Truth & Rumors > NHL

Source: League lost $240M over two seasons

Views
3897
Comments
46

08:23 AM ET 09.05 | Make of the timing what you will, but on Tuesday an answer came as to why the league is asking for significant concessions from players. Obviously, if the NHL is now demanding a pay cut of 19.3% to each player, there is a reason. A source at the NHL who wishes not to be named, confirmed to me that even if some teams are making profits, the league as a whole lost a lot of money. Another source confirmed to me that yes, the league has not made profits over the last two seasons and losses are approximately 240 million during this period. This is huge and it is clear that the leaders of the Players Association can not ignore them, even if they dispute the accuracy of the data.

RDS.ca

Dustin Brown with the Stanley Cup, Icon Sports Dustin Brown with the Stanley Cup, Icon Sports
September 5, 2012  08:42 AM ET

Maybe the league should not own the coyotes and should get rid of the teams that are losing money or move them to more lucrative cities. Bettman should look to get rid of teams not add them. Put teams in places where they are NHL fans. Putting franchises in areas that don't like hockey is not going to make more NHL fans. It may add a few fans, but not enough to have a healthy franchise that makes money.

September 5, 2012  08:43 AM ET

I wonder how much of the $240M is associated with a team located in a desert?

Comment #3 has been removed
September 5, 2012  08:50 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

I wonder how much of the $240M is associated with a team located in a desert?

Or a team located in the Land of 10,000 Lakes

September 5, 2012  08:52 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Maybe the league should not own the coyotes and should get rid of the teams that are losing money or move them to more lucrative cities.

There are precious few "more lucrative cities".

Contraction is absolutely necessary. A 24 team league would be more than reasonable.

September 5, 2012  08:54 AM ET
QUOTE(#3):

If the league is losing money, it is the fault of the guy the owners have in charge, and absolutely nobody else.

...and the owners for not setting stop gaps to prevent these situations

September 5, 2012  09:13 AM ET
QUOTE(#5):

There are precious few "more lucrative cities".Contraction is absolutely necessary. A 24 team league would be more than reasonable.

been saying it forever in here.
and the owners, as noted by garb.Man...have put no measures in place (via the troll commissioner that is suppossed to be business savy) to prevent it. And then throw in the ridiculous contracts....and there it is....

September 5, 2012  09:13 AM ET

By the way....to call this timing ....suspicious.....would be understating

September 5, 2012  09:15 AM ET
QUOTE(#2):

I wonder how much of the $240M is associated with a team located in a desert?

Most of it would be my guess.

September 5, 2012  09:17 AM ET

"Make of the timing what you will, but on Tuesday an answer came as to why the league is asking for significant concessions from players."

The timing is perfect. We were starting to get bored waiting for the Fehrer and/or the Buttgoblin to say something we didn't already know.

September 5, 2012  09:21 AM ET

Source: League lost $240M over two seasons

Check your jacket's inside pocket.

September 5, 2012  09:37 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Maybe the league should not own the coyotes and should get rid of the teams that are losing money or move them to more lucrative cities. Bettman should look to get rid of teams not add them. Put teams in places where they are NHL fans. Putting franchises in areas that don't like hockey is not going to make more NHL fans. It may add a few fans, but not enough to have a healthy franchise that makes money.

Heck of a first comment. Pretty much sums up the situation right there.

September 5, 2012  09:41 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Maybe the league should not own the coyotes and should get rid of the teams that are losing money or move them to more lucrative cities. Bettman should look to get rid of teams not add them. Put teams in places where they are NHL fans. Putting franchises in areas that don't like hockey is not going to make more NHL fans. It may add a few fans, but not enough to have a healthy franchise that makes money.

Now, there you go! Trying to confuse the issue at hand by making a perfectly intelligent argument! Where did you come from? ;-)

September 5, 2012  09:51 AM ET
QUOTE(#8):

By the way....to call this timing ....suspicious.....would be understating

Right, how did we suddenly go from unprecedented financial growth to losing $240 million? My guess is they just updated their numbers to include the guaranteed money for Suter and Parise. In this day and age, with tv contracts, merch, and whatnot, for a pro league to work at a huge financial lose you should just fold the league...or at the very least fire the guy "in charge."

September 5, 2012  10:03 AM ET
QUOTE(#1):

Maybe the league should not own the coyotes and should get rid of the teams that are losing money or move them to more lucrative cities. Bettman should look to get rid of teams not add them. Put teams in places where they are NHL fans. Putting franchises in areas that don't like hockey is not going to make more NHL fans. It may add a few fans, but not enough to have a healthy franchise that makes money.

Wow, the first comment is usually a personal attack on a member on here. Nice to see someone buck that trend! Welcome!

September 5, 2012  10:04 AM ET
QUOTE(#12):

Heck of a first comment. Pretty much sums up the situation right there.

I agree. I reported it as completely inappropriate for this site.

September 5, 2012  10:04 AM ET
QUOTE(#14):

Right, how did we suddenly go from unprecedented financial growth to losing $240 million? My guess is they just updated their numbers to include the guaranteed money for Suter and Parise. In this day and age, with tv contracts, merch, and whatnot, for a pro league to work at a huge financial lose you should just fold the league...or at the very least fire the guy "in charge."

that's what I meant by the suspect timing....

September 5, 2012  10:04 AM ET
QUOTE(#15):

Wow, the first comment is usually a personal attack on a member on here. Nice to see someone buck that trend! Welcome!

Clearly we need to train this person on the proper behavior :)

September 5, 2012  10:05 AM ET
QUOTE(#15):

Wow, the first comment is usually a personal attack on a member on here. Nice to see someone buck that trend! Welcome!

and to jump right in on the side of common sense....

 
September 5, 2012  10:07 AM ET

Fire the guy in charge! Fire the guy in charge! Fire the guy in charge! Fire the guy in charge!

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Kerr 'absolutely expects' Knicks offer
    Views
    1732
    Comments
    1433
  2. 2
    No return timetable for Lightning MVP
    Views
    859
    Comments
    218
  3. 3
    Yankees, Mets, Red Sox among Hanrahan hopefuls
    Views
    3015
    Comments
    168
  4. 4
    Niners table talks with Kaepernick
    Views
    1164
    Comments
    64
  5. 5
    ... So, L.A. will line up for Love and Durant
    Views
    5689
    Comments
    48

SI.com

SI Photos