Done Deal

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

habit said:

Just watched Bob mcKenzie in TSN. He mentioned that if revenue goes up, so does the player percentage!!

I'm doing this from memory, bo bear with me...

Revenue = percentage

2.2B = 55%

2.5B = 56%

2.7B = 57%

2.9B = 58%

As this keeps coming out, the players are seaming to get a better of the deal than first thought.

Hmmm, someone is confused, might even be me, but my understanding was that the NHLPA revenue share was a stable 54%—the salary cap would go up, or down, depnding on revenues in any given season under this CBA.

[Doc Holliday]

mrbozo said:

habit said:

Just watched Bob mcKenzie in TSN. He mentioned that if revenue goes up, so does the player percentage!!

I'm doing this from memory, bo bear with me...

Revenue = percentage

2.2B = 55%

2.5B = 56%

2.7B = 57%

2.9B = 58%

As this keeps coming out, the players are seaming to get a better of the deal than first thought.

Hmmm, someone is confused, might even be me, but my understanding was that the NHLPA revenue share was a stable 54%—the salary cap would go up, or down, depnding on revenues in any given season under this CBA.

..I saw BobbyMac last nigh on TSN and indeed he did say that... I was kind of puzzled but I thought that this was not gonna be the only surprise the new CBA has in store for us

[Habit]

Here is some more of what he said:

"a few details about what the cba includes

One of the most significant is that the players' share of revenue
will rise as revenues rise. We all know it starts at 54 per cent, but
it goes up to 55 per cent at $2.2 billion, 56 per cent at 2.4 billion
and 57 per cent at 2.7 billion.


Another key thing to understand is the cap figure. Yes, it's $39
million, but that doesn't mean you can't have players on your roster
whose annual salaries add up to more than $39 million.


You just can't have them on your roster for the whole year. That $39
million figure is not some mythical paper-number, it's how much a
team can actually spend on salaries in one year.


So a team that runs way below the cap for most of the year could
conceivably add a big salary player at the trade deadline and, on a
paper payroll, go over the cap - so long as the actual money spent on
salaries stays below $39 million, it's not a problem.


A team could conceivably go into the playoffs with a roster whose
salaries add up to more than $39 million. It's all a matter of
balancing the books.

Speaking of the trade deadline, it will be moved up by two weeks to
now be 40 days before the end of the regular season instead of the 26
it was before.


There is now also a signing deadline for restricted free agents. If
they aren't signed by December 1, they are ineligible to play for the
rest of the season.

Perhaps the most complicated aspect of this CBA will be the revenue
sharing section. All anyone is saying at this point is the top 10
revenue teams will contribute money to the bottom 15 revenue teams,
but no one is saying how much or how."

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

Man, did Goodenow, Saskin, et al ever negotiate a lousy deal for the players, eh?

Goodenow will be toasted.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

mrbozo said:

habit said:

If the owners want to be "Evil", lower the ticket prices. This will lower revenue, lower Player salary's and still make a profit of 46%.

Muuuhaaaaa... Muuuuuhaaaaaa

*Dr. Evil laff*

What would be truly evil would be to raise ticket prices, and when interrogated to respond blandly, "We have to make up revenues for the lost season."

Well, they didn't raise them, but:

No cut in Habs' ticket prices
Club lost money. Several weak teams plan big reductions

PAT HICKEY
The Gazette

Thursday, July 14, 2005

"With the right economic system, we can take the pressure off of ticket prices and, I believe, with the right economic system, many, if not most, of our teams will actually lower ticket prices. I believe we owe it to our fans to have affordable ticket prices. ... More than a majority of our teams would use the opportunity of economic stability to lower their ticket prices."

That's what National Hockey League commissioner Gary Bettman said at the 2004 NHL All-Star Game in Minneapolis.

Bettman has since backed away from that statement, no doubt motivated by the fact that many, if not most, of the NHL's teams have no plans to cut ticket prices. The best news in most cities, including Montreal, is that ticket prices will not increase.

Canadiens president Pierre Boivin made it clear early in the negotiations that he didn't foresee a scenario that would lead to lower ticket prices. The Canadiens insist they have been losing money in recent years and the new economic order is a chance to catch up.

While many teams are still digesting the terms of the new collective agreement before finalizing their prices for the 2005-06 season, there has been no repeal of the law of supply and demand. That means there will be no reductions in the traditionally strong markets like Montreal, Toronto, Western Canada, Philadelphia, Detroit, Colorado and New York for the Rangers.

There will be substantial reductions in some of the weaker markets, including Buffalo and Pittsburgh - two of the cities that have experienced bankruptcy under the previous system.

Buffalo is offering season tickets for as little at $12 a game in the upper bowl and $21 in the lower bowl. The team will charge a premium for games against popular teams like the Maple Leafs and the Canadiens.

Pittsburgh had already decided to lower its ticket prices for the 2004-05 season, and team president Mario Lemieux has said that every ticket in the Igloo will be cheaper. Sixty-one per cent of the seats will cost $30 or less and the tickets top out at $60.

The Samuelis, the new owners of the Mighty Ducks of Anaheim, have instituted price cuts that average 5.28 per cent. They've cut the price of 1,500 upper-level seats from $25 to $9.50 and there will be a "buy-two-get-two-free" promotion on $23.50 terrace seats for selected games.

Florida, one of the weak links in the league, has launched what it describes as an entry-level season-ticket package for $365, which works out to about $8.70 a game. The Panthers have launched their own new marketing campaign with the slogan "There's a cold front coming," and will soon release details of special 13-game mini-packages.

The Atlanta Thrashers, who have failed to make the playoffs since joining the league for the 1999-2000 season, planned a substantial increase in ticket prices for the 2004-05 season and those prices will remain in effect.

Most teams have been offering some perks for fans who bought tickets for the cancelled 2004-05 season and left their money with the teams. The Phoenix Coyotes are the most generous and will give each season-ticket holder two tickets for the price of one.

The folks running the cash cow that is Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment have said there will be no reduction in ticket prices. MLSE president Richard Peddie conceded that the new CBA will result in lower salaries, but he noted that there were other financial considerations, such as the loss of U.S. TV revenue.

The bottom line in Toronto - and in other cities like Denver and Detroit - is that the CBA will mean less money for the players and more for the owners. Teachers in Ontario might not be able to afford season tickets at the Air Canada Centre, but they can take some joy in the fact more money will be flowing into the Ontario Teachers Pension Fund, which has a major investment in MLSE.

Minnesota, Vancouver, Calgary and the New York Islanders are among the other teams that won't cut prices. Nashville is undecided, but the Predators won't have any choice if they hope to attract some fans. They had the lowest average attendance in the league in 2003-04.

Washington, Florida, the New Jersey Devils and the Boston Bruins are among the teams that will probably adjust prices to boost sagging attendance.