-
First NHL labor strife, players go on strike over lack of deal and to increase playoff share.
-
Revenues have expanded from the $700m at the time of the strike, up to $3.3b in 2012
-
Owners lock the players out for the first time, causing the season to be shortened from 84 to 48 games.
-
Agreement of 1994 extended from 1998 til 2004.
-
The 1994 collective bargaining agreement expired on the 15th of September, and the owners locked the players out. This lockout lasted 310 days, and cost the NHL the entire season.
-
After the 310 day lockout, a new CBA was ratified, with a salary cap that maxed out the player's share at 57% of hockey related revenue in addition to a flat 24% rollback of all salaries prior to the lockout.
-
At the time of the 2004 lockout, the league's revenue was around $2b annually, and by the end of the 2011-2012 season it was up to $3.3b. This created an issue since the players were to receive 57% of hockey related revenue, causing a strain on small market teams.
-
The arguments:
NHL commissioner says that 2/3 of the teams lost money last year, and the players need to take a much lower % of the revenue and a flat salary rollback. The players want to increase revenue sharing between teams, and are willing to take a % cut but not a rollback -
According to Forbes, three teams made a combined $171m profit, and the rest of the league lost a combined $44m. This makes me think that there needs to be more revenue sharing between the teams
Additonally, I would like to think that 57% of the revenue going to players is a bit too much. The players shoulder none of the business risk, and I can't really see why they deserve much more than 50-52%.
