Union Vote and merger impact? what else?

[Tank55]

Ironically, I wonder if unionization will better allow the USFL and XFL to keep wages flat without colluding.

[4th&long]

Ironically, I wonder if unionization will better allow the USFL and XFL to keep wages flat without colluding.

hmmm, well now that's an interesting idea, you may be on to something

[laxtreme56]

I don't think it's too big a deal. If the players ask for more money all Fox has to do is open the books and show their P&L and that should keep player salaries in line. I can see the players bargaining for better housing agreements, food and travel, etc. which may cost Fox a bit more in the short term, but will pay dividends in keeping and maintaining talent.

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

One thing to consider here is that when the XFL was founded, its explicitly non-union stance was a major selling point (for example, it allowed McMahon to demand players stand for the anthem as a contract stipulation, though from a business standpoint that's a minor detail). So if the unions start getting involved with the XFL, then you're talking about a major disruption to the business model.

[Tank55]

I mean, that was just a league rule. What made it explicitly non-union?

[nick1091]

I don't think it's too big a deal. If the players ask for more money all Fox has to do is open the books and show their P&L and that should keep player salaries in line. I can see the players bargaining for better housing agreements, food and travel, etc. which may cost Fox a bit more in the short term, but will pay dividends in keeping and maintaining talent.

I don't think it's quite that simple. The USFL doesn't have the revenue streams most sports leagues do at least in its first year (very little merchandise, super cheap tickets, etc.) so it's likely to be a financial loser from a dollars and cents perspective for certainly this year and maybe the next few, which would probably be true even if the players were all playing for free.

The value to FOX is the low cost in comparison to coverage of other leagues and sports you don't also control, which won't show up in a P&L statement, but is super healthy to Fox's bottom line. Aspirationally, there's also selling the franchises, revenue from local markets, increased merch, potential international rights/streaming, etc.

XFL will certainly face this as well, as I'd expect because this isn't a USFL specific union but a multi-industry one they'll probably attempt to represent as well there. The Rock has repeated the mantra of being for the players and "I've been where they are," and etc so I don't see there's any way they could come off as anti-union.

For good and for bad, I think the unionizing now just accelerates conversations you'd be having a year from now when the options are up and you'd be left individually negotiating deals with all the players all over again, but now with (hypothetically) a US based alternative. If you can hammer out a multi-year CBA with the union, then yes, you're probably paying more next year than you were anticipating, but you could have cost containment that makes revenue projection easier, and potentially more appealing for selling franchises.

[johnnyangryfuzzball]

I mean, that was just a league rule. What made it explicitly non-union?

There was an interview from before the 2020 season started, when Oliver Luck was still in charge. They basically admitted that not having to deal with a labor union meant that they could write the standard-form contracts with whatever terms they wanted or needed, the anthem rule being one (trivial) example. I can't seem to find it now.

[Tank55]

Sure, it would have been up to individual players to negotiate things into (or out of) the contract. But that's just as true of the USFL, AAF, etc. There's nothing that made the XFL special in that regard.

[GDAWG]