I already said that it is a significant factor. It could be the factor that pushes the NHL further over the edge. The only reason I brought it up is your original sentence: "If the NHL wants out of the Olympics, it's probably because the IOC won't cover expenses." Which to me implies that this is the primary reason. It seems like one reason, significant as I already said, but the NHL has wanted out before this issue even existed.
OK so we agree, cool.
No one mentions it because it isn't relevant to criticism of this tournament. This tournament is a factor in the NHL deciding if it will continue with NHL participation - this is taken from Bill Daly's mouth. That there happens to be another factor (IOC funding) doesn't change that simple fact. I's an easy concept to understand. No one is saying that this tournament is the only factor in
NHL removal from the Olympics. One negative aspect of this tournament is that its success works against
NHL participation in the Olympics.
But it is relevant to Olympic participation which is being discussed - you even discuss it later in the same paragraph - see bolded parts.
The NHL's issues are valid, sure. Once again, that is irrelevant. I am not an NHL stakeholder, I am a fan like most here. There is no reason for me to care about whether the NHL profits or not from one international tournament or another unless it significantly affects the fortune of the league. The strange thing about this topic is that the problem with this tournament doesn't relate to NHL profits at all.
So you don't care about the NHL's issues, you only care about your own concerns and if the NHL does something you don't like, you'll complain even if the NHL is completely justified in their actions. Got it. And BTW, profits aren't the only issue, you should know this as you claim to have been following these issues closely and are supposedly well informed.
The league and the players are different things. In general discussion the league refers to the teams/owners. It's widely known that the players mostly wanted to go, and the owners mostly didn't. There is a reason that the stories relating to this, once again widely available in print or on TV, generally referred to this as an issue between the league (the NHL) and the players. If you need it broken down further for some reason, then consider it "the owners" instead of the more common "NHL".
Yes they are different things, thank you for stating the obvious. They are also both parts of the same entity and share a common interest.
The things not to like have been discussed many times over. The tournament has unneeded gimmick teams, prevents two teams from selecting certain players from their own country, and has a team that will likely result in players playing against their own country in a supposedly international tournament.
For some people, there are also things to like though - the fact that there is a World Cup at all for example. It may not be a positive for you but it is for others. It seems like some people only want to harp on the negative as if that's all there is. Kind of sad IMO.