Is There A Role for Ottawa?

[Newfie Canadian]

Well, which government would you get in there? Ottawa or Washington?

The league offices are in New York.

26 out of 30 teams are based in the US.

All transactions and salaries are in US dollars.

Just a thought.

I don't believe there is a place for government in forcing a resolution, and I really can't see anything for them to do.

To me, at this point fault is irrelevant. Nobody wants to step up, act like adults and settle this thing. Bettman and Goodenow can't get through a 30 second sound bite without insulting each other. The thing to do is either kick them both out and get some new leadership, or lock the two of them in a room by themselves and feed them bread and water until they get something done.

[Stoker]

26 out of 30 teams are based in the US.

Unfortuanly Alberta is not yet part of the United States

24 American teams

[Newfie Canadian]

Ooooooooooppppppppps.

Brain cramp. Switched the 4 in 24 for the 6 in 6 Canadian teams

Apologies.

Thanks for pointing that out Stoker.

Unfortuanly Alberta is not yet part of the United States

[Cartman]

PM PM offered his services. Now he should impose them. Everyone (players, owners, fans) will agree. (After all, everyone is losing for each day of this strike.)

PS. I'm preparing my argument with Hugo about why the the State (PM PM) should have the authority to decide a strike.

There is no strike in the NHL.

[theloniusfleabag]

I believe that the NHL is now a business, and no longer a 'sport'. Sad really, but reality. Since the players and owners now regard it thusly, they should follow the rules of business.

Firstly, abolish the union. Unions aren't helping matters, as many young players would love to play in the NHL for far less than some of the overpriced 'marquee players'.

I don't recall the actual name of the business in question, but a few years ago a group of unionized miners refused to work for less than a certain amount of money, and the owner of the mine said "I can't turn a profit with those wages" and he closed the mine rather than be forced to operate at a loss. I don't think the situation is much different with the NHLPA.

It is sad that "Canada's Game" is now only about money, but if that is the way the player's union and the owners want it, then they should suffer the consequences, as with any business. Any business has the right to roll back wages, provided proper notice is given, but unions prevent normal business rules from applying.

[Cartman]

Any business has the right to roll back wages, provided proper notice is given, but unions prevent normal business rules from applying.

The players want a free market. It is the owners who want to deviate from a free market. The owners claim they need laws to stop themselves from overspending.

If an individual/corporation demands too much money, do not hire them. Seems easy enough. Let the market decide! If Jack Layton said that any Canadian corporation or individual should have a profit cap, people would be up in arms screaming "socialism!"

Goes to show you, it is not what you say that matters, it is who is saying it.

[kimmy]

I read that the owners' offer on Tuesday would guarantee the players 54% of the league's revenue. And I have heard that the NHL's revenue is in the range of $2 billion dollars a year. 54% of that is over a billion. There are about 700 players in the NHL, so the owners' offer would give an average annual salary of over $1.4 million. I only wish that my employer would insult ME with an offer like that.

People might miss hockey for the time being, but not for long. If the NHL stays out of operation for too long, then Canadian broadcasters will find other hockey to put on TV. The AHL, Canadian major junior hockey, college hockey... the World Junior Championships will start in a week.

I think that people worried about the big-picture economic impact of the NHL lockout can probably relax. We hear these studies saying how NHL teams generate X millions of dollars of economic activity in their community, but I think the studies neglect to mention that people will find something else to spend their entertainment money on. Perhaps instead of taking the family to one NHL game a month they'll take the family out to dinner 4 times, or to the movies, or to amateur hockey, or some combination of things. Maybe they'll save up to buy a new snowmobile or something. If I owned a sports bar, I would be worried. There'll be losers, of course, but there'll also be winners, somewhere else in the economy. It's all a rich tapestry.

-kimmy

[Cartman]

Personally, I wish they would show some European hockey or more junior hockey. If there was a media alternative, the two sides would get this deal done but fast.

[ndpnic]

Any business has the right to roll back wages, provided proper notice is given, but unions prevent normal business rules from applying.

The players want a free market. It is the owners who want to deviate from a free market. The owners claim they need laws to stop themselves from overspending.

If an individual/corporation demands too much money, do not hire them. Seems easy enough. Let the market decide! If Jack Layton said that any Canadian corporation or individual should have a profit cap, people would be up in arms screaming "socialism!"

Goes to show you, it is not what you say that matters, it is who is saying it.

If Jack Layton said that any Canadian corporation or individual should have a profit cap, people would be up in arms screaming "socialism!"

THAT'S WHAT I'M PRAYING $!!!!!!!

Only the greedy oppose socislism!!!

[August1991]

Stoker:

Is NHL hockey an essential service?

Though it might look like a game of chicken, it's not, the players (rightfully so) don't have a warchest anywhere near that of the size of the owners/league. I heard an interview the other day with Eagleson (formor player rep) and his sources are telling him the the majority of the players don't have enough money to last past Jan 2006........and there will be Hummer payments needing to be made.......I can't think of that many jobs the pay a six-seven-eight figure salary that doesn't require some sort of post secondary education.........

The players will cave.

It's not an essential service but who cares. A strike has got to be the stupidest way to resolve an issue. (Well, a brawl is just as dumb but I digress.)

The purpose of this long,costly strike is merely to determine whether the players will cave, as you say.

As to the players' high salaries, I agree that many players (if not all) would be working on a loading dock if not for chance genetics.

Well, by chance, an acre of land in Manhattan is worth a heck of a lot more than an acre of land in Saskatchewan. And by chance, people with blue eyes earn more than people with brown eyes. It happens.

I hope the NHL folds!

Let these GREEDY assholes(players) get REAL jobs and see what life is like!

[ironic Tone]Eat the Rich![/ironic Tone]

Well, which government would you get in there? Ottawa or Washington?

Good point, Newf. My suggestion about PM PM getting involved was tongue in cheek. So given you point, maybe Kofi Annan could get involved here instead. (Maybe the Russians will sell transcripts to Canadian newspapers.)

There is no strike in the NHL.

Is it a walkout, Cartman? I haven't followed this too closely.

I believe that the NHL is now a business, and no longer a 'sport'. Sad really, but reality. Since the players and owners now regard it thusly, they should follow the rules of business.

Thelonious Monk, I agree with you but it's not clear to me what the difference is between a "sport" and a "business".

It is sad that "Canada's Game" is now only about money, but if that is the way the player's union and the owners want it, then they should suffer the consequences, as with any business.

What's wrong with money?

Look, the NHL is selling improvised entertainment. They would be wise to have teams of similar talent so that no team dominates and the drama is heightened. Honesty is absolutely critical.

The players and team owners have every reason to cooperate on this.

Cooperate? How about this idea. No salary cap but if any individual player negotiates a salary above a certain limit, the excedent of that player is put into a fund and distributed to players below the limit.

The players want a free market. It is the owners who want to deviate from a free market. The owners claim they need laws to stop themselves from overspending.

Free market? You have a bunch of owners who collude (but cheat) and a bunch of players who collude (but cheat unless there's a strike or walk-out, or whatever it is).

This ain't a free market. It's a game of chicken with, in the background, a bunch of hulking guys who by chance genetics own the equivalent of a few acres of Manhattan real estate.

Bottom line? You can change the owners and get new ones. You can't change the players.

If an individual/corporation demands too much money, do not hire them. Seems easy enough. Let the market decide!

Huh? Market decide? You can't choose strategies with a market. This is a game.

There are about 700 players in the NHL, so the owners' offer would give an average annual salary of over $1.4 million. I only wish that my employer would insult ME with an offer like that.

Kimmy, once again, discovers the real world.

There'll be losers, of course, but there'll also be winners, somewhere else in the economy. It's all a rich tapestry.

Rich tapestry? Sorry, you can't buy the Lexus so I'll offer you this used Echo you may like. I exaggerate but the loss is the next alternative use of your time. For about 700 NHL hockey players, that's a steep cliff they're looking at. For the 20 million fans, a slight incline.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

I agree with you but it's not clear to me what the difference is between a "sport" and a "business".

A sport is something invented by people for love, fun, and/or exercise. At some point in history, spectators began to to be drawn in, for a multitude of reasons, I'm sure. When those involved in 'sport' decided to make not just some money from those spectators, but their sole income from said 'sport', it becomes business.

I play hockey Friday and Saturday nights, because I love it, it is lots of fun and good exercise. It is still a 'sport' to me. Sure, it would be nice to make money from it, rather than pay for it, but I would much rather participate than watch. (I feel the same way about porn). I'm sure that, to a large degree, for both sport and porn, once one 'turns pro' there isn't much love or fun left, just money.

[August1991]

I play hockey Friday and Saturday nights, because I love it, it is lots of fun and good exercise.

So, when you derive benefit (fun) from playing hockey, that's OK. But when a professional player derives benefit (money), that's not OK.

Is it because there's a numerical value on one benefit, but not the other?

Why is it if I do something for my benefit (no money involved), it is OK. But if I do something else (money involved), it is considered crass?

I think there is some distinction here between doing something for some "ulterior motive" as opposed to doing something for the "goodness of one's soul".

I have heard the pejorative phrase used, "he only did it for the money". Whereas people will say as a compliment, "he did it out of pure generosity".

Once again, I'm way off topic so you are welcome to ignore or respond in a new thread elsewhere.

[Big Blue Machine]

Ottawa shouldn't be involved in this hockey dispute. It should be solved between the league and the players. They don't need a third party watching their every move. Hockey is a sport not a business. We can't make a crown coporation of hockey.

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear August1991,

So, when you derive benefit (fun) from playing hockey, that's OK. But when a professional player derives benefit (money), that's not OK.

I did not say it was 'not OK', I was merely responding to your query regarding 'when does sport become business'?

Big Blue Machine writes...

Hockey is a sport not a business.

which is true, the NHL is a business, not hockey itself.

[fellowtraveller]

which is true, the NHL is a business, not hockey itself.

No, the NHL is an umbrella organization representing the owners and regulating the on and off ice activities of the commerical groups that own the teams. Each team is a business.

The NHLPA does the same for players, who each negotiate personal services contracts under the general guidelines of the league. It is not a union in the traditional sense.