What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
blogs.hbr.org
What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
1–10 of 33 posts
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#2The title was the best part of this piece. It included hardly any details and doesn't even come to a conclusion about what was revealed other than that the owners have more money than the players (and that the NFL has more money than the NHL).
At minimum it should have discussed what the issues both parties disagreed with. For starters, it wasn't that the owners "still think they deserve to make an attractive profit on this game".
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#3[deleted]
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#4This really isn't much more than a fluff piece giving an excuse for bad management.
It ignores many of the detailed issues and instead makes it entirely about overall revenue using unsourced and likely made up numbers. Missing was any reference to revenue sharing and fact that some teams are turning large profits while others are losing money year after year, but the league insists on keeping teams in unsuccessful locations. The Phoenix Coyotes are a great example of this full of bad business decisions from the start, and only got worse when Jim Balsillie got involved. This shows little evidence of a successful long term plan.
I am not a fan on unions in general, but I see this as a typical issue with American business. Bad decisions are made and instead of management taking responsibility, the blame is simply put onto labour costs, wages are pushed down and the same mistakes happen again.
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#5>"The NFL has managed this shift quite remarkably, in a fashion that has gotten them so that virtually very team is profitable"
Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported).
In addition the market value of players is based upon barter - trades typically don't involve transfer fees, they involve other players sometimes and usually involve draft picks.
Draft picks are interesting because high round picks are associated with a greater out of pocket expense for the team receiving them should they choose to exercise the pick - i.e. the signing bonus and salary of the first overall pick are substantial outlays, whereas a second round pick will involve less money.
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#6Bettman is undeniably an awful commissioner. He was instrumental in forcing the expansion that created the teams that can't make a profit. He has been the driving force for 3 lockouts now.
It's a fault of management, not a fault of the players who have given up ground in each lockout. The leafs are a billion dollar team, the coyotes are worth almost nothing. Cutting player costs by a few million per year wont change this dynamic.
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#7Bettman is undeniably an awful commissioner. He was instrumental in forcing the expansion that created the teams that can't make a profit. He has been the driving force for 3 lockouts now. It's a fault of management, not a fault of the players who have given up ground in each lockout. The leafs are a billion dollar team, the coyotes are worth almost nothing. Cutting player costs by a few million per year wont change…
Fortunately for everyone outside of Glendale, this is an 8 year (minimum) deal. Over that period the Coyotes won't make it, Columbus doesn't look like they'll make it, and the Panthers might not either. I think the _length_ of this CBA is the most transformative part. There's nothing Bettman can do now except move or shut down franchises.
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#8Strikes would not happen if US sports leagues were based around free market principles rather than monopolies that set artificial restrictions on athletes salaries and conditions.
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#9> "The NFL has managed this shift quite remarkably, in a fashion that has gotten them so that virtually very team is profitable" Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported). In addition the market value of players is based upon barter - tra…
>Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported).
The NHL has a similar system, though. They draw on NCAA and international minor league talent, neither of which are paid for by the league.
The NBA is similar, though I would argue that the out of high school and "one and done" draft rules have hurt the league much more than anything else.
Re: What the NHL Lockout Reveals About Capital and Labor
#10> "The NFL has managed this shift quite remarkably, in a fashion that has gotten them so that virtually very team is profitable" Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported). In addition the market value of players is based upon barter - tra…
>Professional football's labor economics are radically different from other sports. They have virtually no development costs associated with talent - development of talent is largely done by universities (many tax supported). The NHL has a similar system, though. They draw on NCAA and international minor league talent, neither of which are paid for by the league. The NBA is similar, though I would argue that the out…
> The NHL has a similar system, though. They draw on NCAA and international minor league talent, neither of which are paid for by the league.
Not at all. Most NHL talent development is done through an extensive farm system affiliated with and financially supported by their NHL teams, similar in some but not all respects to the MLB.
Prospects pursuing the NCAA route vs junior leagues and the AHL are widely regarded as inferior, facing significantly less stiff competition. A typical player (ie, more than 50% of current players) would grow up advancing through various levels of midget hockey, forgo college to play in one of the CHL leagues (QMJHL, WHL, OHL), from which they would be drafted by an NHL team and assigned to their AHL or ECHL affiliate. This is true even of international players, who are often sent from their home countries to stay with Canadian host families while playing in the Canadian junior leagues.
Making the NHL out of NCAA is the exception, rather than the rule. The system is much, much less subsidized by tax payer funded schooling than the NFL's.