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

#2641 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 14 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

Because you don't seem to understand meanings I've included the meaning of the word hyperbole for you. You're welcome.
hyperbole \hy-PUHR-buh-lee\ , noun:
Extravagant exaggeration.


If the owners had "all the power", they could tell the players that maximum salary will be $500,000 and the players would eventually have to take it. That will never happen. You are using hyperbole.

You seem to be the one who is butthurt. I stated that you "come across" as a league stooge. I based this opinion on the tone of your posts and your overuse of hyperbole. Image control is SOP for corporations and I don't believe for a second that the League doesn't have people patrolling social media sites etc in order to do their spin control. You seem like one of them. If that hurts your feelings and is insulting to you then perhaps you are a tad over-sensitive.


To DB simply disagreeing with him is taken as a personal attack. This is how the end starts for him though every other time he's been here.

If the owners had all the power there would be hockey right now...

Pro owner or pro player it doesn't really matter...the bottom line is both sides have gotten the other to move from their original positions and that will continue to do so until it is resolved. Neither side is going to win because neither side is going to get what they want. The reason for that is because both sides hold power. This is a tug of war and both sides get a piece of the rope.

All this NHLPA has no power garbage is just that...garbage. It's just as stupid as all the NHL owners are greedy and evil crap.
  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#2642 smurf47

smurf47

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,948 posts
  • Joined: 01-April 10

Posted 14 November 2012 - 10:08 PM

To DB simply disagreeing with him is taken as a personal attack. This is how the end starts for him though every other time he's been here.

If the owners had all the power there would be hockey right now...

Pro owner or pro player it doesn't really matter...the bottom line is both sides have gotten the other to move from their original positions and that will continue to do so until it is resolved. Neither side is going to win because neither side is going to get what they want. The reason for that is because both sides hold power. This is a tug of war and both sides get a piece of the rope.

All this NHLPA has no power garbage is just that...garbage. It's just as stupid as all the NHL owners are greedy and evil crap.

The owners imposed a lockout.....thats why there is no hockey!
  • 0

#2643 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,788 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 14 November 2012 - 10:09 PM

To DB simply disagreeing with him is taken as a personal attack. This is how the end starts for him though every other time he's been here.

If the owners had all the power there would be hockey right now...

Pro owner or pro player it doesn't really matter...the bottom line is both sides have gotten the other to move from their original positions and that will continue to do so until it is resolved. Neither side is going to win because neither side is going to get what they want. The reason for that is because both sides hold power. This is a tug of war and both sides get a piece of the rope.

All this NHLPA has no power garbage is just that...garbage. It's just as stupid as all the NHL owners are greedy and evil crap.


Yeah, they're just greedy.
  • 0
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#2644 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,939 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 14 November 2012 - 10:11 PM

Hiring Fehr was a error on the part of the players. Is he doing a great job like you say!?!? I don't see any signed and sealed CBA's flaunting about lol. They players went as far as to hire Fehr to make a statement..."We mean biz" But "if" I were an owner and this came to my attention I would say "looks like we are in it for the long haul boys! We are not going to let some hired gun come in to our league with one Proposal and make us accept it, Frack THAT!"
____
I like this: Dec 18, 2010 - Fehr said it's very unfair for hockey fans to automatically assume another lockout is now imminent because of his appointment to the NHLPA.
.Oh oh Guess what !?!?! lol
____
"Nobody in the world knows more about the labour business in sports," Boston Bruins player representative Mark Stuart told NESN. "[Fehr]did a great job in baseball and I think we're lucky to have him on our side." Uhhh Whut!?!? Do the players still feel this way? And i dont mean the reps all in an nice pattern behind Fehr either lol.

or

"His reputation is that he doesn't mess around. But I don't think anybody wants to see that happen." Dominic Moore...lol or "After hearing Don's presentation, let's just say there is no one else who can hold his jock strap if he decides to do it," said another agent, also off the record.------Ahhh the words that started the lock out lol
  • 0

#2645 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,616 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 14 November 2012 - 10:16 PM

^ You're drooling.
  • 3

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#2646 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,965 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 14 November 2012 - 10:20 PM

The owners imposed a lockout.....thats why there is no hockey!

Why'd they impose a lockout if the players have no power.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#2647 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

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

Posted 14 November 2012 - 11:11 PM

The owners imposed a lockout.....thats why there is no hockey!


I am no self proclaimed expert,
From what I gather, Only a select few Teams actually make a lot of money

As an owner of a hockey team or business, wouldnt You be upset, if You were paying your employees more money in a yr, than you make profit for yourself, after paying employees,staff,travel,expenses,rent,stress etc?

On top of taking all the risks to employ many people, they are not the ones who receive Guaranteed money and bonus money with endorsements, ( If owning was easily done,the players would do it)
The players dont care more about the NHL, than the Owners do- They both do it to make money
(actually,only one side "invests" in the NHL. The other side plays for money and walks away a multi-millionaire)

Taking sides is pointless as I see it
Both sides will be damaging the game itself, to the casual fan
At least I can enjoy the Jr Super-Series now and the World Juniors next month

I question people who say the owners are greedy
If all the teams were doing as well as the Canucks, I would agree with that comment
I dont pity or support any multi-millionaires sides - players or owners
Neither are saints

I see both of their arguments and I dont care who is right
From their points of views, I suppose they are both right

Again, I dont care, fix it, dont pull another lockout or strike for a very very long time if ever

They are both worried about their income, guess what ? It gave me time to think of mine too
I will probabily wont even go to another game, theTotal money it cost me now to go to a game, I can get more fun and longer time spending it, than for the 2 1/2 hrs watching a game,Sometimes even spent on a dog of a game if both teams even bother putting in a 100% effort or the Refs taking away from the game to manage it

Edited by ba;;isticsports, 15 November 2012 - 06:26 AM.

  • 0

#2648 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:05 AM

I sure am glad that Bettman is sticking to his plan. These contracting issues need to be fixed. I could put up with missing the entire season as long as these front loaded, life time contracts are dealt with.

Doesn't look like the NHL is going to bend too much on contracting issues, the players are going to have to give in now or after missing an entire season.

50-50 and fix the contract issues. NHL gets everything they could have hoped for.
  • 1

#2649 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:17 AM

Hiring Fehr was a error on the part of the players. Is he doing a great job like you say!?!? I don't see any signed and sealed CBA's flaunting about lol. They players went as far as to hire Fehr to make a statement..."We mean biz" But "if" I were an owner and this came to my attention I would say "looks like we are in it for the long haul boys! We are not going to let some hired gun come in to our league with one Proposal and make us accept it, Frack THAT!"
____
I like this: Dec 18, 2010 - Fehr said it's very unfair for hockey fans to automatically assume another lockout is now imminent because of his appointment to the NHLPA.
.Oh oh Guess what !?!?! lol
____
"Nobody in the world knows more about the labour business in sports," Boston Bruins player representative Mark Stuart told NESN. "[Fehr]did a great job in baseball and I think we're lucky to have him on our side." Uhhh Whut!?!? Do the players still feel this way? And i dont mean the reps all in an nice pattern behind Fehr either lol.

or

"His reputation is that he doesn't mess around. But I don't think anybody wants to see that happen." Dominic Moore...lol or "After hearing Don's presentation, let's just say there is no one else who can hold his jock strap if he decides to do it," said another agent, also off the record.------Ahhh the words that started the lock out lol


Fehr rolled the dice and he's going to lose. He could have had 50-50 well before the old CBA expired. He could have had the same deal he'll get now if not a better one. The owners will not move much on contracting rights.

There is no way he wins this. It's been all give and he's just trying to save his reputation. The players are uneducated young jocks, most have never seen a college campus. They don't know much besides playing hockey. Many of them couldn't even understand the concept of escrow after last lockout. They were surprised and upset after seeing escrow deductions from their cheques. Idiots.
  • 0

#2650 Drive-By Body Pierce

Drive-By Body Pierce

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts
  • Joined: 09-October 08

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:24 AM


@ChrisBottaNHL

Source: if there isn't a deal in place in next 7days, NHL will cancel games thru Dec. 15. Next cancellation could be the season.

  • 0

Posted Image


#2651 goalie13

goalie13

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,881 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:28 AM

@ChrisBottaNHL
Source: if there isn't a deal in place in next 7days, NHL will cancel games thru Dec. 15. Next cancellation could be the season.


I think his source might be jumping the gun a little. The last time they cancelled the whole season it wasn't until mid-February.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2652 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,390 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:30 AM

Hiring Fehr was a error on the part of the players. Is he doing a great job like you say!?!? I don't see any signed and sealed CBA's flaunting about lol. They players went as far as to hire Fehr to make a statement..."We mean biz" But "if" I were an owner and this came to my attention I would say "looks like we are in it for the long haul boys! We are not going to let some hired gun come in to our league with one Proposal and make us accept it, Frack THAT!"
____
I like this: Dec 18, 2010 - Fehr said it's very unfair for hockey fans to automatically assume another lockout is now imminent because of his appointment to the NHLPA.
.Oh oh Guess what !?!?! lol
____
"Nobody in the world knows more about the labour business in sports," Boston Bruins player representative Mark Stuart told NESN. "[Fehr]did a great job in baseball and I think we're lucky to have him on our side." Uhhh Whut!?!? Do the players still feel this way? And i dont mean the reps all in an nice pattern behind Fehr either lol.

or

"His reputation is that he doesn't mess around. But I don't think anybody wants to see that happen." Dominic Moore...lol or "After hearing Don's presentation, let's just say there is no one else who can hold his jock strap if he decides to do it," said another agent, also off the record.------Ahhh the words that started the lock out lol


Fehr is doing a great job.

First off, he isn't going to win, he has already lost 7%, so he has already lost. It's not about winning this. His responsibility is the to get the absolute best deal for the players possible.

He is on his way to doing it, people think he doesn't have power, but the longer he holds out and stays firm the better the offers seem to be getting. Explain that one.

Niether guy is going to completely crack anytime soon but Gary is cracking much faster than Fehr is, there is much more pressure on Gary and the league, because they are responsabile for growing the revenue and Gary realizes that there has already been a ton of damage done, and that if the season is lost it could do serious damage to the game, more so than already done. And Fehr doesn't feel that pressure. Why? Cause that's not his responsibility, it's not his job to help grow revenue's or end the lockout immediatly, it is to get the best deal possible for the players, obviously a timely fashion would be nice & is another goal of theirs, but the deal is most important, and all the players have just grown stronger and stronger together and behind him the longer this has gone on.
  • 2

zackass.png


#2653 Navyblue

Navyblue

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,199 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:31 AM

Fehr rolled the dice and he's going to lose. He could have had 50-50 well before the old CBA expired. He could have had the same deal he'll get now if not a better one. The owners will not move much on contracting rights.

There is no way he wins this. It's been all give and he's just trying to save his reputation. The players are uneducated young jocks, most have never seen a college campus. They don't know much besides playing hockey. Many of them couldn't even understand the concept of escrow after last lockout. They were surprised and upset after seeing escrow deductions from their cheques. Idiots.


At least try to be a little less obvious.
  • 2
Posted Image

#2654 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,390 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:32 AM

@ChrisBottaNHL
Source: if there isn't a deal in place in next 7days, NHL will cancel games thru Dec. 15. Next cancellation could be the season.

I think his source might be jumping the gun a little. The last time they cancelled the whole season it wasn't until mid-February.


IMO it's just a ploy by the league to scare the players and try to take pressure off Gary and the Owner's and put more of it on Fehr and the players.

I don't think it will work though, Fehr knows he won't cancel it that quickly, if they do that will seriously seriously damage the state of the game, there is way to much to lose.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 15 November 2012 - 12:32 AM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#2655 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:44 AM

At least try to be a little less obvious.


about what and why?
  • 0

#2656 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,646 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:19 AM

Fehr rolled the dice and he's going to lose. He could have had 50-50 well before the old CBA expired. He could have had the same deal he'll get now if not a better one. The owners will not move much on contracting rights.

There is no way he wins this. It's been all give and he's just trying to save his reputation. The players are uneducated young jocks, most have never seen a college campus. They don't know much besides playing hockey. Many of them couldn't even understand the concept of escrow after last lockout. They were surprised and upset after seeing escrow deductions from their cheques. Idiots.

That reminds me of the puzzled look on my son's face when he received his first pay cheque. When he comprehended the loss of money to CPP and UIC he was outraged!

How can the NHLPA have a strong position when the players lose more money with each cancelled game than the owners do? I can understand that both sides might become more rigid as the lockout progresses in an effort to recover lost revenue but that does not change the reality. Ownership's time frame is much longer than that of a NHL career. If the average career is 6 seasons losing a year is equal to losing 16% of career earnings. Some players now stand to lose 2 seasons.

I suspect if a deal isn't struck by mid January the season is cancelled. That is 2 months away. At what point does the lost revenue become an investment in a settlement that yields most of the objectives going in? However you dice it the players will pay for this lockout.
  • 0

#2657 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,509 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:45 AM

Any arguments that the owners are not trying to gouge the players as much as possible are completely shot down by the first "offer" from the league.

43% of HRR? Are you kidding me?

It should be completely obvious to everyone that the owners intended from day one to go for the throat, and squeeze out every last concession they possibly could.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2658 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,939 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:12 AM

Any arguments that the owners are not trying to gouge the players as much as possible are completely shot down by the first "offer" from the league.

43% of HRR? Are you kidding me?

It should be completely obvious to everyone that the owners intended from day one to go for the throat, and squeeze out every last concession they possibly could.


It should be completely obvious to anyone that when you run a biz' you dont want to be giving over have your revenue to the workers, who are doing only what they supposed to be doing as per their contract....
  • 1

#2659 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,788 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:17 AM

Fehr is doing a great job.

First off, he isn't going to win, he has already lost 7%, so he has already lost. It's not about winning this. His responsibility is the to get the absolute best deal for the players possible.

He is on his way to doing it, people think he doesn't have power, but the longer he holds out and stays firm the better the offers seem to be getting. Explain that one.

Niether guy is going to completely crack anytime soon but Gary is cracking much faster than Fehr is, there is much more pressure on Gary and the league, because they are responsabile for growing the revenue and Gary realizes that there has already been a ton of damage done, and that if the season is lost it could do serious damage to the game, more so than already done. And Fehr doesn't feel that pressure. Why? Cause that's not his responsibility, it's not his job to help grow revenue's or end the lockout immediatly, it is to get the best deal possible for the players, obviously a timely fashion would be nice & is another goal of theirs, but the deal is most important, and all the players have just grown stronger and stronger together and behind him the longer this has gone on.


I personally hope the USA market for hockey completely goes in the tank. I could care less if we get crap hockey for the next 10 years because of this. Hopefully someone besides us gets hurt by this.

In the end one party will wake up one day, deside they are bored or restless, take stock of the situation, concede a bit, and resolve the lockout. Grown children. :(

At the end of the day both the players who've made millions since they were 20 and the owners who have millions upon millions whenever they need it are completely removed from normal society and live in a complete bubble. Would love to see them budget $40 for 5 days in order to eat, entertain yourself, and get to work.

I have to somewhat agree with the owners when it comes to contractual rights though. They put all the risk with their own money, no matter how shadily they got it. They also pay for all the employees, and coordinate everything from capoligists, to sleepoligists, to travel secretaries, to trainers, and everything else. The players do SFA besides train like animals and play a game for millions of dollars per year.

Unlike a real work force and a union hockey must have different rules as this is no ordinary business. People say the owners need to stop signing these contracts, which a point can be made for, but a lot of times the GM is responsible for those signings. Unfortunately, GM's change and when they move on from a franchise they have no accoutability for the contracts they have signed. There is no incentive to remain viable for them and the owners trust them to make the right moves so really the protecting themselves from themselves idea is not exactly right.
  • 1
There are things known and unknown ... and in between are the doors.

#2660 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,509 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:41 AM

It should be completely obvious to anyone that when you run a biz' you dont want to be giving over have your revenue to the workers, who are doing  only what they supposed to be doing as per their contract....


This isn't some two-bit contracting firm with a few employees. Pretty much any large business with hundreds of skilled (domestic) workers, whose business is selling the expertise of these workers, will spend well over half their revenues in salaries.

It cost money to pay people, at any level. In the organization I work for, over 95% of hundreds of millions of dollars of expenses are for workers' compensation. And almost all of these people make only 40-100k a year.
  • 2
Posted Image

#2661 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,939 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:05 AM

This isn't some two-bit contracting firm with a few employees. Pretty much any large business with hundreds of skilled (domestic) workers, whose business is selling the expertise of these workers, will spend well over half their revenues in salaries.

It cost money to pay people, at any level. In the organization I work for, over 95% of hundreds of millions of dollars of expenses are for workers' compensation. And almost all of these people make only 40-100k a year.


I agree in regards to the revenue and salaries BUT like you state it costs money so why should I as an owner give you MORE than half of the Revenue when all you do is step on the ice. Sure you can make the arguement about: Name on the Jersey, public appearances, media, but this is not worthy of over half my revenue....Give reason why the NHLPA deserves atleast 50/50....and give me your stand on the contracting agreements and why they should not be changed to meet the "new" requirements of the NHL.
  • 1

#2662 Li'l Fra

Li'l Fra

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,643 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:19 AM

"#$$#^*(**(((&&())))&&^%$%#@!#%^&!"

That's just how I feel, man.

I can't believe the idiocy of the NHL and the NHLPA, but mostly Bettman and his cronies. The fans are angry. The players are so angry they're willing to cut off their nose despite their face.

Over half the owners seem to be being held hostage by the others, they must be angry.

This is TERRIBLE for the game, for the fans, for the owners. Everyone!

It's devolved, once again, into an ego battle, with very little common sense to be found.

I know I'm just venting, and not saying anything, but I need to.

So:

%&*%&^$%(()*&^(%^)&^()*^)(&)_*(&^&*^)(&(&)(^)&^)^*()&^)^(((*&%^%$%$**&^%$%$#@#!
  • 0

#2663 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,356 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:44 AM

As an owner of a hockey team or business, wouldnt You be upset, if You were paying your employees more money in a yr, than you make profit for yourself, after paying employees,staff,travel,expenses,rent,stress etc?


People keep saying that and I'm curious, where did this idea come from? What kind of business model allows an owner to personally take home more than all of their employees collectively? None that I've ever heard of.

A Google search can illustrate the point that the players' collective percentage is not completely out of line with other industries so heavily dependent on people, especially people with highly specialized skills, rather than physical products.

But for other labor-intensive businesses, like restaurants and theme parks, labor costs are a much greater percentage of costs, ranging up to 20 to 40 percent. Payroll costs average more than 60 percent of total expenses in the trucking industry.

Source: http://smallbusiness...roll-18985.html

If your payroll expenditures fall within 15-30% of gross revenue, your business is in a safety zone of sorts with solid footing. Businesses that live within this range tend to be most successful, at least from a payroll perspective. However, there are many businesses, usually within the service industry, who operate with payroll making up more than 50% of their gross revenue.

Source: http://secondwindcon...ted-to-payroll/

And remember, those percentages are based on gross revenue, meaning all revenue before other costs are deducted. The NHL doesn't pay the players' percentage against gross revenue, but an artificially constructed number known as HRR which is certain revenue MINUS certain allowed deductions.

According to a 2008 study,

The three industries with the highest median percentage of salaries as a percentage of operating expense were health care services (52%), for-profit services (50%) and educational services (50%).

Source: http://www.shrm.org/...ingExpense.aspx

Service industries tend to have a much higher percentage of their costs tied up in wages. According to a Purdue University study, "The Seven Most Important Performance Indicators," labor can account for as much as 67 percent of costs in a service company.

Source: http://www.ehow.com/...ross-sales.html

And of course the most fair comparison is with other professional sports leagues.

NFL players agreed to reduce their share of league revenue from 50 percent to 47 percent, and NBA players agreed to reduce from 57 percent to a 49 to 51 percent range. MLB has no salary cap, but players have historically received a percentage similar to what NFL and NBA players are now receiving.

Source: http://espn.go.com/b...ng-a-la-nba-nfl


So, yes, they are all disgusting overpaid when compared to what other people get for doing work far more valuable. (Most firefighters are volunteers after all.) But can we please stop promoting the false idea that the players are somehow taking advantage of the hapless owners by insisting that, as the employees and product of the business, they get a decent percentage of the HRR?
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2664 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 11:49 AM

Any arguments that the owners are not trying to gouge the players as much as possible are completely shot down by the first "offer" from the league.

43% of HRR? Are you kidding me?

It should be completely obvious to everyone that the owners intended from day one to go for the throat, and squeeze out every last concession they possibly could.


Of course, whats wrong with that? It should be obvious when you spend hundreds of millions on a business you should at least turn some sort of profit. With the salaries at 57% of revenue most of the teams are losing money. Whats wrong with trying to get a favorable deal?
  • 0

#2665 RWMc1

RWMc1

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,076 posts
  • Joined: 13-September 08

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:04 PM

<p>

@ChrisBottaNHL
Source: if there isn't a deal in place in next 7days, NHL will cancel games thru Dec. 15. Next cancellation could be the season.

Last time the entire season was cancelled the players caved in to the owners. Cost certainty in the form of a salary cap was necessary to create more stability in the League. This time their is no real reason to lock out the players and lose a season. If the players are to lose an entire season of salary, there is no reason to give in this time. I hope the players stick to their position and hold out if the season is cancelled. In the end, it will be Bettemans pet teams who will suffer the most. I wonder if the reasonable owners are willing to lose revenue and fan support for the sake of the egos of those who get to whisper in Betteman's ear.I resent the spin that owners have all the power. This suggests that fans have no power whatsoever. If an entire season is lost, then I guess we will find out.

Edited by RWMc1, 15 November 2012 - 12:53 PM.

  • 2

Vancouver Canucks Stanley Cup Champions 2014/15 So let it be written, So let it be done!

 

My Cup Runneth. Go get it and bring it here!

 

Cupquester "Who are those horrible little men?"
 


#2666 RWMc1

RWMc1

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,076 posts
  • Joined: 13-September 08

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:30 PM

I support the players 100%

Edited by RWMc1, 19 November 2012 - 05:04 PM.

  • 0

Vancouver Canucks Stanley Cup Champions 2014/15 So let it be written, So let it be done!

 

My Cup Runneth. Go get it and bring it here!

 

Cupquester "Who are those horrible little men?"
 


#2667 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 911 posts
  • Joined: 30-September 05

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:38 PM

It's been awhile since the last lockout, so if anyone needs a refresher on the timeline of events from the last lockout, it is here:
http://www.cbc.ca/sp...chronology.html
Some of the events in there are chilling, filled with Bettman "ultimatum's", and "deadlines".

The contracting item that scares me the most is the 8 year UFA. If the owners insist on this, the season is gone, *for sure*. Realistically, the only contracting change that should be needed is the %variance to defeat the back-loaded contracts.
  • 0

#2668 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:43 PM

It's been awhile since the last lockout, so if anyone needs a refresher on the timeline of events from the last lockout, it is here:
http://www.cbc.ca/sp...chronology.html
Some of the events in there are chilling, filled with Bettman "ultimatum's", and "deadlines".


I admit................I lol'd on when I got to Nov2
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#2669 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,356 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:51 PM

Realistically, the only contracting change that should be needed is the %variance to defeat the back-loaded contracts.


Exactly. Either the % variance limit or 5-year term limit will take care of back-loaded contracts. Both are unnecessarily limiting, though I could see a 10-year term limit being agreed to in conjunction with the % variance limit without too much fuss.

The rest of the contract restrictions are about owners wanting to have more control over players and giving players less control over their own careers. I think far too many people are glossing over how important those issues are to the players. Of course they want to have more control over where they (and their families!) live and how likely it is that they will have to move. If the owners refuse to move on those demands, it could very well spell the end of the season needlessly.

Edited by poetica, 15 November 2012 - 12:52 PM.

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

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2670 canucksnihilist

canucksnihilist

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 14-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:57 PM

The NHL created this monster problem in 2004
[/font]

Read more: http://www.ottawacit...l#ixzz2CFXLW1or


wicket post!

The one thing I would comment on is the assumption of growth. The owners didn't take that deal because they didn't think that the league profits would expand, they thought that the profits might potentially tumble. With lots of teams struggling (and still struggling), no good TV deal... you can see why they thought that way. They wouldn't be stuck paying a higher and higher amount of % revenue to the players when they are losing money.

Makes you wonder how league revenues have grown so much... What has changed? Has anything really changed? New arenas but corporate buy-in is still low, no real local big TV deals. Canadian $ ... but most of the teams are in the USA. Marketing - maybe a bit better, but where are the returns exactly? Is all this money they say they make intrinsically tied to the salary cap? Didn't they have a rule where they could arbitrarily increase it by 5% a year no matter what (on both sides? can't recall)... meaning their revenues they report automatically go up??? I think that they aren't really making 3b in gross revenue. I think that figure is before any losses incurred by the owners in struggling franchises. Certainly there is no independent audit of the books (NHLPA has a vested interest in showing hockey strength, they are not independent). How did the league finish doubling it's revenue in this last contract period (or close to it) in the middle of a HUGE economic downturn - didn't slow down at all. Something doesn't add up. I think it is a conspiracy / cover-up. The aren't showing the real figures.

Voltaire was right - but tautological in his own twisted genius kind of way.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.