Skip to content

First step: actually define hockey-related revenue

Aug 31, 2012, 12:41 PM EDT

Pie Getty Images

Which would you prefer – a 50 percent split of one pie, or a 43 percent split of a slightly larger pie?

Answer: depends how much bigger the second pie is, right?

That’s essentially what’s happening in the NHL when it comes to hockey-related revenue (HRR). The NHL and NHLPA can’t seem to agree on what size of pie they’re trying to split up.

Hockey Night in Canada’s Elliotte Friedman highlights four changes the owners would like to make to the current formula. The first involves limits on “cost of doing business” deductions, the second the cost of selling luxury suites, the third receiving credit for stadium upgrades, and the fourth closing the loophole that allows teams to gain cap relief by sending players on one-way contracts (e.g. Wade Redden) to the minors.

Cue everyone fuming at the owners for trying to close a loophole that THEY EXPLOIT.

Anyway, it probably makes sense to define the size of the pie the two sides are fighting over before the fighting starts.


  1. kingfooj - Aug 31, 2012 at 12:52 PM

    i love apple pie.

  2. cweez2 - Aug 31, 2012 at 1:08 PM

    I think the pie graphic made sense to any 6th grader landing on the page for the first time.

  3. sjsharks66 - Aug 31, 2012 at 1:08 PM

    I’d rather watch hockey then have pie. If you catch my drift. OHH!

  4. test2402 - Aug 31, 2012 at 1:19 PM

    Freaking guy in the shop. Bozo bastard.

  5. ballistictrajectory - Aug 31, 2012 at 2:36 PM

    It all depends on what the meaning of “is” is.

  6. windmiller4 - Aug 31, 2012 at 3:15 PM

    Wouldn’t it just make sense to split it 50/50? cause then no matter how big the pie the owners and players can’t whine about the other side getting more money.

    • paperkid96 - Aug 31, 2012 at 7:55 PM

      Money? What money? I thought we were talking about pie.

  7. paledevil - Aug 31, 2012 at 5:20 PM

    Leave it to EF to point out preseason games and road trips are the best earners for the league Somehow even though i reread 3 or 4 times i got the idea they want players to share overseas travel costs?

    As far as # 3 Where i am from suites are separate from normal team operations if they contracted it out explains things but honestly i cannot see how or why the sales people are not signing 10 or 20 year suite contracts in a marketing partnership similar to naming the stadium… Stunned better word….o well someone took my job in phoenix …
    the point is the owners should get the suites Why should the players benefit for advantageous corporate partnerships Besides as i ranted some sales peop are better than others

  8. keeganbattistoni - Aug 31, 2012 at 10:57 PM


Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (2074)
  2. P. Kessel (1523)
  3. M. Richards (1331)
  4. N. Backstrom (1230)
  5. M. Giordano (1137)