Of course not. That is why we are where we are. You need healthy teams and owners. That is the bottom line. The more teams that are healthy, the more you can grow your business, and the more you can pay your employees. Most people pay 5 to 7 years of cash flow (not necessarily accounting profit). So if you had a company that was making 20 million a year, you can expect to sell it for 100 million..plus what other assets are valued at. You buy cash flow.....
- TrueGrit

My opinion - the NHL with 30 teams in its present locations is not a business model that works. In other words, 8-10 franchises will always be struggling. Write up any new CBA you want - force the players into even deeper concessions than 50/50, have a 125 game regular season, force the season ticket holders into buying tickets for 20 pre-season games starting in July to generate more cash, whatever novel ideas you want. There will still be a third of the teams hemorraging financially.

It is a sad lockout. The NHL is fighting the fight to protect the scum, peripheral teams at the bottom of their pond and the NHLPA is haggling over things that are only meaningful to 10-15% of their membership. Neither one seems to realize withdrawing your product from the market pretty much assures your eventual demise.

The owners need to settle the in house problems such as controlling crazy contracts. They bring that crap on themselves. The players shouldn't have to save the owners from themselves.
- yttrohs

You can't do that. It's called collusion. See MLB in the 80's. That's how Fehr got his start working with Marvin Miller.

What's up
- RichardHertz

The usual... My schlong

Nobody talks about this one item. The NHL protects their weak teams, because they forced them to anti up hundreds of millions of dollars, just to join the NHL. They're not just going to drop them, due to a bad business model. When the league received this money, it was split up among the teams and put into their operating revenue. Where did the operating revenue go? To the players. Before the last CBA, the player's share was at 73% of league revenue's. That is ludicrous. Now the tab has come in, because the weak teams can't compete, due to the high cap floor. Now the players don't want to contribute to fixing the problem. It's just give me more, all of the time.

The model doesn't work! There are only 4 teams that contribute 80% of the Revenue Sharing. And the players want them to kick in some more? Screw you bastards, and the horse you rode in on. It's caused so much inflation, in a market like Toronto, that an average fan can't afford to see a game anymore. Without that ridiculous 40 million in transfer payments, from the Leafs, the league might as well fold.

Do you even have a clue? Take a few minutes away from bashing the players union to look at the FACTS...
- yttrohs

What are the facts? Please enlighten us.
Is it the fact there is no more CBA the Players/Owners
let that lapse in Sept/Oct when they should have been negotitating(spelling)?
Is it the fact the players think they are still making 57%?
When in fact 57% of zero is still zero, nada, nothing.
Is it the fact the players say the Owners are Negotitating(spelling) in bad faith?
When in fact it's the players and Fehr stalling, changing the subject, and oh ya never once putting in a full proposalfor the owners to look at, just the same one
worded differntly everytime. For example the NHL was stating that the NHLPA were quoted as being at 50-50, but they fail to let the public know that a few item they want out of the 50-50 actually drive it back up to 57%.
Is it the FAct that many of these players are starting to act like spoiled brats?
Ask the average person from Winnipeg what they think of Evander Kanes Tweet?
Ask the Average person of Finnish decent here in Canada think of Kyle Turris's tweet about playing in Finland?

Yes please enlighten us on these so called facts so we don't get confused here.

Nobody talks about this one item. The NHL protects their weak teams, because they forced them to anti up hundreds of millions of dollars, just to join the NHL. They're not just going to drop them, due to a bad business model. When the league received this money, it was split up among the teams and put into their operating revenue. Where did the operating revenue go? To the players. Before the last CBA, the player's share was at 73% of league revenue's. That is ludicrous. Now the tab has come in, because the weak teams can't compete, due to the high cap floor. Now the players don't want to contribute to fixing the problem. It's just give me more, all of the time.

The model doesn't work! There are only 4 teams that contribute 80% of the Revenue Sharing. And the players want them to kick in some more? Screw you bastards, and the horse you rode in on. It's caused so much inflation, in a market like Toronto, that an average fan can't afford to see a game anymore. Without that ridiculous 40 million in transfer payments, from the Leafs, the league might as well fold.
- PrinceLH

Whatever happened to Caveat Emptor - let the buyer beware.

It's easy to pin most of the problem on the players - of course they are greedy and want too big a share of the pie. But what say the owners - the same guys who have propped up the sinkhole in Phoenix for 2 years incurring major losses to do it; what about Dallas - once a strong franchise that is now a leper and Bettman still found somebody to buy that team.

You want to make the players get religion fast - let some of the dog franchises go broke and fold. Couple of teams this year, couple of them next year. The NHLPA will start to see things differently and quickly.

OK. Tell me what concessions the owners have made? All that has happened is that the players have allowed the percentage to go from 57 to 50 %. A huge win for the owners.........and they have given nothing back. i'd tell them to stuff it 2.
- yttrohs

Ummm what CBA are you talking about them making 57% oh yeah the one that the NHLPA let lapse w/o trying to negotiate befre the season started. The one where they got slaughtered on in 05 but still ended up raising the average salary by a million since then? The one in which Fehr made his famous statement that they could negotiate while playing? How did that work out for the Expo's in 95 when Fehr did the exact same thing?
That one the players say they gave so much on and were slaughtered on but were still willing to play under.
That one is gone they started at 0-0 when the start of the season should have started.
The owners started the negotiations at 43% to the players and have conceeded back to 50%. The players have not completed a full CBA offer so what have they conceeded nothing.

What are the facts? Please enlighten us.
Is it the fact there is no more CBA the Players/Owners
let that lapse in Sept/Oct when they should have been negotitating(spelling)?
Is it the fact the players think they are still making 57%?
When in fact 57% of zero is still zero, nada, nothing.
Is it the fact the players say the Owners are Negotitating(spelling) in bad faith?
When in fact it's the players and Fehr stalling, changing the subject, and oh ya never once putting in a full proposalfor the owners to look at, just the same one
worded differntly everytime. For example the NHL was stating that the NHLPA were quoted as being at 50-50, but they fail to let the public know that a few item they want out of the 50-50 actually drive it back up to 57%.
Is it the FAct that many of these players are starting to act like spoiled brats?
Ask the average person from Winnipeg what they think of Evander Kanes Tweet?
Ask the Average person of Finnish decent here in Canada think of Kyle Turris's tweet about playing in Finland?

Yes please enlighten us on these so called facts so we don't get confused here.
- longbottom

Add Joffrey Lupul to that list, when he went off about not getting his reservations at a restaurant at the ACC. Entitlement! That's all it is! It's all about me, what I perceive as what I am worth. To me, your worth next to nothing. You play a game that 99.9999% would play for nothing. Do you add any great works of art or literature to the world? Do you create great music, invent new drugs? Do you do surgery and save lives? No, you play a childs game, for mega millions and you whine. You get no respect from me!

I see....the owners take what they want and too bad for the players. I hope you don't run a business. You would never keep employees.
- yttrohs

Tell me any business in the world where the Employees make 57% (other than the NHL). And I will show you a business that is out of business in three years.

If owning an NHL team was such a terrible, money loosing venture......people wouldn't be lined up to buy franchises like they are.
- yttrohs

Ummmm if there are people lining up to buy NHL franchises why is it Phoenix was in the leagues hands for three years? Why is it Atlanta had to move to Winnipeg last year. The only reason Quebec is paying to build an arena for one of the richest Media groups is to make sure they make a profit so they don't lose the team again when the Canadian dollar falls below 75 cents American which it will when the States get the heads out of their collective arses and gets their economy back on track.

Make Whole does not cover player contracts completely. And the 50M going to the players pension fund was the League's idea.

Yes we do know what the players want. They want longer contract term.
- MJL

For who the top 5% of the players because that is the only ones it affects.
You will never see a 2nd third or 4thliner get a deal over 5 years. You will never see a second pairing and below defenseman get a deal over 5 years. and only the elite of the goalies get long term contracts. Like I said 95% of the players are not effected by the contract length. Then when they do get a long term contract the Players ussually end up demanding a trade out of dodge before the contract is over. For past examples Heatly, Nash, Louongo, Pronger. Funny thing is all of these guys had contracts in the 5 year plus catagory. Can you what Tambo would do is Belanger demanded a trade? He would be gone in a non second or be playing in the AHL for another team not connected to the Oilers. Ala Sour-ray.

Ummmm if there are people lining up to buy NHL franchises why is it Phoenix was in the leagues hands for three years? Why is it Atlanta had to move to Winnipeg last year. The only reason Quebec is paying to build an arena for one of the richest Media groups is to make sure they make a profit so they don't lose the team again when the Canadian dollar falls below 75 cents American which it will when the States get the heads out of their collective arses and gets their economy back on track.
- longbottom

No worries there dude, our heads are going to be up our asses for at least 4 more years.

Nobody talks about this one item. The NHL protects their weak teams, because they forced them to anti up hundreds of millions of dollars, just to join the NHL. They're not just going to drop them, due to a bad business model. When the league received this money, it was split up among the teams and put into their operating revenue. Where did the operating revenue go? To the players. Before the last CBA, the player's share was at 73% of league revenue's. That is ludicrous. Now the tab has come in, because the weak teams can't compete, due to the high cap floor. Now the players don't want to contribute to fixing the problem. It's just give me more, all of the time.

The model doesn't work! There are only 4 teams that contribute 80% of the Revenue Sharing. And the players want them to kick in some more? Screw you bastards, and the horse you rode in on. It's caused so much inflation, in a market like Toronto, that an average fan can't afford to see a game anymore. Without that ridiculous 40 million in transfer payments, from the Leafs, the league might as well fold.
- PrinceLH

If you notice the NHL will go to the wall for teams that lose money but have government backing. Phoenix has how much going into the pot from Glendale every year and Atlanta had zero help? Make sense? The Islanders get to move from the pot to the fire because the government has put up very little tax dollars to help out Wang.
Pittsburg was going to lose their team before Lemiuex took over as owner, he gets the city and the state on board to help out and then the NHL is helping them out.
Quebec and Winnipeg never really had the support of any level of goverment they move. Winnipeg gets the support of the city(subsity and non compete clause) and all of a sudden they get ther team back. Think about it.

No worries there dude, our heads are going to be up our asses for at least 4 more years.
- duxcup07

LOL then we Canadians are safe and a bit richer for 4 more years then......lol

I have to agree, NHL hockey is not a guarantee.

The usual... My schlong
- laughs2907

You must REALLY like Hockeybuzz.

OK. Tell me what concessions the owners have made? All that has happened is that the players have allowed the percentage to go from 57 to 50 %. A huge win for the owners.........and they have given nothing back. i'd tell them to stuff it 2.
- yttrohs

no. to keep saying theyve agreed to 50/50 over and over again doesnt make it so. cause they havent yet. neither does writing the word FACT down. cause it's not

first, that CBA is expired. they have no right to that 57% anymore. it's gone. everything being negotiated now is for a completely different CBA.

they originally offered getting to 50 after a bunch of years. with a first year of raises on that 57 actually. somewhere around 61 i believe!
and never getting to 50 until that piece of the pie was actually a larger number than the 57 they currently have. they were like a billion dollars apart at this point.

then over the next month or so, they offered that same proposal a few more times, just worded differently.... with the added addendum that they get the same amount of money as the previously expired cba in the first year. even after games and tons of revenue lost!! this would actually be a huge raise!

then they said theyd go to 50/50 without the initial raises. (but again, only after a bunch of years while never getting to 50 until that piece of the pie was actually a larger number than the 57 they currently have)
BUT more importantly to come off guarantees towards the owners proposed percentage. big concession!
but only if they were guaranteed to never make less money than the previous year.
which isnt at all a percentage. its still guarantees....regardless of league revenue.

now, theyve said theyll go to 50 by 5 years down the road. but wont accept the nhl's 10 year CBA. they propose to get there right at the year the new CBA would end!! which again, is never actually getting to 50!
but also coincidentally sets them up right at the 100 year anniversary giving them tons of leverage to strike.
not to mention of course, more guarantees that next year doesnt go below a 67 mil cap ceiling...regardless of league revenue.
and of course with contingencies about no cap hit on burying players in the minors and one time buyout. all money outside the cap.
this would be EXTRA money outside of the 50%. so again, MORE

these PA idiots annoy me

You must REALLY like Hockeybuzz.
- bloatedmosquito

I don't like it...
I don't respect it...

But it...


Turns me on...

The usual... My schlong
- laughs2907

and this is a result of ... hockeybuzz...

I don't like it...
I don't respect it...

But it...


Turns me on...
- laughs2907

Ha... you turned a few heads with that one I see.. the same lame joke

Make Whole does not cover player contracts completely. And the 50M going to the players pension fund was the League's idea.

Yes we do know what the players want. They want longer contract term.
- MJL

They want longer contracts... and an amnesty clause to buy out past failed long term contracts (all money off the books mind you).

Between 300 make whole, amnesty clause, pension, and all the "signing bonuses" paid out due to recent signings.

They would still be at roughly 57 revenue share if they get all this, would they not ?

Ha... you turned a few heads with that one I see.. the same lame joke
- Thesource

OK. Tell me what concessions the owners have made? All that has happened is that the players have allowed the percentage to go from 57 to 50 %. A huge win for the owners.........and they have given nothing back. i'd tell them to stuff it 2.
- yttrohs

Yeah! And while your at it tell them to stuff the million dollar salaries, the charter planes to games, the 5 star hotels, the wiping thier snotty noses and thier poopty asses. The movie star pamperint. All that needs to be stuffed. By Golly!

You're honestly going to state that is what the NHL is giving the players in the CBA negotiations?
- MJL

Beats skating for the Ice Capades!

Wow...MJL is back!! No seriously...you actually add facts to the argument...always good.

*ahem* Lets start with the fact the that the NHLPA keep changing what they want out of a CBA? First is was adding more $$$ to the Make Whole. Then it was they wanted money for the pension fund. DONE. Then they come back with a proposal that they knew would infuriate the owners while going in front of the cameras saying the deal was oh so close.

What CRAP!!!

Everyone knows what the owners want out of this deal. 50/50 split on revenue, keeping the terms of individual players contracts to 5 years (7 for re-signing with current clubs) and long term CBA to prevent us having to go through this crap in another 5 years.

What's the end game for the NHLPA??? Other than honoring current contracts, no one knows. So I ask you, what is it the NHLPA is truly fighting for? I'm guessing it's stalling and hoping that the NHL will cave.

Big difference between the MLB back in the day when Fehr ran their PA and the current NHL...it takes only 8 teams to maintain this lock out. Think about that....
- cdninatl

Don't make his freaken head and bigger than it already is. What facts are you speaking of by the way. Are they facts as he reads them or how he sees them?