Eklund: NHL Waiting For NHLPA's Offer. The Year 1 Cap Dilemma NOT So Bad. 12-1-12?

First

First
- Snagglepuss

well done Snagglepuss.

well done Snagglepuss.
- Eklund

That's what happends when u have nightmares about no hockey, you tend to awake and check hockeybuzz for some hope .

So basically the two sides wait all year, do next to nothing except token negotiations until recently to "show their resolve" and now they are complaining that their will be less profit this year?

I understand that people have move allegiance to the owners on this as they seem to be doing the most but lets call a spade a spade. They locked the players out for a year getting a salary cap. They negotiated a system where profits increasing equals a higher spending. Now profits are at an all time high and they are calling foul because the revenue is not being shared equally. Whose fault is that?

The owners fought for this system. Plus how do we know if the owners are telling the truth. Most of the owners have team profits and then they have real estate and "other" profit. Plus owners like Katz benefits from marketing his Rexall brand of pharmacy's that use to go by different names before he bought the team (for the most part). Profits from the owners aren't completely shared so we will never know and if they were some of the benefits aren't tangible.

The owners will claim they have staff to pay but what about the players. They have staff as well. Some have agent(s) that they have already paid to settle a contract they will be breaking. Some have medical staff, trainers, lawyers, financial advisers/accountants that all take a cut of what they make. Plus there are expenses they had to cover during the lockout. Not all players are full time NHLers. Finally there are taxes.

Both sides are out money so who is hurt more? Teemu Hartkinen who plays part time in the NHL who had a legitimate chance to start this year on a team that might have been good or Katz who at last I checked was the 498th richest man in the world and is just about to have a 500+ million dollar arena built and given to him by the tax payers?

I think much like the first year split, this CBA needs to be looked at case by case. Teams that are having troubles making it need to have a forensic audit done and if profit sharing doesn't work, relocation has to be the option. Other teams are making good money, there is no reason to force a team in a market like Phoenix when Quebec is building an arena.

I hope the PA comes with a SOLID offer and not a test the waters kinda offer.....GET THIS THING DONE

I hope the PA comes with a SOLID offer and not a test the waters kinda offer.....GET THIS THING DONE
- southernhawk

Pretty much this. Enough already.

Both sides are pathetic but it is becoming increasingly clear that the PA is prepared to sit a year or more hoping the NHL buckles. The idiocy in this position is almost incomprehensible until you consider that there aren't leaders but lawyers on each side.

That's what happends when u have nightmares about no hockey, you tend to awake and check hockeybuzz for some hope .
- Snagglepuss

You need a life

The NHL does have one requirement of the the NHLPA's next offer.

"It has to see a drop in salaries to eventual 50/50 and can NOT contain a rise in salaries in year 1."

Hey Crosby, why don't you tell us again how the players are making all these concessions?

I'm seeing alot of spouting off by the players and their supporters on how the players are giving up everything and the owners nothing, yet the players have not given a single proposal that reduces salaries (but instead increase the salaries) of the players.

So basically the two sides wait all year, do next to nothing except token negotiations until recently to "show their resolve" and now they are complaining that their will be less profit this year?

I understand that people have move allegiance to the owners on this as they seem to be doing the most but lets call a spade a spade. They locked the players out for a year getting a salary cap. They negotiated a system where profits increasing equals a higher spending. Now profits are at an all time high and they are calling foul because the revenue is not being shared equally. Whose fault is that?

- bsteinley

Are you sure you aren't Jimmy_Tea because you and he have the same misconception regarding revenue? Revenue does not equal profit. They are 2 different concepts yet you and Jimmy don't seem to be able to distinguish between the two. Revenue is income before expenses. Profit is income after expenses.

While the revenue has never been higher, the expenses have never been higher as well. If the expenses grow faster than the revenue then the profits shrink or disappear.

The reality of the matter is that if the owners had asked for a 50/50 split in addition to the salary cap last time the players most likely would've sat out a second year. As it is, it is a very combustable issue. The players don't look at this or anything as what's best for the game, they look at it like a 5 year old child. This is mine and you can't take it away from me.

They need to first ask Bettman and Fehr to take a flying leap, then a core of owners sit down with 1 player rep from each team and get this done. This is supposed to be the greatest league in the world, if it was it it's not now it's a joke.

Althought December 1 sounds optimistic, there *might* be something to that.

Apparently, word is (Fan590) that the NHL is on the verge of cancelling games into December 15 if a deal is not done this week.

Is it possible the two sides have been meeting, in real, actual secret this time, and there has been progress?

making it need to have a forensic audit done and if profit sharing doesn't work, relocation has to be the option. Other teams are making good money, there is no reason to force a team in a market like Phoenix when Quebec is building an arena.
- bsteinley

A forensic audit? WTF? where did that come from?

The next point you mention is my FAVOURITE!

The NHLPA in this negotiation, cried foul about the NHL proposed method of honouring contracts. They coined the term "players paying players". It is not literally true, and I think it is debatable whether or not it is figuratively true.

It is my favourite arguement because this same group keeps proposing that the solution to the problem of teams failing financially is OWNER PAYING OWNERS. This is not figuratively speaking... this is literally speaking.

So let me get this straight, the players take home about 8X what the owners do after expenses (retarded in itself) ... and the players' solution is that the few owners making money pay the ones losing it. Not to mention that the intent of this is really to allow teams to spend at or over the cap floor which is necessary for those teams to be competitive so there is every chance that at least some of the shared revenue ends up back in the players' pockets.

So... the player's solution is ... "Pay us more".

A forensic audit? WTF? where did that come from?

The next point you mention is my FAVOURITE!

The NHLPA in this negotiation, cried foul about the NHL proposed method of honouring contracts. They coined the term "players paying players". It is not literally true, and I think it is debatable whether or not it is figuratively true.

It is my favourite arguement because this same group keeps proposing that the solution to the problem of teams failing financially is OWNER PAYING OWNERS. This is not figuratively speaking... this is literally speaking.

So let me get this straight, the players take home about 8X what the owners do after expenses (retarded in itself) ... and the players' solution is that the few owners making money pay the ones losing it. Not to mention that the intent of this is really to allow teams to spend at or over the cap floor which is necessary for those teams to be competitive so there is every chance that at least some of the shared revenue ends up back in the players' pockets.

So... the player's solution is ... "Pay us more".
- Aetherial

Revenue sharing is part of the solution in every major sport. Because it works. In the current system teams have to already spend to the Cap floor. And who put that system in place? But let's put that on the players! And most teams don't seem to need any urging from the PA, to spend to the hilt and hand out the big checks. And in the NHL's first make whole offer, it wasn't just literally true. It was just plain true. The money for make whole came out of the players share in that offer. To the NHL's credit, they made a good offer in their 2nd make whole offer. The players counter proposal to as you put it "pay us more". Is simply a reaction to the NHL stance on the contract issues. Nothing more. It's a negotiation. Now if the NHL says that the PA should come to the table and see what they're willing to negotiate, then that's what they should do. Because talking can lead to a deal.

You need a life
- Rayven

I hope the PA comes with a SOLID offer and not a test the waters kinda offer.....GET THIS THING DONE
- southernhawk

We can only hope!!

A forensic audit? WTF? where did that come from?

The next point you mention is my FAVOURITE!

The NHLPA in this negotiation, cried foul about the NHL proposed method of honouring contracts. They coined the term "players paying players". It is not literally true, and I think it is debatable whether or not it is figuratively true.

It is my favourite arguement because this same group keeps proposing that the solution to the problem of teams failing financially is OWNER PAYING OWNERS. This is not figuratively speaking... this is literally speaking.

So let me get this straight, the players take home about 8X what the owners do after expenses (retarded in itself) ... and the players' solution is that the few owners making money pay the ones losing it. Not to mention that the intent of this is really to allow teams to spend at or over the cap floor which is necessary for those teams to be competitive so there is every chance that at least some of the shared revenue ends up back in the players' pockets.

So... the player's solution is ... "Pay us more".
- Aetherial

It was really late when I wrote that that and I had taken a lot of cough medicine. The point with the accountants, was made. A team like the Islanders can say it loses money but the books need to be more transparent. Plus there needs to be an independent group or two that puts a value on the intangible benefits gained, such as tax breaks, cross marketing etc...

You take a look at the different ways they tried to make the Coyotes profitable in Phoenix and there are ways to negotiate with the state or city. Maybe it is real estate development nearby or tax breaks. These are the things that should be explored on top of a new profit sharing program. However, in the end, if the city can't support a team then there is no need to force a team on them. There are many areas that can support hockey teams and 3 new NHL arenas being built.

I also want to state that I agree that more money should go to the owners and I am on their sides. I simply want to point out that the owners painted themselves into this corner. The cap system is good in theory but fans want to see their team have more money to get that one extra player. They can't control the ridiculous contracts that GMs are offering. They can't stop rookies getting 3.5 mill in their first year and these long term deals signing players till they are in their 40s.

The owners new this was coming and should have down shifted slowly to avoid this lockout. Gaining shares each year over this new CBA rather than go for it all at first.

In the end the owners are making more than they are reporting. That has always been known but I agree that salaries are out of control. But the GMs control the salaries with the owners who hire them and the players have proven they can find somewhere else to play and make money. The players hold all the cards on this one and it was obvious before last year started this would be true. This was all predictable.

But we are all talking about which rich person should become more rich so I will leave it at that.

I'm getting more and more convinced the two sides can't reach a solution with the positions taken, unless they're willing to half-ass a deal for the sake of getting one and see the next CBA have all kinds of flaws (and the ideas currently on the table from both sides are riddled with flaws). They may be better off just starting from scratch and trying this again - and that may mean having different people do the negotiating this time.

It was really late when I wrote that that and I had taken a lot of cough medicine. The point with the accountants, was made. A team like the Islanders can say it loses money but the books need to be more transparent. Plus there needs to be an independent group or two that puts a value on the intangible benefits gained, such as tax breaks, cross marketing etc...
- bsteinley

The NHLPA has (and always has had) the ability to audit the HRR data of up to 10 teams a year. That's how the fight over the $25 million that Glendale was paying to cover losses broke out.

The owners new this was coming and should have down shifted slowly to avoid this lockout. Gaining shares each year over this new CBA rather than go for it all at first.
- bsteinley

They should have also worked under the prior $64.3 million cap number knowing that they were going to go for a lower HRR split. They could still get to a 50/50 split point both at the end of the next CBA and in aggregate ... but doing so immediately effectively rewards the teams who knowingly overspent this past summer (despite warnings not to do so and that there would be no amnesty for them) and doing so from 57/43 as the players want requires the split point to get to almost 50/50 in Year 2 and then more like 48/52 or 47/53 for the next couple of years.

I don't see either side agreeing to either of those ideas. Not with where they currently stand.

In the end the owners are making more than they are reporting.
- bsteinley

HRR omits some key pieces of revenue (I don't have time to go through the list). Additionally, tricks like what the Blackhawks do (report all concessions, merchandise and parking as revenues of the United Center instead of the Blackhawks, claim the Hawks are losing $20M) can't be done in the HRR reports. All of that revenue has to be reported as accruing to the NHL team. That probably changes the true profitability of a few teams, but there's still several that are hurting in a major way.

The NHLPA has (and always has had) the ability to audit the HRR data of up to 10 teams a year. That's how the fight over the $25 million that Glendale was paying to cover losses broke out.


They should have also worked under the prior $64.3 million cap number knowing that they were going to go for a lower HRR split. They could still get to a 50/50 split point both at the end of the next CBA and in aggregate ... but doing so immediately effectively rewards the teams who knowingly overspent this past summer (despite warnings not to do so and that there would be no amnesty for them) and doing so from 57/43 as the players want requires the split point to get to almost 50/50 in Year 2 and then more like 48/52 or 47/53 for the next couple of years.

I don't see either side agreeing to either of those ideas. Not with where they currently stand.


HRR omits some key pieces of revenue (I don't have time to go through the list). Additionally, tricks like what the Blackhawks do (report all concessions, merchandise and parking as revenues of the United Center instead of the Blackhawks, claim the Hawks are losing $20M) can't be done in the HRR reports. All of that revenue has to be reported as accruing to the NHL team. That probably changes the true profitability of a few teams, but there's still several that are hurting in a major way.
- Irish Blues

The League told the teams to operate business as usual during the Summer, and that teams would not be punished for being over whatever the new Cap would be.

Was one of your reliable sources PJ Stock ?

Judge Arthur Boylan, the guy who mediated the deal between the NFL and NFLPA said he would mediate the discussions for the NHL and PA for free.

this is a no-brainer.. get this guy involved and get this deal done

i've said it before.. i cannot fathom why there isnt a third party present during these discussions. a neutral would be able to look at things far more objectively and it would go a long ways to solving the trust issues between the two sides.

Judge Arthur Boylan, the guy who mediated the deal between the NFL and NFLPA said he would mediate the discussions for the NHL and PA for free.

this is a no-brainer.. get this guy involved and get this deal done

i've said it before.. i cannot fathom why there isnt a third party present during these discussions. a neutral would be able to look at things far more objectively and it would go a long ways to solving the trust issues between the two sides.
- Dozzer

I agree. I would hope that if this stalemate goes much longer, that they consider that.

Eklund: NHL Waiting For NHLPA's Offer. The Year 1 Cap Dilemma NOT So Bad. 12-1-12?
- Eklund

If there is no deal struck by US Thanksgiving the NHL will cancel games through Dec 15th, then NHL will cancel the season somewhere around the middle of December. After that, the nuclear winter will set in and the NHL as we know will end. The NHLPA will begin the process of starting the basis for an unfair labor practice agaisnt Bettman and the owners, followed closely by a challenge to the entire CBA salary cap and all. I suppose it's possible there may be a hybrid NHL come October of 2013, but I wouldn't count on it. Many NHL careers will be over, and Gary Bettman will finally resign as Commissioner after the owners take a no confidence vote. Only Jeremy Jacobs votes for keeping Bettman as commish and he is burned in effigy in the parking lot adjacent the beautiful TD Bank Garden. In the eventual new NHL, the Coyotes, Islanders, Predators, Panthers, Columbus and possibly Lightning, Devils and Ducks will fold and cease operations. The 3 billion dollars in revenue will be long gone, and the Don Cherry's of the world will embrace the new league saying it's better than ever, while never looking back twice at those who scarficed their careers for a better CBA and league.