Yes I'm aware it's a CBA, I've been apart of several of them myself... and the owners DO have the right to impose their wills if they so choose. It's their business, they own it, they run it. If they wanted to bust the union, they have the power to do so, they'd be foolish, but they have that option nonetheless.
That having been said, the players can try and drag this out as long as they wish, but in the end they will concede to the owners with out a doubt, they may get a few things in their favor, but for the most part, the owners will have won. - MnGump
right but i think we should remember that even if the players gave into all the owners demands they will still be making a kings ransom to go live out their dreams. dont worry players you know that you will still be making millions of dollars and that the owners will figure out a way to game this CBA.
... that tries to address complex issues and ignores other simple things like the PA being a party to HRR rules. The PA being able to audit the books etc.
I think I will trust in the FACTS that the PA was party to establishing the rules for HRR determination and that they are also entitled to their own audits. Yet, we have never once even heard a whisper of formal objection on those points.
... but YOU object, based on a sports writer's blog and your own interpretation of a county audit... so you must be right. - Aetherial
I don't even know where to start here. The article had nothing to do with the PA being party to HRR rules, or the PA being party to establishing the rules for HRR determinations, or that they were entitled to their own audits. The article was simply about the financial picture of one team.
I believe a lot of the issues here are trust-based and ego-based.
I believe that the player's comments cannot be so easily dismissed as harmless.
When you are a governor on the fence about how much you want to give in, I agree that your choice is 99% financial and rational... but there is ALWAYS the Ego part. Not to mention Bettman's own actions and opinions almost certainly have a lot of influence. We know he has a thick skin, but I can easily imagine that the player's comments do some damage to his willingness to be open minded and listen to the PA; not as much damage as Fehr's antics mind you.
Bottom line; it isn't helping, and it is most definitely helping to give people a bad taste in their mouths about the PA. - Aetherial
I don't agree. Bettman is a professional. He here's those comments and he probably laughs at it. He's not going to let it affect his judgement or his mission. It really has zero to do with the process.
Yes I'm aware it's a CBA, I've been apart of several of them myself... and the owners DO have the right to impose their wills if they so choose. It's their business, they own it, they run it. If they wanted to bust the union, they have the power to do so, they'd be foolish, but they have that option nonetheless.
That having been said, the players can try and drag this out as long as they wish, but in the end they will concede to the owners with out a doubt, they may get a few things in their favor, but for the most part, the owners will have won. - MnGump
No they don't have the right to impose their will if they so choose, nor do they have the power to bust the Union. If all that was true, they'd be playing Hockey right now, and the players would be getting 43% of revenue.
No one will win this lockout. Too late for that. Revenue and salaries have been lost. Damage to the game has been done.
Location: I eat richards for breakfast! - stormey Joined: 03.01.2010
Nov 20 @ 12:55 PM ET
Oh, Lord, let's not open that can of worms.
But one thing I do find a little curious: if I buy a Kessel jersey, Phil Kessel doesn't see a dime of it.
I'm assuming it's the same deal for all sports around the world, but it is kind of funny.
I recall that a bunch of NCAA football players were suing for the rights to their likenesses (actual pictures) being used without their consent or compensation, but I don't recall how that ended up (probably safe to assume they were told to shut up and like it). - Atomic Wedgie
I think it would be a nice piece of candy that the owners could offer the players.
Or make it optional in contract negotiations, where players and teams could negotiate a certain percentage of their specific merchandise sales as a bonus of sorts.
Location: Bobby Ryan + 1st rounder for Clarkson, ON Joined: 08.30.2007
Nov 20 @ 1:24 PM ET
Frig you guys love to bicker on and on... we should subject Bettman and Fehr to this until they come to an agreement. - Senators2112
It’s unbelievable though. The article actually flat out says at the bottom that it refers to AOC, not the Panthers, yet, he’s still insisting it’s referring to the Panthers. I don’t get it. He’s essentially saying the author of the article is lying, and that it actually IS the Panthers. How ridiculously and deliberately obtuse can someone be?
But one thing I do find a little curious: if I buy a Kessel jersey, Phil Kessel doesn't see a dime of it. - Atomic Wedgie
Article 50.1, (a)(i)(U) - Other Revenues (counted in HRR)
(3) The sale or disposition of game-worn, practice-worn and other event-worn or used Player jerseys and/or equipment along with the sale of any other hockey-related items whose vlaue is directly enhanced by an association with a Player's personality rights;
No, Kessel doesn't get all of that money from every sale of a jersey with his name on the back - but he and his union brethren get 57% of the revenues (net of Direct Costs, of course).
Location: Bobby Ryan + 1st rounder for Clarkson, ON Joined: 08.30.2007
Nov 20 @ 1:29 PM ET
Article 50.1, (a)(i)(U) - Other Revenues (counted in HRR)
No, Kessel doesn't get all of that money from every sale of a jersey with his name on the back - but he and his union brethren get 57% of the revenues (net of Direct Costs, of course). - Irish Blues
Which you can’t say is entirely unfair. For every (err, well, most at least) jersey you’ll find with Kessel’s name on the back, there is a Leaf logo on the front, right?
Which you can’t say is entirely unfair. For every (err, well, most at least) jersey you’ll find with Kessel’s name on the back, there is a Leaf logo on the front, right? - prock
Unless it's a Bruins jersey - but most of them probably got burned at 2011 Cup parties.
Which you can’t say is entirely unfair. For every (err, well, most at least) jersey you’ll find with Kessel’s name on the back, there is a Leaf logo on the front, right? - prock
Dozzer has a Kessel jersey with a Bruins logo in front.
Maybe we should start a fake rumour that the lockout is over. Give details as to when they are starting back up and such. Maybe that will somehow synergistically get things going by undermining the games both sides are playing.
Location: God bless us Hockeybuzzers, everyone! Joined: 07.31.2006
Nov 20 @ 1:50 PM ET
Article 50.1, (a)(i)(U) - Other Revenues (counted in HRR)
No, Kessel doesn't get all of that money from every sale of a jersey with his name on the back - but he and his union brethren get 57% of the revenues (net of Direct Costs, of course). - Irish Blues
Yes, but my point is that Kessel doesn't get directly compensated for his name on the back. In theory, I'm buying the jersey (at least in part) because I love Phil Kessel.
David Steckel gets the same benefits as Phil Kessel when 1,000 Kessel jerseys are sold, compared to one David Steckel jersey (I'm assuming his mom bought one when he came to the Leafs).
