rabble rabble rabble rabble

Wow
- Aetherial

Why wow? LOL Instead of replying like that, why not expand and state why you disagree, and we'll discuss it. You may not like or agree with they way they're negotiating, and I would agree with that. But that is true about both sides, isn't it? But yet we hear response after response that it is just the players that aren't negotiating. We'd all like it to be both sides sitting down to compromise and work out a good faith agreement for the good of the sport. But it just isn't like that. But it is still negotiating. Even if we all think it's a bunch of BS.

MJL looks like he's up for another 12 hour shift of shoveling bs for the PA.

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.
- MJL

You know I love you, MJL, and I admire your devotion to coming on here every day and sticking up for the players.

But much like the author of the original article, you need to stop pontificating on areas where you simply don't have the background.

As per our original discussion on the subject, you didn't actually read the report.

I did.

The author of the article is a sports blogger, with no business background. Simply put, he grossly misinterprets the financial data, making a wild conclusion at the end that isn't supported by the evident facts.

Yes, the company operating the arena is making money.

That absolutely does not mean that the Florida Panthers are making money. Nor does it mean that the profits of the holding company minus the losses of the Panthers equals overall profits.

As for your assertion that the books are cooked to hide revenues, this is just false. The CBA clearly outlines what constitutes hockey-related revenues and what does not, and the NHLPA is given access to all the financial information. If there was any monkey business going on, not only would it constitute fraud, but the NHLPA would be on it like Byfuglien on a smartie.

The rip tide is pretty strong today, MJL; don't go wading into waters that you aren't able to handle.

I didn't state anywhere that you have never criticized the Owners. You definitely have on occasion. But the majority of your posts is laying criticism on the players and Fehr, imo. And the post I replied to there was biased towards the players side. Which is why I responded as I did.
- MJL

Yes. I side with the owners.

As the weeks have gone by, more and more evidence has piled up that Fehr has no interest in negotiating (maybe he will today?). His antics are described by just about every media outlet. It is well-documented that he will not make an offer. (to date). It is easy to see what his game is.

Then look at the "profit" split from that 3.3 billion... seems ridiculous to me.

Then consider that I do not buy into the players being entitled to 57% any more (not about to argue this with you again )

Then, throw in the player's public quotes.

That sums up my reason for siding with the owners. It does not mean I don't recognize the owners faults also... just that I choose not to list them all the time. Other people can do that well enough.

As near as I can tell, anyone on this board who has engaged in any conversation on this issue besides "they all suck"... has chosen a side to support.

I disagree that the players haven't been negotiating. And I would need to know what your definition of giving into the Owners is.
- MJL

Well you are entitled to your opinion for sure. It seems that you are in the minority but each to their own. My "giving in this year" is 50/50 with a make whole to come form owners purse for this years contracts pro-rated for games played. No gauranteed money for players. This will be based on HRR as set out in expired CBA. Max contract length 7years. Up front bonuses will count to cap depending on contract length. Entry level contracts 4 years.

Next year.... which I hope for.... 53 / 47 in owners favor... no make whole...

200 players receiving paychecks is quite different from the players are receiving nothing. You really think the players are in danger of going broke from missing 3 paychecks? Your point on botox and divorce rates going up is really relevant here.
- MJL

For the majority of those players, those pay cheques are only covering insurance and living expenses.

~ 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

I've advocated something along these lines, except that I've got the percentages by year going more like 51.5, 50, 49, 49, and then 50 from there out.

The "luxury tax for being over the cap" part is an absolute must IMO, but only for compliance - not as part of some "... and teams can always go over the cap whenever the feel like it" idea. Putting that money toward revenue sharing has been something I've suggested from way back in February when I first put a proposal together.

Well you are entitled to your opinion for sure. It seems that you are in the minority but each to their own. My "giving in this year" is 50/50 with a make whole to come form owners purse for this years contracts pro-rated for games played. No gauranteed money for players. This will be based on HRR as set out in expired CBA. Max contract length 7years. Up front bonuses will count to cap depending on contract length. Entry level contracts 4 years.

Next year.... which I hope for.... 53 / 47 in owners favor... no make whole...
- TSTER

I am in agreement with your position...

with regards to the bolded though. The expired CBA is irrelevant except as a starting point for discussion, but not necessarily an ending point on any specific issue. Just as I believe the 57% is a number that should have no real meaning... I also believe that the PA is free to ask for guaranteed increases delinked from HRR in the case of an HRR decrease.

I think they are ridiculous for asking. I think Fehr did damage to the process last week with his timing... but they are certainly entitled to ask and we should not assume that the next CBA will be the same as the previous one in that regard.

You know I love you, MJL, and I admire your devotion to coming on here every day and sticking up for the players.

But much like the author of the original article, you need to stop pontificating on areas where you simply don't have the background.

As per our original discussion on the subject, you didn't actually read the report.

I did.

The author of the article is a sports blogger, with no business background. Simply put, he grossly misinterprets the financial data, making a wild conclusion at the end that isn't supported by the evident facts.

Yes, the company operating the arena is making money.

That absolutely does not mean that the Florida Panthers are making money. Nor does it mean that the profits of the holding company minus the losses of the Panthers equals overall profits.

As for your assertion that the books are cooked to hide revenues, this is just false. The CBA clearly outlines what constitutes hockey-related revenues and what does not, and the NHLPA is given access to all the financial information. If there was any monkey business going on, not only would it constitute fraud, but the NHLPA would be on it like Byfuglien on a smartie.

The rip tide is pretty strong today, MJL; don't go wading into waters that you aren't able to handle.
- Atomic Wedgie

I don't agree. The conclusions the article makes are sound in my opinion. Don't need to have any background in that area to understand that. And secondly, my simple point was that I don't agree with procks point that while the NHL is making a lot of revenue, but very little profit. I don't beleive that overall that is true. I beleive there are certainly some teams that are struggling, but not to the extent that we are made to beleive. And that article is just one point baout one team out of 30, and how things are not always as they appear.

And as far as the PA being all over it, have you ever heard of a non disclosure agreement? And Fraud has to be proven. And I've never mentioned fraud. There are a lot of legal ways to push money around. And if you have any background in that area, you'd know that. But maybe this is too deep for you to handle.

For the majority of those players, those pay cheques are only covering insurance and living expenses.
- Atomic Wedgie

Maybe, maybe not. In a lot of cases, the teams they are playing for have covered the insurance.

, but the NHLPA would be on it like Byfuglien on a smartie.
- Atomic Wedgie

LOL!

Well you are entitled to your opinion for sure. It seems that you are in the minority but each to their own. My "giving in this year" is 50/50 with a make whole to come form owners purse for this years contracts pro-rated for games played. No gauranteed money for players. This will be based on HRR as set out in expired CBA. Max contract length 7years. Up front bonuses will count to cap depending on contract length. Entry level contracts 4 years.

Next year.... which I hope for.... 53 / 47 in owners favor... no make whole...
- TSTER

The players taking a lesser share was always a given. And Fehr's role was always to try and limit the damage to the players.

I am in agreement with your position...

with regards to the bolded though. The expired CBA is irrelevant except as a starting point for discussion, but not necessarily an ending point on any specific issue. Just as I believe the 57% is a number that should have no real meaning... I also believe that the PA is free to ask for guaranteed increases delinked from HRR in the case of an HRR decrease.

I think they are ridiculous for asking. I think Fehr did damage to the process last week with his timing... but they are certainly entitled to ask and we should not assume that the next CBA will be the same as the previous one in that regard.
- Aetherial

I would agree... I guess from where I see it, if the framework for the agreement was to be changed then both sides should have been negotiating last year. Once again the NHL was ready to do this but Fehr was to busy filling the NHLPA with doubt and mistrust towards the owners as a way to strengthen the unions. To change the framework of the CBA now I don't believe is feasible. You are correct about the players right to ask for a fixed percentage of HRR as a form of a gaurantee against declining HRR. I thinks from the owners perspective this would be a bad decision if they agreed. It would tell the players that they are not responsible for the mess they have both created this year.

It's set up that way to mask profits. You ignore the fact of how during the lockout, it showed how Florida wasn't the financial drag it's supposed to be.
- MJL

No. I doubt you find any sports teams that have it set up as one. None. That's an absolutely normal way of doing things.

Honestly, you've got your tin hat on too tight, and are talking out of your a$$.

There is no company on earth that would take sports teams, arenas, etc, and combine them under one corporate entity. None. Zero. I've done work for several fairly large companies, and there are literally 15 or 20 companies under thm, dividing lines of business. That's par for the course. Suggesting that the reason they're doing this is to mask profits is downright asinine. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

I didn't say anywhere that I disagree that it's an important distinction.
- MJL

Actually, that's precisely what you said, right here:

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

Again Ek your painting a positive out of nothing...
The players might show up to the meeting and that's great. Doesn't mean they have anything to say the owners want to hear.
The only thing we know is their supposed to put together some proposals and present to the owners. Until we know what's proposed your cheerleading again.

Prove this.

Prove your point about the numbers during the lockout.

Don't just say your opinion or assumption or "common sense" makes it true.

First of all, you have no idea of all the variables contributing to the situation.

More importantly, this is the EXACT thing you do to everyone on this board who provides a logical arguement against your position.

So, prove your point... don't make assumptions, provide evidence.
- Aetherial

Aetherial, you have it totally wrong. Big business never, ever, ever set up several companies to divide lines of business. If you look at, say, Royal Bank, things like Royal Trust, Action Direct, RBC Dominion Securities, RBC insurance, RBC Capital Markets, RBC Wealth Management US, hell, RBC actually has companies set up to provide services to no one other than RBC segments of business. But these are all just figments of our imagination. Did you know that McDonalds has one of the biggest real estate portfolios in the world? Guess what? It’s not owned in the same line of business as their burgers. I wonder why that might be.

As per the article and his supposed "point". It should be totally surprising to you that a building with one tenant made less than a building with two tenants. Shocking, in fact.

It's over Johnny..... over.. Nothing happens today but anger and more bitterness,,, Season will be cancelled soon... ECk no offense but I wonder who your player sources are.. cause it just don't seem they are being truthful with ya
- Popcorn Kid

It's Richard Park & Kenny Baumgartner

Delighted to see the normal conversation continuing here. I think we can all blame Kris Versteeg if there is no hockey this year. His ill-timed and rude comments hurt Bettman and Daly at a deep personal level and convinced them to stop working at trying to find a deal that would make the PA happy.

MJL looks like he's up for another 12 hour shift of shoveling bs for the PA.




- robin_steele264

That or MJL knows what he's talking about unlike most posters on the forum

I don't agree. The conclusions the article makes are sound in my opinion. Don't need to have any background in that area to understand that. And secondly, my simple point was that I don't agree with procks point that while the NHL is making a lot of revenue, but very little profit. I don't beleive that overall that is true. I beleive there are certainly some teams that are struggling, but not to the extent that we are made to beleive. And that article is just one point baout one team out of 30, and how things are not always as they appear.

And as far as the PA being all over it, have you ever heard of a non disclosure agreement? And Fraud has to be proven. And I've never mentioned fraud. There are a lot of legal ways to push money around. And if you have any background in that area, you'd know that. But maybe this is too deep for you to handle.
- MJL

Even the original author admits his conclusions aren't sound.

And yes, you need a financial background to understand what is going on.

Obviously, you don't have one, which is why yhou are struggling to grasp these simple concepts.

A non-disclosure agreement would not protect teams that were cooking books.

Once again, quit throwing around terms for which you do not have the necessary background.

You aren't qualified to make these statements.

When is season 3 starting......screw hockey
- Alexzanki

I'm pretty sure it is in March

That or MJL knows what he's talking about unlike most posters on the forum
- Flyers_1488

I'm gonna stick with option A

Because they've already conceded a big chunk of revenue to the owners, despite the fact that the league is making more money than it ever has. It's the owners that are holding up your season not the players.

People are running from the players because the longer this thing goes on, the more people just want their hockey back and the quickest way for that to happen is for the players to just capitulate. Don't forget the laughable offer the owners came out with. They're still going to end up getting about half what was on that draconian list.
- fattyboubatty

It sounds to me like the chances of an NHL season this year are pretty much nil. The bottom line is the Players do not feel they should be forced to absorb the costs or be financially burdened for the Leagues inability to effectively run a $3.3 billion a year business. The owners are trying to fix their mistakes by imposing less revenues and contractual limitations on the PA.

That being said, it's the owners business and whether they are at fault or not for the mishandlings of League finances, they have the right to impose their will upon the PA in order to continue to grow the league and allow all NHL franchises to become more viable entities for the betterment of the league as a whole.