The_Admiral Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I don't think it's ever so cut and dried as saying "all NHL players can live comfortably." Consider players on two-way contracts, whose salaries on paper are prorated down to, I don't know, something between $65,000 and $500,000, or even players on low-end one-way contracts. Sure, even those are still handsome sums, but then deduct the escrow clawback, federal tax, state/provincial tax, and the "traveling athlete" tax levied on road teams in places like Nashville. Sidney Crosby isn't crying poor, but it's easy to see how the rank and file can have their wages whittled down to the point where they can't be expected to roll over and take it when ownership says to give up 24% of their salaries because someone spent too much on Zach Parise. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 So why are we punishing the players for teams not making money? ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrySmalls Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Why do I think that taking the average ticket cost is not the best method for the data set? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvrdgsfn Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=405196 Get a deal done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aci Posted September 13, 2012 Share Posted September 13, 2012 Why do I think that taking the average ticket cost is not the best method for the data set?It should be: asses x average = total cash reaped from gates.Obviously it doesn't factor in concessions and whatnot, but I think it gives a pretty good baseline. And frankly, just from seeing that chart, if a team has ticket prices at 60-70% of the league average and still can't sell most of their building night in and night out, that team needs to be removed from the league. The Islanders can use the valid argument that they need a new building, but Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim, Colorado and Carolina just plain sucks, and from the looks of it, Columbus should be lowering their ticket prices while Tampa Bay and Buffalo should probably be raising theirs. I've heard Buffalo keeps their prices low for two reasons: 1) to steal fans away from the Leafs, and 2) to be eligible for revenue-sharing, which requires a minimum attendance number.Seriously, though, when Dallas is bringing in half as much money at the gate as the 19th-ranked team, there is a serious problem. Hamilton Eagles- 2012 and 2013 Continental Hockey League Champions! 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 & 2015 CHL East Division Champions! Niagara Dragoons- 2012 United League and CCSLC World Series Champions! 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 UL Robinson Division Champions! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaRadniz29 Posted September 19, 2012 Share Posted September 19, 2012 Well, let's see third work stoppage under "He we do not speak of" or HWDNSO. The way I understand it is it goes like this: HWDNSO who with the owners went to the players and basically asked for some of the money back because they were "making too much, here's are proposal:. The players said well yeah, okay we can give a little, but not as much as you want, here's our counter offer, which was obviously rejected. I'm for the players on this one. However I think both sides waited way too damn long before talking. Last I heard they hand one, maybe two "formal" talks throughout the summer before meeting for a mere two days in the last week... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cujo Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 I went ahead, thumbed through my Twitter account, and unfollowed everything/everyone NHL related. Not that my actions alone are going to go noticed by the league, but I do encourage everyone else to do the same. It's become very clear that the owners and player don't give a damn about the fans. If they don't care about me, I don't care about them. I've done my part. So long, NHL. May you greedy bastards rest in peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ninersdd Posted September 20, 2012 Share Posted September 20, 2012 This was after the Sharks got blanked in Phoenix and their playoffs hopes had taken a hit. Ray Ratto was saying "Just win the game!" a bunch of times and not to make any excuses essentially. That's how I feel about the lockout pretty much: Just get the f***in deal done! BEAR DOWN ARIZONA!2013/14 Tanks Picks Champion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElwoodCuse Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 However I think both sides waited way too damn long before talking. Last I heard they hand one, maybe two "formal" talks throughout the summer before meeting for a mere two days in the last week...There's no point in having talks if there is no true urgency, because without that there's no reason for each side to budge off of their original ridiculous demands.No one cares if the preseason is wiped out. No one cares if some regular season games are missed. If the Winter Classic might be canceled, that's a big money big deal event and by then the whole season is at risk. THAT'S when there will be furious negotiating. Not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Again, I am really shocked that NBC/Comcast is not exerting more pressure on both parties to get back to business. NBC Sports just lost its bid for baseball, and I don't expect ESPN/Fox to lose NASCAR, so they pretty much have to double down on the NHL now. Their whole "you guys sort this out, we'll still pay for this year" thing does not seem good for either side, especially if the NHL gets to the end of its deal and has to play a year with no American television revenue. Man, these guys sure are dumb. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Why do I think that taking the average ticket cost is not the best method for the data set?It should be: asses x average = total cash reaped from gates.Obviously it doesn't factor in concessions and whatnot, but I think it gives a pretty good baseline. And frankly, just from seeing that chart, if a team has ticket prices at 60-70% of the league average and still can't sell most of their building night in and night out, that team needs to be removed from the league. The Islanders can use the valid argument that they need a new building, but Dallas, Phoenix, Anaheim, Colorado and Carolina just plain sucks, and from the looks of it, Columbus should be lowering their ticket prices while Tampa Bay and Buffalo should probably be raising theirs. I've heard Buffalo keeps their prices low for two reasons: 1) to steal fans away from the Leafs, and 2) to be eligible for revenue-sharing, which requires a minimum attendance number.Seriously, though, when Dallas is bringing in half as much money at the gate as the 19th-ranked team, there is a serious problem.Actually, it's still not quite right.Let's say a team like the Coyotes sells out their upper bowl (they don't) but can't sell any tickets in the lower bowl (probably not terribly far off). Now let's just say the arena capacity is 25,000 (just for example)—15,000 in the upper bowl, 10,000 in the lower bowl.If upper bowl tickets cost $10 and lower bowl tickets cost $20 dollars, you're taking the $15 average times the 15,000 tickets sold to estimate that they club is making $225,000 a night. In truth, the tickets actually purchased only cost $10 and the so the actual gate revenues for a night were $150,000.Still, the gist of what Admiral showed is good, but it's far from a perfect study. JUSTIN STRIEBEL | PORTFOLIO | RESUME | CONTACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayMac Posted September 29, 2012 Share Posted September 29, 2012 Neither. Simply put, it is the haves vs. the haves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.