I sort of think outside of the box. My friends think I should climb back in every once in a while. I know they are right. Anyway......here are some random interesting things. These are directly and indirectly related to the CBA topic so I thought I would throw these out now.
A. I looked at Capgeek. Tweaked the search function a bit: Did you know the actual salaries next year for the <strong>highest earning top 20 forwards and top 20 defensemen and top 20 goalies</strong> in the NHL will earn about 21.5% of all the money paid to all NHL players? That works out to 6.9% of all NHL players (60) will make 21.5% of all salaries paid next year.
B. A on-line blogger, Peter Tessier, came up with an interesting observation. It goes something like this: Why do player's insist that all NHL revenues be included in hockey related revenue to be used in a owner/player split when they are not including their own personal revenue they make though NHL related endorsements. He pointed out Crosby made over $11.2 million dollars in just endorsement money in the year 2010. Interesting notion and observation.
C. Along that same line something I have mentioned before: NHL guarantees salary for all players......maybe players should contribute to guarantee a minimum owner's profit. I guess that is partnership pushed to the extreme............
D. Here is another twist: The players have said they want to help struggling teams in the new CBA.......then have they ignored struggling players? Revenue Sharing among players......now that is extreme. Or, if there are no struggling players but there are struggling teams what does that suggests?
E. Forbes magazine provided some other nuggets such as most extra revenue earned by some NHL teams is actually done in partnership with splits of earnings done by contract. Even though the total earnings might be much greater in that endeavor.....it would be hard to count all of that in hockey revenue to be split with players.
F. How can teams lose money on the accounting books but yet spend lots of money for players? Who hasn't heard of "cooking" the books! I have been puzzled by that but the Canes provided at least a partial answer recently. Revenue verses expenditures equals profit does not included (initially) any new money. Minnesota and the Canes both spent a large amount of money (over time) this summer yet both have hovered around the break even point. The answer to the puzzle is simple: new money comes from the pockets of the owner(s) or new revenue streams (eg. TV). It might show up later on the books (TV money) but if from owner and just a one time infusion then that does not improve the operation which generated the loss to begin with.
G. If everything remained the same and the revenue growth was 7.5% each year, then in 5 years the salary cap would be over $100 million and the floor over $86 million. How much do you think lower level tickets will be then? Teams then can spend up to $20 million per year on their top guy! A five year deal for that top guy then would be over $100 million over the 5 year term, not 12 years as we saw recently. I think parking might have to be increased at that rate too. Total NHL revenues would come close to $5 billion under that set of numbers. Larger revenue totals than the NBA now? Sustainable? No I don't think so.......
H. At the beginning of the last CBA the floor was about $21.45 million with a cap of $39 million. That was a difference of 55%. If the exact same CBA is rolled into this coming season then the cap will be $70+ million and the floor about $54 million. That difference as a percent is 77%. The cap has grown over 79% from its original number and the floor has grown 151% from its original number. Why you ask? The floor is now a fixed amount of $16 million below the cap. The changes in the cap amounts are percentage based so over time the fixed amount floor calculation will get closer and closer as a percentage even though it will remain fixed at $16 million below the cap. The floor is getting closer to the cap as a percentage.
I. The Canadian dollar at the beginning of this last CBA was about 65 cents to the USD. Now that number is 99 cents to the USD. I understand there was an NHL plan back then to share earnings with distressed Canadian hockey clubs and in fact did so to a certain extent for a while for this reason. Should the Canadian Clubs reciprocate now if there are teams in distress?
Anyway, that is enough random thoughts for one day.........I make no claim that any random thought is valid..........