Toggle sidebar

Forslund contract negotiations

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Navin R Slavin said:
That's not a universally held opinion, fwiw -- but at least you can see the rationale.
Click to expand...

Regardless, you can't compare something that effects the in-arena experience to something from the broadcast. Who has a problem with cheerleaders?
 
SlavinAway said:
Regardless, you can't compare something that effects the in-arena experience to something from the broadcast. Who has a problem with cheerleaders?
Click to expand...

A pretty sizable percentage of the women hockey fans and players I know. But again, it is at least an attempt at improving the in-arena experience for paying customers, whether or not everyone agrees with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cptjeff
The transition to contractor status after so many years is insulting as well. Losing access to healthcare and benefits is a much bigger deal as you age. COBRA costs for a family plan or the underwhelming HC options on the exchange...no wonder he balked.

The whole thing is just so tasteless. Particularly, after he exposed the total lack of respect given to him and doublespeak by the organization on the podcast. Tripp confirmed the approach used, too.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: emptyNedder, bleedgreen, DaveG and 2 others
hblueridgegal said:
The transition to contractor status after so many years is insulting as well. Losing access to healthcare and benefits is a much bigger deal as you age. COBRA costs for a family plan or the underwhelming HC options on the exchange...no wonder he balked.

The whole thing is just so tasteless. Particularly, after he exposed the total lack of respect given to him and doublespeak by the organization on the podcast. Tripp confirmed the approach used, too.
Click to expand...

I didn’t catch the switch to contractor status. THAT is bullshit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: skipnjump and bleedgreen
42 jerks said:
They did get rid of the radio broadcaster. The Canes were a bottom-t franchise for a decade with the Storm Squad in place.

You are missing the logic. If $100,000 is worth getting rid of Forslund, then surely $25K (my guess) is worth getting rid of something that adds no value.
Click to expand...
If there is no hockey, or no fan attendance, then the storm squad costs zero, because there won’t be one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A Star is Burns
42 jerks said:
They did get rid of the radio broadcaster.
Click to expand...

No, they didn’t get rid of the radio broadcaster. They made simply John Forslund the radio broadcaster. Going forward, Mike Maniscalco will be the radio broadcaster.

The only thing that changed is one guy used to do the job and now another guy does it, at less than half the cost.

The Canes were a bottom-t franchise for a decade with the Storm Squad in place.

You are missing the logic. If $100,000 is worth getting rid of Forslund, then surely $25K (my guess) is worth getting rid of something that adds no value.
Click to expand...

The Storm Squad actually does add bottom-line value, though. Even if we set aside their value-add to the arena experience and various team functions (similar to John), we can point to the Storm Squad making paid public appearances that otherwise would not exist. They offset their costs by creating a revenue stream. A lot of the time they are also effectively event staff, preventing the team from needing to hire more greeters for things like training camps and STH events. I’d be surprised if the Storm Squad didn’t ultimately represent a a profit rather than an expense, when all factors are considered.

And again, this isn’t about “why don’t we just get rid of positions”. This is about the team making a choice not to pay a premium for Person A for part of the season when Person B can do the entire season for less, and the bottom line difference is a wash.

We all knew for years this moment for John was coming, before Dundon even bought the team. It was never going to be fun, but we’re in a true crisis regarding the economic model of pro sports. It is what it is, time to part ways.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Svechhammer, cptjeff, Chrispy and 1 other person
tarheelhockey said:
No, they didn’t get rid of the radio broadcaster. They made simply John Forslund the radio broadcaster. Going forward, Mike Maniscalco will be the radio broadcaster.

The only thing that changed is one guy used to do the job and now another guy does it, at less than half the cost.
Click to expand...

Lol this sounds like a Eugene Melnyk-esque spin of why gutting the team is appropriate.

"No, we didn't trade away our #1 defenseman to the San Jose Sharks. Thomas Chabot is simply now the #1 defenseman."



Turns out Dundon also never got rid of a GM. Don Waddell is simply the GM now.
 
tarheelhockey said:
No, they didn’t get rid of the radio broadcaster. They made simply John Forslund the radio broadcaster. Going forward, Mike Maniscalco will be the radio broadcaster.

The only thing that changed is one guy used to do the job and now another guy does it, at less than half the cost.



The Storm Squad actually does add bottom-line value, though. Even if we set aside their value-add to the arena experience and various team functions (similar to John), we can point to the Storm Squad making paid public appearances that otherwise would not exist. They offset their costs by creating a revenue stream. A lot of the time they are also effectively event staff, preventing the team from needing to hire more greeters for things like training camps and STH events. I’d be surprised if the Storm Squad didn’t ultimately represent a a profit rather than an expense, when all factors are considered.

And again, this isn’t about “why don’t we just get rid of positions”. This is about the team making a choice not to pay a premium for Person A for part of the season when Person B can do the entire season for less, and the bottom line difference is a wash.

We all knew for years this moment for John was coming, before Dundon even bought the team. It was never going to be fun, but we’re in a true crisis regarding the economic model of pro sports. It is what it is, time to part ways.
Click to expand...
Not going to argue your points. It all may be justified. But it is the way it was done.

Not: 'Sorry John. You've been a big part....but the new economic reality is this. Maybe we can work something out down the line.'

It (from what I have gathered from JF's statement) was: 'This is the deal. Take it or leave it. Don't agree to it? Well bye.'

JF said the only person he has a problem with is TD. Not like him to call someone out..
 
Anton Dubinchuk said:
Lol this sounds like a Eugene Melnyk-esque spin of why gutting the team is appropriate.

"No, we didn't trade away our #1 defenseman to the San Jose Sharks. Thomas Chabot is simply now the #1 defenseman."



Turns out Dundon also never got rid of a GM. Don Waddell is simply the GM now.
Click to expand...

I mean... it’s the truth. Consolidating positions is a normal business practice. And this is still all just a business.

Did anyone stop following this team after Kaiton was let go? Did anyone refuse to listen to John’s voice on the radio? Doubt it. So what was the purpose of paying two guys for one guy’s worth of product?

John’s situation is a little more nuanced, but again — we all know there will be close to zero follow-through on all these threats to dis-engage from the team. Games will start in a few days and this will be forgotten. So what’s the point in paying a premium to keep him here part-time during a massive budget shortfall?

Or to put it differently, which 2-3 lower level employees need to be added to the layoff list to make that happen? And what critical function were they performing which had them survive the deep cuts that were already made? That’s the reality of how these decisions happen, not just Tom Dundon diving into a Scrooge McDuck money pool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Svechhammer and cptjeff
Does anyone else think it's sort of weird Tripp quickly agreed to his deal? I figured he would maybe hold out in solidarity with his longtime partner, especially if the deal is as bad as people are making it out to be.
 
Canes said:
Does anyone else think it's sort of weird Tripp quickly agreed to his deal? I figured he would maybe hold out in solidarity with his longtime partner, especially if the deal is as bad as people are making it out to be.
Click to expand...
If you have expensive hobbies like eating and electricity-using, being put in a "take it or leave it, tick tock" spot over your job, at times like these, may easily see you taking it.

The salary may more or less return when the audience returns; I'd assume there kind of has to be at least theoretical way to present it as not a permanent legit paycut but a theoretically beneficial bonus scheme. "In full capacity situation you'd be paid more than now."
 
  • Like
Reactions: cptjeff
Lempo said:
If you have expensive hobbies like eating and electricity-using, being put in a "take it or leave it, tick tock" spot over your job, at times like these, may easily see you taking it.
Click to expand...
Tripp's got a Harvard degree so that's one huge network there, then I'm sure he has a huge hockey network as well. He might not have been able to quickly get another similar job like Forslund can but he has more options than the average person.

If it was some huge insulting offer, he probably wouldn't have taken it. Just my opinion though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG
Canes said:
Tripp's got a Harvard degree so that's one huge network there, then I'm sure he has a huge hockey network as well. He might not have been able to quickly get another similar job like Forslund can but he has more options than the average person.

If it was some huge insulting offer, he probably wouldn't have taken it. Just my opinion though.
Click to expand...
Harvard degree, schmarvard degree... I've seen people go play for the goddamn Rags over getting themself a Harvard degree!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lucky Lindy, geehaad, DaveG and 1 other person
Canes said:
Tripp's got a Harvard degree so that's one huge network there, then I'm sure he has a huge hockey network as well. He might not have been able to quickly get another similar job like Forslund can but he has more options than the average person.

If it was some huge insulting offer, he probably wouldn't have taken it. Just my opinion though.
Click to expand...

He may have the Harvard degree and lots of connections, but that doesn’t guarantee him a job today. Especially in this market. He may have taken a shitty offer to keep getting paid (even if it’s half) while he starts the process of finding a landing spot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cptjeff and DaveG
MinJaBen said:
He may have the Harvard degree and lots of connections, but that doesn’t guarantee him a job today. Especially in this market. He may have taken a shitty offer to keep getting paid (even if it’s half) while he starts the process of finding a landing spot.
Click to expand...
Correct. On Adam Gold's show, he spelled it all out - how crappy the pay cut was, zero negotiation and how painful the process was for him and Forslund. Called it a bitter pill. He said re-signed because he hopes in the long term it will pay off eventually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tryamw and DaveG
tarheelhockey said:
I mean... it’s the truth. Consolidating positions is a normal business practice. And this is still all just a business.

Did anyone stop following this team after Kaiton was let go? Did anyone refuse to listen to John’s voice on the radio? Doubt it. So what was the purpose of paying two guys for one guy’s worth of product?

John’s situation is a little more nuanced, but again — we all know there will be close to zero follow-through on all these threats to dis-engage from the team. Games will start in a few days and this will be forgotten. So what’s the point in paying a premium to keep him here part-time during a massive budget shortfall?

Or to put it differently, which 2-3 lower level employees need to be added to the layoff list to make that happen? And what critical function were they performing which had them survive the deep cuts that were already made? That’s the reality of how these decisions happen, not just Tom Dundon diving into a Scrooge McDuck money pool.
Click to expand...

FWIW I have it on good authority that the national currency shortage is directly related to the Tom Dundon's growing Scrooge McDuck-style money pool. The fat stacks saved on Forslund made the high-dive possible. Don't shoot the messenger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tryamw, cptjeff, tarheelhockey and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom