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

#1291 Dittohead

Dittohead

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,198 posts
  • Joined: 13-August 04

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:53 AM

Once a few of the jackalopes miss a couple pay cheques we'll be back to Hockey.
  • 0

#1292 Canada Hockey Place

Canada Hockey Place

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,599 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 08

Posted 11 October 2012 - 11:57 AM

Seen this? Diary of a locked out NHL player - http://thebarnstorme...r/cheap-throat/

eg. 1st post from day 1

12:00PM — Got up. Had three coffees and a box of Sudafed before I remembered there was no practice today. Washed the Maserati. Called agent to see if there were any jobs I could take away from old friends in Europe. Watched Ellen.
Created myself in NHL2K12. Rose up the minor league ranks by lunchtime. Beat the crap out PK Subban in my first game. It’s not racism. I just don’t like the guy. Then GM traded me to the Habs. Still refuse to pass him the puck. So confused.


:lol:

Edited by Canada Hockey Place, 11 October 2012 - 11:58 AM.

  • 0
Quando omni flunkus moritati

#1293 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:22 PM

The season should have started today. It didn't because a bunch of grown men can't agree on how to divide up the obscene amount of money the fans give them for having some of the best jobs in the world. The owners may be the ranch owners and the players may be the ranch hands, but without the fans there wouldn't be any ranches at all! Despite that, there seems to be little, if any, concern for the fans. It's just assumed we'll be back and making it rain. Only by letting them know that they can no longer take our support for granted will we be considered at all. If they don't hear our voices, maybe they will hear the collective sounds of our wallets going into lock down! Even if we can't do much about this lockout, if we band together we can send a message and hopefully avoid any future stoppages.

So, I hope others will join me in a.....

Posted Image


NHL Fan Lockout Pledge
I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related during any season where a single game is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind. If an entire season is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind, I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related for the entire next season.

  • 2
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1294 Standing_Tall#37

Standing_Tall#37

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,000 posts
  • Joined: 07-October 09

Posted 11 October 2012 - 12:40 PM

Phone 212-789-2000 then hit 1 when the prompt comes. Gary Bettman's personal voicemail :towel:

Voice your displeasure directly :lol:
  • 0

#1295 Owen Nolan

Owen Nolan

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,135 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 07

Posted 11 October 2012 - 01:48 PM

No progess made today again!
  • 0
Posted Image

#1296 Remy

Remy

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,188 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08

Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:26 PM

The season should have started today. It didn't because a bunch of grown men can't agree on how to divide up the obscene amount of money the fans give them for having some of the best jobs in the world. The owners may be the ranch owners and the players may be the ranch hands, but without the fans there wouldn't be any ranches at all! Despite that, there seems to be little, if any, concern for the fans. It's just assumed we'll be back and making it rain. Only by letting them know that they can no longer take our support for granted will we be considered at all. If they don't hear our voices, maybe they will hear the collective sounds of our wallets going into lock down! Even if we can't do much about this lockout, if we band together we can send a message and hopefully avoid any future stoppages.

So, I hope others will join me in a.....

Posted Image


NHL Fan Lockout Pledge
I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related during any season where a single game is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind. If an entire season is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind, I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related for the entire next season.


There's a part of me that would genuinely love to see this get off the ground and start gaining some momentum.

But the cynical side of me doesn't think that these types of protests will have any effect whatsoever.
  • 0

#1297 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:04 PM

Maybe not. But I am for one am sticking to it. We're already telling people not to buy us anything with a Canucks logo on it for Christmas (as we often get at least one fan gift a year). If even a percentage of the foot stomping "I'm not coming back ever!" people just locked out their wallets for one year then maybe fans would start to be taken more seriously and the NHL wouldn't think they can just whatever they want without an repercussions.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1298 Nuck_Family_in_SD

Nuck_Family_in_SD

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 11

Posted 11 October 2012 - 04:34 PM

The season should have started today. It didn't because a bunch of grown men can't agree on how to divide up the obscene amount of money the fans give them for having some of the best jobs in the world. The owners may be the ranch owners and the players may be the ranch hands, but without the fans there wouldn't be any ranches at all! Despite that, there seems to be little, if any, concern for the fans. It's just assumed we'll be back and making it rain. Only by letting them know that they can no longer take our support for granted will we be considered at all. If they don't hear our voices, maybe they will hear the collective sounds of our wallets going into lock down! Even if we can't do much about this lockout, if we band together we can send a message and hopefully avoid any future stoppages.

So, I hope others will join me in a.....

Posted Image


NHL Fan Lockout Pledge
I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related during any season where a single game is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind. If an entire season is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind, I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related for the entire next season.


100% agree. I've thought all along since the lockout that the NHL thinks they have US in their back pocket, but maybe if (once a CBA is agreed on and the games begin) we, the FANS, organize and boycott a few of the first games. Sure, season ticket holders take the biggest hit since they've already paid, but empty arena's, no concessions, no NHL gear, etc., might send a message.

Better yet, seriously start threatening it NOW, publicly and LOUD so the NHL believes we might walk out of the first few games.

It really sucks. It seems the league and players aren't even really trying hard to reach an agreement. A day or two every week? Why didn't they get this figured out in Sept?? Why does the CBA expire right before hockey season? Wouldn't it make sense to expire at the END of the season? That gives them ALL SUMMER to figure it out without screwing their customers (fans).
  • 0

#1299 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,989 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 11 October 2012 - 07:51 PM

Red Wings Henrik Zetterberg thinks that some players will remain overseas this year:

“I know for a fact Russians will probably stay,” Zetterberg said. “I can’t blame them either. The Russian league treats players a different way. For them to play in their home country and not have these (labor) disputes every other year … and they honor the contracts over there. If you sign a deal, that’s the deal you get.”


http://www.mlive.com...rberg_st_1.html

Sharks Ryane Clowe on the lockout:

“Players are on the same page,” Clowe told ESPN.com Wednesday. “No one’s cracking. We’re informed and updated and guys have a good understanding of what’s going on. …


“We’re hockey players,” he added. “We’re not going to get pushed around.”


“The way I see it, if Ryan Suter or Zach Parise signed those big deals in July and then arrived at training camp and said, ‘We’re not playing until we get 20 percent more on our contract,’ there would be an uproar,” said Clowe. “The owners would say, ‘No chance.’ Well, it’s the same thing. Contracts have been signed, both the owners and the players have signed these contracts. Now they’re trying to take whatever percentage off the top? It’s all about principle. It’s a handshake and an agreement. Why did all these owners rush to sign all these players before the lockout?”


“I’m sure there are owners that want to be playing now and probably like our last proposal,” said Clowe. “Obviously Gary has done a good job keeping the reins tight. But I can’t believe how the owners are kept on the back burner like that.”


http://espn.go.com/b...-arent-cracking
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#1300 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

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

Posted 12 October 2012 - 04:38 AM

Red Wings Henrik Zetterberg thinks that some players will remain overseas this year:


“I know for a fact Russians will probably stay,” Zetterberg said. “I can’t blame them either. The Russian league treats players a different way. For them to play in their home country and not have these (labor) disputes every other year … and they honor the contracts over there. If you sign a deal, that’s the deal you get.”


http://www.mlive.com...rberg_st_1.html

Sharks Ryane Clowe on the lockout:


“Players are on the same page,” Clowe told ESPN.com Wednesday. “No one’s cracking. We’re informed and updated and guys have a good understanding of what’s going on. …


“We’re hockey players,” he added. “We’re not going to get pushed around.”


“The way I see it, if Ryan Suter or Zach Parise signed those big deals in July and then arrived at training camp and said, ‘We’re not playing until we get 20 percent more on our contract,’ there would be an uproar,” said Clowe. “The owners would say, ‘No chance.’ Well, it’s the same thing. Contracts have been signed, both the owners and the players have signed these contracts. Now they’re trying to take whatever percentage off the top? It’s all about principle. It’s a handshake and an agreement. Why did all these owners rush to sign all these players before the lockout?”


“I’m sure there are owners that want to be playing now and probably like our last proposal,” said Clowe. “Obviously Gary has done a good job keeping the reins tight. But I can’t believe how the owners are kept on the back burner like that.”


http://espn.go.com/b...-arent-cracking


I'm sure no player has ever asked for a trade after signing a contract......Rick Nash, Dany Heatley, Chris Pronger to name a few
  • 0

#1301 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,275 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 12 October 2012 - 08:39 AM

Red Wings Henrik Zetterberg thinks that some players will remain overseas this year:

“I know for a fact Russians will probably stay,” Zetterberg said. “I can’t blame them either. The Russian league treats players a different way. For them to play in their home country and not have these (labor) disputes every other year … and they honor the contracts over there. If you sign a deal, that’s the deal you get.”


http://www.mlive.com...rberg_st_1.html

Sharks Ryane Clowe on the lockout:

“Players are on the same page,” Clowe told ESPN.com Wednesday. “No one’s cracking. We’re informed and updated and guys have a good understanding of what’s going on. …


“We’re hockey players,” he added. “We’re not going to get pushed around.”


“The way I see it, if Ryan Suter or Zach Parise signed those big deals in July and then arrived at training camp and said, ‘We’re not playing until we get 20 percent more on our contract,’ there would be an uproar,” said Clowe. “The owners would say, ‘No chance.’ Well, it’s the same thing. Contracts have been signed, both the owners and the players have signed these contracts. Now they’re trying to take whatever percentage off the top? It’s all about principle. It’s a handshake and an agreement. Why did all these owners rush to sign all these players before the lockout?”


“I’m sure there are owners that want to be playing now and probably like our last proposal,” said Clowe. “Obviously Gary has done a good job keeping the reins tight. But I can’t believe how the owners are kept on the back burner like that.”


http://espn.go.com/b...-arent-cracking

I don't have a lot of respect for the Russians in the NHL anyway so if they stay home it is fine by me. At least the NHL should have made it clear that any contract signed by a NHLer in Europe would be for the whole season and they would not have been allowed back to NHL play until 2013-14.

Clowe's point about retro-active claw backs on signed contracts is bang on in my opinion. Obviously contract terms extend over 2 or 3 CBA agreements. How the NHL can write into contracts that clawbacks could be an option is beyond me. If it wasn't written into the contract then players would be able to sue for damages but that isn't happening. No matter what, this is poor business practice and a black mark on the NHL's rep. This option could only be condoned if the NHL was in a bankruptcy situation and would have to be negociated at that time IMO.

My appreciation for the CFL grows each week. Their roster CAP is $4.5 mil with league sales at $150 mil +/-. That averages $18.75 mil in revenue per team. CFL players get about 24% of revenue. Hmmm? Sure enough the two leagues are not comparable. Just sayin...
  • 0

#1302 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 12 October 2012 - 09:49 AM

I'm sure no player has ever asked for a trade after signing a contract......Rick Nash, Dany Heatley, Chris Pronger to name a few


Well, that goes both ways. Teams trade players without them wanting to be traded too, or even make them miserable enough to want to be traded and agree to break a NTC.

But either way, there's a big difference between an individual player asking for a trade (which the team gets some say in) or being traded by a team and the owners locking out all of the players and refusing to honor part of all of the contracts they've signed, some just a few weeks ago.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1303 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:12 AM

Posted Image


NHL Fan Lockout Pledge
I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related during any season where a single game is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind. If an entire season is lost due to a work stoppage of any kind, I pledge to not spend a single penny on anything NHL related for the entire next season.


This is a great idea. Other than NHL 13 (I'm sorry but if I don't at least get some virtual hockey people will be murdered, damn small town with no hockey to play...) I'm not spending a nickel on another NHL related or endorsed product.

This should be posted everywhere, spacebook, tweeter, all those social networking sites, get the word out there maybe a news network will pick it up.

We can only hope...

You should make that picture in sig form, if you do I'll gladly put it in my sig.

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 12 October 2012 - 10:17 AM.

  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#1304 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:32 AM

[Message edited for brevity.]
You should make that picture in sig form, if you do I'll gladly put it in my sig.


Great idea. I'll look into it.


In the meantime, I've posted the original at my Facebook account and in a post at the NHL National Fan Association Facebook page. Everyone, please feel free to post it to your own accounts!


(But I'm with you on NHL 13. We pre-ordered it months ago, so that doesn't count. :lol: )



EDIT: Hope these work. :)

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image

Anyone interested, please feel free to take them, use them, & share them!

Edited by poetica, 12 October 2012 - 12:34 PM.

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

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1305 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,989 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 12 October 2012 - 04:12 PM

Quotes from Sidney Crosby:

“If you look at the offers,” he said, “I think they’re pretty clear. We’re willing to make a deal. There isn’t a deal to be made right now. There’s their deal. And there’s our deal. They want their deal. There is no real meeting (in the middle). They’ve drawn that line. Hopefully they understand that taking a stance like that is affecting a lot of people besides us.”


http://triblive.com/...n#axzz294yPwYqw
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#1306 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

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

Posted 12 October 2012 - 06:19 PM

I'm sure no player has ever asked for a trade after signing a contract......Rick Nash, Dany Heatley, Chris Pronger to name a few

How does just a few examples justify the league rolling back all the players' salaries?
  • 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


#1307 puckluv

puckluv

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 307 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Posted 12 October 2012 - 06:50 PM

I have a question -- please humor me. I wish I could see a graph of where the money goes :(

(1)When the players get 57% (or whatever percent) of the HRR what happens to that money? is it shared evenly amongst all the players on top of their individual contracts?

(2)or is that where the money for their contract comes from? And since their contracts are guaranteed the difference comes from the top revenue earning teams to the lowest earning teams ??

Edited by puckluv, 12 October 2012 - 06:51 PM.

  • 0

Always turn a negative situation into a positive situation. Michael Jordon


#1308 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 12 October 2012 - 08:04 PM

LP
  • 0

#1309 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 12 October 2012 - 08:28 PM

*
POPULAR

Puckluv, as I understand it (and I could be wrong....this is seriously complicated stuff!).....

HRR was defined in the last CBA as including certain types of revenue but not others (like arena revenue not related to hockey events.) Each year teams had to fill out HRR reports which were like filling out tax forms. (You can see a sample of the report of the copy of the last CBA which is available, in its entirety, at the NHLPA website.) In it teams had to list qualified initial HRR as well as note allowed costs which were taken off of the HRR. All of these reports were given to an independent accountant who compiled them, deducted additional agreed upon amounts at the league level and then used those numbers to come up with the final HRR. It is that final HRR number, after numerous deductions (which probably did not cover all of the costs, but also means players weren't getting nearly a full 57% of all revenues like many people falsely believe) that players' share was taken from.

That number was used to determine the salary cap and floor for the following year. It was also used to determine who was owed money (from the portion of each player's salary that had been held back in escrow) and how much based upon the agreed percentages of HRR. (The actual percentage of salary held in escrow was different every year. If you'd like to take a stab at that equation, be my guest.) After the final HRR number was determined the independent accountant decided if there was an overage or shortage, or if the teams overpaid according to the agreed upon percentage of final HRR or underpaid. If they overpaid (say if the league's revenues dropped from the previous year's), the appropriate amount was refunded to the league (not sure how that was split up to be honest) and the remaining money released to the players. If the teams underpaid, the money was released to the players on the agreed upon escrow date.

As for where that money comes from, I would assume it comes from each team's operating budgets. Each team is required to spend to the cap floor. According to the last CBA certain teams were eligible for what amounted to bailout money to help them stay afloat. At the end of each season after the final HRR was determined teams that qualified that spent more than the agreed upon percentage of the club's final HRR on player's salary were eligible for "full share" compensation. That gets pretty complicated too, so feel free to read about it in the CBA.

It is seriously complicated, but I fully encourage everyone to at least have a look at the last CBA, especially the attached sample HRR reporting package. There are many myths floating around, especially the one about how the players supposedly got 57% of every dollar of revenue and then the owners had to pay all of the expenses out of the 43% they got. In reality, teams don't have to count all revenue to start with and then got deductions for many costs before the players' share was determined. In fact, as I understand it teams that used the final HRR number to plead poverty may not have been in the red at all once all of the excluded revenue was included.
  • 5
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1310 Provost

Provost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,916 posts
  • Joined: 05-September 03

Posted 12 October 2012 - 10:09 PM

It is seriously complicated, but I fully encourage everyone to at least have a look at the last CBA, especially the attached sample HRR reporting package. There are many myths floating around, especially the one about how the players supposedly got 57% of every dollar of revenue and then the owners had to pay all of the expenses out of the 43% they got. In reality, teams don't have to count all revenue to start with and then got deductions for many costs before the players' share was determined. In fact, as I understand it teams that used the final HRR number to plead poverty may not have been in the red at all once all of the excluded revenue was included.


I think this is a key element that a lot of people don't consider when they throw out "it should be a 50/50 split" to be even. If you count total revenue rather than HRR, then you could argue a 50/50 split.

I honestly thought that discussing what revenue was to be included in HRR would have been the first issue to be dealt with... but they have hardly tried to crack that nut yet at all.

At this point I think the only way they are able to move forward is to leave it as is and play with percentages. With all the different corporate structures between the teams (who runs the arena, concession, etc) it is way too complicated to deal with in a short time frame.

Most service related companies spend 70-80% of their total revenue on salary and benefits (the rest going for facilities, overhead, etc), so I don't think it is way out of line for the players to be expecting 50% of the total piece of the pie.

Edited by Provost, 12 October 2012 - 10:11 PM.

  • 0
Protons have mass? I didn't even know they were Catholic!

#1311 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,112 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 12 October 2012 - 11:38 PM

Puckluv, as I understand it (and I could be wrong....this is seriously complicated stuff!).....

HRR was defined in the last CBA as including certain types of revenue but not others (like arena revenue not related to hockey events.) Each year teams had to fill out HRR reports which were like filling out tax forms. (You can see a sample of the report of the copy of the last CBA which is available, in its entirety, at the NHLPA website.) In it teams had to list qualified initial HRR as well as note allowed costs which were taken off of the HRR. All of these reports were given to an independent accountant who compiled them, deducted additional agreed upon amounts at the league level and then used those numbers to come up with the final HRR. It is that final HRR number, after numerous deductions (which probably did not cover all of the costs, but also means players weren't getting nearly a full 57% of all revenues like many people falsely believe) that players' share was taken from.

That number was used to determine the salary cap and floor for the following year. It was also used to determine who was owed money (from the portion of each player's salary that had been held back in escrow) and how much based upon the agreed percentages of HRR. (The actual percentage of salary held in escrow was different every year. If you'd like to take a stab at that equation, be my guest.) After the final HRR number was determined the independent accountant decided if there was an overage or shortage, or if the teams overpaid according to the agreed upon percentage of final HRR or underpaid. If they overpaid (say if the league's revenues dropped from the previous year's), the appropriate amount was refunded to the league (not sure how that was split up to be honest) and the remaining money released to the players. If the teams underpaid, the money was released to the players on the agreed upon escrow date.

As for where that money comes from, I would assume it comes from each team's operating budgets. Each team is required to spend to the cap floor. According to the last CBA certain teams were eligible for what amounted to bailout money to help them stay afloat. At the end of each season after the final HRR was determined teams that qualified that spent more than the agreed upon percentage of the club's final HRR on player's salary were eligible for "full share" compensation. That gets pretty complicated too, so feel free to read about it in the CBA.

It is seriously complicated, but I fully encourage everyone to at least have a look at the last CBA, especially the attached sample HRR reporting package. There are many myths floating around, especially the one about how the players supposedly got 57% of every dollar of revenue and then the owners had to pay all of the expenses out of the 43% they got. In reality, teams don't have to count all revenue to start with and then got deductions for many costs before the players' share was determined. In fact, as I understand it teams that used the final HRR number to plead poverty may not have been in the red at all once all of the excluded revenue was included.


Easily one of the best posts on CDC. Thank you for highlighting that the final HRR number is a very convoluted thing. People don't seem to get that there is a lot of room for teams in the black to claim they are poor, and HRR is the primary way they do it. It's a necessary number, unfortunately made over-complicated by the fact that owners are actively hiding how much they are making, but its relevance in CBA discussions is determined by the honesty of each individual owner.
  • 0

Keswho.jpg


#1312 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,275 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 13 October 2012 - 08:47 AM

I think this is a key element that a lot of people don't consider when they throw out "it should be a 50/50 split" to be even. If you count total revenue rather than HRR, then you could argue a 50/50 split.

I honestly thought that discussing what revenue was to be included in HRR would have been the first issue to be dealt with... but they have hardly tried to crack that nut yet at all.

At this point I think the only way they are able to move forward is to leave it as is and play with percentages. With all the different corporate structures between the teams (who runs the arena, concession, etc) it is way too complicated to deal with in a short time frame.

Most service related companies spend 70-80% of their total revenue on salary and benefits (the rest going for facilities, overhead, etc), so I don't think it is way out of line for the players to be expecting 50% of the total piece of the pie.

A clearer idea of what is HRR and what costs are taken out of that total is worthwhile if the current CBA framework is to be used. Comparing the NHL to a 'service related' industry with a labour cost of 70-80% doesn't make much sense to me.

It goes against my nature but no one can call the NHL a free enterprise entity. As long as strong revenue teams are sending checks to their weaker oponents it will never be the case. If it were the NHL would become the WWF and all the players could work for the same outfit. That being the case then an agreement that recognizes owner return on investment and recognizes franchises that operate 'good' businesses has to be included.

I say this because I believe that recognizing competent operators and respecting the value of money does translate into a better product on the ice. I don't want the NHL to be dominated by owners or players who main objective is cashing a cheque.
  • 0

#1313 Owen Nolan

Owen Nolan

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,135 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 07

Posted 13 October 2012 - 10:47 AM

First saturday night lost...
  • 0
Posted Image

#1314 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 73,989 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:07 AM

Source said that NHL and NHLPA are not any further along in the CBA process than they were on Sept. 15th.

https://twitter.com/...765951729614848
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#1315 WiDeN

WiDeN

    Canucks Second-Line

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

Posted 13 October 2012 - 11:11 AM

It is completely irresponsible to have left the negotiations to this point. They should have been at this point around July 1st.
  • 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


#1316 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 13 October 2012 - 12:09 PM

It is completely irresponsible to have left the negotiations to this point. They should have been at this point around July 1st.


That's what boggles my mind, they wait until the last second and they know their not going to settle right away....
  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#1317 gmen81

gmen81

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,271 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 07

Posted 13 October 2012 - 06:37 PM

Does anyone know when the NFL and NBA lockouts ended if both sides were far apart like the NHL and NHLPA are right now and then all of a sudden reached a deal. Or were both sides far apart and then after a few weeks of getting negotiating they finally reached a deal?

I ask because obviously both sides are far apart and was wondering if maybe one day we wake up and they reach a deal, or do we have to sit through a few weeks of people telling us they are getting closer before reaching a deal.
  • 0
Posted Image

#1318 puckluv

puckluv

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 307 posts
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Posted 13 October 2012 - 07:46 PM

Puckluv, as I understand it (and I could be wrong....this is seriously complicated stuff!).....

HRR was defined in the last CBA as including certain types of revenue but not others (like arena revenue not related to hockey events.) Each year teams had to fill out HRR reports which were like filling out tax forms. (You can see a sample of the report of the copy of the last CBA which is available, in its entirety, at the NHLPA website.) In it teams had to list qualified initial HRR as well as note allowed costs which were taken off of the HRR. All of these reports were given to an independent accountant who compiled them, deducted additional agreed upon amounts at the league level and then used those numbers to come up with the final HRR. It is that final HRR number, after numerous deductions (which probably did not cover all of the costs, but also means players weren't getting nearly a full 57% of all revenues like many people falsely believe) that players' share was taken from.

That number was used to determine the salary cap and floor for the following year. It was also used to determine who was owed money (from the portion of each player's salary that had been held back in escrow) and how much based upon the agreed percentages of HRR. (The actual percentage of salary held in escrow was different every year. If you'd like to take a stab at that equation, be my guest.) After the final HRR number was determined the independent accountant decided if there was an overage or shortage, or if the teams overpaid according to the agreed upon percentage of final HRR or underpaid. If they overpaid (say if the league's revenues dropped from the previous year's), the appropriate amount was refunded to the league (not sure how that was split up to be honest) and the remaining money released to the players. If the teams underpaid, the money was released to the players on the agreed upon escrow date.

As for where that money comes from, I would assume it comes from each team's operating budgets. Each team is required to spend to the cap floor. According to the last CBA certain teams were eligible for what amounted to bailout money to help them stay afloat. At the end of each season after the final HRR was determined teams that qualified that spent more than the agreed upon percentage of the club's final HRR on player's salary were eligible for "full share" compensation. That gets pretty complicated too, so feel free to read about it in the CBA.

It is seriously complicated, but I fully encourage everyone to at least have a look at the last CBA, especially the attached sample HRR reporting package. There are many myths floating around, especially the one about how the players supposedly got 57% of every dollar of revenue and then the owners had to pay all of the expenses out of the 43% they got. In reality, teams don't have to count all revenue to start with and then got deductions for many costs before the players' share was determined. In fact, as I understand it teams that used the final HRR number to plead poverty may not have been in the red at all once all of the excluded revenue was included.


Thanks for your detailed answer, that clarifies some of the confusion for me. I would love to see a chart lol! I read this quick and dirty explanation here http://basketball.ab...-Leagues_4.htm
but you filled in a lot of the blanks! thanks again!

I find it funny that redistribution of wealth is a common place within the business realm because it makes sense ;-)
  • 0

Always turn a negative situation into a positive situation. Michael Jordon


#1319 canuck_trevor16

canuck_trevor16

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,657 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 07

Posted 13 October 2012 - 08:49 PM

I just have a bad feeling negotiation wont be done by December............and likely no NHL this year............maybe just short-term deal first? like 2 years? and go from there..............
  • 0

One day some of us will look back on the year and look at the chicago, and most of us will realize that it was a small bump in the road to the cup


WIN THE CUP FOR SALO CAMPAIGN

#1320 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,185 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 13 October 2012 - 08:51 PM

Thanks for your detailed answer, that clarifies some of the confusion for me. I would love to see a chart lol! I read this quick and dirty explanation here http://basketball.ab...-Leagues_4.htm
but you filled in a lot of the blanks! thanks again!

I find it funny that redistribution of wealth is a common place within the business realm because it makes sense ;-)


You're welcome. I'm glad it helped a little. :)
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(




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.