wienerdog wrote:To create a competitive League that has parity and that produces good hockey for us to watch, the best one could hope for is a pool of 30 owners that all want to spend to their best capacity to be ultra-competitive with one another.
That bolded part is the key. If the costs of running any given franchise are outstripping it's ability to turn a profit, that particular owner will quickly lose interest in spending money to remain competitive; he will start to cut costs - just like any business that's in the red in any industry would. In the NHL, the first place that such cuts will happen are in player salaries.
And that's where League-wide competition slides, parity falters, and certain teams are eventually left to languish in permanent mediocrity, never getting a leg up to increase their competitiveness and thereby increase franchise value.
Enter the concept of revenue sharing to try and prevent this from happening.
The problem is that for-profit enterprises (like major pro sports teams) hate the concept of revenue sharing. It goes against every principle of capitalist ideals. It only makes business sense if it can strengthen your bottom line.
<snipped a lot of good stuff>
The problem is magnified when owners start to believe that they are running a team in a capitalist/free market environment, which they are not. The have a product as individual teams that only has value if other teams exist. Running it using a capitalistic dogma ensures that profits are driven out of the league for all owners due to competition. 30 companies in any industry will force it to run with no profit margin. Yes, some companies will make $$, but others will lose. In the long run, there will be less teams, devaluing the remaining teams, until there is only one team left. (and yes, in the 2067 season, the Maple Leafs, being the only team remaining in the NHL will be swept in the 1st round by the Association of Retired Zamboni Drivers, making it an even 100 years without a cup)
Obviously, the NHL is not a capitalist/free market environment, and instead of focusing on individual team profits, at the expense of other team's profits, the owners should be focusing on maximizing total profits for all and ensuring all teams are profitable. There's a lot more to it than just a salary cap. Growing the pie is by far more important. Which is why a strike/lockout makes little sense, as both players and owners lose, and only spouses and the home renovation stores win.