TORONTO - Bob Goodenow, NHLPA Executive Director, had the following comments in response to the League commissioned report by Arthur Levitt:
"We understand the Levitt report took 12 months and thousands of hours to complete. Because we received the report from the League late this morning, it will take more than a couple of hours of review to fully comment. Selected media outlets received this report days before us, which speaks volumes about its intended audience. Without a detailed review of all the underlying documents one can only make preliminary comments on the report:
1. The owners and their commissioner Gary Bettman have obviously found it necessary to retain a new spokesman/consultant to provide general conclusions about League finances while still not disclosing any individual team information or providing an opportunity to examine the actual records upon which the conclusions are allegedly based.
2. We understand that 12 months ago, Levitt was retained by the League's commissioner through two New York City based law firms. The League did not advise the NHLPA of this initiative and there has been no discussion of it by the parties, even though we had many discussions of issues flowing from the URO process during the substantive economic discussions and collective bargaining sessions we have had over the last 12 months. Against this background, it is clear the Levitt report is simply another League public relations initiative. To suggest the report is in any way independent is misleading.
3. We have consistently stated that one critical issue of disagreement between the NHLPA and the League on finances is how to define the complete business of owning an NHL franchise, and how to address the significant inconsistencies contained in the NHL's voluntary and unaudited URO reporting process. At the outset it is clear the Levitt report, commissioned by the League, is fundamentally flawed when the author "elects" to define hockey revenues on the same basis as used in the NBA and NFL for defining revenues in their salary cap systems.
4. We were given access to the UROs for 30 clubs, but were only able to conduct a thorough review of four NHL clubs. On those four clubs alone we found just over $52 million in hockey related revenues and benefits not reported in the League's voluntary and unaudited URO process. If we are given similar access to all of the other individual teams' financial information, presumably used in the Levitt report, we will be in a position to provide further comment.
We continue to believe that a market system, not a team of hired-gun accountants, provides the best measure of the value of the hockey business. In a market system, the owner decides how much to pay the players. The owner knows the value of his business better than any paid consultant or league employee and the owner uses this knowledge when he sets player salaries. In our view, there is no better indicator of the true value of the players and the business."