The more people you have present at the bargaining table, the less chance there is that a deal can be done.

With all the people present from each side, this must be a total free for all mess of people arguing and screaming.

The league is barely making any money at all. Lots of revenue, no profit.
- prock

I doubt that is true!

I doubt that is true!
- MJL

Of course you do! I wouldn't expect anything else!

Of course you do! I wouldn't expect anything else!
- prock

Did you see the article that was posted the other day about Florida? How Forbes says they lost millions last year. But the Auditor of Broward County who has direct access to the financial records of the team says differently.

What I don't understand is why the words of a few, paint the entire body of over 700 players with the same brush stroke? The players don't want everything they had before. They just don't want to give everything up, nor do they want to be the only side that pays for the struggling financial issues of some teams.The Owners don't own the game, they own the teams. If the Owners are so smart, then how come so many of them are struggling when the League has taken in record revenue. Read Bill Meltzer's latest blog today on how some of those Owner's have badly mismanaged their teams. And isn't it a contradiction to state how smart they are, then in a later sentence state that they need a deal to save them from themselves?
- MJL

Don't kid yourself MJL. If the owners don't own the game who does? It sure isn't the players. While players sit and get paid nothing, the owners at least still have the value of their teams which reduces as this thing drags on but still have value. Players are employees. you once again speak of what players are giving up.... For god sake maybe they should look at what they might get since right now they are getting nothing. Yes i will say it again. Owners as soon as this lock out ends will be looking for ways to circumvent whatever was negotiated. This is why they are smart, this is why they are billionaires. They take risks that you and I would never dream of.

NO MERCH!

Don't kid yourself MJL. If the owners don't own the game who does? It sure isn't the players. While players sit and get paid nothing, the owners at least still have the value of their teams which reduces as this thing drags on but still have value. Players are employees. you once again speak of what players are giving up.... For god sake maybe they should look at what they might get since right now they are getting nothing. Yes i will say it again. Owners as soon as this lock out ends will be looking for ways to circumvent whatever was negotiated. This is why they are smart, this is why they are billionaires. They take risks that you and I would never dream of.
- TSTER

The Owners own the individual teams, don't kid yourself. There's a lot of players who are getting paid. Injured players are paid, and players are getting their signing bonuses. And there are players playing overseas. So it is not true that players are getting nothing. And if you think the players are normal employees then your kidding yourself. And again I'll ask if the Owners are so smart, why are we in a lockout? Why are some teams struggling so badly!

~ Drop it back to 50/50 IMMEDIATELY.

~ Honor current contract obligations. If current contract obligations exceed the cap for team x, make that team pay a luxury tax. Money collected from these taxes will be distributed to the financially challenged teams.
- laughs2907

Almost,
1) honor current contract obligations - but scaled back by some percentage - not as much as 20% however
2) no new contracts longer than CBA itself... if it is six years - max contract length is six years
3) make reparations to players who have their contracts impacted based on profit of team... in other words, you play for a money losing club, too bad - which will indirectly over time stop clubs from signing stupidly large contracts they can't afford
4) give teams ONE TIME option to buy out 2 or 3 contracts each without buyout CAP hit to get under new CAP... player still gets paid, team doesn't take CAP hit for this buyout
5) bought out players may sign anywhere - including back with same team
6) increase # of professional player contracts that clubs may hold to 60 from 50 (more players in union... likely more at lower salary levels)
7) free agency outright at age 25 or 5 years of NHL playing time... which ever comes first
8) move current July 1st Free Agency day to the day before or the day of the draft - this will increase trade and movement of both young players and FAs
9) any luxury tax / cap overage / penalities that are transfered MUST go to player signings (not to finance the purchase of European soccer teams or to golf club or real estate development)
10) announce the expansion to two locations in two years (locations to be determined)
11) annouce the Coyotes are moving somewhere/anywhere (Quebec), give Bettman ownership of the team so he can manage his own mess and no longer be the commissioner...
12) teams may go over the CAP until the first game of the season... a which time they begin to pay a pro-rated daily fine

Did you see the article that was posted the other day about Florida? How Forbes says they lost millions last year. But the Auditor of Broward County who has direct access to the financial records of the team says differently.
- MJL

Actually, the auditor doesn't say differently. The auditor says that the Arena Operating Company made money, not the Panthers :

Update
As Erin Bolen points out at SBNation, the audit by Broward County is limited to financial date for the Arena Operating Company, the division of Sunrise Sports & Entertainment.

...

However, with that said the above piece at times confuses the financial data for the arena operating company with the financial data for Sunrise Sports and Entertainment, due to my misreading portions of the audit. That’s an important distinction to make, and one that I failed to make in my reading of the audit.

Did you see the article that was posted the other day about Florida? How Forbes says they lost millions last year. But the Auditor of Broward County who has direct access to the financial records of the team says differently.
- MJL

No, because no such article exists. The article you're referring to is not referring to Florida Panthers profit. Its not even referring to the company that owns the Florida Panthers. Its referring to the parent company of THAT company, the company set up to run the arena. Essentially, what you're looking at goes WAY beyond hockey games.

Actually, the auditor doesn't say differently. The auditor says that the Arena Operating Company made money, not the Panthers :
- Flyers_01

And who does that money go to? The same place.

From another article :

Fehr, however, said he was "not in the prediction business" when asked whether Monday's discussion would lead to a detailed proposal presentation by his union on Tuesday.

Oh joy, the owners have to be thrilled about another wasted day of Fehr taking bathroom breaks and throwing out random demands without producing anything of his own.

The owners may not want to cancel the season but it may be better than having to continue to sit in meeting rooms waiting on Fehr to start negotiating. 6 hours late for meetings, interminable bathroom breaks and ZERO credible proposals.
- Flyers_01

What do you mean?

He submitted THREE proposals... THREE! That the league walked away from in 10 minutes.

What an insult, do you mean to tell me that the league couldn't even give the proposals more than 10 minutes of their time.

Yeah, I mean, Fehr did show up with his band of idiots, 2 hours late. Yeah, 2 of the "proposals" were on a single sheet of paper each, and the third one was verbal. How very professional

Sure, when pressed, he had to admit that he had not "run the numbers".

But ALL the proposals were 50/50...

OK well they were "called" 50/50 even if the players were actually going to earn more than 50% until *maybe* some year in the future... but those offers were 50/50 damnit! The PA and Fehr would never lie or say something disingenuous.

So how can you say the PA is not negotiating or presenting offers?

Oh wait, nevermind.

No, because no such article exists. The article you're referring to is not referring to Florida Panthers profit. Its not even referring to the company that owns the Florida Panthers. Its referring to the parent company of THAT company, the company set up to run the arena. Essentially, what you're looking at goes WAY beyond hockey games.
- prock

It's set up that way for a reason!
Here is the sum of what the article basically points out in the below two points. Take note of what the author added at the bottom of point #2.

1. NHL teams are gateways to favourable arena deals, and thus greater revenue. Sunrise Sports & Entertainment would never have received their current sweetheart deal with Broward County without the Panthers. Even in a year where the Panthers lose money, owning the team allows SSE to make profits overall, thanks to their arena deal and the non-hockey events they collect revenue from as a result.

2. Hockey-related revenue is defined in such a way so as to maximize the appearance of losses on the hockey side. I expected to see that the Panthers were making good money on their arena deal; I was surprised to find that what was far and away their worst fiscal year coincided with the NHL lockout. If the Panthers were losing money but the arena business was profitable, we would not expect to see a major drop in SSE revenue in 2005; instead we saw a significant dip. (Note: judging by the email commentary I’ve received, this point is being missed by many readers. If the Panthers were acting as a drag on revenue, the 2005 lockout year should have been quite profitable for SSE; instead it was easily their worst fiscal year of the decade – JW.)

The league is barely making any money at all. Lots of revenue, no profit.
- prock

The league is making money... but that is not important... the owners individually are doing just fine.... they just want it be more fine... so that they can finance broader investments - such as EPL soccer teams, bad life time contracts to underachieving goalies, etc.

If the teams weren't a money making venture for the owners personally, why would they stay in the game?

And who does that money go to? The same place.
- MJL

So? What is your point?

For ONCE man up, and consider that when someone presents evidence counter to your arguement, that it might mean your arguement is flawed.

Barring that, just admit you are confused about what you are even reading and you are in way over your head debating with him. Of course that happens to you so consistently, you obviously don't even recognize it anymore.

And who does that money go to? The same place.
- MJL

So? Are you saying players should start taking a share of concert revenue? Maybe NBA games if there is one in the same arena?

Are you saying that if a team buys its arena, that should mean zero dollars are accounted for playing there, therefore increasing profits and allocating that to players?

What do you mean?

He submitted THREE proposals... THREE! That the league walked away from in 10 minutes.

What an insult, do you mean to tell me that the league couldn't even give the proposals more than 10 minutes of their time.

Yeah, I mean, Fehr did show up with his band of idiots, 2 hours late. Yeah, 2 of the "proposals" were on a single sheet of paper each, and the third one was verbal. How very professional

Sure, when pressed, he had to admit that he had not "run the numbers".

But ALL the proposals were 50/50...

OK well they were "called" 50/50 even if the players were actually going to earn more than 50% until *maybe* some year in the future... but those offers were 50/50 damnit! The PA and Fehr would never lie or say something disingenuous.

So how can you say the PA is not negotiating or presenting offers?

Oh wait, nevermind.
- Aetherial

I get the sacrcasm...but seriously, there isn't even a clear definition of what hockey related revenue is... without that as a starting point... how can any of this be taking seriously.

and btw... lots of large contracts are negotiated based on scribbled back of the napkin type paperwork... but it requires trust to get to that point... and because Bettman and Fehr in both intermediaries and nothing more... this won't go anywhere until a real leader emerges from both sides.

So? What is your point?

For ONCE man up, and consider that when someone presents evidence counter to your arguement, that it might mean your arguement is flawed.

Barring that, just admit you are confused about what you are even reading and you are in way over your head debating with him. Of course that happens to you so consistently, you obviously don't even recognize it anymore.
- Aetherial

I'd be glad to do so if such evidence was provided. The rest of it, pretty hilarious and not worth commenting on.

It's set up that way for a reason!
Here is the sum of what the article basically points out in the below two points. Take note of what the author added at the bottom of point #2.

1. NHL teams are gateways to favourable arena deals, and thus greater revenue. Sunrise Sports & Entertainment would never have received their current sweetheart deal with Broward County without the Panthers. Even in a year where the Panthers lose money, owning the team allows SSE to make profits overall, thanks to their arena deal and the non-hockey events they collect revenue from as a result.

2. Hockey-related revenue is defined in such a way so as to maximize the appearance of losses on the hockey side. I expected to see that the Panthers were making good money on their arena deal; I was surprised to find that what was far and away their worst fiscal year coincided with the NHL lockout. If the Panthers were losing money but the arena business was profitable, we would not expect to see a major drop in SSE revenue in 2005; instead we saw a significant dip. (Note: judging by the email commentary I’ve received, this point is being missed by many readers. If the Panthers were acting as a drag on revenue, the 2005 lockout year should have been quite profitable for SSE; instead it was easily their worst fiscal year of the decade – JW.)
- MJL

Yes, its set up that way because the running of a hockey team, and the running of a large venue space, are two very distinctly different businesses, and should logically be two seperate entities. I doubt there are many teams that don't have it set up that way.

I'd be glad to do so if such evidence was provided. The rest of it, pretty hilarious and not worth commenting on.
- MJL

The article itself says it is flawed. Stop being an idiot.

So? Are you saying players should start taking a share of concert revenue? Maybe NBA games if there is one in the same arena?

Are you saying that if a team buys its arena, that should mean zero dollars are accounted for playing there, therefore increasing profits and allocating that to players?
- prock

Didn't say any of that. My point is quite simple. I have no doubt that there are some teams struggling. But your point that the NHL is making little profit. I don't believe that to be true imo.

The article itself says it is flawed. Stop being an idiot.
- prock

Here is what it says. The 2 main points that the article made, which I posted for you remain the same.

As Erin Bolen points out at SBNation, the audit by Broward County is limited to financial date for the Arena Operating Company, the division of Sunrise Sports & Entertainment.

This doesn’t shift the two basic points of this piece highlighted in bold. The AOC is incredibly profitable, and SSE only gets to run it because of the Panthers, so the Panthers still serve as a gateway. Additionally, a 90% drop in total AOC profitability in a lockout year remains highly interesting when the number of hockey events should only represent roughly one-third of their total revenue.

However, with that said the above piece at times confuses the financial data for the arena operating company with the financial data for Sunrise Sports and Entertainment, due to my misreading portions of the audit. That’s an important distinction to make, and one that I failed to make in my reading of the audit.

If the teams weren't a money making venture for the owners personally, why would they stay in the game?
- BorjeFan4Ever

Maybe that's why there is a lockout, Sherlock.

The Owners own the individual teams, don't kid yourself. There's a lot of players who are getting paid. Injured players are paid, and players are getting their signing bonuses. And there are players playing overseas. So it is not true that players are getting nothing. And if you think the players are normal employees then your kidding yourself. And again I'll ask if the Owners are so smart, why are we in a lockout? Why are some teams struggling so badly!
- MJL

You seem to know quite a bit... so how many players are receiving bonuses? How many players are playing overseas? Maybe 200 tops. What percentage is that of total NHL players? And what type of money are they making. Probably not enough to keep up the weekly botox injections into the puck bunny wives lips. If the players don't go broke first, their divorce rates will increase as all their wives move on to baseball and football players who are making the money that they are used to spending.