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

#1501 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 18 October 2012 - 10:49 AM

The players need to tweak it a little bit...but I'm optimistic :)
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1502 zombieksa

zombieksa

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,218 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 10:55 AM

I still feel to compete on a PR level the pa will make very minimal changes to the propsal as to keep their image as the protagonists in this story. I expect an agreement by the 23rd
  • 0
"All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry."
-Edgar Allen Poe

#1503 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,586 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:12 AM

Sounds like the players are making a counter-offer. I hope it's just a bit of tweaking and not some big huge rebuttal.
  • 0

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

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


#1504 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

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

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:25 AM

aaronward_nhl: Per player source,NHLPA #CBA proposal "should be interesting today because it comes closer to NHL ideology". #TSN
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#1505 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,708 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:26 AM

Sounds like the players are making a counter-offer. I hope it's just a bit of tweaking and not some big huge rebuttal.

If anything I think the players will offer a 49-51 in revenue.
  • 0

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#1506 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,095 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:50 AM

This whole lockout is all on the greedy players.

One thing is i definitely didn't like Jonathan Toews whiny, arrogant, spoiled attitude before this lockout but after hearing his big mouth and bitter attitude while he already has enough money to live rich the rest of his life i can't stand the guy!

One thing that becomes very clear to me in all this is that there is a lot of spoiled brat hockey players that don't have a clue of what the real world is from their pedestals.

The players attitude is sickening.


Are you serious?

First, the owners are even richer than the players despite not having done anything more to earn it than the players, so if you're going to hate on the players for being rich, why not hate on the even richer owners, many of whom got rich by screwing over those less fortunate?

Look at what Katz is trying to do to Edmonton! A multi-BILLIONAIRE wants taxpayers to take out loans to build him an arena, allow him to pay back well under half at little or no interest over decades, keep naming rights and advertising revenue, get even more significant tax breaks over and above the luxury rate the team already enjoys, get a yearly handout of $5 million to completely offset, when combined with advertising and naming revenues, the cost of operating the arena, give him a casino license for the arena, and then let him keep the profits from all events in the arena for 11 months of the year. And keep in mind, it's only the $5 million yearly handout the finally got the politicians concerned (for their political futures, most likely.) Other than that, they were on board with a deal that would have already cost taxpayers millions a year in lost tax revenue and loan repayments. (Sorry, kids with cancer. Can't build you that new hospital wing. A private corporation wanted public handouts for private profit!) And even still, Katz couldn't be bothered to show up to public meetings to talk about the deal or defend why he was demanding even more money from the taxpayers for his private corporation. That's an prime example of how owners made their money - by taking it from the rest of us.

Secondly, it's the owners who locked out the players for not taking their first incredibly insulting, demeaning and darn near criminal offer. So, how is the actions of the owners on the players?

Third, the owners are better off than they were the last CBA but they are still demanding even more in every regard (money, contract limits, required service term, etc.) while, again, not offering to give up a single thing themselves (and probably already planning their next ticket price hike). How exactly does that make the players greedy?

Fourth, why is it that so many fans want to hold players accountable but not owners? Players created record revenue (and yes, they created it...no one's buying owner jerseys or bobble heads!) despite a bad economy. Players made all of the concessions in the last CBA and gave the owners exactly what they said they needed. Owners, on the other hand, are the one who found ways around the very rules they demanded. Owners are the ones who created long-term, front loaded contracts to get around the cap they demanded. Owners are the ones inflating salaries for big name players because they know that those big names are where the big revenues come from. Owners are the ones using creative accounting to get around fully reporting all agreed upon HRR (such as by taking portions of luxury boxes as deductions for concessions or parking, or claiming portions as being for other non-hockey events despite the fact that luxury boxes were to be included in entirety.) Owners are the ones who continue to get huge tax breaks and other public handouts at taxpayers' expense while giving back next to nothing. (And despite research that shows that professional sports teams do not have a significant positive impact on the local economy and in fact it's often the opposite, as it encourages locals to spend disposable income on a company that will take most of it out of the local area.) In fact, even the charitable acts done by teams (probably for the team's tax credit) is done largely by the players!

And despite their claims of being concerned for the health of the league, owners are the ones who limited which teams were eligible for team revenue sharing in the last CBA because they wanted the players to just take less instead of them having to do any of the sharing themselves. And matters only got worse for the lower end teams. But still, it was the players who asked for increased team revenue sharing this time in order to help the poorer teams and make the league healthier. That's the only "concession" owners have made (and it benefits them!) The new proposed revenue sharing will be inline with other North American sports offer while still barely touching to the bottom line of the rich teams but will make all but a couple of teams profitable. (If the revenue share pot is $200 mill and 20 teams are eligible, that means $10 mill for each and in 2010, the last year we have team reports for, only 2 teams, Florida and Phoenix, would still have a loss. All other owners of losing teams will take home a profit while still professing poverty publicly. In fact, in the past teams that publicly reported operating losses but who were eligible for revenue sharing very likely were made profitable by the handout money, even though the team still publicly decried poverty.)

Mark my words. If owners continue to get this kind of positive reinforcement, we will have a lockout every time the CBA expires. Why wouldn't they lock the players out if fans just blindly blame the players and public opinion is used to force players into giving up even more while yet again allowing the owners to benefit while not being held accountable for their own actions and bad choices?

I say we make them all pay by going into a fan spending lockout! Let BOTH sides know that they will not just benefit from stoppages. There will be consequences, if not from the parities involved in the negotiations, at least from the fans!
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1507 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,672 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 11:53 AM

If anything I think the players will offer a 49-51 in revenue.

Maybe. If they do, that should hardly be a significant change in their proposal - at least enough of one to have stopped them from accepting the majority of what the NHL just proposed. I'd think we'd see more than a 1% swing in how HRR is divided up if they change it in their proposal.

There's more likely to be changes to the other more talked about areas, like how the salaries are protected, what happens to the borderline deals from the last CBA, how HRR is defined, etc.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

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

 


#1508 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,083 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:00 PM

L.A. Lariviere@L_A_theRiver
According to my colleague Mathieu Dandenault, the NHLPA will submit 4 different offers to the #NHL. All include 50-50 clauses on rev sharing

David Pagnotta@TheFourthPeriod
Of the 4 proposals being presented to the NHL by the NHLPA, all include a gradual step towards 50/50 split. Year 1 starts around 54/46.

Edited by gizmo2337, 18 October 2012 - 12:10 PM.

  • 0

#1509 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,922 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:10 PM

L.A. Lariviere@L_A_theRiver
According to my colleague Mathieu Dandenault, the NHLPA will submit 4 different offers to the #NHL. All include 50-50 clauses on rev sharing


Beautiful, seems they're on the same page. I knew it was just about ironing out contractual freedoms, the 4 yr ELC, 5 year contract max, and 8 year RFA all have to be tweaked. We'll see an agreement soon.
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#1510 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

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

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:11 PM

Can you guys take your back and forth bickering to private message or something?


And then how are people such as myself suppose to follow the conversation?
  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#1511 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,624 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:13 PM

And then how are people such as myself suppose to follow the conversation?

Maybe you can subscribe to their PM convo? For a fee of course.
  • 1

#1512 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,095 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:18 PM

L.A. Lariviere@L_A_theRiver
According to my colleague Mathieu Dandenault, the NHLPA will submit 4 different offers to the #NHL. All include 50-50 clauses on rev sharing

David Pagnotta@TheFourthPeriod
Of the 4 proposals being presented to the NHL by the NHLPA, all include a gradual step towards 50/50 split. Year 1 starts around 54/46.


Great movement from the union. That's 4 options for the owners to pick an agreement they can live with and 4 opportunities to prove they want this resolved and are willing to give a little themselves to get it done.


Looking at my TV longingly and doodling a heart around November 2nd on my calendar... (Still using pencil though.)
  • 2
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1513 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

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

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:20 PM

Maybe you can subscribe to their PM convo? For a fee of course.


Pfffft! They should be paying me just to listen to what they have to say!

Same goes to everybody else on this forum!!
  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#1514 thad

thad

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,227 posts
  • Joined: 09-February 09

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:50 PM

Mobile
  • 0

#1515 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,095 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:54 PM

Pfffft! They should be paying me just to listen to what they have to say!

Same goes to everybody else on this forum!!


Glad to see someone else using my Fan Lockout graphic!

Not paying you though. :lol:
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#1516 Spotted Zebra

Spotted Zebra

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,103 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:57 PM

Bettman : "Players not willing to gradually go to 50-50 " we're speaking different languages right now
  • 0
Posted Image
Thanks Vintage Canuck!

#1517 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,083 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:58 PM


David Pagnotta@TheFourthPeriod

Bettman: "I am, to say the least, thoroughly disappointed" ... "This is the best offer we can make."



David Pagnotta@TheFourthPeriod

Bettman said Tuesday's offer was their best offer. they're prepared to make "tweaks and adjustments"


That's it, I think we can probably call the season off very soon.
  • 0

#1518 Xbox

Xbox

    Formerly Lups

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,829 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 12:59 PM

NHL disappointed with new offer from NHLPA

Edited by Henrik Sedin, 18 October 2012 - 12:59 PM.

  • 0

2yo50sh.jpg

small.pngGM - STHS                                  Sig Cred to -Vintage Canuck-

 

 


#1519 Spotted Zebra

Spotted Zebra

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,103 posts
  • Joined: 07-January 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:00 PM

Sympathy for players = Gone.

If they wanted to play a full season this year they'd take 50-50, the fact they're not even going there proves how greedy they are
  • 0
Posted Image
Thanks Vintage Canuck!

#1520 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:02 PM

NHL disappointed with new offer from NHLPA


Check the date on that, did ya?
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#1521 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:07 PM

Sympathy for players = Gone.

If they wanted to play a full season this year they'd take 50-50, the fact they're not even going there proves how greedy they are


4 offers tabled. All 50/50. Players are saying "Sounds good. Lets tweak things" and are making owners pick their poison. Me likey.
  • 0

Keswho.jpg


#1522 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,083 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:09 PM

4 offers tabled. All 50/50. Players are saying "Sounds good. Lets tweak things" and are making owners pick their poison. Me likey.


Sounds like 3 offers were presented. All three with gradual drop to 50/50. NHL wants immediate 50/50. Game over
  • 0

#1523 StevenStamkos

StevenStamkos

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 18-June 12

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:10 PM

Screw you, Donald Fehr, you greedy bastard.
  • 0

Follow me on twitter! @RealStamkos91


#1524 The Big Luongo

The Big Luongo

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,436 posts
  • Joined: 04-November 06

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:11 PM

Are you serious?

First, the owners are even richer than the players despite not having done anything more to earn it than the players, so if you're going to hate on the players for being rich, why not hate on the even richer owners, many of whom got rich by screwing over those less fortunate?

Look at what Katz is trying to do to Edmonton! A multi-BILLIONAIRE wants taxpayers to take out loans to build him an arena, allow him to pay back well under half at little or no interest over decades, keep naming rights and advertising revenue, get even more significant tax breaks over and above the luxury rate the team already enjoys, get a yearly handout of $5 million to completely offset, when combined with advertising and naming revenues, the cost of operating the arena, give him a casino license for the arena, and then let him keep the profits from all events in the arena for 11 months of the year. And keep in mind, it's only the $5 million yearly handout the finally got the politicians concerned (for their political futures, most likely.) Other than that, they were on board with a deal that would have already cost taxpayers millions a year in lost tax revenue and loan repayments. (Sorry, kids with cancer. Can't build you that new hospital wing. A private corporation wanted public handouts for private profit!) And even still, Katz couldn't be bothered to show up to public meetings to talk about the deal or defend why he was demanding even more money from the taxpayers for his private corporation. That's an prime example of how owners made their money - by taking it from the rest of us.

Secondly, it's the owners who locked out the players for not taking their first incredibly insulting, demeaning and darn near criminal offer. So, how is the actions of the owners on the players?

Third, the owners are better off than they were the last CBA but they are still demanding even more in every regard (money, contract limits, required service term, etc.) while, again, not offering to give up a single thing themselves (and probably already planning their next ticket price hike). How exactly does that make the players greedy?

Fourth, why is it that so many fans want to hold players accountable but not owners? Players created record revenue (and yes, they created it...no one's buying owner jerseys or bobble heads!) despite a bad economy. Players made all of the concessions in the last CBA and gave the owners exactly what they said they needed. Owners, on the other hand, are the one who found ways around the very rules they demanded. Owners are the ones who created long-term, front loaded contracts to get around the cap they demanded. Owners are the ones inflating salaries for big name players because they know that those big names are where the big revenues come from. Owners are the ones using creative accounting to get around fully reporting all agreed upon HRR (such as by taking portions of luxury boxes as deductions for concessions or parking, or claiming portions as being for other non-hockey events despite the fact that luxury boxes were to be included in entirety.) Owners are the ones who continue to get huge tax breaks and other public handouts at taxpayers' expense while giving back next to nothing. (And despite research that shows that professional sports teams do not have a significant positive impact on the local economy and in fact it's often the opposite, as it encourages locals to spend disposable income on a company that will take most of it out of the local area.) In fact, even the charitable acts done by teams (probably for the team's tax credit) is done largely by the players!

And despite their claims of being concerned for the health of the league, owners are the ones who limited which teams were eligible for team revenue sharing in the last CBA because they wanted the players to just take less instead of them having to do any of the sharing themselves. And matters only got worse for the lower end teams. But still, it was the players who asked for increased team revenue sharing this time in order to help the poorer teams and make the league healthier. That's the only "concession" owners have made (and it benefits them!) The new proposed revenue sharing will be inline with other North American sports offer while still barely touching to the bottom line of the rich teams but will make all but a couple of teams profitable. (If the revenue share pot is $200 mill and 20 teams are eligible, that means $10 mill for each and in 2010, the last year we have team reports for, only 2 teams, Florida and Phoenix, would still have a loss. All other owners of losing teams will take home a profit while still professing poverty publicly. In fact, in the past teams that publicly reported operating losses but who were eligible for revenue sharing very likely were made profitable by the handout money, even though the team still publicly decried poverty.)

Mark my words. If owners continue to get this kind of positive reinforcement, we will have a lockout every time the CBA expires. Why wouldn't they lock the players out if fans just blindly blame the players and public opinion is used to force players into giving up even more while yet again allowing the owners to benefit while not being held accountable for their own actions and bad choices?

I say we make them all pay by going into a fan spending lockout! Let BOTH sides know that they will not just benefit from stoppages. There will be consequences, if not from the parities involved in the negotiations, at least from the fans!


Look i don't have the time to go through your whole post but i will say that the owners have invested and made their money to buy a franchise and deserve return on their investments. The owners take all the risks at profitting or losing tons of money. There is several teams losing money and lots barely break even and insane high ticket prices and it's all due to players salaries being astronomical thats the bottom line. Why should owners lose money when overpayed spoiled players get their contracts no matter how their team does financially or how much the players underachieve. If a player gets paid to score 40 plus goals and drops to 20 he gets the same there is never a threat he won't get paid so that in itself imo is enough reason for players to shut up and sign a deal and get back at it. Average salaries in the 3+ million range living the lives they live and whining is downright ridiculous. I have no sympathy for the players in this whatsoever.
  • 1

#1525 WestCoastCanucks

WestCoastCanucks

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,399 posts
  • Joined: 03-March 07

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:24 PM

So frustrated and tired of this whole thing. Completely fed up with the players too. Asking for more than 57 on HHR in year 1 is pathetic. They aren't even trying to negotiate.

Edited by WestCoastCanucks, 18 October 2012 - 01:25 PM.

  • 0
Posted ImagePosted Image Posted Image

#1526 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,096 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:27 PM

Look i don't have the time to go through your whole post but i will say that the owners have invested and made their money to buy a franchise and deserve return on their investments. The owners take all the risks at profitting or losing tons of money. There is several teams losing money and lots barely break even and insane high ticket prices and it's all due to players salaries being astronomical thats the bottom line. Why should owners lose money when overpayed spoiled players get their contracts no matter how their team does financially or how much the players underachieve. If a player gets paid to score 40 plus goals and drops to 20 he gets the same there is never a threat he won't get paid so that in itself imo is enough reason for players to shut up and sign a deal and get back at it. Average salaries in the 3+ million range living the lives they live and whining is downright ridiculous. I have no sympathy for the players in this whatsoever.


Players aren't complaining they don't have enough money, that's why they're offering to give some up for the game. Every offer of theirs involves reducing their share and putting that money into growing the game. Players are however complaining that they have bosses who try to force them into deals under duress instead of negotiating in good faith. Moreover, players aren't striking. Owners are locking them out.

As for risks, which is bigger? A financial risk or a physical one? Players can get debilitating injuries that hamper them for life and many more will have issues that require tons of health case spending to treat long after they've retired. And if they're not stars, they may not even play many seasons. They get a couple paydays (most never close to a million, let alone 3) and then are sent out into the world with very few skills. That's why MG is so concerned with getting guys who have degrees.

Owners do take risks too, and no doubt there are good owners, but on the owner's side this is just business. Some ventures are winners, some aren't and as the NHL is now, most teams are not money pits. I'd love to see if you could find a single owner who is now on the streets because of owning a team. What you're saying sounds like political rhetoric that glorifies billionaires, not an actual argument that they sacrifice more, unless a buck is worth more than a happy, healthy life.
  • 1

Keswho.jpg


#1527 Darth Kane

Darth Kane

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,644 posts
  • Joined: 07-June 09

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:28 PM

So frustrated and tired of this whole thing. Completely fed up with the players too. Asking for more than 57 on HHR in year 1 is pathetic. They aren't even trying to negotiate.


It's amazing how quickly the public perception changed this week. Most fans were on the players side last week, now most of us would side with owners. I don't think much as changed in the overall lockout situation, but new information has come to light (i.e. proposals) and the owners (via Bettman) have don't a masterful job of manipulating the situation via their "50/50 82 game" proposal.

Right now it seems like the players are being greedy and focusing a lot on how much they gave up last time. But I'm sure more information will come out in the next few days about the PA's position.
  • 0

#1528 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,273 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:28 PM

Are you serious?

First, the owners are even richer than the players despite not having done anything more to earn it than the players, so if you're going to hate on the players for being rich, why not hate on the even richer owners, many of whom got rich by screwing over those less fortunate?

Look at what Katz is trying to do to Edmonton! A multi-BILLIONAIRE wants taxpayers to take out loans to build him an arena, allow him to pay back well under half at little or no interest over decades, keep naming rights and advertising revenue, get even more significant tax breaks over and above the luxury rate the team already enjoys, get a yearly handout of $5 million to completely offset, when combined with advertising and naming revenues, the cost of operating the arena, give him a casino license for the arena, and then let him keep the profits from all events in the arena for 11 months of the year. And keep in mind, it's only the $5 million yearly handout the finally got the politicians concerned (for their political futures, most likely.) Other than that, they were on board with a deal that would have already cost taxpayers millions a year in lost tax revenue and loan repayments. (Sorry, kids with cancer. Can't build you that new hospital wing. A private corporation wanted public handouts for private profit!) And even still, Katz couldn't be bothered to show up to public meetings to talk about the deal or defend why he was demanding even more money from the taxpayers for his private corporation. That's an prime example of how owners made their money - by taking it from the rest of us.

Secondly, it's the owners who locked out the players for not taking their first incredibly insulting, demeaning and darn near criminal offer. So, how is the actions of the owners on the players?

Third, the owners are better off than they were the last CBA but they are still demanding even more in every regard (money, contract limits, required service term, etc.) while, again, not offering to give up a single thing themselves (and probably already planning their next ticket price hike). How exactly does that make the players greedy?

Fourth, why is it that so many fans want to hold players accountable but not owners? Players created record revenue (and yes, they created it...no one's buying owner jerseys or bobble heads!) despite a bad economy. Players made all of the concessions in the last CBA and gave the owners exactly what they said they needed. Owners, on the other hand, are the one who found ways around the very rules they demanded. Owners are the ones who created long-term, front loaded contracts to get around the cap they demanded. Owners are the ones inflating salaries for big name players because they know that those big names are where the big revenues come from. Owners are the ones using creative accounting to get around fully reporting all agreed upon HRR (such as by taking portions of luxury boxes as deductions for concessions or parking, or claiming portions as being for other non-hockey events despite the fact that luxury boxes were to be included in entirety.) Owners are the ones who continue to get huge tax breaks and other public handouts at taxpayers' expense while giving back next to nothing. (And despite research that shows that professional sports teams do not have a significant positive impact on the local economy and in fact it's often the opposite, as it encourages locals to spend disposable income on a company that will take most of it out of the local area.) In fact, even the charitable acts done by teams (probably for the team's tax credit) is done largely by the players!

And despite their claims of being concerned for the health of the league, owners are the ones who limited which teams were eligible for team revenue sharing in the last CBA because they wanted the players to just take less instead of them having to do any of the sharing themselves. And matters only got worse for the lower end teams. But still, it was the players who asked for increased team revenue sharing this time in order to help the poorer teams and make the league healthier. That's the only "concession" owners have made (and it benefits them!) The new proposed revenue sharing will be inline with other North American sports offer while still barely touching to the bottom line of the rich teams but will make all but a couple of teams profitable. (If the revenue share pot is $200 mill and 20 teams are eligible, that means $10 mill for each and in 2010, the last year we have team reports for, only 2 teams, Florida and Phoenix, would still have a loss. All other owners of losing teams will take home a profit while still professing poverty publicly. In fact, in the past teams that publicly reported operating losses but who were eligible for revenue sharing very likely were made profitable by the handout money, even though the team still publicly decried poverty.)

Mark my words. If owners continue to get this kind of positive reinforcement, we will have a lockout every time the CBA expires. Why wouldn't they lock the players out if fans just blindly blame the players and public opinion is used to force players into giving up even more while yet again allowing the owners to benefit while not being held accountable for their own actions and bad choices?

I say we make them all pay by going into a fan spending lockout! Let BOTH sides know that they will not just benefit from stoppages. There will be consequences, if not from the parities involved in the negotiations, at least from the fans!

Now that the season will probably be toast I am sure that Kevin has some $20 tickets for you. His player's league needs all the cash they can get!


Are you serious?

First, the owners are even richer than the players despite not having done anything more to earn it than the players, so if you're going to hate on the players for being rich, why not hate on the even richer owners, many of whom got rich by screwing over those less fortunate?

Look at what Katz is trying to do to Edmonton! A multi-BILLIONAIRE wants taxpayers to take out loans to build him an arena, allow him to pay back well under half at little or no interest over decades, keep naming rights and advertising revenue, get even more significant tax breaks over and above the luxury rate the team already enjoys, get a yearly handout of $5 million to completely offset, when combined with advertising and naming revenues, the cost of operating the arena, give him a casino license for the arena, and then let him keep the profits from all events in the arena for 11 months of the year. And keep in mind, it's only the $5 million yearly handout the finally got the politicians concerned (for their political futures, most likely.) Other than that, they were on board with a deal that would have already cost taxpayers millions a year in lost tax revenue and loan repayments. (Sorry, kids with cancer. Can't build you that new hospital wing. A private corporation wanted public handouts for private profit!) And even still, Katz couldn't be bothered to show up to public meetings to talk about the deal or defend why he was demanding even more money from the taxpayers for his private corporation. That's an prime example of how owners made their money - by taking it from the rest of us.

Secondly, it's the owners who locked out the players for not taking their first incredibly insulting, demeaning and darn near criminal offer. So, how is the actions of the owners on the players?

Third, the owners are better off than they were the last CBA but they are still demanding even more in every regard (money, contract limits, required service term, etc.) while, again, not offering to give up a single thing themselves (and probably already planning their next ticket price hike). How exactly does that make the players greedy?

Fourth, why is it that so many fans want to hold players accountable but not owners? Players created record revenue (and yes, they created it...no one's buying owner jerseys or bobble heads!) despite a bad economy. Players made all of the concessions in the last CBA and gave the owners exactly what they said they needed. Owners, on the other hand, are the one who found ways around the very rules they demanded. Owners are the ones who created long-term, front loaded contracts to get around the cap they demanded. Owners are the ones inflating salaries for big name players because they know that those big names are where the big revenues come from. Owners are the ones using creative accounting to get around fully reporting all agreed upon HRR (such as by taking portions of luxury boxes as deductions for concessions or parking, or claiming portions as being for other non-hockey events despite the fact that luxury boxes were to be included in entirety.) Owners are the ones who continue to get huge tax breaks and other public handouts at taxpayers' expense while giving back next to nothing. (And despite research that shows that professional sports teams do not have a significant positive impact on the local economy and in fact it's often the opposite, as it encourages locals to spend disposable income on a company that will take most of it out of the local area.) In fact, even the charitable acts done by teams (probably for the team's tax credit) is done largely by the players!

And despite their claims of being concerned for the health of the league, owners are the ones who limited which teams were eligible for team revenue sharing in the last CBA because they wanted the players to just take less instead of them having to do any of the sharing themselves. And matters only got worse for the lower end teams. But still, it was the players who asked for increased team revenue sharing this time in order to help the poorer teams and make the league healthier. That's the only "concession" owners have made (and it benefits them!) The new proposed revenue sharing will be inline with other North American sports offer while still barely touching to the bottom line of the rich teams but will make all but a couple of teams profitable. (If the revenue share pot is $200 mill and 20 teams are eligible, that means $10 mill for each and in 2010, the last year we have team reports for, only 2 teams, Florida and Phoenix, would still have a loss. All other owners of losing teams will take home a profit while still professing poverty publicly. In fact, in the past teams that publicly reported operating losses but who were eligible for revenue sharing very likely were made profitable by the handout money, even though the team still publicly decried poverty.)

Mark my words. If owners continue to get this kind of positive reinforcement, we will have a lockout every time the CBA expires. Why wouldn't they lock the players out if fans just blindly blame the players and public opinion is used to force players into giving up even more while yet again allowing the owners to benefit while not being held accountable for their own actions and bad choices?

I say we make them all pay by going into a fan spending lockout! Let BOTH sides know that they will not just benefit from stoppages. There will be consequences, if not from the parities involved in the negotiations, at least from the fans!


  • 0

#1529 ccc44

ccc44

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:29 PM

Sympathy for players = Gone.

If they wanted to play a full season this year they'd take 50-50, the fact they're not even going there proves how greedy they are

I dont want to see a full season anymore , The games would be so crammed together that you would not see quality hockey
  • 0
Posted Image
SHOTS ! SHOTS ! SHOTS !

#1530 ccc44

ccc44

    Canucks Regular

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

Posted 18 October 2012 - 01:31 PM

It's amazing how quickly the public perception changed this week. Most fans were on the players side last week, now most of us would side with owners. I don't think much as changed in the overall lockout situation, but new information has come to light (i.e. proposals) and the owners (via Bettman) have don't a masterful job of manipulating the situation via their "50/50 82 game" proposal.

Right now it seems like the players are being greedy and focusing a lot on how much they gave up last time. But I'm sure more information will come out in the next few days about the PA's position.

If anyone can have there opinion swayed by PR stunts then there opinion dont mean anything anyways
  • 0
Posted Image
SHOTS ! SHOTS ! SHOTS !




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.