Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

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

Moderator: Referees

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:22 am

Topper wrote:So some one else did.

That is the case throughout the league. That is why Suter and Parise held their auctions for services.

If the owners decided not to pay up, that is collusion.

I was under the impression collusion would exist if collectively owners co-operate to keep contracts artificially low. But anyway, I agree for it not to be collusion the players have to agree collectively. They have done that and now I can sympathise that a market correction might be needed, however, with revenues going up collectively I think the owners need to share that load equally. so far they are not and thats why I cant support them

wow thats a lot of collectively's said the borg...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Topper » Tue Sep 11, 2012 9:42 am

Is demanding 57% equally?
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby rats19 » Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:02 am

Topper wrote:Is demanding 57% equally?

according to my math Tops...its leaning 57% one way..
You are who you hang with.....
User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over there.....

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:22 am

rats19 wrote:
Topper wrote:Is demanding 57% equally?

according to my math Tops...its leaning 57% one way..

No 57% isn't equal you're right, but if they set the split at 47% what happens to the 10 % ?
the owners could then say that's enough for the weak markets and no more is needed, meanwhile the strong teams owners just got a tidy little windfall at the players expense...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby rats19 » Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:26 am

ukcanuck wrote:
rats19 wrote:
Topper wrote:Is demanding 57% equally?

according to my math Tops...its leaning 57% one way..

No 57% isn't equal you're right, but if they set the split at 47% what happens to the 10 % ?
the owners could then say that's enough for the weak markets and no more is needed, meanwhile the strong teams owners just got a tidy little windfall at the players expense...

God forbid that hey Uk...lol

jk...why cant they just do 50/50?
You are who you hang with.....
User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over there.....

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Topper » Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:33 am

ukcanuck wrote:
rats19 wrote:
Topper wrote:Is demanding 57% equally?

according to my math Tops...its leaning 57% one way..

No 57% isn't equal you're right, but if they set the split at 47% what happens to the 10 % ?
the owners could then say that's enough for the weak markets and no more is needed, meanwhile the strong teams owners just got a tidy little windfall at the players expense...

No, it still funds revenue sharing.

and Rats, for your math skills, you are awarded a Pisa. Extra anchovies, hold the pepperoni.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby rats19 » Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:36 am

No, it still funds revenue sharing.

and Rats, for your math skills, you are awarded a Pisa. Extra anchovies, hold the pepperoni.

its not all that hard tops...90% mental and the other 10% is in your head...:)
You are who you hang with.....
User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over there.....

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby ukcanuck » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:29 pm

rats19 wrote:
No, it still funds revenue sharing.

and Rats, for your math skills, you are awarded a Pisa. Extra anchovies, hold the pepperoni.

its not all that hard tops...90% mental and the other 10% is in your head...:)

Lol Topper handing out leaning pizza with toppings, just got to love that sense of humour...when you can catch it that is..
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2337
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby rats19 » Tue Sep 11, 2012 2:48 pm

ukcanuck wrote:
rats19 wrote:
No, it still funds revenue sharing.

and Rats, for your math skills, you are awarded a Pisa. Extra anchovies, hold the pepperoni.

its not all that hard tops...90% mental and the other 10% is in your head...:)

Lol Topper handing out leaning pizza with toppings, just got to love that sense of humour...when you can catch it that is..

at the risk of dissapointing topper, i must say I saw the peculiar spelling of "pizza" but it did not click...whooosh!! I thought it might be some chef lingo kind of deal.. :blush:
You are who you hang with.....
User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
 
Posts: 4579
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over there.....

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Topper » Tue Sep 11, 2012 3:28 pm

No one caught the smelly fish holding the pepperoni?
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Arachnid » Tue Sep 11, 2012 10:46 pm

the Dogsalmon wrote:
Arachnid wrote:I said this last strike/lock-out. The Players should be the owners, ala Super Mario, dissolve the league and start a new one.

They've changed the game so much from the original 6 era that tradition means didley squat anymore. The owners don't give a shit about the bread and butter fans and the players need to learn to manage themselves better so ticket prices are fair.

Revolution involves more than government sometimes :D




'again...anarchy is great when you get a government cheque...'


said Oedipus 8-)
Socks are dead puppets :(
Arachnid
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4907
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby ClamRussel » Tue Sep 11, 2012 11:52 pm

Topper wrote:
ClamRussel wrote:There's no "risk" to these owners. Thats a joke yet it keeps coming up here again and again. Look at that list on the boycott site, these owners have NHL franchises as hobbies, nothing more.

Are you ignoring the cost of entry into the business? Of coarse the teams are not the owners primary business. They had to make their money to acquire a team somehow. You can not just go out and start up your own NHL franchise as an entrepreneur.

However that does seem to be what Jamison is trying to do and you are so critical of his methodology.

Curious as to what ownership model you'd prefer.

Interesting that in Sweden, as I believe Per pointed out, they don't have owners. They have boards. Seems to work out fine for them. Not saying I prefer that, but it does show there are other ways.

I'm not critical of Jamison per say, I'm critical that he's being trumpeted as the saviour to the Phoenix ownership problem...yet he doesn't have the capital to buy the team let alone run it. He's had to secure financing and it doesn't hurt to be Bettman's "man". If there are going to be *owners* perhaps its best that they actually own the team and not be in debt from the get-go....especially in a city that the team is perpetually in debt. How long can he sustain it? ...how long will his investors tolerate it? Shades of Bruce McNall and Boots Del Baggio?

Topper wrote:I'm sure owners posess sports teams for various reason and ego is certainly one of those reason in many instances. That said, they are very high profile parts of the owners corporate portfolio. Why would someone driven by ego want to see their company with the greatest degree of public attention, run as a circus?

Islanders?

Topper wrote:As a fan, I'd be far more concerned of the Rogers/Bell purchase of MLSE and any sort of impact that may have on fan access to game broadcasts.

No doubt there.
"Once a King, always a King"
-Mike Murphy
User avatar
ClamRussel
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3637
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 10:50 am
Location: New South Wales, Australia

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Topper » Wed Sep 12, 2012 6:24 am

ClamRussel wrote:
Topper wrote:Are you ignoring the cost of entry into the business? Of coarse the teams are not the owners primary business. They had to make their money to acquire a team somehow. You can not just go out and start up your own NHL franchise as an entrepreneur.

However that does seem to be what Jamison is trying to do and you are so critical of his methodology.

Curious as to what ownership model you'd prefer.

Interesting that in Sweden, as I believe Per pointed out, they don't have owners. They have boards. Seems to work out fine for them. Not saying I prefer that, but it does show there are other ways.

I'm not critical of Jamison per say, I'm critical that he's being trumpeted as the saviour to the Phoenix ownership problem...yet he doesn't have the capital to buy the team let alone run it. He's had to secure financing and it doesn't hurt to be Bettman's "man". If there are going to be *owners* perhaps its best that they actually own the team and not be in debt from the get-go....especially in a city that the team is perpetually in debt. How long can he sustain it? ...how long will his investors tolerate it? Shades of Bruce McNall and Boots Del Baggio?

Topper wrote:I'm sure owners posess sports teams for various reason and ego is certainly one of those reason in many instances. That said, they are very high profile parts of the owners corporate portfolio. Why would someone driven by ego want to see their company with the greatest degree of public attention, run as a circus?

Islanders?

The Islanders may be one of the closest fits the managerial board model in Sweden.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Per » Wed Sep 12, 2012 1:34 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
Aaronp18 wrote:
Take the top 700 people on the planet in any profession and they will likely be just as well compensated. And of course in most professions their careers are substantially longer.


I would suggest you are mistaken on that point.

Not that it really matters. The players have every right to get the best deal they can, but make no mistake they are very fortunate to be very good at one of the few sports that pays very well.

I'm pretty sure the 700 best swimmers, or gymnasts, work every bit as hard and don't have an average salary of 2.5 mill per.

Sure, but they don't need as much dental work... :wink:
User avatar
Per
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: Boycott NHL owners non-NHL Businesses

Postby Per » Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:22 pm

OK, so let's see if I get this straight:

1) players and owners have signed legally binding contracts under the current CBA
2) most people agreed that the players were forced to bend over royally when that CBA was negotiated
3) league revenue has increased significantly since the last lockout
4) the owners want the players to accept a 25% pay cut
5) the players basically want status quo, but say they can agree to a temporary 5% pay cut over three years
6) the owners have decided to call a lockout

And some of you still blame the players that there is no hockey? :|

I hear Douglas Murray is the San Jose NHLPA representative.
Why don't they just let him and Bettman sort it out on the rink? :drink:
User avatar
Per
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1774
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Cornuck, Southern_Canuck and 5 guests