Dead

Lockout 2012-2013 (Hockey's back!)

   130 members have voted

  1. 1. When will we see hockey?

    • Oct 12
      10
    • Nov 12
      19
    • Dec 12
      26
    • Jan 13
      33
    • Feb 13
      1
    • Mar 13
      0
    • Apr 13
      0
    • Oct 13
      14
    • Never
      27

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

1,718 posts in this topic

Not to try to make this political, but does anyone else see this "Wastebook 2012" thing affecting the lockout?

For anyone who didn't catch it, apparently the NFL got itself out of paying $91M in taxes by classifying itself as non-profit, and the NHL (and PGA, too) take advantage of the same non-profit, tax-exempt status. (Also worth note, MLB gave up its tax-exempt status in 2007.)

If suddenly the NHL needs to reclassify itself and start paying taxes, is that gonna make the league want even more concessions to make up for lost money? Or will negative PR from labeling themselves as being the same kind of organization as the Red Cross make them humble up and end this damn thing?

Probably grasping at straws here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to try to make this political, but does anyone else see this "Wastebook 2012" thing affecting the lockout?

For anyone who didn't catch it, apparently the NFL got itself out of paying $91M in taxes by classifying itself as non-profit, and the NHL (and PGA, too) take advantage of the same non-profit, tax-exempt status. (Also worth note, MLB gave up its tax-exempt status in 2007.)

If suddenly the NHL needs to reclassify itself and start paying taxes, is that gonna make the league want even more concessions to make up for lost money? Or will negative PR from labeling themselves as being the same kind of organization as the Red Cross make them humble up and end this damn thing?

Probably grasping at straws here.

I don't think it will matter all that much. These negotiations aren't really about what's fair or how much the owners or players think they ought to be making. It's just a matter of who blinks first and how much leverage one side has over the other. The last time around, it just wasn't worth it for the owners to operate the business without a much more owner friendly CBA which ultimately put the players in a bind. I don't think the taxes the NHL has to pay will enter so much into the equation.

Also, while I'm not a tax expert, seems to me that whether the league has to pay income tax doesn't really have all that much of an effect, since the amount the league pays in taxes will offset the owners income and hence the direct taxes the owners have to pay.

I don't think there's anything inherently sneaky about the league classifying itself as a non-profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Per everyone on twitter, NHL made proposal to NHLPA with 50/50 HRR split implemented in year 1, no phasing in. Contigent on that the first game is on Nov 2nd and 82-game season is preserved.

For the sake of the players and my sanity I think the players should take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its a 50-50 split and apparently there is no phasing into the 50-50 split BUT per TG:

"Don't know details yet, but from what I'm told NHL proposal in some way protects player salaries as is in 2012-13. Interested to see how."

If the Fehr comes out and does his normal "no progress" BS im ganna go ape sh!t. Im in class right now though so it would probably make a great story if I did flip out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good move by Gary Bettman. I just hope this isn't some PR move with a bunch of undesirable conditions attached to it (that we can't easily understand). I hope this is the real deal, the way it sounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good move by Gary Bettman. I just hope this isn't some PR move with a bunch of undesirable conditions attached to it (that we can't easily understand). I hope this is the real deal, the way it sounds.

Me thinks sponsors are the major drivers here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? What are the owners conceding with this offer? 50-50 sounds nice and fair but at the end of the day they are still asking the players to take a 7% cut while they give themselves a 7% raise, right? What are the players getting out of this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? What are the owners conceding with this offer? 50-50 sounds nice and fair but at the end of the day they are still asking the players to take a 7% cut while they give themselves a 7% raise, right? What are the players getting out of this?

No immediate paycut and the league promised to give money back in other ways (no idea how though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? What are the owners conceding with this offer? 50-50 sounds nice and fair but at the end of the day they are still asking the players to take a 7% cut while they give themselves a 7% raise, right? What are the players getting out of this?

The players would start getting a paycheck sooner rather than later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apparently free agency would be changed to 28 years old or 8 years played. Would that make Zajac an RFA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from what im gathering... the CBA would be at least 6 years...

contracts 5 years max, entry level contrats 4 years, 28 years old for an UFA status... the arbitration would remain too

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not excited until the news breaks that the first game(s) of the season will be played. Until then so what...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This offer is a step in the right direction, but NHLPA won't take it. NHLPA can't take any offer unless it gets even a SINGLE concession. Even if it's some bogus revenue sharing plan that has almost no impact it's important to save face. There's no way this is over yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apparently free agency would be changed to 28 years old or 8 years played. Would that make Zajac an RFA?

i think it's 28 years old AND 8 years played.

I think it would give Zajac an extra year as an RFA. He'll be 28, but will have only played seven years in 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoa ... 5-year cap on contracts? That changes everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I missing something? What are the owners conceding with this offer? 50-50 sounds nice and fair but at the end of the day they are still asking the players to take a 7% cut while they give themselves a 7% raise, right? What are the players getting out of this?

The "players" are taking a 12% cut ((57-50)/57). Losing a year of UFA, and supposedly taking a 5 year cap on non-rookie deals. In exchange they are being granted nothing from the NHL.

This is the first reasonable offer from the NHL though because it supposedly protects the contracts the players signed during the last CBA. For that it's the first offer to actually get excited about since it's not a complete non-starter for the NHLPA. Regardless, it's still not a great offer. It only seems like one in comparison to the terrible earlier ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

per JSportsnet

Another interesting tidbit from NHL offer... Players' Salaries for those NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "players" are taking a 12% cut ((57-50)/57). Losing a year of UFA, and supposedly taking a 5 year cap on non-rookie deals. In exchange they are being granted nothing from the NHL.

This is the first reasonable offer from the NHL though because it supposedly protects the contracts the players signed during the last CBA. For that it's the first offer to actually get excited about since it's not a complete non-starter for the NHLPA. Regardless, it's still not a great offer. It only seems like one in comparison to the terrible earlier ones.

Ah you're right it is 12%. This is probably working out exactly as the NHL wants it to. Everyone is getting excited about a 50-50 deal because it sounds fair and reasonable and then when the NHLPA inevitably rejects it everybody will point the finger at them instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "players" are taking a 12% cut ((57-50)/57). Losing a year of UFA, and supposedly taking a 5 year cap on non-rookie deals. In exchange they are being granted nothing from the NHL.

This is the first reasonable offer from the NHL though because it supposedly protects the contracts the players signed during the last CBA. For that it's the first offer to actually get excited about since it's not a complete non-starter for the NHLPA. Regardless, it's still not a great offer. It only seems like one in comparison to the terrible earlier ones.

It does look like the league made a pretty decent concession in revenue sharing. I'm not current on what past proposals included but they're going from the current rate of sharing about $150M in revenue to $200M. The PA started out asking for $240M. That's JUST a little more than meeting them halfway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

per JSportsnet

Another interesting tidbit from NHL offer... Players' Salaries for those NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap.

Interesting. Between the 5-year cap on deals and this, it looks like the owners are really working hard to put the kibash on cap shenanigans. Weird, since they're the ones proposing those contracts. Maybe the small market teams are starting to drive the bus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

per JSportsnet

Another interesting tidbit from NHL offer... Players' Salaries for those NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap.

Redden *cough cough*

That's good for the players though.

Edited by Zubie#8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites