Quote:
Originally Posted by SBXVII
Neither do I, and I can't for the life of me figure out why some people are all hung up on the fact the owners don't want to show them. The only businesses that have to show them are businesses that are owned by the general public and even then I think it's limited info.
I also don't see talent agencies opening their books to their clients. Nor do you hear of building owners or stadium owners having to show their books to a musician or comedian who is performing. What they do know is either how many seats the place holds and they figure on a sell out times how much per seat and they split the money accordingly. Or they sell tickets and pay the performer based off ticket sales. They don't figure in food and drink sales nor do they figure in any souvenir sales unless the performer has it copy written ie; CD's, or in this case football jerseys and such.
I just know that if I was the owner of a McDonalds or even the Kennedy Center I'd be pissed if my employees or the performing act said "show us your books or we are going to court." I'd say see you in court.
On top of this I'm pretty sure that I read somewhere that if the owners are forced to open their books it would set a huge precedence on other businesses that have union workers. So I'm almost certain other businesses are watching as well as unions. So for those throwing out there that businesses have to show their books for singers and comedians and the like, I think your wrong.
|
A classic case of fine ignorance and bad analogies here.
What publicly held companies show to auditors is everything that one learns in ****ing financial accounting. Grasp that first, then worry about the books.
Financial accountancy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Also, the "see you in court" is the threat of
anti-trust litigation against the NHL. Anti-trust laws prohibit the monopolization--"natural monopolies" do not count because the agents don't perform the act of monopolization-- of a market. The employees of the ****ing Kennedy Center or McDonalds have no chance of proving that their respective employers are monopolizing the market nor does it have any ****ing relevance to their welfare of reduced benefits, etc.
Your analogies are caricatures. Do realize that the owners want to take 1 BILLION dollars for themselves because of "rising players costs", mean that they're claming that in their books, a good chunk of their books have journal entries that credit Cash and debit Players' Salaries Expense A LOT.
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness".
Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten.
The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is
Don Juan.