Just because they aren't lendors or potential investors doesn't rule out the usage of the already audited financials (although the owners did say that the players are "partners"). It's the idea of it. This is a massive negotiation that will affect both parties over a very long-time (even after this next deal expires), just like a Company purchase. It's truth in negotiations. And it's a lot different than a vendor arguing over a price listing (as suggested), because if they disagree then they take their business elsewhere. This is the employees arguing over their compensation where the employees also happen to be the Product.
In this negotiation they are adversaries.
What would the financials accomplish?
The only purpose of the financials, since revenue is transparent, is for the union to see the profit margins of the owners, and use that as a negotiating point.
In effect the union would want to collectively bargain what the owners are allowed to consider an acceptable return on their investment.
That is way beyond the scope of employer and union.
And look at it this way: They are so far apart in the negotiations. One of the main impasses is the f/s.
I dont think that is accurate. I know the union wants you to believe that so you can assign blame. But Rooney said they offered financials and the union refused to even look at them.
When they say 'show us the f/s or we'll sue' it's a consequence of them realizing that they've progressed as far as they can and the only way to continue is to review this vital information.
Really? You would give information to your adversary that they could use against you while they are on their way to the courthouse to sue you? Wow.
As for how they'll use the information for every nefarious means imaginable, I think we're taking a bit too cynical a perspective on their actions.
The union is trying to secure the highest possible payday they can get. The owners are trying to pay them as little as they possibly can.
That is what a CBA negotiation is.
You are an accountant. If I gave you the financials of a corporation and said I want you to go thorugh these and show me how I can argue my employees deserve more, I am certain you could create some good arguments.
Conversely if I gave you the same financials and asked you to give me a defense as to why the company really cannot afford to pay the employees any more, you could do that too.
Financials are not 2+2=4 and everyone sees it the same way. There is interpretation.
If we expand the above to 32 corporations over 10 years, both jobs I asked you to do become a awful lot easier to accomplish.
I know this, because I've done it. I've used financials to back up the plans I wanted to enact for a company and know that I could have couched the argument to support the opposite side if I believed it was best. There is way too much gray area to think that no matter what shape the teams are in financially the union can create an argument that they are reaping a huge bonanza at the expense of the players.
That all being said, like someone else remarked, it depends on how much information is presented to them. If they're looking at the financials in aggregate, then it's entirely reasonable for them to review the statements (with let's say the Company names removed so they can't identify which is which). We can already see some of the revenue figures by Company online, with a little searching. The audited figures substantiate things. However, if they want access to the detail by account, then that's a whole other story. But realize that more detail doesn't necessarily mean more information. I look at different trial balances every week. Seeing more doesn't always mean more. I can't count how many accounts are labeled 'miscellaneous' and 'other'. It isn't like an account is labeled "Mr. Kraft's secret stash of money for frivolous billionaire pursuits"...I don't think. I am curious as to the specific terms of the third party review of the f/s, and what the hold up is that the NFLPA is claiming. I wish we knew more.
Rooney said they handed over financials and the union handed them back without looking at them and said give me 10 years. That does not seem like good faith.
In any event, I appreciate your opinion, and I am curious to your response to this:
What would you expect to happen if the league had turned over those financials? In what way do you think it would help?