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

#2671 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:51 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".


That doesn't even include what I found to be the most chilling part, how Bettman started holding weekly training sessions for the lockout 4 years before it started.
  • 0

#2672 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:55 PM

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?


As far as I know, the NHL hasn't released any financial information about last season other than the final HRR (via their CBA proposal). However, some of your questions may be answered by a release put out by the NHL last season trumpeting their record revenues and noting the many areas of revenue growth.

(Again, this is for 2010/11.)

Led by dramatic increases in sponsorship and merchandise sales, landmark corporate investment in its big events and impressive digital growth, the NHL is on pace for its fifth consecutive year of record total revenue and is projected to bring more than $2.9 billion by the end of the Stanley Cup Playoffs. NHL Enterprises' revenue is forecasted to increase by 14.8 percent and also will set a new best. Sponsorship sales set an all-time record with gross sales increasing by 33 percent over last year as the League added to its blue chip roster of corporate partners, attracted by the most coveted fan demographic in all of pro sports. In February, the NHL announced a new seven-year partnership with Molson Coors in Canada and MillerCoors in the U.S. to begin in July – the biggest sponsorship in the League's 93-year history.


Other important 2010/11 numbers:
  • NHL All-Star Game presented by Discover in Raleigh showed a 64 percent increase in sponsorship revenue over the last U.S.-based All-Star event
  • The NHL Network increased ad revenue this season by 70 percent
  • Overall merchandise sales gained 15 percent
  • Revenue for the NHL's digital businesses increased by 14 percent, with NHL.com revenue alone up 28 percent, setting a new best.
  • In-arena per-cap sales increased by 10 percent
  • Regular season viewership increased by 17 percent over last year
  • NHL teams averaged 17,132 fans and played to 93.2 percent of capacity. This average is the third largest all-time and an increase over last year.
Source: http://www.nhl.com/i...s.htm?id=559630

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)


Not exactly. Players' share was a percentage of revenue. In the last CBA, the players' percentage rose (from 54% to 57%) as HRR rose above certain agreed upon thresholds.

The players' share was determined by the actual HRR of any given year, but that number could not be known until after the year was done. So, they had to make an educated projection of what the players' share would be for a year and from that determined the salary cap.

Under the last CBA the union (only) had the option to increase the salary cap for the following year by 5%. This was done in order to try to keep the salary cap in close approximation to what the players' actual share would be so as to avoid players losing more of their salary to escrow (i.e. having it held in a savings account that wouldn't be released until after the season was over) and to avoid having owners paying out large lump sums to players at the end of the season to honor their full share.

Note: An increase in the salary cap did not increase the amount players were actually paid. In the end, players got paid exactly their share, no more and no less. Escrow was used to "make whole" owners in years they overpaid the players' actual share. Owners had to make additional payments in years they underpaid the players' share.

I think that they aren't really making 3b in gross revenue.


You're right. They're not. They make more. The NHL doesn't release their gross revenue numbers as far as I know, only HRR which is certain revenues (excluding, for example, any non-NHL related revenue generated by an arena owned by the team) and after certain allowed deductions for costs.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2673 gizmo2337

gizmo2337

    Comets Star

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

Feb. 15: The NHL offers an ultimatum, saying the union has until 11 a.m. ET to accept a salary cap of $42.5 million. Goodenow tries to negotiate, making an offer of a $49-million cap. The league rejects it.

Feb. 16: Bettman cancels the 2004-05 NHL season at a news conference in New York.

March 1: League says the 2005-06 season will go ahead as scheduled and hints at using replacement players after a board of governors meeting.

The NHL looks foolish for not taking that offer now. A fixed cap of 49m would have been a steal for the owners by now.

Edited by gizmo2337, 15 November 2012 - 01:56 PM.

  • 0

#2674 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,749 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:04 PM

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?


The league as a whole is making record profits. They just need to share more, like other leagues do. Also, one might question the business decisions behind putting the money-losing teams where they are in the first place. If this is purely business, then quit screwing around, and move Phoenix to Quebec already.

I can understand attempting to negotiate a higher percentage of profit. And with the economy stagnant, it is probably necessary. But coming out with an offer to make your employees take a 25% pay cut, while your business is making record profits...it's absolutely obscene. Adding on a litany of forfeited contractual rights makes it even worse.

Edited by D-Money, 15 November 2012 - 02:09 PM.

  • 2
Posted Image

#2675 chisoxin12

chisoxin12

    Canucks Rookie

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:10 PM

How much clout does Jeremy Jacobs have over Gary Bettman? Apparently all through last weeks negotiations, without his presence, talks were going smoothly, he appeared, and now talks are at a stalemate. If this guy is the one thats holding fans at ransom, I think the Bruin organization should be inundated with messages.
  • 0

#2676 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,944 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:41 PM

I let this slide because I mistakenly believed that the League was actually bargaining in good faith. If we lose an entire season, I and other passionate hockey fans will plaster this on every social media site we can think of. We will even take this to other sports to see if they want to get back at greedy owners even if from another sport. We've had enough!!!!!!!

"Almost all of the owners (/owning entities) of NHL teams have large stakes in other businesses. By uniting a large group of NHL fans to start a boycott of at least some of these businesses, right now, we may be able to influence the owners in some way. At the very least, we can let them know that their actions are affecting us in a negative way, so we have the ability and power to do the same to them.

Here is a list of NHL owners (from http://icehockey.wik...t_of_NHL_Owners), and other businesses that they have a large stake in. You may be surprised at some of the names - if not the sheer quantity:

Henry Samueli  - Anaheim Ducks
Broadcom Corporation - Computer & Telecommunications Networking
  
Jeremy Jacobs  - Boston Bruins  
Chairman of Delaware North Companies (hospitality and food service company)

Terrence Pegula - Buffalo Sabres
Owns the AHL Rocester Americans.

N. Murray Edwards - Calgary Flames
Owns Canadian Natural Resources (oilsands development). Also owns Resorts of the Canadian Rockies, which owns Fernie Alpine Resort, Kimberley Alpine Resort, Nakiska, Stoneham Mountain Resort, and Mont-Sainte-Anne, Kicking Horse Resort.

Peter Karmanos - Carolina Hurricanes
Owns Compuware, large business software developer

Rocky Wirtz - Chicago Blackhawks
Rocky oversees Wirtz Corporation's commercial and residential real estate companies, wine distributor Wirtz Beverage Group, an insurance company and banks in Illinois and Florida. Wirtz is also the co-chairman of the Executive Committee of the United Center.
  
Stan Kroenke - Colorado Avalanche
Owns Kroenke Sports Enterprises, which in addition to the AVS, controls the Denver Nuggets (NBA), Colorado Rapids (MLS), Colorado Mammoth (NLL) and St. Louis Rams (NFL).

JMAC Inc. - Columbus Blue Jackets  
n/a

Tom Gaglardi - Dallas Stars
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Sandman Hotels, Inns & Suites and Moxie's Restaurants, LP. Also part owner of Kamloops Blazers.
  
Mike Ilitch - Detroit Red Wings
Also owns Little Cesars Pizza and the Detroit Tigers.
  
Rexall Sports (of Katz Group) - Edmonton Oilers
Owns over 1800 pharmacies in Canada, under the names: Rexall, Herbie's for Drug and Food, Meditrust Pharmacy, Pharma Plus, Super Drug Mart, and Dell Pharmacies.

Cliff Viner (& Stu Siegel?) - Florida Panthers
Cliff Viner is a general partner with AVM, LP a fixed income broker/dealer, and III Associates, a fixed income derivatives money management firm. Last I heard, Stu Siegel sold his shares in the team.
  
Philip Anschutz & Edward Roski Jr. - Los Angeles Kings
Philip Anschutz owns or has stakes in MLS teams LA Galaxy, Chicago Fire, Houston Dynamo, San Jose Earthquakes, and the NY/NJ Metro Stars; Los Angeles Lakers; Staples Center and O2 Arena; and the Home Depot Center. Ed Roski is also a part owner of the Lakers, and owns the Silverton Casino Lodge in Las Vegas.
  
Craig Leipold - Minnesota Wild
Leipold's companies own the Grand Ol' Opry in Nashville, and the Houston Aeros AHL team. They also manage the Xcel Energy Center and the Saint Paul RiverCentre.

Molson Family - Montreal Canadiens
Molson is a big invester in the NHL (for many teams), besides owning a cornerstone franchise. Their beers include Canadian, Coors, Ice, Golden, Export, Dry, XXX, Stock Ale, Rickard's, Pilsner, Carling, Keystone, Bohemian, and Calgary Export. Owns partial stakes in the Brazilian brands A Marca Bavaria and Kaiser. In Canada, has the marketing and selling rights for Corona, Heineken, and Miller brands.
  
Predators Holdings LLC - Nashville Predators
Owns and operates Bridgestone arena.  

Jeffrey Vanderbeek - New Jersey Devils
Owns the Prudential Center (but maybe not for long!)
  
Charles Wang - New York Islanders
Owner of CA Technologies (systems software developer) and the Bridgport Sound Tigers AHL team.

James Dolan - New York Rangers
Also President and CEO of Cablevision Systems Corporation (only operates in NYC - unrelated to Cablevision Canada).  

Eugene Melnyk - Ottawa Senators
He is the founder, and former chairman and CEO of Biovail Corporation (Parmaceuticals), which merged with merged with Valeant Pharmaceuticals International in 2010. Its major products include Cesamet (nabilone), Efudex, Mestinon, Diastat, and Ribavirin.

Comcast-Spectator - Philadelphia Flyers
Comcast is a major Internet/Cable/Phone provider in the US.
  
NHL - Phoenix Coyotes
Hah!

Mario Lemieux & Ron Burkle - Pittsburgh Penguins
Ron Burkle has his fingers in a lot of pies. Some of the major ones are: 20.7% stake in Americold Realty Trust; major invester in Sean John clothing line; small stakes of Barnes & Noble and American Apparel. Significant stake in Relativity Media, which produced such films as Let Me In, Limitless, Machine Gun Preacher, Mirror Mirror, The Raven, and upcoming releases such as The House at the End of the Street, Movie 43, and Safe Haven.

Sports Capital Partners - St. Louis Blues
Owns Real Madrid! Also Real Salt Lake (MLS), Peoria Rivermen (AHL), Scottrade Center, Peabody Opera House, KALL700 Sports Radio, and Tupelo-Honey productions.

Sharks Entertainment Enterprises - San Jose Sharks
Owns the HP Pavillion and Worcester Sharks. Also a minority shareholder in the San Jose Earthquakes (MLS).

Jeff Vinik - Tampa Bay Lightning  
Also owns the Tampa Bay Storm. Minority owner of the Boston Red Sox. Also on board of directors for Liverpool Football Club.

M.L.S.E - Toronto Maple Leafs
Also owns the Raptors, Marlies (AHL), Toronto FC (MLS), Air Canada Centre, Ricoh Coliseum, BMO Field, Mastercard Centre, and Real Sports.

Canucks Sports and Entertainment - Vancouver Canucks
Also owns Rogers Arena. But it is 100% owned by Aquilini Investment Group, which owns/operates: multi-storey residential developments in Vancouver including the King Edward Village, Richards Living tower, and Maynards Block; proponent of the proposed $2.6B Garibaldi at Squamish resort; half ownership of Halifax-based Pacrim Hospitality Services, which owns and manages 30 hotels across Canada, and all Pizza Hut locations in BC; creator and producer of Bassano Hard Soda.

Ted Leonsis - Washington Capitals
Also majority owner of majority owner of the Washington Wizards (NBA), Washington Mystics (WNBA) and the Verizon Center. Founder and Chairman of SnagFilms, which offers ad-supported documentaries. Vice chairman of Groupon and on the board of American Express.

True North Sports and Entertainment - Winnipeg Jets
Owns and operates the MTS Centre, and the St. John's Ice Caps (AHL).


Now, obviously every person will not be a direct consumer of these companies. However, I am going to make my own "boycott list". I encourage any of you to do the same.
So, if a lockout is declared on September 15th, I will begin a boycott of the following:

- All beers produced/distributed by Molson (no Heinekin or Corona)
- Rexall drugs (normally gets around $50/month from me)
- Moxies
- Little Cesars
- Pizza Hut (BC)
- Sandman Hotels
- All films produced by Relativity Media
- Premiership games with Liverpool or Real Madrid, merchandise for either team
- Will try to influence brother-in-law to boycott St. Louis Rams (he's a huge fan)
- Fernie Alpine Resort, Kimberley Alpine Resort, Nakiska, Stoneham Mountain Resort, and Kicking Horse Resort (I go to Kicking Horse every year)
- No events at Rogers Arena when I'm in Vancouver (I catch concerts here)
- Bassano Hard Soda (will tell everyone it's terrible)


Feel free to spread this by any means possible. I am going to start tweeting information/etc. using hashtag #fanlockout." from the thread BETTER KNOW A BOYCOTT  by D-Money


And yet people assume the Owners need the NHL lol the NHL is just another dollar in their pocket...the players need the NHL more than the owners..the owners can wait much more longer than the players lol Caving time is near.~!
  • 0

#2677 goalie13

goalie13

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,068 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:45 PM

You're right. They're not. They make more. The NHL doesn't release their gross revenue numbers as far as I know, only HRR which is certain revenues (excluding, for example, any non-NHL related revenue generated by an arena owned by the team) and after certain allowed deductions for costs.


Some of that makes perfectly good sense to not include though. If U2 goes on tour and that generates revenue for Rogers Arena, should that be included? Or what about in Calgary where (if I'm not mistaken) the Flames own the WHL Hitmen. Neither of these examples are part of the core operation of an NHL franchise so I don't feel they should be included.

At the same time, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there were things that really ought to be tied to hockey that the owners are trying to exclude.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2678 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:46 PM

Some of that makes perfectly good sense to not include though. If U2 goes on tour and that generates revenue for Rogers Arena, should that be included? Or what about in Calgary where (if I'm not mistaken) the Flames own the WHL Hitmen. Neither of these examples are part of the core operation of an NHL franchise so I don't feel they should be included.

At the same time, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there were things that really ought to be tied to hockey that the owners are trying to exclude.


It is fine to deduct those revenues but it isn't fine to deduct ANY costs from the revenues.
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#2679 goalie13

goalie13

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,068 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 02:54 PM

It is fine to deduct those revenues but it isn't fine to deduct ANY costs from the revenues.


Agreed. That just doesn't make sense to me.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2680 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:05 PM

Some of that makes perfectly good sense to not include though. If U2 goes on tour and that generates revenue for Rogers Arena, should that be included? Or what about in Calgary where (if I'm not mistaken) the Flames own the WHL Hitmen. Neither of these examples are part of the core operation of an NHL franchise so I don't feel they should be included.


Definitely. I wasn't implying players should get a share of other revenues generated by arenas or by other teams owned by the same company. I simply meant to note that the HRR is a partial report for a company and should not be taken as a true indicator of the business' health as it is does not include all sources of actual revenue. That's equally true for the NHL as it is for the individual teams as the NHL itself gets monies, such as relocation or new franchise fees, that aren't included in HRR.

My point was simply that the companies that own and operate NHL teams absolutely make more than they report publicly, and therein lies the problem when they cry poverty to the public using only that limited picture as proof. It's dishonest.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2681 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:12 PM

Little weird that the threat right now is cancelling only the first half of Dec games. They wiped out both October and November in one go.

The NBA lockout ended on Dec 16 (that's when games started again).
  • 0

#2682 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:16 PM

Little weird that the threat right now is cancelling only the first half of Dec games. They wiped out both October and November in one go.

The NBA lockout ended on Dec 16 (that's when games started again).


All along I have felt the earliest we would see hockey is Dec 15.
While that date is still possible my 'optimism' for it has faded.
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#2683 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,746 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 03:40 PM

“There will ultimately be a new collective bargaining agreement, but the 2011-12 season is now in jeopardy.”
That was NBA commissioner David Stern on Nov. 14 of last year, a mere 11 days before reports of a tentative agreement between the league and the union began to surface.
They were back on the court playing on Dec. 16.
And there’s little question there are some parallels between what’s currently happening in hockey.
The one saying I’ve been thinking of the past week or so when it comes to the NHL lockout is that “it’s always the darkest before dawn.”
Cliché? Sure. But that’s exactly what we’re dealing with here.
These negotiations between Gary Bettman and Donald Fehr were always going to be difficult. Heck they were always going to be a clusterbeep. Two smart men who know this game and who are trying to get the best of one another while pushing the boundaries of what they can coax out of the other side.
There were always going to be casualties here - and by casualties, I mean hockey games missed.
Did anyone really think we would have a season of more than 60 games? Would anyone have been surprised if, coming in, they were told the endgame of all of this was similar to the 48-game season we had in 1994-95?
The path to that shortened season isn’t an easy one. It’s going to involve plenty of ultimatums and leaks to the media about how this really is the last chance to get a deal done.
The fact is that we’re so far from a full season being cancelled that it’s not even worth contemplating at this point. If you’re looking for a real timeline for when that becomes a possibility, we’re probably looking at eight weeks from now - which would take the talks (or non-talks) to Jan. 10 or so.
That would be dire times right there - and if no progress is made between now and then, you better believe the season is likely in jeopardy.
The thing is, however, this lockout only started, officially speaking, eight weeks ago. If you accept that end point I’ve laid out as in the right part of the timeline, we’re only at halftime right now.
Sure it’s dark. And yes they’re angry at one another and not talking. But to say there hasn’t been any progress in the last eight weeks (or even two weeks) is just flat out wrong.
Financially speaking, we’re talking about two sides that are only $300-million or so apart in their proposals over the next five years. Even closer if you factor in what prorating the Year 1 salaries would do, which is the likely next step by the NHLPA.
Contractually speaking, there are three key issues at play and, while both sides are standing firm, they also indicate there’s some room to talk about their differences.
This isn’t the stuff of Armageddon. It may be frustrating and it may be ridiculous, but it’s not the end of the line, by any means.
(Especially if you consider that, to this point, the NHL believes 2012-13 revenues have only been impacted by about $350- to $400-million or 10 to 12 per cent.)
Now, it’s widely expected that, in the next week or so, the league will cancel more games, likely taking them to Dec. 15. That announcement will be greeted with the same doom and gloom you’re hearing and reading all over, but again, not the end of the world.
According to The Canadian Press’ Chris Johnston, however, the NHL would have been able to play a 68-game season if they were able to start it on Dec. 1. The only thing these new cancellations are going to mean is that we’re dealing with a shorter season than that.
Which seems a given anyway.
Both sides here are looking for pressure points, and what this really is is a game of chicken.
“How late can we go? When will the other side get desperate and crack?”
Unfortunately, we’re not at those breaking points yet, and the earliest there will likely be any games is mid-December (when the NBA began its own 66-game season a year ago).
But, then again, this is where we were always headed coming into this mess. The negotiations really aren’t in any different a place than was predictable and the final agreement is – despite all the rhetoric out there – closer to being realized than ever.
Even if dawn is still a ways off.


http://www.theglobea..._medium=twitter
  • 0

#2684 RAMBUTANS

RAMBUTANS

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,410 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 06

Posted 15 November 2012 - 06:47 PM

LOL at everyone thinking or hoping the season can be salvaged. I've said it once since the negotiations started I'll say it again. The season will be cancelled. There is also a big possibility that the lockout extends to next season. You can quote me on this,

Now, go get some hobby or try to like the NBA.
  • 0
Mr. Reputable of the HFBoards

#2685 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 06:51 PM

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.


Im Curious as to where You think the Owners ACTUALLY make more than the COMBINED take home of ALL their employees ?

I doubt that one of the richest teams as the Canucks even makes more than what he pays the players combined,,after he pays his players, bills,flights,doctors,staff,accomadations,taxes,as well paying the weaker Teams. too much too list etc
I doubt the majority of the Owners make as much as some of the top players after bills are paid

You asked drybone for facts
Maybe You could back that up?
Interesting though, I dont know if its true though?
I would like to know for myself
I would be suprised if that was more than 5, if any
  • 0

#2686 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:15 PM

Im Curious as to where You think the Owners ACTUALLY make more than the COMBINED take home of ALL their employees ?


Are you confused? I never said that NHL owners make more profit than their employees. I was responding to you saying,

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


I asked, very clearly even in the 3 sentences you quoted in your reply, where this idea came from. I then went on to point out, citing multiple sources might I add, that the percentage players receive is not out of line with what employees in other service industries make. You are the one who was complaining that employees got more of the revenue than the owner got as if there were some (legal) business model where that was not true.

Edited by poetica, 15 November 2012 - 07:18 PM.

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

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2687 gmen81

gmen81

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,716 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:20 PM

Last page
  • 0
Posted Image

#2688 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:22 PM

BETTMAN SUGGESTS TO NHLPA SIDES TAKE A BREAK IN NEGOTIATIONS



TORONTO -- With another chunk of the NHL schedule in danger of being cancelled, about the only thing the league and NHL Players' Association are talking about is taking a break.

Gary Bettman contacted Donald Fehr on Wednesday and suggested the sides place a two-week moratorium on negotiations, two sources confirmed to The Canadian Press on Thursday night.

A response has yet to be given. Fehr, the NHLPA's executive director, told the NHL commissioner he wanted to take the offer to his membership before providing an answer.

The requested break comes after talks fell silent following six consecutive days of meetings between the sides last week in New York. It was clear by the end of that run that pessimism and some bad feelings had made their way into the proceedings.

"We are extremely disappointed in where we and the Players find ourselves," deputy commissioner Bill Daly told TSN. "And from our perspective, we have made repeated moves in the Players' direction with absolutely no reciprocation. Unfortunately, we have determined we are involved with Union leadership that has no genuine interest in reaching an agreement. Regardless of what we propose, or how we suggest to compromise the answer is "no." At some point you just have to say "enough is enough".

The league is close to making another round of game cancellations, prompting some to suggest the season was in danger. Asked about that possibility on Thursday morning, Daly replied: "I hope not."
"But I'm more discouraged now than I have been at any point in the process," Daly added.

The NHL is expected to start wiping games beyond Nov. 30 off the schedule early next week. There had previously been hope for a shortened 68-game season starting Dec. 1, but that now appears to be gone.

In total, the lockout has already forced the cancellation of 327 games, including the Winter Classic between the Maple Leafs and Red Wings at Michigan Stadium. The league's other big mid-season event -- the Jan. 27 all-star game at Nationwide Arena in Columbus -- is also expected to be formally cancelled in the near future.

Earlier this week, NHLPA special counsel Steve Fehr indicated that he thought a new CBA could be completed quickly once a breakthrough was made in negotiations.

"One thing Bill Daly and I agree upon is that when the moment is right the deal could be done very quickly," Fehr said Monday. "One days, three days or whatever."

The right moment doesn't appear to be forthcoming. Fehr acknowledged that the union and league remained split on three major issues: the division of money, player contract rights and who pays for the damage caused by the lockout.

The lack of progress in talks has started raising fears that the NHL might lose another year to a labour dispute. Even though the 2004-05 season was cancelled by commissioner Gary Bettman on Feb. 16, it's believed the league wouldn't put the decision off that long if the 2012-13 season is to meet the same fate.

A deal that saved a 48-game season after the 1994-95 lockout was signed on Jan. 11.

Source: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409553
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2689 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,227 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 15 November 2012 - 08:22 PM

Darren Dreger@DarrenDreger
Series of Daly quotes on league initiated hiatus: "We have made repeated moves in the Players' direction with absolutely no reciprocation."

Daly: "unfortunately, we have determined we are involved with Union leadership that has no genuine interest in reaching an agreement."

Daly: "Regardless of what we propose or how we suggest to compromise the answer is "no," At some pt you have to say "enough is enough".

ouch. harsh words from the NHL today on the state of the NHLPA leadership. I find it funny that the PA says the league wont negotiate and their offers are all "take it over leave it" and the NHL is saying the exact same thing about the NHLPA.

I think it is time for mediation.
  • 0

#2690 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 08:31 PM

I think its an excellent idea by Bettman to take 2 weeks off negotiating and let everyone sit back and think about things. Players will miss another paycheck and ask themselves if was really worth having hired Fehr.
  • 0

#2691 ba;;isticsports

ba;;isticsports

    Comets Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:20 PM

Posted Imagepoetica, on 15 November 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:


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.

Are you confused? I never said that NHL owners make more profit than their employees. I was responding to you saying,



I asked, very clearly even in the 3 sentences you quoted in your reply, where this idea came from. I then went on to point out, citing multiple sources might I add, that the percentage players receive is not out of line with what employees in other service industries make. You are the one who was complaining that employees got more of the revenue than the owner got as if there were some (legal) business model where that was not true.



I think You may be confused by what I was trying to say?
I will try better to explain the comment I made

I did not mean it to sound as You took it, that an owner should be entitled to more money than what the players collectively make on his Team.

What I was saying is, if You are an owner of a Hockey team or Business, would You not be upset if just ONE (but actually several) Employees were actually taking home more money than You at the end of the Year from the Operation?

To say that they shouldnt have teams there then (which I agree) Hurts many NHL players looking to be rich and employed.

Not all Teams are doing as well as the Canucks, many are treading, Many are losing and people in those cities dont care, (which means if those Teams fold it hurts more players than Owners, not to mention workers,businesses etc)

As a fan, I say screw the Owners who are really hurting
Screw the Players who will be out of a job by losing these teams
They dont care about us,why should I care about them?
In return, i will get Better quality of players,beter quality of hockey, better refs etc.

Then get rid of 1 way contracts after that and have them fight to stay up in the NHL, because the players/refs that got the short end of the stick will be hungry to play up here

Edited by ba;;isticsports, 15 November 2012 - 09:23 PM.

  • 0

#2692 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

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

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:22 PM

So, as many of you know, the commissioner came out today and suggested they take a two week break in negotiations.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409553


Is there anyone left who honestly believes hiring Fehr has HELPED the union at all. The owners are basically laughing at Fehr at this point.

Either Fehr gives into the owners demands, or there is no hockey. What a bunch of dummies the NHLPA is.

They need Fehr to step down and come back to the table with a fresh credibility.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2693 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,156 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:29 PM

I think its an excellent idea by Bettman to take 2 weeks off negotiating and let everyone sit back and think about things. Players will miss another paycheck and ask themselves if was really worth having hired Fehr.

So, as many of you know, the commissioner came out today and suggested they take a two week break in negotiations.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409553


Is there anyone left who honestly believes hiring Fehr has HELPED the union at all. The owners are basically laughing at Fehr at this point.

Either Fehr gives into the owners demands, or there is no hockey. What a bunch of dummies the NHLPA is.

They need Fehr to step down and come back to the table with a fresh credibility.


Can you guys please explain why you both think Fehr was a bad hire?

Cause myself and alot of other's agree he has done a good job thus-far.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2694 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:45 PM

What I was saying is, if You are an owner of a Hockey team or Business, would You not be upset if just ONE (but actually several) Employees were actually taking home more money than You at the end of the Year from the Operation?

To say that they shouldnt have teams there then (which I agree) Hurts many NHL players looking to be rich and employed.


Oh, I see. I understand your point, but I don't think you can compare a sports franchise to any other kind of business. It's not. It's tied to and limited by other businesses in an artificial market.

And it's not like owners don't know going in what the business is like. None of them bought a team thinking they were gold mines only to find out the were black pits. They were, I'm sure, made fully aware of the financial situation before buying in.

Also, owners have a say in how much they pay players, so it seems silly for them to complain about something they have control over. If it were a real problem, they could just pay them less. But of course, the smart owner knows that big name players tend to generate higher revenue, making them good (when selected smartly) investments.

Many have argued, as you seem to be, that teams losing money should be allowed to fold but that will likely not happen because the teams need one another. More teams mean more games, which in turn means more revenue for the financially successful teams. A better plan, as many have suggested, is to move unsuccessful teams to better hockey markets. The only other real option is sufficient team revenue sharing.

In the end, it all comes down to owners taking responsibility for their own businesses.

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

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2695 Sully2Cool

Sully2Cool

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,551 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:49 PM

Report: If no deal in seven days, games to be canceled through December 15


The NHL and NHLPA spent today not meeting about a new Collective Bargaining Agreement and now another deadline is on the horizon.

Chris Botta from Sports Business Journal reports that if a deal isn’t worked out in the next seven days, games through December 15 will be canceled. Botta adds that a “drop dead date” may come after that as the threat of wiping out the entire season might be the only thing to help the players and owners get things figured out.

Things ended on a poor note after Sunday’s talks concluded with a battle over contract rights becoming the latest roadblockto labor peace. Both NHL Deputy Commissioner Bill Daly andNHLPA Executive Director Donald Fehr expressed frustrations in that meeting.

Meanwhile, NHLPA Special Counsel Steve Fehr says “when the moment is right, a deal will be done quickly.” That time doesn’t appear to be the presen

  • 0
Posted Image

#2696 goalie13

goalie13

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,068 posts
  • Joined: 30-April 07

Posted 15 November 2012 - 09:56 PM

The only other real option is sufficient team revenue sharing.


The only problem I have with that is it means that a percentage of what I save to go see my one game a year in Vancouver is actually going to pay for an empty seat in Phoenix, Florida, Dallas, wherever.

It may be the team's revenue, but it was my money before that, and I feel like the NHL and the PA forget that sometimes.
  • 2
Posted Image

#2697 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,675 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:02 PM

I'm coming around the Deniro's point that a deal is close but the league is deliberately shortening the season for some owners (including itself with respect to Phoenix). Read in that light, the comments of both sides imply that they are both on the same page and the PA is simply waiting for the NHL to go "Okay, we aren't gonna screw you over on contracts" once the owners give the signal (if they haven't got a pre-decided date already).
  • 0

#2698 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,806 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:08 PM

I'm coming around the Deniro's point that a deal is close but the league is deliberately shortening the season for some owners (including itself with respect to Phoenix). Read in that light, the comments of both sides imply that they are both on the same page and the PA is simply waiting for the NHL to go "Okay, we aren't gonna screw you over on contracts" once the owners give the signal (if they haven't got a pre-decided date already).


Well it makes sense. I mean with what Daly and Bettman are throwing in the media again, saying that players haven't made concessions on their own contract rights is clearly meant to stir up the public against the PA again. I see it's worked on some of our less intelligent members.

I mean saying that the PA should come further into negotiating by not only having an immediate reduction to 50%, but to also give up the contract rights they fought for back in 2004 is insane. Why would this appeal to the players at all, take less and have less bargaining power in a COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT? If anything the title of said agreement implies that it is a partnership and not an employee/employer relationship that some of these clowns are making it out to be.
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#2699 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,460 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:37 PM

The only problem I have with that is it means that a percentage of what I save to go see my one game a year in Vancouver is actually going to pay for an empty seat in Phoenix, Florida, Dallas, wherever.

It may be the team's revenue, but it was my money before that, and I feel like the NHL and the PA forget that sometimes.


I hear you, but the truth is most of the revenue we give them leaves the local area anyway. Most of the players live somewhere else in the off-season and have their primary residence wherever that is. Most will retire elsewhere and spend the millions they made here in another city. Likewise, owners don't always live in the city their team is in either. We're lucky our owners do live here, but then so does Katz, owner of the Oilers.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2700 Tangerines

Tangerines

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,312 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 15 November 2012 - 10:49 PM

Can you guys please explain why you both think Fehr was a bad hire?

Cause myself and alot of other's agree he has done a good job thus-far.


I personally think the NHL, and NHLPA have both done a CRAP job b/c THERE STILL ISN'T ANY NHL HOCKEY AND IT'S MID NOVEMBER!
:( :mad: :angry:

Edited by JohnLennon, 16 November 2012 - 12:20 AM.

  • 2




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.