NFL hires International Investment Bank (1 Viewer)

[fatness]

If the NFL releases their financial information to the NFLPA, which has been the stumbling block in negotiations according to reports, a financial firm has been retained by the NFLPA to review the information.

The NFL still hasn’t agreed to surrender financial information to the players’ union. But the move is expected, and the NFLPA is now prepared for it.

Per multiple reports, the union has hired International Investment Bank to review any financial information the league discloses.

Albert Breer of NFL Network reports that an auditor the union “has used for years” arrived at the offices of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service at 3:00 p.m.

 

[VaCatFan]

WASHINGTON (AP)—The NFL’s lead labor negotiator says the league offered to give the players’ union financial information that the league doesn’t even give its 32 clubs.

On his way into Wednesday’s mediation session, NFL general counsel Jeff Pash said the issue of financial transparency—a key sticking point in labor talks this week—“really should be behind us.”

“We’ve made more information available in the course of this negotiation than has ever been made available in decades of collective bargaining with the NFLPA,” Pash said. “Far more information. And we’ve offered to make even more information (available), including information that we do not disclose to our own clubs.”

Pash did not reveal any specifics of the league’s offer and wouldn’t say what the union’s response was. But a person familiar with the negotiations told The Associated Press that the NFL offered to turn over five years of profitability data to the players’ union—and the offer was rejected.

The person spoke on condition of anonymity because the mediator overseeing the labor talks has told participants to not discuss details publicly.

According to the person who spoke to the AP, the NFL’s proposal to the union included:

— audited league-wide profitability data with dollar figures from 2005-09, based on individual club statements;

— the number of teams that have seen a shift in profitability in that span;

— an independent auditor to examine the data.

The NFL Players Association long has demanded that the league give it full access to financial data, making that a central issue in contract talks.

The union didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment Wednesday. NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith, union president Kevin Mawae(notes) and other members of their negotiating team entered the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service office before Pash spoke to the media.

The current collective bargaining agreement was set to expire last week, but two extensions now have pushed the cutoff to the end of Friday.

With various issues under discussion, the crux of the labor dispute is how to split more than $9 billion in annual revenues. NFLPA executive committee member Scott Fujita(notes), a linebacker for the Cleveland Browns, said Tuesday that what the NFL has turned over to the union so far “hasn’t been sufficient.”

The union retained a global investment bank to help it decide whether the league’s offer to reveal more financial information during negotiations will be enough to satisfy the union’s call for full disclosure.

Another executive committee member, Indianapolis Colts center Jeff Saturday(notes), said as he left Tuesday’s 9 1/2 -hour mediation session that the investment bank would “help judge how helpful the material they were offering to give us” would be.

One key question is what cut team owners should get up front to help cover costs such as stadium construction and improvement. Under the old deal, owners received more than $1 billion off the top. They entered these negotiations seeking to add another $1 billion to that amount, before other revenues are divided with players.

Although progress has been made, both sides have stuck to their stances when it comes to two key matters: The NFLPA has not agreed to any major economic concessions; the NFL has not agreed to completely open its books.

“I don’t think there should be any issue of disclosure, I don’t think there should be any issue of transparency,” Pash said. “I don’t think there should be any issue of who knows what.”

Commissioner Roger Goodell was joined by three members of the owners’ 10-person labor committee: Art Rooney II of the Pittsburgh Steelers, John Mara of the New York Giants, and Clark Hunt of the Kansas City Chiefs. More owners are expected to attend mediation Thursday, when once again the sides will be nearing the expiration of the CBA.

“We’ve got a long ways to go, but as long as we stay at it, we’ve got a chance of getting an agreement done,” Pash said.

If a deal isn’t reached by Friday, the sides could agree to another extension. Or talks could break off, leading to, possibly, a lockout by owners or antitrust lawsuits by players.

“The commissioner said ‘talking is better than litigating.’ Talking is better than, you know, going to DEFCON 3 or whatever term I’ve heard thrown around,” Pash said. “So let’s keep at it.”

 

[Orange Crush]

There's a concern from the Union's point of view that if they were only to receive "profit" data but with no information on team costs, the data wouldn't be very helpful. For example, both Mike Brown of the Bengals and Ralph Wilson of the Bills are rumored to pay themselves and family members salaries well above league average for services provided to their clubs. Under standard accounting statements, this would fall under office payroll, and not team profits. Yet, most of that money should be included in team profits as part of the negotiations. Likewise, is Daniel Snyder's personal jet a team expense or a personal expense? What about renovations to the owner's luxury box at the stadium?

If the owners are going to claim that the current system isn't sustainable, then they should be prepared to support that with data rather than asking the players to trust their word.

 

[Heatman]

There's a concern from the Union's point of view that if they were only to receive "profit" data but with no information on team costs, the data wouldn't be very helpful. For example, both Mike Brown of the Bengals and Ralph Wilson of the Bills are rumored to pay themselves and family members salaries well above league average for services provided to their clubs. Under standard accounting statements, this would fall under office payroll, and not team profits. Yet, most of that money should be included in team profits as part of the negotiations. Likewise, is Daniel Snyder's personal jet a team expense or a personal expense? What about renovations to the owner's luxury box at the stadium? If the owners are going to claim that the current system isn't sustainable, then they should be prepared to support that with data rather than asking the players to trust their word.

Those things are irrelevant to the negotiations. Businesses are set up that way all the time but even the IRS can't ask individuals or businesses to pay more taxes on such things. The players certainly don't have the right to have those things listed as profits if the IRS doesn't.Also Mike Brown, despite not having a great team, runs one of the most profitable teams in the NFL. His team is one the NFLPA will try to use to say all teams are making a profit. I don't think him paying himself more than other GMS make is something the players can gripe about IF that is the case.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

This is similar to actors in Hollywood who have a share of the 'profits' from a film and then following a blockbuster along the lines of The Titanic find that the film 'lost money' and their share is roughly zero point zero dollars.

As Crush points out you can hide an awful lot of profit by beefing up the expense side of the ledger if you're properly incentivized.

 

[Orange Crush]

There's a concern from the Union's point of view that if they were only to receive "profit" data but with no information on team costs, the data wouldn't be very helpful. For example, both Mike Brown of the Bengals and Ralph Wilson of the Bills are rumored to pay themselves and family members salaries well above league average for services provided to their clubs. Under standard accounting statements, this would fall under office payroll, and not team profits. Yet, most of that money should be included in team profits as part of the negotiations. Likewise, is Daniel Snyder's personal jet a team expense or a personal expense? What about renovations to the owner's luxury box at the stadium? If the owners are going to claim that the current system isn't sustainable, then they should be prepared to support that with data rather than asking the players to trust their word.

Those things are irrelevant to the negotiations. Businesses are set up that way all the time but even the IRS can't ask individuals or businesses to pay more taxes on such things. The players certainly don't have the right to have those things listed as profits if the IRS doesn't.Also Mike Brown, despite not having a great team, runs one of the most profitable teams in the NFL. His team is one the NFLPA will try to use to say all teams are making a profit. I don't think him paying himself more than other GMS make is something the players can gripe about IF that is the case.

The players aren't going to stop Mike Brown from paying himself mucho money. The negotiations aren't about that. The point is that the NFL can't say that they aren't making enough profits if they are cooking the books to artificially lower the amount of profits the teams are making.