The hockey team per se or the entire organizations as a whole? Cuz Jacobs et al make a shit ton of revenue off secondary revenue streams (parking, merchandise, vendors, F&B etc), effectively off setting any "loss" the team itself might accrue.

__________________

Four out of three people have difficulty with fractions

Commish - Twisted Wrister Fantasy Hockey League

12 team, $$$, 24 players, Weekly, H2H, limited keeper (8), multi-cat (G, A, PIMs, Hits, SOG, HT/ W, GA, SV%, SO)

Start: 2C, 2RW, 2LW, 4D, 2G

You know, with this cross-border metric/imperial conversion nonsense things can get a bit confusing. Where does 'shit ton' rank compared to 'ton' (907kg) or 'tonne' (1000kg)... and is there a 'shit tonne' as well?

__________________
Okay, so maybe nobody likes a cynic, but everybody f**king hates those perky optimists!

... and anyway, I make a damn good cynic.

Most of those (parking, merchandise, vendors etc.) are counted against HRR so it isn't something that goes directly into owners' pockets as such.

__________________
UHL Pittsburgh Penguins

24 Team Fantrax Salary Cap H2H Dynasty League Daily
G, A, +/-, PIM, PPP, SHP, GWG, SOG, Hits, Blks, FOW
W, GAA, SV, SV%, SO
23 Man Roster - 3C, 3LW, 3RW, 3F, 6D, 1G, 4BN, 4IR
27 Man Minor Team

C- Tavares, Stepan, Hodgson, Shaw, Bjugstad
LW- Ryan, Perron, Downie, Killorn, Rinaldo
RW- Wheeler, Simmonds, Coyle, Frattin, Boyes
D- Pietrangelo, JJ, Bogosian, EJ, Josi, Cowen, Muzzin
G- Lehtonen

F: Granlund, Silfverberg, Jensen, Dalpe, Bowman, Knight, Fasth, JAM
D: Beaulieu, Koekkoek, Gelinas, Pysyk, McCabe, Irwin
G: Nilsson, Nilstorp, Ramo, Berra, Brossoit, Gibson

So the league needs more meaningful revenue sharing so that forgettable players can continue to be overpaid by their owners, who pass the extra cost along to truly underpaid people like me.

Gotcha.

Knock it off. That isn't what I said at all.

Oh and if you think the cost of tickets would go down after a massive drop in player salaries I want what you are smoking.

__________________
Okay, so maybe nobody likes a cynic, but everybody f**king hates those perky optimists!

... and anyway, I make a damn good cynic.

How is that not what you said?
Instead of addressing the problem of rapidly rising player salaries (a concept I support, and why I'm pro-owner), you completely ignored it, and instead brought up the necessity of "more meaningful revenue sharing."

And I never said ticket prices would go down. Just like I never said the players were making out like bandits. But a surefire way to ensure ticket prices continue to rise rapidly would be to allow salaries to keep spiralling out of control.

It's between a metric ton and two-tons-oh-fun.

lol...I have to admit, I adopted that expression from my wife. And I also asked her if it was similar to a metric ton. Too funny...

__________________

Four out of three people have difficulty with fractions

Commish - Twisted Wrister Fantasy Hockey League

12 team, $$$, 24 players, Weekly, H2H, limited keeper (8), multi-cat (G, A, PIMs, Hits, SOG, HT/ W, GA, SV%, SO)

Start: 2C, 2RW, 2LW, 4D, 2G

They're logged in different books and are not considered HRR, nor are luxury suites. but they do indeed go into the owners pocket.

Concerts and all events within the arenas too.

__________________

Four out of three people have difficulty with fractions

Commish - Twisted Wrister Fantasy Hockey League

12 team, $$$, 24 players, Weekly, H2H, limited keeper (8), multi-cat (G, A, PIMs, Hits, SOG, HT/ W, GA, SV%, SO)

Start: 2C, 2RW, 2LW, 4D, 2G

The players' salaries have grown as a result of league revenue growing.
Regardless of the size of their slice of the pie this growth rate would be unchanged, ergo it is not the problem. Complain about the size of their share, sure, but the growth rate is not the issue here. I believe I did already mention that.

Fairly certain I've not been throwing around 'free market' as the cap and cap floor impose maximums and minimums, perhaps you have me confused with someone else.

You said the teams were passing on escalating costs to you which seemed to suggest you felt they would pass savings on to you. I did say 'if you think' so that isn't what I'd call 'putting words in your mouth', merely asserting that if you held that belief that you'd be nuts.

See, here is the problem with your argument. You have the causal relationship backwards. Player salaries (collectively) are determined by league revenue. League revenue is largely (60% or so) determined by ticket revenue. So as ticket prices increase player salaries MUST increase (thank you cap floor!).

You think:
Players Salaries increasing causes ticket prices to increase.
Reality says:
Ticket revenues increasing causes player salaries to increase.

Now the profitability issues for a large chunk of the teams results from the revenue increase NOT being very evenly distributed whereas the cost increase IS evenly distributed.
Columbus revenue went up 12% from 2005 to 2009, the player costs went up 15% in the same span.
Toronto revenue went up 35% from 2005 to 2010, the player costs went up 16%.
(forbes numbers fyi)

Yes the system is failing but it is not in any way 'caused' by player salary growth as that growth is a dependent variable in the NHL's economic system.

__________________
Okay, so maybe nobody likes a cynic, but everybody f**king hates those perky optimists!

... and anyway, I make a damn good cynic.

Interesting way of looking at it. (sincerely)
I don't think I agree, but it's certainly worth considering.

And, yes, my apologies - I realized you hadn't made the free market post and revised my post accordingly. But you had already started your reply.