greedy owners

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    it was the owners who insisted on paying X% of "revenue", not the hired hands.  Big difference between revenue, and any form of profit...gross, or net.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, the owners insisted upon it because the hired hands continued to demand more and more money.  And now, with the math done incorrectly previously, (it was their first cap, mistakes can be made), they have to revamp the parameters.

    But, the hired hands are being unreasonable.  Two years ago, guys who had only enough skill to clean up horse manure agreed to work for $8.12/hr.  As pay spiraled out of control, their next deals were for $11/hr. 

    The guys who own the farms have decided that it's just not feesible to pay someone $11/hr to clean horse dung.  They told their stall boys that they can still keep the jobs, but they have to go back to $8.25/hr.

    And that is now so unacceptable, they refuse to work for those wages.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to stevegm's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    it was the owners who insisted on paying X% of "revenue", not the hired hands.  Big difference between revenue, and any form of profit...gross, or net.

    [/QUOTE]

    Yes, the owners insisted upon it because the hired hands continued to demand more and more money.  And now, with the math done incorrectly previously, (it was their first cap, mistakes can be made), they have to revamp the parameters.

    But, the hired hands are being unreasonable.  Two years ago, guys who had only enough skill to clean up horse manure agreed to work for $8.12/hr.  As pay spiraled out of control, their next deals were for $11/hr. 

    The guys who own the farms have decided that it's just not feesible to pay someone $11/hr to clean horse dung.  They told their stall boys that they can still keep the jobs, but they have to go back to $8.25/hr.

    And that is now so unacceptable, they refuse to work for those wages.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


     

    what's your point?  do you expect the "stall boys" to work for $8.12 an hour?

    Or should they be able to consider a different "stall" that pays a little better?

    And finally...virtually no one is suggesting the perimeters shouldn't be re-worked a bit.  nobody wants to do away with the cap.  Most feel the players though...shouldn't bear 100% accountability in making all NHL teams profitable by reducing salaries 20-25% every few years.  Especially, when the league as an industry is doing very well.  Most agree that the NHL's proposals so far, do slightly help the Nashville Predators of the league....but not nearly as much as they do the toronto Maple Leafs.

    Whose "most" greedy so far, is unquestionably the owners(see thread heading)  

    You disagree, in fact I believe you stated it would be great if there were something like an 85% rollback.

    If only the south won.

     

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: greedy owners

    Free enterprize without free labor is simply myopic.  When does a contract seize to be contract, in the sports entertainment business.  In that business, the NHL CBA can roll back contracts that are legally binding.  In any shape or form, the owners are in the driving seat.  

    In a perfect world, there should be no CBA, contracts signed by players should be no longer than one year, and the owners can have full control over the revenue sharing system. 

    In reality, the owners and players are greedy!  Got to love the modern definition of capitalism where governments buyout poor business practices by banks and industry, and owners can roll back contracts because they are not making enough money.  Yikes!

     

Share