case, if I were an owner, every player would be showing up to the rink and skating for 8 hours. After all they are not getting paid to sit at home they are getting paid to work.
  • 0

#1278 Owen Nolan

Owen Nolan

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,127 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 07

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:40 PM

No progress again at todays meetings, meaning ive lost all hope.. Maybe next year..
  • 0
Posted Image

#1279 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,876 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 10 October 2012 - 04:41 PM

Daly said that very little progress was made today, and apparently they didn't even talk about money.

All they talked about was drug testing...

Why are they even bothering to meet? They're just going through the motions and making it look like they're working on something. If they were actually serious, they would spend a full week of full day meetings trying to hammer out numbers. Not meeting for 4 hours here and 4 hours there. It's a joke. What do these people get paid for?
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#1280 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,746 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:05 PM

NHL and NHLPA will choke on their own money. I see a new league forming and players get only a fraction if what they used to. Fehr is a baseball man not a hockey minded guy and will take it too far. Bettman will shut down the season and then sit on the fact fans will be lost and moved along to other things never to return for this post lockout.
  • 0

#1281 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,751 posts
  • Joined: 08-December 06

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:19 PM

If the NHLPA would have won this case, if I were an owner, every player would be showing up to the rink and skating for 8 hours. After all they are not getting paid to sit at home they are getting paid to work.

Yeah, cause that's how a lockout works. All the win would have meant is that the Flames and Oilers players must be paid their salary. There is no way the owners would make their players jump hoops like that because of some legal technicality.

Edited by WiDeN, 10 October 2012 - 07:20 PM.

  • 0

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

Posted Image
2 0 14 S t a n l e y C u p C h a m p i o n s


#1282 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,876 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 10 October 2012 - 07:42 PM

NHL and NHLPA will choke on their own money. I see a new league forming and players get only a fraction if what they used to. Fehr is a baseball man not a hockey minded guy and will take it too far. Bettman will shut down the season and then sit on the fact fans will be lost and moved along to other things never to return for this post lockout.


Like I said, when people in charge of running the league have no respect for the league and the game, this is how they treat it.

Bettman is a businessman and was NBA guy before being brought in. He has now been involved in 3 lockouts in his 20 year tenure.

Fehr is a lawyer and was a MLB guy before being brought in. He has now been involved in 8 negotiations, where 6 of them have resulted in work stoppages; including the loss of the entire 04-05 MLB season. Five in a row being with the MLB, and this one makes him the only executive director to be involved in work stoppages in two sports.

Bottom line is, these guys have horrible track records. They're probably the two worst guys you could have in charge of negotiating a new CBA. They're rejects from other sports that couldn't do their jobs properly.
  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#1283 sting

sting

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 824 posts
  • Joined: 09-November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 08:50 PM

You nailed it.

As someone previously posted I didn't see Gionta offering any of his contract back to the Habs for non-performance. The only point I can agree with most anti-ownership blogers is the contract rollbacks. I do not agree with this in any form. When someone signs a contract it has to be lived up to. If the NHL had publically stated that franchises would have to honour any contract and that no rollback would happen even if it was allowed in the 2004 CBA then the Weber, Parise and Suter deals wouldn't have happened.

For those that constantly cast this dispute into a labour vs owner scenario then carry it to extreme. Suggesting that ticket prices are simply because of 'greedy' owners when the players are 57% of cost and thusly the ticket price, is farcical. The bitter reality that most don't want to acknowledge is that when you work for someone you are simply selling your time. If you don't like your job move on. Ownership should gain incremental revenues based on efficiences, market penetration and yes control of cost.

I am quite prepared to see the NHL go broke if ownership has misread their businesses. They have no guarantee of success and with looming financial crisis in both the USA and Canada it could happen. If it does I will move on to another interest. Both these parties, the players and owners, run that risk. I am suggesting that ownership answers to far more pressures than do the players. If ownership is to far out of line then another league can take over. Why don't the players form a quasi NHL co-operative and barnstorm North America. If revenue is the determinant of what running the business is all about they should be successful.

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't the NHL business plan to market the game through media broadcast? Fans dwell on the ticket aspect but that isn't the reality. This will be the biggest incentive to ownership cutting a deal. If media buyers start to right off the NHL then their plan falls apart. The NBA, MLB and NFL do not survive from gate revenue. The NHL has not matured to the point where TV revenue can provide the money enjoyed by the other sports. They may never do that. the NBC contract at $2 billion was a great start. If the NHL aspiration is to follow the senior leagues then similiar contracts are probably their objective. Those leagues have player cost at roughly 50% of revenue. I suspect that is where the NHL will end up. With NHL revenue still dependant on gate receipts I don't know whether that will give the owners enough revenue.


Great Post Boudrias!!

It is the NHL,s objective to be as successful as possible for the long term. Creating a business plan to do this means using other leagues as examples for your sharing of league revenues. The NHL of all the big leagues has not only the highest percent of revenues going to the players it also has the highest percentage of teams in financial distress.

On the subject of ticket prices...... If your arena is sold out every game and people are scalping tickets for larger sums than why would you lower them?? I know it sucks to be priced out of the market but in the end a blue collar guy like me goes to a couple of games every year instead of ten. That's just the way it is.........Thank you HDTV.

One last thing........ I have heard people use the argument that nobody forced the owners to go out and sign the players for ridiculous sums. Imagine yourself as the owner or GM of the Minnesota Wild this year....You have probably the most knowledgeable and passionate fans of any American market in the league. You have had a tremendous success at the box office since your team came back. Your fans have been loyal and supportive in every way but you just cannot seem to put together a lineup that makes your team a cup contender.

Enter two American born UFA players. ( Parise and Suter) One from Minnesota and the other from nearby Wisconsin both showing an interest in signing long term contracts near there families. So at this point the owner has to say.........Do I make my team a contender and take my team to the next level because I care about winning and fans or.....

So in the end Mr Leipold has to do what every GM in the league has to when it comes time to sign elite level Free Agent players. Pay market value and put the best offer on the table.




  • 0

#1284 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,771 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:16 PM

Daly said that very little progress was made today, and apparently they didn't even talk about money.

All they talked about was drug testing...

Why are they even bothering to meet? They're just going through the motions and making it look like they're working on something. If they were actually serious, they would spend a full week of full day meetings trying to hammer out numbers. Not meeting for 4 hours here and 4 hours there. It's a joke. What do these people get paid for?


Daly is saying there's no progress after every meeting because its in his interest to do so. His job at this point is one thing: make it look like a lockout imposed by the owners is the fault of the players. He comes off as a liar and a child coming out of every meeting whining. I expect Fehr knows this. It seems like he's trashing the reputations of Bettman and Daly by dragging them to meetings and watching them bitch on TV afterwards. Meanwhile he's appearing optimistic but not foolishly so. From a political standpoint (and at this point, negotiating is all politics because no one will give until they're forced to), Fehr is a demigod. Bettman meanwhile is letting Daly take on the cameras because he knows he can't win.

It may not be hockey but I'd be lying if I didn't find the tactics used somewhat interesting.
  • 0

#1285 CrazyAL

CrazyAL

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined: 10-March 03

Posted 10 October 2012 - 10:53 PM

The owners only concern is making more and thinking they can stick it to the players. Yes there are some teams that are losing money but revenue sharing or moving the franchises are the only real ways to address that. Lowering the cap won't make the Coyotes profitable only more league revenue sharing could do that. The Canucks would never disclose what they made last year but it is probably in excess of $50 million after everything is considered. If the cap is lowered the Canucks would make more money and not even consider passing any of that savings onto the fans. The owners don't really want to negotiate they just want the players to cave because they expect them to think in terms of the shortterm money lost. I agree both parties will fair poorly from the lockout in the shortterm but are the players just suppose to cave everytime a CBA ends? When the owners initially suggested a drop from 57% to 43%, I was shocked. That was a brutal way to start the negotiating.

Yes the last CBA has worked out pretty good for the players because of the rising revenues and because of the GM's longterm contracts but the revenues won't keep rising at that pace. I think one of the main reasons thst revenues have gone up so much is because of the Canadian dollar and all the regional Canadian TV contracts. In 2004 the dollar was under 80 cents and now it is over par. But both of these factors are probably maxed out now so the growth rate can't continue

The problem from the players standpoint isn't just signing this collective agreement the problem for them is they have to really stand up to the owners one time or the owners arrogance will never go away.

Think about, imagine you worked for a company that one day signed you to a contract and the next day said give us back 20% and if you don't like it quit. And then said you don't have any good alternatives so take it or leave it. Now even though they may be right in terms of pay do you really want to work for a company that treats you with that much disrespect? Bettman is out of control and the players have to stand up to him at some point. A long work stoppage now may be the best thing in the longterm. Look at baseball, after Fehr beat the owners in 1994 and stood up to them they haven't come close to a work stoppage since and revenues continue to grow and almost everyteam is making money. All sides are happy because now there is a true partnership between players and owners. Hockey is too fractioned. This has to be settled once and for all.

I was a teen during that 1994 baseball lockout and remember hating Donald Fehr with a passion at that the time. I'm sure by the end of the contract he will be hated by most hockey fans too but I think he is the right hire for the players because he is the only guy capable of standing up to Bettman and I think that needs to be done.

Bettman really really needs to go for the good of hockey. The revenues of all the sports have grown substantially since 1994 and hockey's has probably grown the least so I am not sure why he gets so much credit for that.


I'm with you they are getting shafted but imo the players hold non of the cards. You have a handful of teams in the NHL that make good money, some clubs barley break even or maybe make a small profit, the rest lose money, so why would these billionare owners care if they lockout players for a season? They know what will happen in the end, the players will cave, if the players wait a season they'll never make that money back. I get they don't want to look weak but they can't seriously think they are going to win this battle by waiting for the owners to flinch.
  • 1

#1286 gradin123

gradin123

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,093 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:29 AM

I'm with you they are getting shafted but imo the players hold non of the cards. You have a handful of teams in the NHL that make good money, some clubs barley break even or maybe make a small profit, the rest lose money, so why would these billionare owners care if they lockout players for a season? They know what will happen in the end, the players will cave, if the players wait a season they'll never make that money back. I get they don't want to look weak but they can't seriously think they are going to win this battle by waiting for the owners to flinch.


You don't understand Donald Fehr. He is just as hard headed as Bettman. He also has made the NHLPA nearly mutiny proof. The players will not cave this time. The sticking point for players is the owners demand for contract rollbacks.

I'm telling you Fehr will never agree to that.

Edited by gradin123, 11 October 2012 - 01:40 AM.

  • 0

#1287 gradin123

gradin123

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,093 posts
  • Joined: 29-December 03

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:37 AM

Great Post Boudrias!!

It is the NHL,s objective to be as successful as possible for the long term. Creating a business plan to do this means using other leagues as examples for your sharing of league revenues. The NHL of all the big leagues has not only the highest percent of revenues going to the players it also has the highest percentage of teams in financial distress.

On the subject of ticket prices...... If your arena is sold out every game and people are scalping tickets for larger sums than why would you lower them?? I know it sucks to be priced out of the market but in the end a blue collar guy like me goes to a couple of games every year instead of ten. That's just the way it is.........Thank you HDTV.


Hate to break it to you but Canucks tickets can be bought for the vast majority of games for below the Ticketmaster face Value. The Canucks tickets are mostly sold out to corporations and small businesses but the demand for Canucks Tickets in the resale market is soft. Scalpers only make money on the Canucks by buying below face value from people who can't go to certain games and then flipping them for closer to face value.

So basically, the Canucks are charging more than scalpers.

Edited by gradin123, 11 October 2012 - 01:44 AM.

  • 0

#1288 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,166 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 11 October 2012 - 09:29 AM

You don't understand Donald Fehr. He is just as hard headed as Bettman. He also has made the NHLPA nearly mutiny proof. The players will not cave this time. The sticking point for players is the owners demand for contract rollbacks.

I'm telling you Fehr will never agree to that.

It makes no difference who is more hard headed than the other. In the end neither Don Fehr or Gary Bettman will decide if an agreement goes through. It will be the players and the owners.

I agree with you that existing contracts should not be subject to rollbacks. If GMs signed deals in anticipation of rollbacks then bad on the NHL for encouraging that might be an option. Obviously it was an option because it happened in 2004. Very bad business.

I can agree that UFA status should be restricted to age 30 or 10 years of NHL play. It would halt some of the contract escalation and encourage franchises to invest in player development. Contract length should be maxed at 5 years which would let players get market rates for their play.

Back to Don Fehr. Ultimately he will fail if this lockout goes into a 2nd season. MLB is not the NHL. MLB is a far richer league. The fact that he took 4 of 6 negociations to a work stoppage makes him no better than Bettman. Even while saying that I still feel that the solution will come down to the economics involved and not the personalities of the negociators. Early in a dispute personalities might want to establish their creditentials but in the long term the $s involved will determine the settlement. I at least hope that to be the case. The NHL absolutely has to end up with a settlement framework that yields a secure future. Failure will probably mean a collapse of the NHL business plan and a severe contraction of the league and the revenue that supports so many teams.

Edited by Boudrias, 11 October 2012 - 09:33 AM.

  • 1

#1289 gurn

gurn

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,294 posts
  • Joined: 25-September 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 10:15 AM

How many of Fehr's work stoppages were lockouts and how many were strikes?
  • 0

#1290 goalie13

goalie13

    Osgoodian One

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,097 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:07 AM

How many of Fehr's work stoppages were lockouts and how many were strikes?


I believe 4 were strikes and two were lockouts.

Both of the lockouts and 2 of the strikes resulted in zero games lost. They were resolved before games had to be cancelled.

The 1981 strike resulted in the loss of 713 games. The 94/95 strike resulted in the loss of over 900 games and the entire playoffs, and wrecked what was looking like a Championship season for the Expos.
  • 0
Posted Image




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.