tactics

[bocelts@scsn.net (R. Bentz Kirby)]

I wonder about the various tactics in play here.  The owners locked the
players out because their share of revenues exceeded 51% or so.  The
players respond by saying we want 60% of revenues.  Does this make
sense?  Are we supposed to believe that they are being reasonable?

As to the revenues, is this a percentage of profits or gross revenues. 
Are the owners to pay for hotels, meals, transportation, medical and
training care, and what all else out of their less than 40%?  Is this
fair?  If the players want this type of deal, shouldn't they also accept
60% of the expenses of running the league.

Now, if we are talking net profits, then shouldn't the owners get their
expenses back?  Why not some sort of graduated scale?  Say 50/50 until
the owners make, oh say about 250 million in net profits, then 60/40 to
be spread around to all players making less than $1,000,000 until all
players make at least a million and then say any further profits are
split 70/30, but the players have to start paying back their meals and
housing etc.  Or something like this where the scale slides on net
profits?
-- 
Bentz
bocelts@scsn.net

http://www.scsn.net/users/sclaw