greedy owners

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from skater68. Show skater68's posts

    greedy owners

    The owners are asking the players to make monetary concession after record profits while working under an old contract that was mainly crafted by the owners. More of the 1% being greedy pigs.

    Bettman is doing his job well, a high priced whore

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to skater68's comment:

    The owners are asking the players to make monetary concession after record profits while working under an old contract that was mainly crafted by the owners. More of the 1% being greedy pigs.

    Bettman is doing his job well, a high priced person




    The player are upset because they want to make more millions.

    Let me know when I can start crying for Jarrett "$2.1M" Boll.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    The players are also the 1%.  Don Fehr is in the 1%.  Ilya Kovalchuk has a 9 figure contract.  This isn't big business vs. steel workers.  That rhetoric is out of place.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to skater68's comment:

     

    The owners are asking the players to make monetary concession after record profits while working under an old contract that was mainly crafted by the owners. More of the 1% being greedy pigs.

    Bettman is doing his job well, a high priced

     

     



    First of all it is record revenue not record profit.  Second if you ignore the profits of the Leafs, the Rangers and the Canadian the rest of the league runs at a big loss.  According to Forbes 18 out of 30 teams lost money during the 10/11 season.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    Everyone involved is "greedy", not just the owners. In fact, it's the owners who are giving these players their large contracts.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    Here is a video that I think is a must watch:  http://video.forbes.com/fvn/sportsmoney/nhl-valuations-2011

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:



    First of all it is record revenue not record profit.  Second if you ignore the profits of the Leafs, the Rangers and the Canadian the rest of the league runs at a big loss.  According to Forbes 18 out of 30 teams lost money during the 10/11 season.

     

    good point orrthebest, and here's the kicker with negotiations so far.   if the players go down to 46%, those 12 teams making money now...make a lot more.  those on the bubble, will creep into the black, and the bottom feeders, will remain there.  those with the most to gain, are the ones already doing really well.
    It all comes down to this.  are all 30 NHL teams, regardless where they're located "entitled" to make a profit?  should the players be mandated to endure pay cut after pay cut until this happenns?

    Is that a sensible business strategy?  in what other business does that happen?

    the

     

    there

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:



    First of all it is record revenue not record profit.  Second if you ignore the profits of the Leafs, the Rangers and the Canadian the rest of the league runs at a big loss.  According to Forbes 18 out of 30 teams lost money during the 10/11 season.

     

    good point orrthebest, and here's the kicker with negotiations so far.   if the players go down to 46%, those 12 teams making money now...make a lot more.  those on the bubble, will creep into the black, and the bottom feeders, will remain there.  those with the most to gain, are the ones already doing really well.
    It all comes down to this.  are all 30 NHL teams, regardless where they're located "entitled" to make a profit?  should the players be mandated to endure pay cut after pay cut until this happenns?

    Is that a sensible business strategy?  in what other business does that happen?

    the

     

    there

     




    Do you realize that the NHLPA were the one that offered the rollback during the last negotiations.  The NHL has asked for a rollback a total of 1 time in their orginal offer this summer and that was a deal thet did not expect to be accepted.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:



    First of all it is record revenue not record profit.  Second if you ignore the profits of the Leafs, the Rangers and the Canadian the rest of the league runs at a big loss.  According to Forbes 18 out of 30 teams lost money during the 10/11 season.

     

    good point orrthebest, and here's the kicker with negotiations so far.   if the players go down to 46%, those 12 teams making money now...make a lot more.  those on the bubble, will creep into the black, and the bottom feeders, will remain there.  those with the most to gain, are the ones already doing really well.
    It all comes down to this.  are all 30 NHL teams, regardless where they're located "entitled" to make a profit?  should the players be mandated to endure pay cut after pay cut until this happenns?

    Is that a sensible business strategy?  in what other business does that happen?

    the

     

    there

     




    Do you realize that the NHLPA were the one that offered the rollback during the last negotiations.  The NHL has asked for a rollback a total of 1 time in their orginal offer this summer and that was a deal thet did not expect to be accepted.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:




    do you realize that the NHLPA were the one that offered the rollback during the last negotiations.  The NHL has asked for a rollback a total of 1 time in their orginal offer this summer and that was a deal thet did not expect to be accepted.

     

    I don't really understand.  when "cost certainty" was instituted last time, didn't the players take a 20 something percent pay cut?.  Aren't they being asked to take around 20% this time?  

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    I don't really understand.  when "cost certainty" was instituted last time, didn't the players take a 20 something percent pay cut?.  Aren't they being asked to take around 20% this time?  




    Looks like you do understand.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    I don't really understand.  when "cost certainty" was instituted last time, didn't the players take a 20 something percent pay cut?.  Aren't they being asked to take around 20% this time?  




    Looks like you do understand.

     




    so every few years, owners will just insist the players take another 20% pay cut, and the industry will be wonderful.  excellent game plan.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    The players are also the 1%.  Don Fehr is in the 1%.  Ilya Kovalchuk has a 9 figure contract.  This isn't big business vs. steel workers.  That rhetoric is out of place.

     




    Exactly.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    so every few years, owners will just insist the players take another 20% pay cut, and the industry will be wonderful.  excellent game plan.



    If the salary cap goes up over 50% in that time, yes. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    so every few years, owners will just insist the players take another 20% pay cut, and the industry will be wonderful.  excellent game plan.



    If the salary cap goes up over 50% in that time, yes. 

     




    guess we're in agreement then.  the cap goes to around 50%, and the "allocation' part of the collective agreement is handled for the next generation or so. 

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from skater68. Show skater68's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    Professional athletes at the NHL level have a short window of opportunity to cash in on the talent and hard work.

    Owners for the most part are not dependent on their ownership of major league franchises for their income. For some it's a hobby , a status symbol or in some cases a way to show losses against their other incomes. They're greedy and basically have a rich guy mentality that thinks that workers deserve as little as you can force them to take.

     

    There are a few exceptions

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    If it came right down to it, the owners could force the players to accept far, far less than this.  Shut down the league for three years.  The players don't have a right to as much as they can grab.  They have a right to do something else if they don't like the pay scale as an NHL pro.  Someone here posted that pro players in the Swiss A make about $40K a year plus perks.  Say the perks are work $200K.  They still don't make half of NHL minimum.  Same is true in Sweden, Germany, Finland and in the KHL.

    The talent and hard work = right to big payday just doesn't hold.  It reminds me of every reality TV show ever where the contestants tell the judges/jury/chefs/monkeys/executives/Trump/bi-sexual groupie that they want it more than anyone else and they want it for the right reasons.  That's great...now beat it.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    If it came right down to it, the owners could force the players to accept far, far less than this.  Shut down the league for three years.  The players don't have a right to as much as they can grab.  They have a right to do something else if they don't like the pay scale as an NHL pro.  Someone here posted that pro players in the Swiss A make about $40K a year plus perks.  Say the perks are work $200K.  They still don't make half of NHL minimum.  Same is true in Sweden, Germany, Finland and in the KHL.

    The talent and hard work = right to big payday just doesn't hold.  It reminds me of every reality TV show ever where the contestants tell the judges/jury/chefs/monkeys/executives/Trump/bi-sexual groupie that they want it more than anyone else and they want it for the right reasons.  That's great...now beat it.

     




    I agree.  This isn't about "rights".  Introducing that logic is silly.  So is the notion that these poor souls only have a few years to cash in, or that those who own the business should be able to do whatever they want.  You're absolutely correct in your previous 1% statement.  Everyone here is rich....both sides.  All of these peripheral arguments though...steer us away from the root issue.

    The question is, which side is most reasonable.  Who is "least greedy".   What the league wants is a system that pretty much thwarts  the whole supply and demand thing, yet, with the exception of the players...they still want to operate within that model.  They are insisting on a base that most certainly will cause the same commotion when the next agreement expires.  They're suggesting a fix...that doesn't fix anything.  They are demanding a system that is unavailable in virtually every other business category in North America.  "Profit Certainty".  For those arguing any kind of  "entitlement" argument from the players...chew on profit certainty for a moment. 

    The league is looking for a deal that will insulate themselves from pretty much any economic peril imaginable on the "expense" ledger while insisting on the freedom to capitalize on any "revenue possibility" thinkable.  Not even the Government has it that good, let alone the rest of the business world.

    Rather than attempt to "tweak" the agreement to levels from which there is precedent, the league decided to swing for the fence, go for the knockout, and shoot the moon all at once.  Now, maybe even bigger than economics, both sides have to save face too. 

    And realistically...the league could not force the players to take "far, far less".  A 3 year lockout would cost them way, way too much, plus, in the meantime a new league would emerge causing untold financial grief for everyone.

    The question isn't whether there's greed involved, but which side is "most" greedy.  Depending on the circumstance, the answer changes.  Clearly, this time...to this point... it's the league.  That can and probably will change as negotiations continue, but as of today, it's hardly debatable.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    Sometimes I think there's some confusion about who's in competition here.  Owners are in competition with eachother for wins, not money.  The League, as a whole, is in competition for our disposible income.

    This whole collective barganing proceedure is about trying to ensure that the league, as a whole, is competative with the other sports leagues, as well as other forms of entertainment.  That means trying to protect the weaker members.

    Of course, this should lead to significant profit sharing... but you can bet the 'have' owners will be reluctant to do that.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:

     

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    so every few years, owners will just insist the players take another 20% pay cut, and the industry will be wonderful.  excellent game plan.



    If the salary cap goes up over 50% in that time, yes. 

     




    guess we're in agreement then.  the cap goes to around 50%, and the "allocation' part of the collective agreement is handled for the next generation or so. 

     




    Salary cap, not revenue split. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    "Of course, this should lead to significant profit sharing... but you can bet the 'have' owners will be reluctant to do that."

    Good point DRCC and what Fehr was trying to do with the NHLPA offer, get wider range of profit sharing to help for the struggling teams. Oh those poor Billionaires having to give up a few of their mistresses becuase the Bush tax cuts are long gone come January.

    From David Shoalts:

    "While the strategy of NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr and his associates can be seen as one of divide-and-conquer when it comes to pushing revenue sharing, it is hard to argue that it does not make more sense for a league that is perpetually trying to prop up as many as a dozen weak markets every year.

    The most successful sports league in the world, the NFL, shares almost every penny that comes in among its teams. Major League Baseball, another outfit that pulls in far more money than the NHL, owes much of its prosperity to increased revenue sharing in a system designed in large part by Fehr when he was head of the baseball players' union."

     

    Jacobs, Murray Edwards plus a few other owners just aren't going to allow it.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    Why do people get upset about people wanting to make more money?

    I want to make more money?  I'm I a terrible, greedy person?

    I want to make as much as I can.  When I invest, I want the largest return.  When I have felt underpaid at a job, I've gotten a higher paying one.  Does that make me greedy? 

     

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    Why do people get upset about people wanting to make more money?

    I want to make more money?  I'm I a terrible, greedy person?

    I want to make as much as I can.  When I invest, I want the largest return.  When I have felt underpaid at a job, I've gotten a higher paying one.  Does that make me greedy? 

     

     




    Not at all.  You've obviously done well for yourself in a free system...one that doesn't mandate limits on how much you can earn. 

    Why do you feel entitled to your economic potential, but insist others shouldn't have the same opportunity?

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    Not at all.  You've obviously done well for yourself in a free system...one that doesn't mandate limits on how much you can earn. 

    Why do you feel entitled to your economic potential, but insist others shouldn't have the same opportunity?



    Salary caps are common in sports.  Anyone going into the profession should be aware of that.

    Furthermore, I have never viewed the profit of a company I worked for and demanded X% of the net profit.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    In response to stevegm's comment:

    Not at all.  You've obviously done well for yourself in a free system...one that doesn't mandate limits on how much you can earn. 

    Why do you feel entitled to your economic potential, but insist others shouldn't have the same opportunity?



    Salary caps are common in sports.  Anyone going into the profession should be aware of that.

    Furthermore, I have never viewed the profit of a company I worked for and demanded X% of the net profit.

     




    it was the owners who insisted on paying X% of "revenue", not the hired hands.  Big difference between revenue, and any form of profit...gross, or net.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share