NHL Strike

[Elevatorguy2]

From the TSN article:
virtually nothing in the Union's proposal that would prevent the dollars 'saved' from being re-directed right back into the player compensation system, such that the League's overall financial losses would approach current levels in only a matter of a couple of years."
I believe they are called General Managers.

No matter how bad the owners offer is I expect the NHLPA to still have a reply that the owners will have to react to. The NHLPA cannot aford to look like the guys who walk away and call off the season.

 

[detroit diver]

There is only one end result from these negotiations. There will be a salary cap based on revenues.

The players are in no position here. They are playing a weak hand, and everyone knows it. They have much more to lose than the owners. The owners still have corporations to pay their salaries, and many have stated that they are losing less money this year than if they were playing.

The players (aside from any investments they have made) mostly rely on their salaries. Hard to pay those huge mortgages for homes and cars when no money is rolling in.

There is no other outcome that can come of this.

 

[jiveturkey]

From the TSN article:
virtually nothing in the Union's proposal that would prevent the dollars 'saved' from being re-directed right back into the player compensation system, such that the League's overall financial losses would approach current levels in only a matter of a couple of years."
I believe they are called General Managers.

No matter how bad the owners offer is I expect the NHLPA to still have a reply that the owners will have to react to. The NHLPA cannot aford to look like the guys who walk away and call off the season.

Yeah it's kind of dumb actually. What are we to trust the managers and gms to not use that money saved from a roll back for salaries? They'll have that money spent by the trade deadline. Give me a break. This is a bandaid solution. Detroit Diver is right. The cap is the only acceptable outcome.

 

[sharpenu]

The side I am on? How about the fans? How about the guys who sell foam hands and beer at the arena? I cant feel sorry for either side. Millionaires vs Billionaires. Who loses? The little guy.

In contrast to what you all are saying, I think the owners are lying to us and to the players. It isnt a dollar figure cap they want, but a cap tied to a percent of revenue. Remember that being billionaires, they are good at hiding profits from the IRS. There are hidden sources of revenue that they dont admit to. You cannot make me believe that a man who runs a billion dollar company will buy a business (a professional team in ANY sport) that is losing money.

Revenue sorces like the fact that most teams also own the venue they play in. That means they get money from every concert and game there. But that money is not counted as hockey revenue. The expenses of owning and maintaining the venue are paid by the team, which allows the owner to show a loss and take a fat tax deduction.

Does that mean I side with the players? No, because I can't feel sorry for them, either. But remember, this season is being cancelled not because the players are on strike, but because the owners are taking a my way or the highway attitude. What if your boss wanted you to take a cut in pay? How would you feel? Keep in mind that no matter how little you make, there is probably someone out there who makes less than you and feels you make too much.

Who gets shafted here? We do, the fans and little employees. Thanks, guys. All of you, way to show love for your fans and supporters.

 

[detroit diver]

I think you need to re-read the posts again. What was said precisely is that the owners want a salary cap based on revenues. That wasn't made up by any of us-it is what the owners have stated they want.

Any good businessperson will take advantage of tax or other breaks that are given to them. Hiding profits from the IRS is not necessarily bad (unless it is illegal). A business person is entitled to make the largest profit that he/she/their shareholders can squeeze out of a business. You might not like the decisions that they make, but then again they're not forcing you to buy tickets or watch the game.

In my town (Detroit), the best season tickets are $85.00 each seat, including pre-season games. If the Red Wings get to the finals, those same seats are then $500.00 each seat. I scream and moan every year when my tickets are renewed, but I buy them anyway. And just about every seat in the house is in the same boat as me. I use them for business purposes. And the owner knows that just about every seat in the arena is owned by a company. Most individuals can't afford seats there anymore. What incentive is there for him to make it affordable to the little guy? None. Better example-the Detroit Lions. They havent' won anything in 40+ years, but they sell out almost every game. Every dollar that the owner spends on improving the team comes directly out of his pocket because corporations are going to buy the seats anyways.

Some of the owners might buy a business as a tax loss. Most would rather put their money in an investment that will grow. Hockey is not growing-by any measure that you want to put on it. The salaries are inflated and are too great a percentage of revenues that most owners do not want to bear. You can place fault all over the place, but the end result is the same.

The revenues from events other than hockey are irrelevant to this discussion. The venue is a completely different business than the hockey team. As it should be. Would you really suggest that a team that only plays 48 games in a year at home should support the facility 100 percent that it plays in? That's absurd. The facililty requires concerts, rodeos, and whatever to keep itself open. Those revenues are completely separate from hockey revenues, and there is a separate corporation that owns the venue.

Yes, the owners are taking a "my way or the highway" attitude. Because they can.

As for your fans and little guys statement-HUH? I am a fan, and my friends work there. So what? We are not in the negotiations and never will be. This has nothing to do with the fans or "little employees". Do we get hurt in this lockout? Some of us more than others, but it's stupid to moan about it because reality says it doesn't matter. The owners don't care whether the hot dog guy is making $8.00 or $8.50. That's not affecting their business.

The side I am on? How about the fans? How about the guys who sell foam hands and beer at the arena? I cant feel sorry for either side. Millionaires vs Billionaires. Who loses? The little guy.

In contrast to what you all are saying, I think the owners are lying to us and to the players. It isnt a dollar figure cap they want, but a cap tied to a percent of revenue. Remember that being billionaires, they are good at hiding profits from the IRS. There are hidden sources of revenue that they dont admit to. You cannot make me believe that a man who runs a billion dollar company will buy a business (a professional team in ANY sport) that is losing money.

Revenue sorces like the fact that most teams also own the venue they play in. That means they get money from every concert and game there. But that money is not counted as hockey revenue. The expenses of owning and maintaining the venue are paid by the team, which allows the owner to show a loss and take a fat tax deduction.

Does that mean I side with the players? No, because I can't feel sorry for them, either. But remember, this season is being cancelled not because the players are on strike, but because the owners are taking a my way or the highway attitude. What if your boss wanted you to take a cut in pay? How would you feel? Keep in mind that no matter how little you make, there is probably someone out there who makes less than you and feels you make too much.

Who gets shafted here? We do, the fans and little employees. Thanks, guys. All of you, way to show love for your fans and supporters.

 

[snorkelcorey]

I agree with Detroit Diver, I think the owners are making way too much $, myself. Heck, I think these owners are being paid way too money, maybe more than the players. Some times, I think even the players make way more than the rest of us, back here in the real world. I think these poeple should be thankful for what they've got, instead of whinning, '' We're not making enough money''. Come on, wake up and take a good look around at the things you do have. Do you think I'm being too harsh, by saying this? SnorkelCorey

 

[sharpenu]

All I am getting at is that the owners are not hurting anywhere near as much as they claim. Like any business, they are attempting (effectively- I might add) to spin this into making the players look greedy. Tickets here are a bit more for glass seats, more like $185 per seat. I sit on the end, 7 rows back from the glass and pay $55 per seat.

Teams are plythings for Billionaires, no matter what sport. The revenues from other events ARE relevant, because ownership of a major league franchise often carries the venue with it. That is where the profits lie, and that is where the money is made. No team, no venue. I am not faulting them for making money, what I am faulting them for is trying to play like they are being held at gunpoint by the PA. If the owners are so afraid of rising player costs, why do they keep offering them more?

The two corporations, the team and venue, are separate. This is what allows the owner to cry poverty. Of course, the fact that the owner owns both Corporations is not really mentioned much.

As fans, we should be offended. We are losing in the lockout, because we are the customers. The customer has gotten lost in the scramble for the money. Why are pro sports in a decline? Do we really need to wonder?

 

[grouchyturtle]

Outch those are some steep prices!!!

We pay $25 each for the blues. That's right only $25 We're right on the Rangers blue line and only the second row back, so the view isn't that bad. And it's still close enough for Sather to hear how much he sucks every night.

And the best part, no business ticket holders! Everyone up there is a real fan.

Some one mention how I'd feel if my boss mention pay cut. Well I'd be history...BUT I don't pay a frigin' game for a living and my salary isn't quite 7 figures.

 

[Don Burke]

I had forgotten the league existed until the news of the latest talks broke.

If the owners were making money off hockey, I suspect there would not be a lockout.

It would appear a salary cap is the only alternative for a league with no signifigant television revenue. Those ticket prices are just too high.

With many of the players making money elesewhere and the owners preferring a shutdown to playing, this could take a while to resolve. I would not invest in foam finger futures.

 

[Corigan]

The corporatation here in Atlanta (The Atlanta Spirit LLC) own the Atlanta thrashers (NHL), The Atlanta Hawks (NBA) and the venue that both teams play in (Phillips Arena). It costs around $100 to sit on the glass, and lower level seats are in the $55-$75 range. So in the Situation of the thrashers, the owners do own the venue as well. These owners also just recently purchased the venue and the clubs as of last year. They knew the CBA was ending and this was all going to happen. Maybe that was more incentive for them to buy the company, who knows. All I do know is nobody seems to be making out with this lockout. Even my Season ticket holder rep has left his job since I assume he is making no money. Sad Sad days for everyone involved, ecspecially the fans. I find it hard to believe that teams can't make money with the insane markup on beer alone. $6.50 for a beer that costs $1, how can you not make some kind of profit..

Matt