There will be a strike

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Potatoe1 »

Hockey Widow wrote: Therein lies the problem. If they agree to 50-50 then they take a pay cut via higher escrow payments, without getting anything back. If the NHL would allow existing contracts to be honoured over the 50% up to the 57% they would eventually all be off the books.

Thing is,,,, the current contracts were never expected, by either side, to be paid in full.

What the league could, and likely would do is slow the drop down too 50% so that the players don't get hammered by escrow. If the players are pitching proposals with 5% year over year growth, then the players portion could drop by about 2.5% per year with out a significant drop in the cap.

If the offer were 57%, 54.5%, 52%, 50%, 50%, 50%, then current contracts wouldn't change much unless growth is less then 5%.

To me that is the logical solution and I think the owners would be happy with that deal.

The players on the other hand probably wouldn't be happy as they are dropping from their current share with nothing in return.


That said I do not think the players will take that
Boston Canucker
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 816
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:30 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Boston Canucker »

"Hockey WidowTherein lies the problem. If they agree to 50-50 then they take a pay cut via higher escrow payments, without getting anything back. If the NHL would allow existing contracts to be honoured over the 50% up to the 57% they would eventually all be off the books. As long as you have legacy contracts to deal with going forward the landscape can change too much and someone loses. The PA is willing to grandfather the contracts somehow but the NHL then equates that to a higher percentage and the numbers get played. Shame on all the GM's and owners that negotiated these deals before the CBA expired.
I read somewhere - don't remember where to be honest - that over 400 contracts will be done in 2 years, so the 'off the books' would seem to happen fairly quickly for most of the contracts. It seems that the solution lies in them dealing with that, this transition from now to the 50/50. I don't agree that the linkage is the key issue for the PA. It's securing the present deals so they don't have a cut masked as an escrow, where as to this point the escrow held out the possibility for getting money back, which in fact happened this week. I don't think this deal will happen soon, certainly not for a Nov 2 opening, but I see it sometime by early Dec., but until then we'll get the usual sturm and drang from all sides...and I'll get more actual work done!
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Potatoe1 »

Boston Canucker wrote: I don't agree that the linkage is the key issue for the PA.

If linkage is not a key issue for the PA then why do none of their offers include it.

Why not offer a proposal built around the current system that gives them a "soft landing" so that escrow is kept low?

They have now made 5 different proposals none of which included linkage at a percentage below 57%.

Why ?
Boston Canucker
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 816
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:30 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Boston Canucker »

Potatoe1 wrote:
Boston Canucker wrote: I don't agree that the linkage is the key issue for the PA.

If linkage is not a key issue for the PA then why do none of their offers include it.

Why not offer a proposal built around the current system that gives them a "soft landing" so that escrow is kept low?

They have now made 5 different proposals none of which included linkage at a percentage below 57%.

Why ?
Well, I don't agree on your formulation, especially with the 3rd proposal from this week, but either way, it is a negotiation strategy. The end game is something that neither you nor I know (is this really the owner's final offer, if it is not why did Bettman say it was, why did he he say the one in September was off the table after Sept 15 ..but then made another one that seemed slightly better why? why? why does he say these things that may not be totally true...what could be the reason...? I just can't imagine...). If the agreed upon deal ends with linkage then so much for that theory...We have different takes on the end game here, we'll see how it plays out...hopefully sooner than later.
User avatar
darren
CC Veteran
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2011 10:45 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by darren »

Potatoe1 wrote:
Why (would the players) agree to a lower percentage with out getting anything in return?
I know it's a rhetorical question, but the answer is: "so that the owners will open the arena doors and the game can resume".

The players might claim that it is a divine law of negotiations that it's not fair for them to do all the giving without getting something in return, but I would ask: "under the current system, would you rather be an owner or a player?"

Show me a player who lost money last year! 8-)

Plenty of owners did, and as I said, the ones who didn't paid very handsomely to be in that position. Sure, the 10-12 owners who are doing well under the current system could send $30m a year each to the 10-12 teams that are underwater, but what's the point of owning a successful franchise if half your profits are going to Phoenix so that a few thousand disinterested Sunbelters can pay $10 each to watch a $50m team every night?

Yep, there needs to be revenue sharing if the league is staying at 30 teams, but you can't expect 10-12 big market owners to keep the whole thing afloat....the players have to give something up too. When they understand that, this thing will end, but not before.
The_Pauser
CC 2nd Team All-Star
Posts: 406
Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2006 10:21 pm
Location: Surrey, BC

Re: There will be a strike

Post by The_Pauser »

The problem with the NHL isn't that the players are making 57% of league revenues. This set-up worked back in 2005. The problem with the NHL is that there is a massive range in revenues between the top revenue teams and the bottom revenue teams in the league, and the revenues at the top are growing at a faster rate than the revenues at the bottom. When you have a league with such a large variance, it is impossible to achieve micro profitability for all teams when the biggest cost is linked to macro revenues. That is, what may be 57% (or 50%) of league revenues on a macro level, may be closer to 80-85% of team revenues on a micro level in some instances.
User avatar
Zamboni Driver
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 716
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 5:24 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Zamboni Driver »

Tciso wrote:
Fred wrote:Pretty good article comparing both offers

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/h ... le4622895/

So, both sides agree to move to 50/50. The only issue is how quickly. And, the other "issues" that they discussed earlier and "made good headway" on seem to be just as much of a stumbling block.

So, to summarize. Both sides are willing to go 50/50, but won't move on a bunch of other issues, unless the 50/50 is changed, at which point, they may conciser agreeing to other concessions, unless someone proposes something else, at which point, the negotiations may take a step backwards. Neither side is "talking the same language", but are moving towards some commonality. However, there is still a great divide between the two sides, which can optimistically be closed, assuming good faith negotiations continue.

(I blacked out for a bit while typing, so if you know what that summary means, please let me know)

The whole thing is retarded, there should be binding arbitration....

I get the feeling that if they could solve the revenue split then the other stuff could be hashed out.
The players are willing to flush an entire season to gain a few % then they come out losers.
Same for the owners, and if the strike kills potential future growth of revenues then they are shooting themselves in the foot too.
User avatar
Meds
MVP
MVP
Posts: 13355
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Meds »

Zamboni Driver wrote:I get the feeling that if they could solve the revenue split then the other stuff could be hashed out.
The players are willing to flush an entire season to gain a few % then they come out losers.
Same for the owners, and if the strike kills potential future growth of revenues then they are shooting themselves in the foot too.
I think that's what the players fail to understand.....either that or they just want to dismiss it and are playing stupid.

When the PA comes in and is hung up over linkage to HRR then the owners won't even look at it. You can't hire people based on future growth in a world where the employee is guaranteed his money regardless of what the future may hold. What do these players expect? If the league turns around and suddenly HRR goes south, do the players lose out on their negotiated salaries? Can the owner lay them off? No. If these players actually did care what their fans thought of them then they would be attuned to the fact that there are a pile of people, particularly south of 49, who are fine with not coming back to watching the NHL when it returns. I would venture to say that Tampa Bay, Florida, Phoenix, Anaheim, Nashville, Carolina, Dallas, Columbus, Colorado, and the NY Islanders, maybe even New Jersey, will all be struggling to fill the seats whenever the puck finally drops next.

With the exception of Tampa Bay and Nashville, all of those teams were in the 86% attendance range or below. Tampa and Nashville are both a couple of teams that have only recently begun to attract serious fan support and were sitting at 78% and 87% respectively as little as 3 years ago. Both teams saw some success in either the playoffs or in the individual success of a few players (Stamkos, Weber, Rinne) and the team was able to build. You can pretty much count on a significant drop in ticket sales and attendance for both of them now that the lockout has killed any PR and marketing momentum that they had going. So what happens if the NHL returns and 10 (maybe 11) teams are struggling to put fans in the seats and are losing money or breaking even? Can the NHL really employ profit sharing to float 1/3 of the league? I suppose the players don't care, so long as they get paid.....
dbr
CC Legend
Posts: 3093
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2011 5:37 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by dbr »

darren wrote:Show me a player who lost money last year! 8-)
I didn't get a chance to reply when I initially read this, but I wanted to come back and say.. I hate this trope.

Show me a McDonalds employee who lost money last year. Show me an owner who got injured on the job last year. Blah blah blah.. meaningless blather, all of it.

Uh, no offense.
User avatar
ukcanuck
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4591
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck »

dbr wrote:
darren wrote:Show me a player who lost money last year! 8-)
I didn't get a chance to reply when I initially read this, but I wanted to come back and say.. I hate this trope.

Show me a McDonalds employee who lost money last year. Show me an owner who got injured on the job last year. Blah blah blah.. meaningless blather, all of it.

Uh, no offense.
+1
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
Posts: 19129
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Hockey Widow »

dbr wrote:
darren wrote:Show me a player who lost money last year! 8-)
I didn't get a chance to reply when I initially read this, but I wanted to come back and say.. I hate this trope.

Show me a McDonalds employee who lost money last year. Show me an owner who got injured on the job last year. Blah blah blah.. meaningless blather, all of it.

Uh, no offense.

Do golf injuries count, if it was golfing for a company tournament?
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Cornuck
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 14969
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 11:39 am
Location: Everywhere

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Cornuck »

Is this lockout thing still going on? :-?

The Lincoln Stars are 5-0 to start the season. How's your local team doing? :D
Doc: "BTW, Donny was right, you're smug."
User avatar
donlever
CC Legend
Posts: 10299
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 2:07 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by donlever »

lol, they're all fucking delusional...

In the case of David Krejci, perhaps something is being lost in a translation. A frustrated-sounding Krejci took issue with NHL commissioner Gary Bettman's $8 million salary and says that he treats players "like animals" according to a Google translation of the article. ... "[Bettman] does what he wants," Krejci said. "We want to play, we're the ones who are doing the show in the NHL. But Bettman thinks it makes him. It is unfortunate that the NHL have such a guy. It's a shame for the entire hockey world. [He] treats us like animals. [It's] really a shame that he is not at the forefront." It should be noted that Krejci is about to start a three-year, $15.75 million contract extension this season.
DeLevering since 1999.
User avatar
Canuck-One
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 11:49 am
Location: Living the Life

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Canuck-One »

I fail to understand why the owners aren't dancing and singing the praises of Donald Fehr. He has offered them just about everything they have asked for. He only asks that they pay what they owe before moving forward. I have never signed a contract that forgave me what I owed prior to the new contract. If I had a 100K mortgage at 6% and didn't make the full payments then renagotiated a new mortgage at 3% do you think the bank is just going to forgive the monies I hadn't paid in full?

Potatoe, your comment that no one expected the contracts to be honored just left me bewildered. I can't fathom your line of reasoning, please explain that one to me.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1612
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Potatoe1 »

Canuck-One wrote:I fail to understand why the owners aren't dancing and singing the praises of Donald Fehr. He has offered them just about everything they have asked for.
I would argue that he hasn't even presented them with 1 offer that they could negotiate reasonably.

Until a players offer follows the current framework i.e. Hard cap that is linked to revenue, then they are simply pretending to negotiate as they know full well that the owners will never accept anything with out linkage.

Fehr has actually given up anything. All he has done to date is smile pretty for the camera and galvanize the players.

I think hes done a great job strategically so far.
Potatoe, your comment that no one expected the contracts to be honored just left me bewildered. I can't fathom your line of reasoning, please explain that one to me.

Then you should take another look at the old CBA because its quite clear.

All contracts under the old CBA were subject to escrow payments and in 5 of the 6 years the players did not receive all of their total contract.

That said I agree in principal with the players, the owners should not ask that the players take a far more significant portion of their current contracts.

Blob McKensie made a ton of scene on the radio today, he said if the total roll back was in the 5 to 7 percent range then the players could probably stomach it. That amount is not significant and kind of in line with what they have been getting dinged for anyway.
Last edited by Potatoe1 on Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply