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

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Fri Sep 21, 2012 6:54 am

Per wrote:
In this case it's a lock out, and I do not see anything wrong at all with a locked out player finding other employment till the conflict is resolved. Had it been a strike, it would be a completely different matter.

- - -

*Actually, "Svenska Hockeyligan" an organisation that all SEL teams are members of, has been sued for collusion, since all teams have agreed not to add any NHLers, which may be a breech of anti-trust laws. A court verdict is expected later today.
I completely agree with you your post

User avatar
rats19
Moderator & MVP
Moderator & MVP
Posts: 8438
Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2011 7:21 am
Location: over here.....

Re: There will be a strike

Post by rats19 » Fri Sep 21, 2012 7:54 am

ukcanuck wrote:
Per wrote:
In this case it's a lock out, and I do not see anything wrong at all with a locked out player finding other employment till the conflict is resolved. Had it been a strike, it would be a completely different matter.

- - -

*Actually, "Svenska Hockeyligan" an organisation that all SEL teams are members of, has been sued for collusion, since all teams have agreed not to add any NHLers, which may be a breech of anti-trust laws. A court verdict is expected later today.
I completely agree with you your post
clear and unmittigated ...chicken ..egg..thingy
You are who you hang with.....

User avatar
the Dogsalmon
CC 1st Team All-Star
Posts: 665
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 9:12 am
Location: in the ainus

Re: There will be a strike

Post by the Dogsalmon » Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:01 am

Mondi wrote:Ask Stranglove, he's part of the kill or be killed crowd.

The owners are owners, they can do as they please. Legally anyhow. The CBA expired, they want a new system. They locked out the players. They could behave however they wanted under the old CBA until 11:59:59 PM on September 14th, 2012.

May the best man win? Business is the law the jungle? You are on your own? Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps? Alls fair in love, war and business? It's nothing personal, it's just business?

And I must say, if the players want to be a union...you know with solidarity and what not. Any one of them who goes and takes a job from another professional in the same field is a speaking out of both sides of his mouth right...for them it's all about making money or is it all about fairness and jobs and protecting the players...hmm....

Maybe both side are being idiots...?


good one Mondi...

User avatar
Per
CC Legend
Posts: 3673
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 7:45 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Per » Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:03 am

The Swedish Competition Authority’s prohibition is an interim decision and applies until the matter has been finally decided.

In the context of the competition rules, ice hockey clubs are to be regarded as undertakings. Cooperation between undertakings is not permitted if it restricts competition.

“The decision of Hockeyligan may be likened to a cartel. Joint decisions made by clubs to boycott certain players are not permitted under the competition rules,” says Per Karlsson, Chief Legal Officer at the Swedish Competition Authority.

Hockeyligan’s decision deprives each club of the ability to act independently with regard to the recruitment of players. Individual clubs must make their own decisions about the players they wish to sign.
“Each club must be able to make their own, independent decisions about investments,” says Per Karlsson.
http://www.konkurrensverket.se/t/NewsPage____8437.aspx

Makes me think the whole NHL setup would be illegal in Sweden..... :?
Whatever you do, always give 100 %!
Except when donating blood.

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Fri Sep 21, 2012 9:17 am

Per wrote:
The Swedish Competition Authority’s prohibition is an interim decision and applies until the matter has been finally decided.

In the context of the competition rules, ice hockey clubs are to be regarded as undertakings. Cooperation between undertakings is not permitted if it restricts competition.

“The decision of Hockeyligan may be likened to a cartel. Joint decisions made by clubs to boycott certain players are not permitted under the competition rules,” says Per Karlsson, Chief Legal Officer at the Swedish Competition Authority.

Hockeyligan’s decision deprives each club of the ability to act independently with regard to the recruitment of players. Individual clubs must make their own decisions about the players they wish to sign.
“Each club must be able to make their own, independent decisions about investments,” says Per Karlsson.
http://www.konkurrensverket.se/t/NewsPage____8437.aspx

Makes me think the whole NHL setup would be illegal in Sweden..... :?
Perhaps that definition is one that needs to be highlighted here, an undertaking or co operation for the purposes of providing athletic competition for profit. the owners provide the real estate and capital, the players provide the expertise and personality
which is a huge component btw that drives this whole thing and is difficult to quantify for purposes of HRR...

which brings it right back to 50/50 which is great but at the last minute before the handshake, the little prick has gotta mutter under his breath yeah but my half is bigger than your half because HRR doesn't include these extra revenue streams...

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5949
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Meds » Sat Sep 22, 2012 12:38 am

I'd love to hear a player with a dose of integrity stand up and tell the media, "Ya know what, this is about greed on both parts. We (the players), for the most part, have played a game all our lives on the dollar of somebody else, be that our parents, our grandparents, scholarships, junior team, and finally NHL owners who not only pay for our game playing but also pay us handsomely to go out and do what we love. And, after it's all said an done, the average annual NHL player salary ($2.45M) is actually more money than the average person in North America will make in 50 years, and that is assuming an average salary of $50K per year (which is above the average). So when I think that our strike is costing some of the working-class people in this country money that they count on just to pay their monthly bills, yeah we should be settling, and yes the fans that ultimately pay our wages deserve a helluvalot more respect from us than they are getting."

Of course any player that said that would probably be in violation of a dozen different union clauses and find himself ostracized by his peers. I think there are more than a few players that recognize this, and I'm just speculating here, but I get that sense when there are some notable faces that appear absent from all the media scrums and are certainly not among Fehr's media posse.

As for myself, well when I hear a guy live Ovechkin making statements in which he says that the players deserve to get what they get for playing hockey, then here a guy like Crosby spin it so that it sounds like the league is being unreasonable, and then listen to guys like Giroux make a comment about how there are guys that need jobs.....I just shake my head. I just can't respect any of these players.

I'm really not sure how anyone can side with the players when the players are so clearly trying to spin this against the owners. To date the league and owners have not put any spin on anything. They have been clear about what they want and they have been clear about their intentions. They have not made any negative comments in regards to the players or the PA. Simply stated facts. The players are out of touch with reality, that much is clear. And when you have a large percentage of players actually in a place where they could end up getting shafted by this process, and a small percentage that are already filthy rich and only looking to get richer, there is no respect left to be had for them.

My own take for the players is that I understand and am fine with them fighting the salary rollback. I think that that is the only area where the owners are being unreasonable. You offer a contract, you sign it, then you should honor it. Not ask the other party to give some of it back a couple of years later. Fair is fair. The players should fight to keep that which they've signed too. Existing individual player contracts should go the distance. The CBA, however, is an expired contract, the owners are free to re-negotiate it and even completely scrap it and offer an entirely new deal. This is no different than when a player's personal contract expires with his team. Both sides can decide what they feel is deserved in the new deal, and any time a player truly over values himself he often ends up signing for less with another team. If the owners want to have shorter terms on contracts and lower the overall cap and limit the maximum salary to as "little" as even $6M per year, they are free to do so, but players with existing individual contracts should be grandfathered in until such a time as their existing contracts expire. Any new CBA should reflect such agreements and salary caps and costs should be structured accordingly. So if a team has 3 players that are being paid $7.5M per year, but the league max is $6M per year, then their salaries should reflect as cap hits of $6M against the team overall. The player should still receive his $7.5M because that was agreed upon. If his contract expires in 2 years, then at that time he will end up taking a pay cut when he re-signs at the league max (assuming he deserves it).

Ultimately it is the owners money and they can choose to regulate it amongs themselves as they see fit. If the players don't like it they can always go find another job. Chances are the only league that is going to pay them more than the NHL, should the NHL set the bar low on salaries is the KHL (by low I mean caps of $55M or less and a max salary of 12% of team cap).....and to be honest I really don't think even the KHL would be offering a plethora of contracts in the $7M range. There would be some, like Ovechkin, who would get big money to go, but I imagine that many of the NHL's superstars would rather stay in the NHL and play in North America for $6.6M rather than go to Russia for $7M-8M.

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Sat Sep 22, 2012 2:05 am

Meds wrote: ($2.45M) is actually more money than the average person in North America will make in 50 years, and that is assuming an average salary of $50K per year ]
Using your number 2.4 mil x 500= 1.2 billion about one third of total (3.3 billion.) is it so unreasonable that the players want to keep that and is 1/3-2/3 such a bad split? considering that the owners keep 100% of franchise values?

if it isnt, and your happy to see the owners make the lion's share, doesn't it bother you that not nearly as much of that money comes back to society as taxes than when its in the players hands? How many social programs or hospital beds is that when Rocky Wirtz hides his money in the Caymans? In fact multiply whatever that number is by all of the big 4 pro sports...

Just once id like to see the rich man take one up the ass for a change. taxpayers and the little guy have been bent over enough

Sorry if you dont think of a 2.4 millionaire as a little guy but he sure as shit aint a rich guy

User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
Posts: 5949
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Meds » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:33 am

ukcanuck wrote:
Meds wrote: ($2.45M) is actually more money than the average person in North America will make in 50 years, and that is assuming an average salary of $50K per year ]
Using your number 2.4 mil x 500= 1.2 billion about one third of total (3.3 billion.) is it so unreasonable that the players want to keep that and is 1/3-2/3 such a bad split? considering that the owners keep 100% of franchise values?

if it isnt, and your happy to see the owners make the lion's share, doesn't it bother you that not nearly as much of that money comes back to society as taxes than when its in the players hands? How many social programs or hospital beds is that when Rocky Wirtz hides his money in the Caymans? In fact multiply whatever that number is by all of the big 4 pro sports...

Just once id like to see the rich man take one up the ass for a change. taxpayers and the little guy have been bent over enough

Sorry if you dont think of a 2.4 millionaire as a little guy but he sure as shit aint a rich guy
First of all if you bothered to quote me, you should quote that I said I support them fighting to keep their salaries and existing contracts. Secondly, where do you get 500 from? If you go by 20 players and 30 teams that is 600 players minimum. I believe the actual number is around 726 or something.....

As for the taxes....well that drops significantly when you consider that there are only 7 teams in Canada....

And when the poor guy is making 2.4 million per year.....he's rich.

And it's not just the money, as I've said, it is the attitude that many of these players have expressed that they DESERVE to be paid $X to play hockey.....

Fred
CC Legend
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Fred » Sat Sep 22, 2012 5:46 am

$2.4 million equates to $144,000 per annum for the rest of your life without ever touching the Capital. It may not be rich but it's better than many posting here.

That by the way is a conservative estimate
cheers

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Sat Sep 22, 2012 7:08 am

Meds wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:
Meds wrote: ($2.45M) is actually more money than the average person in North America will make in 50 years, and that is assuming an average salary of $50K per year ]
Using your number 2.4 mil x 500= 1.2 billion about one third of total (3.3 billion.) is it so unreasonable that the players want to keep that and is 1/3-2/3 such a bad split? considering that the owners keep 100% of franchise values?

if it isnt, and your happy to see the owners make the lion's share, doesn't it bother you that not nearly as much of that money comes back to society as taxes than when its in the players hands? How many social programs or hospital beds is that when Rocky Wirtz hides his money in the Caymans? In fact multiply whatever that number is by all of the big 4 pro sports...

Just once id like to see the rich man take one up the ass for a change. taxpayers and the little guy have been bent over enough

Sorry if you dont think of a 2.4 millionaire as a little guy but he sure as shit aint a rich guy
First of all if you bothered to quote me, you should quote that I said I support them fighting to keep their salaries and existing contracts. Secondly, where do you get 500 from? If you go by 20 players and 30 teams that is 600 players minimum. I believe the actual number is around 726 or something.....

As for the taxes....well that drops significantly when you consider that there are only 7 teams in Canada....

And when the poor guy is making 2.4 million per year.....he's rich.

And it's not just the money, as I've said, it is the attitude that many of these players have expressed that they DESERVE to be paid $X to play hockey.....
I didn't think I was arguing with you about whether a contract was a contract, or whether you think that the current players deserve what's coming to them. Even the hardest league supporter cant argue that...Can they? :hmmm:

Anyway, I thought you asked philosophically how anyone can support the players, and since I've been pretty vocal about it, I thought I would be philosophical abut it in kind. As for being precise about estimates, nobody can be precise, because we can't be precise about all the numbers.

Only the players income is public knowledge. I've mentioned this before and it seems to be over looked. The owners do not have to show their books to anyone other than the taxman, thats including the players. the numbers they release to the PA and the rest of us academics and laymen alike are the numbers they choose to release and you can bet your ass, seriously, the real numbers are a closely guarded secret.

Even by the , IMHO, faulty logic that the players are greedy for wanting more of the pie. It doesn't make sense for the owners to be upfront and giving when it comes to telling the world exactly, to the penny, what the real numbers are. Hell even with the numbers that we do know, the Percent of HRR slides up and down 10 or more points. ten points on the published figure is a lot of cash. How can we be sure that the real number isn't ten points more yet?
Do you really trust Gary Bettman? really? his only loyalty is to himself.

As far as its only the seven Canadian teams, half the league is Canadian and dont kid yourself they are all, even the American and European players paying some Canadian taxes. if your income is 2.4 mil your in the 50% tax bracket in both countries give or take. plus since when aren't there sick and needy people in the US too.

The point remains, as rank and file John Q Publics, we have a more vested interest to see more money in the player's hands.

If you think like Tit Romney and the 50,000 a plate fund raiser fat cats (who I am pretty sure the predominace of owners are members of that class of people) do. That half the people out there are lazy fucks who don't deserve a hand out, well think about unused money siting in offshore accounts every time you cross that fancy new Port Mann bridge...

While 2.4 million does seem like a lot and is a lot more than you and I make (assumption.) Its not that much that it doesn't put players that far from the average guy. Plus its an average. How many of the seven hundred are actually walking away with that? How many 4th liners and 7th and 8th Dmen are closer to CFLers than Kobe Bryant...?

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Potatoe1 » Sat Sep 22, 2012 7:56 am

ukcanuck wrote: Only the players income is public knowledge. I've mentioned this before and it seems to be over looked. The owners do not have to show their books to anyone other than the taxman, thats including the players. the numbers they release to the PA and the rest of us academics and laymen alike are the numbers they choose to release and you can bet your ass, seriously, the real numbers are a closely guarded secret.
The PA has audit rights and you can dam sure bet they use them.

No offence uk but it seems pretty clear that you don't have any clue how accounting works and how difficult it is to hide revenue in a business the size of the NHL.

This isn't some corner store where the owner can put 20's in his pocket instead of his till.

User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
Posts: 9904
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Topper » Sat Sep 22, 2012 8:19 am

Potatoe1 wrote: No offence uk but it seems pretty clear that you don't have any clue
Have I mentioned how easy The List function works on this site.
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
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:41 am

Potatoe1 wrote:
ukcanuck wrote: Only the players income is public knowledge. I've mentioned this before and it seems to be over looked. The owners do not have to show their books to anyone other than the taxman, thats including the players. the numbers they release to the PA and the rest of us academics and laymen alike are the numbers they choose to release and you can bet your ass, seriously, the real numbers are a closely guarded secret.
The PA has audit rights and you can dam sure bet they use them.

No offence uk but it seems pretty clear that you don't have any clue how accounting works and how difficult it is to hide revenue in a business the size of the NHL.

This isn't some corner store where the owner can put 20's in his pocket instead of his till.
No it isn't because putting twenties into your pocket would be illegal and I am not talking about any thing against the law and yes the PA has audit rights but not the same rights as the IRS or The CRA and if you don't think a business' relationship with the taxman isnt sacred you just have never been in business.
The point remains...If you support the owners based on what they say, your taking on faith exactly what they want you to know. Not necessarily the truth and its pretty evident the players even with their audit rights aren't buying what Bettmans cooking
Last edited by ukcanuck on Sat Sep 22, 2012 10:22 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Legend
Posts: 3498
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Post by ukcanuck » Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:42 am

Topper wrote:
Potatoe1 wrote: No offence uk but it seems pretty clear that you don't have any clue
Have I mentioned how easy The List function works on this site.
Would that be the same list as the one senator McCarthy used there Topper?
We can agree to disagree even if your beliefs are a little strange eh lol

Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Post by Potatoe1 » Sat Sep 22, 2012 10:15 am

ukcanuck wrote: No it isn't because putting twenties into your pocket would be illegal and I am not talking about any thing against the law and yes the PA has audit rights but not the same rights as the IRS or The CRA
Ok so explain the diference between the rights of the PA and the rights of the IRS with regard to their ability to audit NHL teams?

While you are at it explain how a company with 100 to 150 mill in revenue is able to hide signifigant pourtions of it and still evade both the tax man and the PA's auditors (who are likely to be top notch BTW)

and if you don't think a business' relationship with the taxman isnt sacred you just have never been in business.
The point remains...
I have been a small business owners since I finished my degree (which was in Business BTW).

I am quite familiar with the tax man and I think it's kind of amusing that you charcterise the relationship as "sacred" :lol:

Post Reply