Topic: OT - News that No One in USA cares about... (Read 3167 times)

el-Karnak · « **Reply #20 on:** July 14, 2005, 05:25:57 pm »

The new CBA is supposed to have one of the best Revenue sharing deals of all the major sports and the Canadian dollar is back to where it should be now that Canada's budget is balanced and staying balanced; so, small-market Canadian teams should be able to operate in a business env. that has not be around since the 1980s. Maybe, a Canadian team is poised to make a Stanley Cup come-back.

I think this is where the players really mis-calculated. Not only were they trying to win a war against Billionaire owners while they were only millionaires, but Bettman was being cheered in cities like Edmonton for going for an Hard Cap. So, the Canadian hockey fans really did not back the players this time around. Big mistake to cross them.

Dfly · « **Reply #21 on:** July 14, 2005, 07:18:15 pm »

I did not back the players, but I also will not back the owners. WHY? well that part is easy. The players demanded more money in their contracts, and the owners SIGNED those contracts. Only team to actually turn down players who arbitrated and won (they did it twice) was Boston. KOODOS for Boston. And yes Boston is American and I am Canadian.

IMO, the owners and the players both messed up the whole system, all for the bottom dollar. Used to be able to go to a game and afford to sit near the redline. Now, if there is a redline, I need to remorgage the house to go.

FPF-Tobin Dax · « **Reply #22 on:** July 14, 2005, 07:45:44 pm »

No KOODOS for Boston. Who do you think got around the cap on rookie salaries by giving them huge signing bonuses, thus driving up costs. Think Joe Thornton. Way to go Harry!

Kruk · « **Reply #23 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:12:20 pm »

Quote from: Darth DeathFly on July 14, 2005, 07:18:15 pm

I did not back the players, but I also will not back the owners. WHY? well that part is easy. The players demanded more money in their contracts, and the owners SIGNED those contracts. Only team to actually turn down players who arbitrated and won (they did it twice) was Boston. KOODOS for Boston. And yes Boston is American and I am Canadian.

IMO, the owners and the players both messed up the whole system, all for the bottom dollar. Used to be able to go to a game and afford to sit near the redline. Now, if there is a redline, I need to remorgage the house to go.

Boston, hmmm like Tobin said

Think Ottawa Senators with Yashin a few years back. As much as I hate the sens, kudos to them back then.

Hexx · « **Reply #24 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:17:06 pm »

Ottawa response to Yashin was becaause way back with the fiasco concerning Daigle.
(Which was a contributing factor to many of the higher salaries seen later)
They did weel with Yashin- but it was from bitter experience.

Dfly · « **Reply #25 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:21:55 pm »

Still I like the fact that there are(were) a few rare teams that would look at the costs, like Ottawa.

FPF-Tobin Dax · « **Reply #26 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:37:16 pm »

New Jersey has done well producing cup victories while keeping the purse strings pretty tight.

KAT Chuut-Ritt · « **Reply #27 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:45:30 pm »

The only way to keep the salaries and ticket prices under control is for the fans to stop paying so much to watch the games and wear the jerseys. It is a simple matter of supply and demand, if the fans really were unhappy with prices they can always watch local leagues until the NHL (or other major sporting league) is hurt enough to alter their behavior.

FPF-Tobin Dax · « **Reply #28 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:48:32 pm »

Quote from: KAT Chuut-Ritt on July 14, 2005, 08:45:30 pm

The only way to keep the salaries and ticket prices under control is for the fans to stop paying so much to watch the games and wear the jerseys. It is a simple matter of supply and demand, if the fans really were unhappy with prices they can always watch local leagues until the NHL (or other major sporting league) is hurt enough to alter their behavior.

Hexx · « **Reply #29 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:52:08 pm »

Actually that's (to a degree) a false assumption
The Problem is -markets like Toronto, NY, etc tend to sell most of their seating to corporate groups.
The corporations use them as perks/ write offs/ etc so don't really care how much the tickets cost.
Although very few (if any) of the owners will say it they would actually prefer if most of their capacity was filled
with corporate boxes.

KAT Chuut-Ritt · « **Reply #30 on:** July 14, 2005, 08:55:30 pm »

Quote from: Hexx on July 14, 2005, 08:52:08 pm

Actually that's (to a degree) a false assumption
The Problem is -markets like Toronto, NY, etc tend to sell most of their seating to corporate groups.
The corporations use them as perks/ write offs/ etc so don't really care how much the tickets cost.
Although very few (if any) of the owners will say it they would actually prefer if most of their capacity was filled
with corporate boxes.

Corporations don't buy a lot of jesreys and posters and such. That is where teams make most of their money. Other thing is TV revenues which come from the average guy watching the advertisements.

News: