NHLPA, Canadiens players lose Round 1


From Hockey Inside/Out’s Brenda Branswell, posted at 8:50 pm ET:

The NHL players’ association lost Round 1 at Quebec’s labour relations board on Friday, but the substance of the case has yet to be decided.

Judge Andrée St-Georges from the Commission des relations du travail rejected a request from NHLPA and 16 Montreal Canadiens players for a provisional order to try to prevent the team from locking out its players.

But in the same terse decision, St-Georges also advised both sides they will be convened for a hearing on the merits of the question.

The players had been seeking an interim decision. Their collective agreement expires at midnight on Saturday.

The NHLPA and 16 Montreal Canadiens players filed an application with the board earlier this week that argued a lockout would be an “obvious violation” of Quebec’s labour code. It contends that an employer in Quebec cannot lock out employees unless they belong to a union that is certified in Quebec by the province’s labour board, which isn’t the case with the NHLPA.

The administrative tribunal in Montreal heard about five hours of legal arguments Friday from lawyers representing the NHLPA, NHL and Montreal Canadiens.

Lawyer Michael Cohen, representing the NHLPA, wrapped up the morning session by saying the conclusions are very simple — to declare a violation of the labour code and to order the league and the Canadiens not to impose a lockout here.

Gary Rosen, a lawyer for the NHL and Montreal Canadiens, argued the Quebec labour code doesn’t apply to the case.

Their legal team also noted the players’ association has negotiated with the NHL for 45 years under the National Labour Relations Act in the United States.


“We are pleased but not surprised with the Quebec Labour Board’s ruling that any lockout of players will be effective on a league-wide basis, including in Quebec. And we are extremely appreciative of the expeditious and decisive manner in which the matter was handled.

“We are hopeful that this ruling will cause the players’ association to cease pursuing these needless distractions and instead focus all of its efforts and energies on making progress at the bargaining table.”


TORONTO/NEW YORK (September 14, 2012) – Don Zavelo, National Hockey League Players’ Association General Counsel, released the following statement regarding this evening’s decision of the Commission des Relations du Travail (Quebec Labour Board):

“We are pleased with the ruling that the Commission released tonight. While the Commission denied the players’ request for emergency relief, it also rejected the NHL’s request to dismiss the case.  The ruling acknowledges that the players have raised issues about the legality of the NHL’s planned lockout that require a full hearing on the merits.

“We remain confident that the lockout is prohibited by the Quebec Labour Code and look forward to presenting our case to the Commission in the near future. Should the NHL carry out its threat to lock out the players in Quebec, it will do so at its own risk.”


  1. boing007 says:

    Horse apples anyone?

    Richard R
    Price is an oyster. Unfortunately not all oysters produce pearls.

  2. boing007 says:

    @ NCRhabsfan
    September 15, 2012 at 12:29 am

    The NHL and the NHLPA are like a gang of thieves falling out over how to split the loot they’ve stolen from some small town. A pox on both their houses.

    My sentiments exactly. Pox on!

    Richard R
    Price is an oyster. Unfortunately not all oysters produce pearls.

  3. boing007 says:

    The Eleventh Hour.

    Richard R
    Price is an oyster. Unfortunately not all oysters produce pearls.

  4. kempie says:

    Looks like I’m going to need some kind of 12-step thing here. Who’s with me? Anybody want to be my sponsor?

  5. KLear says:

    While there is weak hope hockey may start imminently, I have to say I am already disgusted with both sides.

    This is the Owner’s system. And they still screwed it up. I don’t begrudge Bettman – he is working with a group I wouldn’t touch with a barge pole (Ken Dryden’s recent article in the Globe was astute and worth the read).

    As for the players, the average NHL salary is ~$2 million/yr. The median NHL career is 4 years. An average player will make 4-5 times (or more) what the average North American would make in a 25 year career.

    So, how can either side justify that logic is on their side ? Really ?

  6. Hobie Hansen says:

    So doomsday has finally arrived.

    Totally bummed that we’re not getting hockey until at least January. My pipe dream of the Habs making the playoffs is squashed for the meantime, Oh well.

    To look at if from an optimist’s point of view; maybe a 41 game season benefits a weaker team like the Habs? If they get off to a fast start and then play .500 hockey the rest of the way, ya just never know.

    I was looking forward to our first game against Boston to really get the juices going.

    Go Habs Go…I guess?

  7. John Q Public says:

    As in society the wealthy are putting the squeeze on everybody.
    While everything costs more due inflation/hyperinflation they expect everybody to do with less while they make more.
    Both sides had ample time to come to an agreement. The specifics do not matter. They want more!
    So while we Habs fanatics where anticipating the season with all the changes made we get Nothing.
    The only way they would learn is if we stopped spending money on their overchanged game of Hockey.
    But so many have said I will be back when they are back.
    But their time is coming to end.
    I cant watch NFL any more as they changed the rules to make it a pass fest and protect players.
    Formula 1 which I loved so much has devolved in to video game.
    The rest are in the past.
    Will NHL hockey follow?
    Who knows.
    All I know is there’s a whole lot going on this World and nobody seems to care.
    In conclusion both sides can go and F#@* themselves!

  8. rhino514 says:

    Does anyone have an idea what the ongoing operating expenses per year are like for owners in the event of a lock out?

  9. habstrinifan says:

    “The NHLPA and 16 Montreal Canadiens players filed an application with the board earlier this week that argued a lockout would be an “obvious violation” of Quebec’s labour code. It contends that an employer in Quebec cannot lock out employees unless they belong to a union that is certified in Quebec by the province’s labour board, which isn’t the case with the NHLPA…”

    I usually do not quibble over grammatical impreciseness on this site which caters best to spontaneous and emotional reaction to and about our team. After all, on the Internet, one man’s linguistic faux pas could be the twitter world’s newest neologism.

    However, the excerpt which I have pasted above adds to a confusion that I have in understanding the particular statute, enshrined in Quebec’s Labour Law, which the NHLPA used to argue their case.

    I think the phrase “an Employer cannot lock out employees unless they belong to a union that is certified in Quebec” should read “who do not belong to a union that is certified in Quebec”.

    As it is written, the pronoun ‘they’ gives the impression that the ‘EMPLOYER’ must belong to the properly certified union. Surely this is not the case.

    Are you still with me? Hope you are! Cause my convoluted complaint re language is a test of your attention span so that I can ask a real question which stems from the article.

    Quebec is a province known for progressive legislation to protect the working class and this looks like one of those laws. Does it strike anyone then that the restriction forebidding lockouts is strangely worded.

    The legislation seems to give Employers the right to lockout ‘unionized’ labour only. Does this mean then that Walmart cannot lockout its workforce?

    Was this law principally driven by an anti-union legislator? Was it deliberately crafted to offer protection to the group of workers often victimized by not being numeous or permanent enough for unionization?

    It seems a strange law with good intentions but full of possible loopholes.

    Come on Quebec gurus! Explain this law to me without quibbling about my convolution.

    Finally I say SHAME to you millionaire hockey players running for protection under a law which seems to be intended for poorly paid and treated casual labour.

    And by the way, can we lockout P.K and if so does this protect us, P.K fans, from him being traded?

    YES?… I say lock P.K out!!!!

  10. HabinBurlington says:

    So I understand the players perspective, they have said Hey we will continue to play under the old CBA. As Neumann points out down below, this is what the NHL Owners really wanted at the time.

    However, having said that, I think the owners should work on how they phrase and explain their current situation. What needs to be admitted by them, is that while the current CBA has the elements they wanted and need to create economic stability, they didn’t craft a complete agreement and left gaping loopholes which the players, the agents and the owners themselves have maximized. In so doing, they essentially undid all they tried to achieve in the previous agreement.

    The owners clearly were shortsighted in how much revenue growth the game had the potential to realize. As a result, they are seeing much higher dollars being paid in contracts to the players than they ever envisioned. In addition, they have witnessed their co-horts shoot themselves in the foot with ridiculous longterm contracts and contracts with Ginormous signing bonuses.

    These long term front loaded contracts are not the answer for any league, as you are removing incentive from the players to continue to improve and you begin down a slippery slope of paying for past performance instead of future performance.

    Philisophically, I understand the players “plight”, but they must realize that the current average contracts in the NHL have risen dramatically, and I would guess are as high or higher than many other pro leagues in North America. But, Hockey is nowhere near as popular and rich in North America as these other leagues, that doesn’t make sense to me.

    End of day, I think the owners should take a more honest approach and show that they are capable of making mistakes as they have done so, and rather show some contrition. Instead we see arrongance and condescending rhetoric from Bettman and Daly. I guess however, that represents a couple owners very well (Jacobs, Snider etc..)

    • JohnBellyful says:

      Burl’, you’re right about the owners needing to admit to fallibility and to show some contrition. Unfortunately, neither concept is in their vocabulary so you might want to add some explanatory words. Arrogance and condescending, they have no trouble understanding.

      P.S. I wish to apologize for not cheering the Bombers to victory last night. Once a Ticat fan, always a Ticat fan (although this year the team is more like the Puddy Tats). Still, I wouldn’t wish a 44-3 defeat even on my worst enemy (unless it was the Bruins).

      • HabinBurlington says:

        Yah my Bombers are a sorry lot this year. Looks like i will be carrying my rooting interests over to the Cats once the Bombers are mathmatically eliminated. (Of course in the CFL this is virtually impossible)

        I think an owner like Molson has the vocabulary I spoke of, not sure how many others also do.

    • KLear says:

      I agree whole heartedly. But what the Owner’s need to admit (but never will) and what the NHLPA knows and banks on, is Owner greed will undermine every CBA.

  11. Habfan17 says:

    Both the owners and players are hypocrits!

    When I read that 283 players are standing behind Fehr to show their solidarity and then a certain percentage of the players will be playing elsewhere and collecting a cheque while the majority of the players take it on the chin, they are hypocrits, saying they are willing to stay out a year for a fair deal. On top of that, they are taking a spot away from a player in the leagues they run off to.
    Players are well compensated for their hard work and risk. I can’t stand when somone tries to justify that the lower level players play for the league minimum $500,000 at an average of 5 years. That works out to what the average Cdn. makes in 50 years. Then they get to go have another career. On top of that, it is in the CBA that they must stay in 5 star hotels and they get a daily travel per dium. They have access for free to the best doctors, trainers and nutritionists, on the team dime from when they are drafted and at that point they re not helping the team make money.

    The owners take the financial risks, to a point. If the team loses money for 5 years, the players do not share in that, they are guaranteed their salaries. I say owners take the financial risk to a point because many of them get their funding from the tax payers.
    Owners, pay the cost to help genereate the revenue the players feel they are intitled too but they do not pay the cost of generating them.

    For instance, the renovations of Madison Square Gardens. Apparently the renovations cost about $1 billion to update and add more suites etc to generate more revenue. What did that cost the players? Owners keep shooting themselves in the foot by giving out ridiculous contracts. Sure they have to be careful, if they all started being fiscally responsible the union would call collusion.

    So, in the end, the real losers are the people who work in jobs connected to hockey who really need them to get by. The folks who work concessions at the arenas relying on the extra money for university tuition etc. We, the fan who are expected to shell out big bucks for tickets, hats, etc. Paying $30.00 for a hat when you know that $5.00 will go to the NHLPA and $5.00 to the NHL. We are just cash cows to them. There are some who really care for the fans, but there are others who only care because without us fans, they would not make the millions they make!Bothe sides need to just smarten up, don’t bite the hand that feeds you and sign a new CBA!

  12. Chrisadiens says:

    Let’s be honest. We will all watch hockey once it returns. We can’t stay away forever. I wish it was possible to show the owners and players that we (the fans) refuse to be treated this way. We need someone with a voice (a celebrity perhaps) to organize a one game sit out. Once the lockout ends, the first regular season game. All 30 buildings empty and zero tv ratings. Just to let them know this won’t be accepted anymore. Will it destroy them financially? Of course not. But a league wide sit out would receive national attention in the U.S. and at least show that we won’t take this lying down. But alas, this will never happen…one can dream though.

    Chrisadiens and HabFan10912, one of the few father son tandems on HIO.

  13. Habfan10912 says:

    So disappointed this morning. There are few things in life I enjoy more then sitting in my living room and watching a hockey game. Nothing tops my annual trek to Montreal to catch a game. I would love to commit to the “never again” crowd but as an addict I cannot. Sadly, once the games resume I will be back. Buying my Centre Ice package buying tickets and merchandise. I know. I know. I am a fool. Feel free to reign name calling on me.
    So disappointed.


    • HabinBurlington says:

      Okay, I will start with the name calling Jim. You are a crazy and passionate fan of the Habs. And I am right behind you in line with the same addiction!

      Have a good day Chief!

    • Cal says:

      Well, Habfan, you are exactly as your handle suggests. The Habs have been in my blood ever since I can remember. I’ve seen too many Cups and great character players on this team to stop supporting them now.
      If you are a fool, then I am a bigger one.
      Fehr and Bettman don’t give a crap about us. Neither do all the players and owners and that’s why we are where we are.

    • AliHaba says:

      I agree. I can’t see myself staying away from my Habs. One of my great pleasures is to watch a Habs game with my friends and imbibe in one (or two) cold ones.

  14. HabinBurlington says:

    Sounds like Bruins are about to announce they have signed Lucic to a multi year extension.

  15. ProHabs says:

    Would love to see the Habs sign a big goon and a big defenceman for this year. I am optimistic with Mike Terrien running the show. He doesn’t like a soft team. No more being pushed around.

    • neumann103 says:

      With Brandon Prust you have a guy who can do everything a goon can but can take a regular third line shift and be a front line penalty killer. He dresses every game. Not some lunkhead who sits in the pressbox most nights and plays 4 minutes a game when you have a hunch the other team might get dirty.

      This partially explains why you might overpay the guy by about 25-30%.

      “Et le but!”

    • Ian Cobb says:

      Will this fellow be able to stop the owners from pushing the players around? I don’t think so. No hockey until half way through the next season me thinks.

      • Just a Habs Fan says:

        Ian I read much of what you write on here and mostly with approving nods but do you really feel the players aren’t as responsible as the owners here. Do you really think they aren’t as greedy ? I interpret your comments as pro player but can’t for the world of me see how one can be different than the other in this greed fest. Personally I think they belong in the same pot and we the fans are the only ones losing…we pay their damm salaries by hook or by crook whether it be our clothes/food/kids needs for sport and game tickets. Wish I could take a side it would be easier. One day it will all come down on these guys. Just my thoughts on it.

        • neumann103 says:

          Sure, if the players had locked the owners out.

          Players were willing toplay under current CBA which was the owners wet dream from 2005 and has resulted in growth all around.

          Owners position was “No hockey until players unilaterally accept compensation reductions greater than 24%”. None of this will be passed on in lower ticket prices or cheaper arena hot dogs.

          Who would you blame?

          The structural problem is that a very small number of teams lose a lot of money, a large number are essentially breakeven and a half dozen or so are wildly profitable and the League lacks a source of easy equalization money – eg a rich National TV contract that could be split evenly despite obviously different value derived from Rangers vs Coyotes games.

          “Et le but!”

  16. NCRhabsfan says:

    The NHL and the NHLPA are like a gang of thieves falling out over how to split the loot they’ve stolen from some small town. A pox on both their houses.

    Special mention though to Gary Bettman, who should be denied entry to Canada for the rest of his natural life and who should never, ever feel safe in an NHL building again. It would be a real shame if he were pelted with batteries the next time he showed up…car batteries. And c’mon Bill Daley, gloating over winning a court decision that lets you prevent hockey from being played; you do realize you’re in the hockey business. Apparently not.

    Where is the WHA when you need them? I wonder if Mr Molson would be a little more antsy about this if there was a prospect that the Bell Center would sit empty for many years…

    Anyhow, the bottom line is I won’t miss them until the new year when the NFL is finished. Then a few weeks later MLB goes to spring training and the PGA gets going again. Who knows, maybe I won”t miss them at all. Right now the former Expos are leading the NL East and that is way more interesting than anything the NHL is doing, or not doing.

    In “sort of” hockey news, Doan signed in Phoenix for 4 years. In one fell swoop he demonstrated that he has no interest in winning a Stanley Cup or playing in front of a live crowd. The Phoenix management team also showed that money is not an issue; they gave a creaky old guy 21 + million bucks to play in front of empty seats. Yup, the owners need a better deal, but only because fools and their money are soon parted.

  17. accp says:

    Those players are not gonna miss paychecks. most of these guys have enough money to keep a couple of us going for the next 20-years ….

  18. Habitant in Surrey says:

    ‘Together We Can’ change.org/nolockout


    “I got so pissed off when I heard Gary Bettman say that he plans to lockout the players for the third time on September 15 unless there is a new agreement with the players. So, I went and created a YouTube video to tell other angry fans to raise their voices and demand the season starts on time. Over 600,000 people have already watched my video!

    There is NO good reason why the season should not start on time. The players have already said they are ready to play with or without a new agreement.

    So do we stay mute? Or raise our voice!?

    Demand the season starts on time. Let’s get angry!”

    Janne Makkonen

    Espoo, Finland

  19. HardHabits says:

    Bring in the scabs already. Or better yet let’s see upper management strap on some skates and pads and go out there and leave it all on the ice.

    The Quebec Labour Board is playing a cautious waiting game of “if we outright refuse this request we’ll look weak and ineffective but if we go ahead and try and do something about it, which will amount to nothing, we’ll look weak and ineffective”… so by saying that they are going to reject the NHL’s request to dismiss the case while at the same time acknowledging that the players have raised issues about the legality, the Quebec Labour Board is actually doing nothing and thus looks strong and meaningful.

    This is nothing more than a publicity stunt. Pass the remote.

  20. commandant says:

    “It wouldn’t be a wrongful lockout because the Labour board allowed it.”

    Not exactly true, it can still be a wrongful lockout and there can still be back pay

    The Labour Board isn’t saying they are allowing it. They are deferring the decision to a later date. Basically they are saying to both sides that it is too big an issue to decide in a quick emergency meeting. More legal work and legal arguments must be studied first.

    Oh and they are also saying this…

    “To the NHL, Yeah we won’t stop you from doing this right now, but we are going to look at the legality of it in a couple weeks…. and guess what, you better hope you are right, cause if not, you’ll pay backpay in a couple weeks (and legal costs of the NHLPA)….. Oh and PA, you better hope you are right, cause if you lose in a couple weeks, you’ll be paying the NHL’s legal costs”

    So the QLRB has set up a giant game of chicken here… encouraging both sides to settle before they adjudicate the case in a couple weeks.

    Go Habs Go!
    Check out Top Shelf Prospects, my Team by Team prospect reports

  21. habs_54321 says:

    the pa and nhl should make an agreement for the next cba that if an agreement isn’t made by both sides by a certain date that an arbitrator comes in and makes a final decision

    • commandant says:

      Would be nice, but will never happen.

      The owners don’t want to give up the control they have.

      The lockout is their trump card, and they know that in most situations they can hold out for a deal longer than the players can… and that they will win once paycheques start being missed.

      Go Habs Go!
      Check out Top Shelf Prospects, my Team by Team prospect reports

  22. JF says:

    My fears about the impending lockout are twofold:

    First, that it won’t resolve anything. A settlement will eventually be reached and the revenue-split will probably be close to what was envisaged by both sides right from the start. But the revenue-sharing system will remain what it is, which is to say that the rich teams will get richer while the poor teams continue to struggle. So in six or seven years (or however many the new CBA lasts), Bettman can come to the NHLPA again and explain that despite record profits, the owners are in financial difficulties again and need the players to make more concessions. Then we can have another long drawn-out battle.

    Second, that this situation will recur regularly (whenever there is a new CBA), and the League’s weapon of choice every time will be the lockout. The era of Gary Bettman has set a precedent; this will be the fourth work stoppage in the NHL since he has been Commissioner. When you’ve once imposed a lockout, it gets easier to do it again. Labour disputes and lockouts could become par for the course and, unless the players accept that they aren’t going to win these battles, we could see a longer or shorter interruption to the hockey season every few years.

  23. Marc10 says:

    Wow. The biggest hockey news of the day is that the PA’s lawyer is going to take on the League’s lawyer…

    The PA’s got an uphill battle on this one. What is Vegas saying…?

  24. Boomer says:

    A Cool guy, great interview. He’s down to earth, confident and polite. I was a fan before… Now I’m a big fan.
    Again sorry for the broken sentences and the spelling I was trying to type fast and listen and sometimes translate hehe.
    I have a new found respect for Boone and his live blogs! lol

    Cheers guys

  25. commandant says:

    The Day before the NHL lockout, NHL owners hand out contracts to 6 players worth over 100 million dollars in total salary.

    21.2 million of that coming from a team that is still owned by the league itself.

    Go Habs Go!
    Check out Top Shelf Prospects, my Team by Team prospect reports

    • …and yet there is supposed to be acrimony? I don’t get it either. Players and their agents are all too happy to sign contracts with vaporizing totals and for all I can tell owners that are negotiating in bad faith. Would I sign a contract that may be clawed back by 20% with a new CBA to come through? I would want bonuses up front as well. So is it the player or the owner who are the hypocrites? Sounds to me like they are all part of this mess. Ridiculous!

      Promote the Youth, Support From The Veterans and Remember the Heritage!

  26. Boomer says:

    When asked about Montreal’s toughness “Were you guys (Rangers)afraid to get hurt against Montreal?”

    “We were trying to win in montreal cause we lost the last 3 years in a row in mtl. But yea we knew, there were a few guys… like moen.. moen and I had a good battle….
    What did you guys say?
    “I said “Hey MO, WANNA GO?” and he said “Sure”. LOL

    Q:what was the conversation like with Therrien?
    “It’s nice To be part of a rebuilding team a new direction its a challenge to become a piece of the puzzle. It’s nice to be wanted in that scenario and they made me feel that way”.

  27. joeybarrie says:

    Lots of hate for players who want to play hockey. If the NHL doesn’t want to pay them, why wouldn’t they go somewhere, where they will pay them?
    Did you want them to stand outside the hockey hall of fame and picket?
    If the owners in the NHL won’t agree to a season, then I would absolutely sign in the KHL where the owners will.

    Pk Subban. Immature cause he hasn’t signed, wants too much money. Blah blah blah. Why do we bother when we have no idea???
    They will be locked out in 26 hours. So what’s the difference?

    To me its the owners. I saw their first offer. Nonsense. So work harder. They are the ones to LOCKOUT the players. They don’t deserve the fans money. Its not up to the players to come across, its up to the ones instigating the loss of a season.
    Especially in a sport where most teams are lucky to have the fans they do, and will lose them through dis-interest. Montreal, Toronto, Detroit, Boston, etc etc will always be fine.

    YOU ARE THE COMMISSIONER. Make it work, and give us a season.

  28. Boomer says:

    In New york people reckognize you on the ice in montreal people are gonna know you OFF the ice…
    “It’s gonna be a challenge and it’s something i’m gonna enjoy, I thrive under pressure, look forward to it”

  29. Boomer says:

    Former teammate Roy sent a straw to Prust on the show lol
    BAck in the day Prust fought Cam Jansen and broke his jaw, it’s a little inside joke between the two. Jansen slammed him into the boards before the fight breaking his jaw

  30. Boomer says:

    Commercial lol
    sorry if there are spelling mistakes, it might not be quoted exactly as he says it but its pretty close lol.
    The “Crashing and Banging” bit was what he said (LOVE IT).
    He seems really laid back and is smiling a lot 🙂

  31. Boomer says:

    Q: did therrien have a role in bringing you into to Mtl?
    A: he did he said they were making changes and I would fit into those plans. They were heading in a new direction and I would be a good fit. I knew it was a good fit.

    Apparently Therrien and Mellanby visited him at his home, they spoke at length about plans for the team and myself.

  32. Boomer says:

    a little game to get to know prust.
    question: If i was the coach and didnt know you at all how would you describe yoursel?
    Prust: a character guy, I bring a lot of energy on the ice and defend my teammates. I do what needs to be done.
    Question what will you do to help the habs
    Crashing and banging, droppin the mitts when need be and not letting my teammates be pushed around. Bringing energy every night
    quetion how did you get along with Torts?
    I liked him he’s a great coach and he’s passionate you respect him a lot.

  33. Boomer says:

    A quick discussion about pk not being signed… Vinny Damphouse (spelling sorry lol) thinks he’s not signed cause he’s asking for too much money long term… Mario Tremblay thinks him not maturing enough is why.

  34. Boomer says:

    Mario Tremblay’s “manchette”…”finally the player the CH was looking for”… PJ Stock “Finally”. “you can’t win with one or two lines you need depth players like Brandon, it’s a good signing by Bergevin. You need guys with character”

  35. Boomer says:

    k frontenac, Prust juste just opened l’antichambre in French, “good evening, this is Brendan Prust new left winger for the canadiens…. there’s a new sheriff in town”

  36. HabinBurlington says:

    I wonder how different this current CBA negotiation would be if the owners had a different face representing them, perhaps a Gretzky.

  37. ProHabs says:

    Why are so many players getting signed everyday and the Habs can’t sign PK.

  38. JohnBellyful says:

    As I understand it, if the lockout becomes a lock this weekend, there’s gonna be a whole bunch of arenas sitting empty this winter.
    No way is there enough time for the owners to find alternative forms of entertainment.
    That’s where we fans come in. First of all we’re available. It’s not like we were planning to do anything else for the next six, seven months. So, yeah, if you want to lock the players out, fine, but there’s no reason to keep us out.
    It doesn’t have to be a big deal so don’t knock yourself out trying to come up with huge acts as draws. If it gets us out of the house and there’s a promise of beer, count us in. Yeah, we’re easy. Look, if this offer hadn’t come along, we’d be home watching Jackass movies so if whatever you come up with involves stupid stunts, we’re fine. It might even be fun.
    On the other hand, we’re squeamish. If you’re a fan it means you can handle abuse and keep coming back for more but having the league shut down the season isn’t the same as applying a tourniquet to your testicles (which was a hoot in Jackass 4). There has to be some kind of limit to what we’ll endure in person.
    Lastly, we’re bored. Yeah, the lockout hasn’t even started out yet but all this CBA talk for the last month has driven us up the wall. Remember, we were salivating over the prospect of training camp – even more than usual. So we need a diversion and we need it fast. Otherwise a lot of us will slip into a semi-catatonic state and feign interest in life.
    So, owners, you’re pretty much guaranteed a packed house and it won’t require much in the way of thought to make it happen. Sweet music to the ears, eh?
    All you need now is to come up with a gimmick.
    How about this: Fan conventions in every city – 41 of them in each arena, starting in October and ending in March (none of this dragging the season out; keep it short).
    Trust me when I say, we’ll never get tired of them. You could have a different theme each night, and encourage the fans to dress up for every one of them, Childhood Idols, for example, or Monster Enforcers, Players As Villains, Goal-scoring Super Heroes, Playmaking Wizards, Minders of the Net – you get the idea.
    Hockey trivia quizzes, beer-drinking competitions, referee baiting, staged fights, Don Cherry soundalike contests, vegetables-that-look-like-Ron McLean exhibits, giant tabletop hockey games where fans are the players and have to stay within the groove … there’s no end to the possibilities.
    Why, you could even have stalls where owners sign autographs, pose for pictures, and treat fans like dirt. Or a kissing booth where people will be allowed to kiss Bettman’s ring.
    You’re sitting on a goldmine with those empty facilities. I tell ya. And it wouldn’t take much to turn a profit. Low overhead, volume sales in tickets (including season passes).
    You know, guys, if it works out, you might not have to worry about playing hockey ever again.

    • HabinBurlington says:

      Will parking be free? I can live with the gimmick entertainment, but the $25 parking is a hangup for me. Granted in Glendale the parking appears to be much cheaper.

      • JohnBellyful says:

        There’s just no satisfying a Hab fan.
        Okay, you come in, buy a souvenir, the owner will validate your parking: 43 per cent discount.

        • HabinBurlington says:

          Thanks John.

          • JohnBellyful says:

            Your welcome, HB.
            Guess I’ll head downstairs and see how the Bombers are faring.
            As bad as they’re doin’, and the Ticats are only a game ahead. Unbelievable!
            I’d root for Winnipeg tonight but Hamilton fans can’t afford to be charitable, not with a playoff spot slipping away. How about if I hope the Bombers lose a close one?

          • HabinBurlington says:

            9-0 in the first quarter extrapolates to 36-0, i guess that is closer than our 52-0 game. Thanks for your incredible support to the Blue and Gold!

  39. Nina76 says:

    I am sick @ tired of the millionaires plus the billionaires. They are all in the swim together. The players do not give a damn about the fans so don’t let me read again that they feel sorry for the fans BS!BS! sure they are willing to sit on their asses @ get millions . I do not belevie any of the crap that is comming out of their mouths………….My next point is this….Tell me how would they like to live on a fixed income, HA! HA! Gocha millionaires!!! Live from paycheck to paycheck that is something that you will never have to do because you all are loaded with money.Do you think that we seniors in peticular can cry for more money from the Feds or the Prov. NO! NO! we have to live on the money they give us, you should all be ashamed of yourselves.I have been a Habs fan for 67 years I HAVE LOST ALL FAITH IN ALL OF YOU. REmember money is not everything happiness is the key. Will I give you up that is something I am thinking about I no longer trust the lies that you tell

  40. Ian Cobb says:

    Ian gets to tweet and whistle at the same time!
    Que. & Alberta players will be paid if they show up for work!
    If they are locked out, then it becomes a dispute between the two provincial governments and the owners of the three hockey clubs. But the players will be paid. No??

  41. Ron says:

    Stubbs just tweets NHL wins bid to beable to lock out Habs in Quebec.

    NHLPA says that it was deferred for another hearing.

    Whose right haha

    • HabFab says:

      Renaud tweets that decision allows a lock out now, but the Labour Board will hold full hearings in several weeks as NHLPA bid had some interesting points.

      • Ron says:

        That brings up another point then. If the NHL locks out the Habs players say tomorrow night and a further hearing takes place later and the NHLPA comes out as winners, does the NHL club owe the players back pay for a wrongfull lock out ?

        • HabFab says:

          It wouldn’t be a wrongful lock out since the labour board allowed it.

          • Ron says:

            I am somewhat glad the Board allowed the lock out. Will make things even across the board pending the Alberta ruling. Although it would be nice to see the boys practicing etc and many opinions being thrown around on here I would rather take up watching some Q and AHL hockey till its all ironed out.

          • HabFab says:

            But your Seadogs are not going to be too good this season…non?

          • Ron says:

            Does not look to good. Lot of players drafted etc and the young talent needs work. The biggest lose was Gallant as coach, I have no faith in Kelly or the assistants he has. But being hooked on junior hockey I will attend and bitch abit. I was 10 years running the Jr A team in the 80’s here as a GM and it stays in your blood.

          • commandant says:

            I’m pretty sure they would owe back pay.

            It would still be a wrongful lockout.

            The Labour Board isn’t saying they are allowing it. They are deferring the decision to a later date. Basically they are saying,

            “Yeah we won’t stop you from doing this right now, but we are going to look at the legality of it in a couple weeks…. and guess what, you better hope you are right, cause if not, you’ll pay backpay in a couple weeks (and legal costs of the NHLPA)… Oh and PA, you better hope you are right, cause if you lose in a couple weeks, you’ll be paying the NHL’s legal costs”

            So the QLRB has set up a giant game of chicken here… encouraging both sides to settle before they adjudicate the case in a couple weeks.

            Go Habs Go!
            Check out Top Shelf Prospects, my Team by Team prospect reports

  42. ed lopaz says:

    So Malkin and Crosby are already packing their bags to play overseas; there’s a report that Malkin may be in the KHL as early as Sunday evening!

    You see, we need to understand that the players, the “good guys”, must be free to travel half way across the world to steal a job from the lowest paid KHL player in that lineup.

    That’s what the NHLPA supports.

    Its disgusting. Its pathetic.

    And it clearly shows that the Union is not justified in claiming any more of the “high ground” then those fat cat, billionaire owners.

    • HabFab says:

      There are no good guys here…maybe not even any bad guys BUT the only ones entitled to any sympathy are us fans…screw the rest.
      EXCEPT for the non hockey employees and businesses affected, they lose the most.

    • 24 Cups says:

      Not a scab in the true sense of the word, but still a scab.

      “Hey, I love the game and I just want to play.”

      Both sides are so full of it. The “true” games are just about to begin. The Hunger Games, except nobody is starving or dying.

      Man, I miss Mike Boone. I’d love to know his take on all of this crap.

    • HabinBurlington says:

      @Ed, 24 and Habfab, couldn’t agree with you guys more. Both sides need to start talking turkey and stop with the blaming the other guy.

      I have zero empathy for either side. I just want to watch my Habs!!!! And maybe the odd Leaf loss to whomever. 😉

  43. Habfan17 says:

    It seems Doan has resigned in Phoenix for 4 years at @21.2 million. Way too much at 36 and again the owners prove that they need to be saved from themselves by the players. Maybe the number is high because the owners know they will claw back salaries with the new CBA.


  44. Habfan17 says:

    John Carlson signs 6 year $23.8 million dollar contract, that bodes well for the Habs. That works out to just under $4 miilion/season as a cap hit. That makes sense


  45. haloracer18 says:

    Wow, all my comments are being censored at TSN!!! I can’t believe them, they’re totally censoring me, and I’m just putting in my two cents worth in proper english, absolutely nothing to offend anybody!
    A lot of the comments I read attack other commentors, how come those aren’t deleted, eh tsn?? If they have it in for me, I’m boycotting them.
    All I wanted to point out was that we should be very concerned that not ONE player has come forward and said “I want to play, so screw you NHLPA, screw you agents, I’m playing”. It probably means that some strong arm tactics and threats are being put on the players to go along with the plan. There is no other reason. You might think they are greedy, however I assure you there are players that would play in the NHL for $100 000/year. Given all the perks that come with it, it’s a pretty good deal for what amounts to 2 days of work (adding up all the ice time over an entire season).
    Mathieu Darche recently said he thought they are worth millions because the players are both labourers and the product at the same time. So are prostitutes Mathieu. I think people would appreciate it if tickets cost them $10 instead of $100 and since the owners always like to make a big show of players supporting charities, the owners can donate more to charities. It would save them a bundle on taxes.

  46. HabFab says:

    RenLavoieRDS – NHL and NHLPA talked on the phone today and could do so tonight…

    RenLavoieRDS – Both party exchanged financial details on their respective core economic proposition.

  47. The Cat says:

    With the NHL product being what it is (The New NHL -with half the game played on the powerplay), and the amount of dissatisfaction of the average canadian hockey fan, Im surprised a rival league hasnt emerged.

    [Disclaimer]: I’m a hockey fan. I care about the habs, but probably not as much as you.

  48. Dansolo says:

    So What does this mean really? That the Canadiens will still have to pay salaries to the players, because that would be another year on Gomez’s contract paid, that would be good. And if the Canadiens win The Cup by default, who would attend the parade? I might.

  49. db says:

    I love the Capitals signing of Carlson.. he’s a very close comparable to PK. Definitely something to work from… 6 years, 23.8mil !

    I wish Bettman was a mute.

  50. HabFab says:

    AK signs in the KHL for one season.

  51. naweed235 says:

    Thank you to Un Canadien errant for the response re. the CBA below. Very informative and thorough. I appreciate it.

  52. 24 Cups says:

    Another NHLer re-signs for decent coin. In fact, it’s the same money and term as Erik Cole.

    Still waiting to hear if Doan goes to Phoenix or Vancouver today. My money is on Phoenix.


  53. mrhabby says:

    Average salary in NHL is $2.1m… over 7mo’s= $300,000 per month. Will see how long the players can last for.

  54. frontenac1 says:

    Hey Amigos! I think Brandon Prust is on L”Antichambre tonight. I am on the road on business in Ont and probably won’t have access to RDS. Would appreciate if someone could post comments about our New Hab. Gracias and Saludos!

  55. JF says:

    The players talk about staying united and not backing down, about winning this confrontation and getting a fair deal. But you know what? They won’t win and they won’t get a fair deal. This fight isn’t about that. It’s about the owners getting the deal they want – a larger share of League revenues while keeping the current revenue-sharing system more or less intact. Bettman will shut hockey down for as long as it takes to achieve this. The owners won’t get what they originally asked for, but probably something not too far from it. Meanwhile, the players will lose revenue, and older and marginal players who can’t find a temporary job elsewhere will lose conditioning and game fitness, and will likely see their careers end sooner than they would have wished. The eventual settlement will not be “fair,” it will be what the League imposes; and the players will be forced to accept it because they won’t play hockey (NHL hockey) until they do. They stand to lose a lot, and they won’t get it back. The owners stand to lose not very much, and, unless the fans desert en masse, they’ll recoup it fairly quickly.

    Meanwhile we (the fans) lose our hockey. This mess has already robbed us of our pre-season anticipation because there’s no point in speculating about lineups, roster spots or anything else hockey-related. There’ll still be plenty of hockey to watch this winter; like many of us, I’ll watch the Bulldogs (if anyone shows their games) and the junior leagues. I’ll be happy if the Bulldogs have a good season and if our prospects in junior do well; but it won’t be the same as watching the Habs. The passion won’t be there. For me, that’s the main thing that this dispute is robbing us of – the passion and excitement of being a fan, the jubilation when the team wins, the intense discussions about what went wrong when they lose, the all-absorbing interest that gives its colour to the entire winter. And that’s something we won’t get back.

  56. Bripro says:

    This is interesting.
    According to Forbes, the Madison Square Garden stock price is getting hammered on the news of the lock-out.

    • habsnyc says:

      MSG stock price hit an all time high last month. It is up 45% year to date. The Dolans own almost 15 million shares at $45/share. They made about $250million in the stock this year. Most of the appreciation is from the huge renovation, luxury boxes and new sponsorships. The Dolans also own roughly billion dollars worth of Cable Vision stock. Reports from the investment community suggest that MSG will be more profitable after a lockout and views the lockout as long term beneficial.

      Blue, blanc et rouge. Red and White for Canada. Blue for Smurfs.

  57. New says:

    So , like I win the lotto and decide I’m going to start my own business. I get some land, permits, and lawyers, then a building, and finally a franchise to flag it. I stock the shelves, get the orders set up, and hire IT guys. Nothing much works so I buy a big honkin program to do payroll, inventory, and save me money. I hire more IT guys and lawyers to handle this. My accountant calls and says I’m sitting pretty close to the door myself. Yikes! I hire staff and open the doors before I have to close them.

    As the months go on the growing pains subside. I get my staff trained and the lawyers deal with the harassment training I have to do because my employee’s mothers didn’t. One year I make money, the next I lose money. Overall I’m up a bit but the real value of my investment will be realized when I sell it, hopefully. Meanwhile I get an award and free supper for creating 50 jobs.

    The city decides though that my taxes need to go up, the fire inspector notes all my doors should be unlocked 24/7 and keeps hinting about a discount, and a local citizens group wants me to sponsor their ball team. While I am pondering all this the staff come to me and tell me they voted to unionize. Good, now I can deal with one rep rather than 50.

    The next day the rep comes by and tells me the staff want 57% of revenue. I laugh and say sure, if they assume 57% of expenses. The rep demands the books. We have a bit of a closure but finally I show the rep the books. He notes I’m losing money big time as I can’t move my product but still incur costs. I cave and we try 57% for a few years.

    I now lose money in most of my departments even though the managers tell me all I need is this or that new program, tool, or display. I do make some money off a couple departments but overall I’m doing less than breaking even. If I can sell the business though I can make some money. Worse to maintain my franchise rights I have to cough up to the other franchises not making money. There are a lot of those, and damn, don’t they undercut my prices!

    But you know what? It is my business. I built the business. Employees come and go. Lots of times people tell me they only shop there because Angie is so nice, or Frank is so smart. But Angie moved away and Frank left for a competitor. Now they tell me it is because of Michelle and Luke. My bottom line never flickered regardless.

    Today I told the employees enough is enough. I want to get out of this game. I don’t exist to provide you jobs and benefits. They countered with they don’t exist to do the work while I rake off the profit. I ask again if they are interested in 57% of the costs, 54%, 50 %? Naw but they’ll settle on 54% of revenues and I can continue pay the expenses.

    But you know what? It is my business. Isn’t it?

    • ed lopaz says:

      ” But you know what? It is my business. I built the business”

      Not according to Obama you didn’t.

      • Un Canadien errant says:

        You’re refusing to see the point that President Obama made. He pointed out that the successful business that someone builds is dependent on having safe roads and air traffic controllers and police officers and fire departments and environmental laws and good schools so that you have people who can be trained to be effective workers for you.

        That’s what President Obama said: You didn’t build the roads and the schools and hire and train the policemen. Good on you for building a company that puts out a good product that people need, but now chip in with your fair share of taxes so the bridges don’t fall down and the roads get plowed and the health inspectors can make sure the restaurant across the street doesn’t poison your staff.

        So the libertarians and fringe right wingers can discount the role of good government in a lively economy, but it doesn’t pass the litmus test of common sense.

        It’s unfortunate that Governor Romney’s campaign and their propaganda arm Fox News find it necessary to use disinformation campaigns like this and try to create outrage where none is warranted or necessary. It’s sadly par for the course with the Republicans, with the GM plant closing in Paul Ryan’s home state, and Sarah Palin’s death panels.

        This isn’t “Billionaires vs. Millionaires.” Only a willfully uninformed fool would apply that sloppy shorthand designation to this disgraceful power grab crafted by some of the wealthiest individuals and corporate entities in North America aimed against professional athletes.–Larry Brooks of the New York Post


        • ed lopaz says:

          Ok. UCE. Whatever you say.

          Obama and the players are ALL GOOD.

          Romney and the owners are ALL BAD.

          I get it.

          Fox is “propaganda” –

          but CNN and Larry Brooks only tell the “truth”.

          I get it.

          • HabFanSince72 says:


            Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.

          • HabinBurlington says:

            Haha, love the sarcasm beautiful Ed! Of course they are honest, Democrats never lie! 🙂

          • Un Canadien errant says:

            ed, I think it’s interesting that you repeated the strawman argument going around, that President Obama says that business owners didn’t build their businesses and don’t deserve credit or profit from that. It’s patently, factually false. This quote is taken out of context. When he said: “You didn’t build that,” he was referring to infrastructure such as roads and bridges, any cursory inspection of the video proves that. As I said, it’s interesting that you bring up this trumped up accusation, but as soon as you’re called on it you dissemble as opposed to discuss the matter.

            As far as the tangents you take, I don’t say most of these things, you’re building more strawmen.

            President Obama and the players aren’t all good. Brad Marchand is part of that set and negates that proposition.

            Romney and the owners aren’t all bad. I don’t know all thirty tycoons who own NHL teams, and I’m on the record as having a favourable opinion of Geoff Molson.

            Fox is propaganda. It’s obvious to any disinterested observer. An interesting study showed recently that people who identify as Fox News viewers are the most misinformed group of TV News viewers, more than those who watch the major networks or cable outlets. They’re even more misinformed than people who don’t watch news at all.

            I don’t really have an opinion on CNN except that they somewhat try to be an objective news organization, whereas Fox plain doesn’t. Larry Brooks is bangin’.

            ed, we agree apparently on most matters hockey-related, but not in politics obviously. I don’t want you to think I’m hounding you, as you seem to imply, but if you put up a creampuff such as this one on a public forum, I’m going to speak up and tear down such a specious argument. If there was a Summit this year instead of another owner-imposed work stoppage, I’d gladly hoist a beer with you and we’d discuss the present situation facing our Habs and the future prospects, but that’s not going to happen now. I’m still going to enjoy discussing hockey matters with you on this forum, and I hope you do the same.

            To sum up, I think if you resort to the rolling your eyes, cynical-sarcastic passive-aggressive ‘it’s all good’ shtick, it’s an indication that you know you can’t convince reasonable observers that your statement about President Obama is correct, and you’re going to try to move the goalposts.

            If you want to take on President Obama for failing to close Guantanamo as he promised, or his decision to execute presumed terrorists with drone strikes, I’ll listen, but I guess we can consider the original point to be fully refuted with no objections on your part.

            This isn’t “Billionaires vs. Millionaires.” Only a willfully uninformed fool would apply that sloppy shorthand designation to this disgraceful power grab crafted by some of the wealthiest individuals and corporate entities in North America aimed against professional athletes.–Larry Brooks of the New York Post


        • Bripro says:

          Are you surprised by the Republican’t propaganda wagon? The more things change, the more they remain the same.

          • HabinBurlington says:

            Only the Right Wing lies, the Left are like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, they truly love to spend taxpayers money.

            All Politicians are wrought with evil.

    • LesHabs says:

      You cannot compare this to the NHL.

      There are not many businesses where your employees are your product as well…

    • Bripro says:

      So now you’re looking at cutting expenses so you start by going to the city mediator, who’s office is adjacent to the mayor’s. While you’re in trying to negotiate a reduction in taxes, the mayor picks up the phone and next thing you know, the city’s technical adviser on the environment enters the meeting to advise you that your building is sitting on contaminated land and you’ll either have to move, hand over the land to the city, or be expropriated.
      So you go back to the office, find that your network is down and your switchboard has gone amok and the phone is ringing at the building next door, which happens to be your competitor’s. So you fire your IT guys just to find out that the lines were contracted out to Bell, but they can’t help you because you’ve been on hold for three days.
      You watch from your office as your competitor puts down his binoculars to answer your calls.
      You call in the union rep to advise him that you’re shutting down production for lack of orders, but he submits a legal grievance. So you call your lawyer for advice, to find out that your controller hadn’t paid the bill because he really doesn’t know what he’s doing and is totally disorganized, so your so-called lawyer gives you a heads up that not only is the bill in the mail, but there will be a bailiff at your door anytime now.
      As you hang up, the doorbell rings, and the man at the door tells your secretary, who is about to leave with a box under her arm, that he’s worked with you before and that you’re friends.
      “That’s your problem!” she insists, as she directs him to your office before she exits. Her shoes ring hollow from the collective empty offices. Odd … you think.
      The man is no friend, and drops a subpoena in your lap.
      So you consult another lawyer through legal aid who tells you that since you chose not to incorporate way-back-when, you don’t really have a leg to stand on.
      “But my controller had me sign a cheque payable for the incorporation.”
      “Well, according to the Government registry, you’re not incorporated, but are in fact registered, which makes you personally responsible. That’ll be $3,000 in consultation.”
      So you go home to break the news to your wife that you’ll have to sell her Lexus and the house, and she’ll have to tell your daughter to move out of the cottage because you have a buyer for that.
      But there’s a familiar Mercedes in the driveway. So you park your Ford Tempo next to it and as you enter, the dog bites your leg and sends you flying down the stairs.
      You land facing east, with your nose stuck in someone’s hairy ass.
      You pull back and look up to realize that your wife is having a threesome with your controller and your lawyer.
      So you go to your soon-to-be former game room to watch hockey, but Butthead has locked the players out and there’s no hockey.
      So you go to the bathroom, intent on downing the entire bottle of V5s, just to discover that your son has been crushing and snorting them.
      You head back to your office, with nowhere else to go, but the power is out, and the place has been emptied and ransacked.
      You check your phone browser to see that your lottery numbers have come in, but recall that your wife had bought the $50-million ticket the night before.
      You drink yourself into oblivion, waking up on the office floor the next morning, having heard a “thud” as the paper boy tossed it into the entrance.
      You open it up and the front-page reads:
      “Ex-wife of failed entrepreneur wins $50million and moves in with Gary Bettman”
      You think to yourself “I must have been a serial killer in a previous life.”
      No, you were just a small business owner who loves hockey.

    • Timo says:

      Your first and fatal mistake is that you hired the IT guys.

    • Old Bald Bird says:

      It seems to me that all comparisons/analogies fall short in the end. They only take you so far. Small businesses, for example, do not usually contract their employees for years at a time. (I know the union contract and the players’ contracts are separate items, but I think this point is still a consideration.) Also, most employees of most businesses are not limited to that one employer who has a monopoly as these guys are. So, your scenario is not to be dismissed out of hand because it’s certainly a factor to be considered, but I just think there’s a little more to it.

    • Un Canadien errant says:

      Unfortunately your analogy doesn’t work.

      1) NHL players aren’t just replaceable drones who stock the shelves. They’re the actual product. Without them you have empty shelves. They’re the ones who are drawing in clients and creating your revenue.

      2) The players are already underpaid. In your example, there’s an inexhaustible supply of workers who you can hire and train to work for you at little cost. In the NHL, the business owners actually have built a system with features like the universal draft, the reserve clause, brakes on entry-level contracts and a salary cap that creates an effective monopoly. The owners act like free enterprise titans, but they really don’t want any of that to apply to the players, who used to get upwards of 65% of HRR before the salary cap, when there was marginally more freedom for players.

      3) The costs issue is a red herring. It was used by owners in the Gordie Howe-Maurice Richard days to hold back their salaries, they’d say they could pay the boys more, but then the boys would have to pay for their own train tickets and hotel rooms. Read “Net Worth”. When I go away on business for the company, they pay for my mileage or plane tickets, and my meals and hotel and other expense. If they don’t need me to travel, they don’t send me. If there’s a benefit to them, then they send me. If Gary Bettman treated the players like real partners, they could have a meaningful discussion about rising costs, but the players don’t trust his arguments, with reason.

      This isn’t “Billionaires vs. Millionaires.” Only a willfully uninformed fool would apply that sloppy shorthand designation to this disgraceful power grab crafted by some of the wealthiest individuals and corporate entities in North America aimed against professional athletes.–Larry Brooks of the New York Post


    • frontenac1 says:

      Equating Pro Sports to the real world? Good luck with that .

    • Bripro says:

      Oh you were being serious in your comparative analogy.
      Sorry, my rebuttal was a spoof.
      I’m a small business owner, and I have to tell you that you’re looking at it through rose-colored glasses.
      Theirs is a business beyond our realm of comprehension.
      I don’t feel sorry for either side. The money we’re talking about is ludicrous.
      The money an average player makes in one year, say in the $3-4MM range, would be enough for me to support a staff of 5 for a year and cover all expenses.
      As for the owners, well…that’s just greed, pure and simple.

    • Sean Bonjovi says:

      Here’s what the NHL is like:

      You want to throw a Paul McCartney concert in a public park, and you think that Sir Paul is responsible for less than 50% of the ticket revenue.

    • neumann103 says:

      Or more accurately…

      So, I like build or inherit a fortune of a billion dollars in a totally unrelated industry, and I have a huge monster ego and I want to own a franchise in a popular oligopolistic cartel where the ROI is derived largely from appreciation of franchise value and not operational profits.

      So don’t really have to get permits or land or anything because the city burghers are falling over themselves to build me a facility and make things easy so that I will locate there or not relocate elsewhere.

      I stock the shelves with product, which happens to be my employees. Blah blah blah accountants and IT guys…

      As the months go by the majority of what I would do in a business: Product Development, Marketing, Sales, is taken care of for me because the Cartel schedules all the games, provides opponents and the amount of free publicity I get from every media outlet around is un-freaking-believable. I have to install hot tubs, book charter flights, hire ushers and sell $8 hot dogs.

      The city decides that I should get a tax holiday for the next 10 years because they are afraid I will move the team. While I am pondering my incredible good fortune and attributing it to my own genius in taking on such a sweet gig, the staff -who you may recall also happen to be the product I sell come to me and tell me they voted to unionize. Good, now I can deal with one rep rather than 50.

      The next day the rep comes by and tells me the staff want 57% of revenue. I laugh and say sure, if they assume 57% of expenses. The rep kicks me in the nuts for being such a dick and demands the books. Finally I show the rep the books. The second set of cooked books i keep in the false drawer bottom just in case the staff shows up. I get absolutely everyting I want and practically break labour into a quivering mass and we try 57% for a 6 years over which revenues grow 50%.

      Operationally the business is roughly a break even position. If I can sell the business though I can make a ton of money. But I won’t because the ego stroking is so freaking great. Worse to maintain my franchise rights I have to cough up to the other franchises not making money. There are a lot of those, and damn, don’t they undercut my prices!

      But you know what? It is my business. I built the business. Or at least bought into the cartel. Employees come and go. I am the main attraction. I have cost certainty, the protection of an oligopoly, I am protected from competition, assert incomprehensibly strong chattel rights over my employee/product (Hey you looked pretty to me at 18 therefore I own your ass until 27). My bottom line never flickered regardless.

      I gave them a proposal to cut their compensation by more than 24%, redefine the definition of revenue so that is even lower, extend their years of indentured servitude and spit in their soup. Surprisingly, they did not thank me.

      Today I told my employees/product enough is enough. I want to get out of this game. I don’t exist to provide you jobs and benefits. I exist to have my ego stroked through sports ownership and to make massive capital appreciation in franchise value. So I will quit being a big baby. I will pick one. I will either sell the franchise and realize a big capital gain and take up Yachting or something to stroke my ego, or i will STFU.

      But you know what? It is my business, this 1/30th of an oligopolistic cartel with a pre-fab business model. Isn’t it? I made it. Look at meeeeeeeeee. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

      “Et le but!”

  58. Marc10 says:

    The cupboard’s going to be full in Hamilton. I wonder where guys like Blunden or AHL veterans are going to end up.

    I imagine the ECHL is going to benefit from the trickle down effect. With NHL stars crowding Europe, there’ll be a lot of players on the sidelines or pushed into early retirement…

    It’s going to be interesting to see who blinks first come January. There’ll be a lot of rev to lose at that point and the players will have already taken a massive hit…

  59. Andy and the habs says:

    So what happens to the drafts in 2013 if there is a lockout. What would be the ladder, would Canadiens still pick in the third? Or would they even have a better pick.

    If we remain in third or even better, then I want a lockout. I’ll prefer to watch AHL and Sarnia all season long. Occasionally I would check our current players playing overseas.

  60. shiram says:

    Blunden on waivers.

  61. naweed235 says:

    I’ll ask again:
    What do the percentage sharing of HRR have to do with the players’ revenue? Don’t they just get paid whatever amount their contracts state? Is the HRR share an extra source of income for them? does this have anything to do with the escrow accounts we’ve been hearing about?

    • Un Canadien errant says:

      Add up all the contracts, the total amount in dollars. Compare that total to the total amount of revenues brought in that year, by percentage. If that is equal to 57% of HRR, tickedyboo. If it is higher, then the players ‘give back’ a portion of their salary. If it is lower (that has never happened), let’s say the player salaries added up to 55%, then the owners would have to ‘top up’ these salaries to the 57% level.

      That is precisely what escrow is all about. The players don’t get their ‘full’ salary every two weeks on their paycheques, a significant amount is held back in escrow. Once the final tabulation of revenues is done, then the players get a portion of that escrow money back. This system is felt to be easier to manage than to pay everyone their full salaries, then run around after the season to get some money back from everyone.

      So in a purely illustrative example, let’s say a player is signed to a $1M/year contract. Usually what will happen is that his paycheques over the year will add up to $920 000 minus taxes, and $80 000 will be ehld back in the escrow fund. Once the revenues and percentages are figured out, the player will get another $30 000 back, the owners will keep $50 000. So the player’s salary won’t quite be a million, it will in fact be $950 000.

      This isn’t “Billionaires vs. Millionaires.” Only a willfully uninformed fool would apply that sloppy shorthand designation to this disgraceful power grab crafted by some of the wealthiest individuals and corporate entities in North America aimed against professional athletes.–Larry Brooks of the New York Post


      • B says:

        The escrow % amount is held back from the players pay cheques. Once revenues are determined the players may get back none of it (if the revenues dropped by more than the escrow %), get back only some of it (if revenues dropped but not by as much as the escrow %), get back all of it (if revenues remain neutral) or bet back all of it and then some more (if revenues increased more than expected). I am paraphrasing an article I read, but this is the gist of it. The actual escrow holdbacks or paybacks may actually be based on a calculation of expected revenues or something to that effect.

        Under the about to expire CBA, players have almost always received back a cheque for more than was held back in escrow.

        Interestingly, the league wanted to reduce the escrow amount a while back, but the PA refused to allow it. There was some speculated in the article that this was because the PA wanted this to continue since escrow hold backs are a sore point for the players and the PA wanted to continue fanning the feeling of discontentment among the players. I tried to find this interesting (to me anyways) article again to post the link, but I have not been able to find it again yet.

  62. 24 Cups says:

    The same principle might apply once real CBA talks begin in the NHL. It would be a major starting point to an eventual compromise.


  63. Maksimir says:

    Anyone else going to tsn.ca on a regular basis getting sick of seeing Cammy’s face?

  64. Boomer says:

    In the local paper today here in Calgary there was an article with Iginla quoted as saying “I’m willing to sit the whole season out if I have to” which is kinda suprising to me cause he doesn’t have that many years left lol. This Sh**’s real. Neither side is gonna budge for a while.

    • B says:

      Iginla’s NHL salary total to date is over $69M. I think he will manage to get by ok no matter how it plays out.

      • Boomer says:

        you know how hard it is to give up the game? these guys bleed hockey. Obviously he’s set in terms of money. I meant more along the lines he doesn’t have a lot of hockey left in him… I’m suprised he’s that willing to just sit it out and let a year go by when there aren’t that many left for him…

  65. B says:

    If the players succeed in this, they will simply be damaging the Montreal Canadiens financially. The effects could then range from the obvious of further ticket price increases to the dumping player salaries all the way to the worst case of bankruptcy.

    Are the players dumb enough to actually believe it when they parade before the media spewing how they are only doing this to play hockey or do they just think that the fans are dumb enough to believe it?

    • savethepuck says:

      Don’t blame the Habs players for this. It’s not 16 guys who said ” hey, we can still get paid during the lockout”, it’s being done by, and with the support of the NHLPA for additional leverage in their negotiations.

      “They don’t hang Conference Championship Banners from the rafters here”
      Carey Price

      • B says:

        When I said players, I was referring to the NHLPA. Of course the Habs players in the NHLPA are not only going along with this, some have even been spewing rhetoric to the media about it as well.

        This action is targeting and threatening to financially damage the Montreal Canadiens.

  66. 24 Cups says:

    You’ve got to be kidding.

    The madness continues.


  67. HabsPEI31 says:


    So Hennan-Blaikie team are to make their case Thursday? Is that a typo?

    “Only a goalie can appreciate what a goalie goes through.” – Jacques Plante

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.