capped exceptions similar to the one used in the National Basketball Association, and a centralized salary negotiation system similar to that used in the Arena Football League and Major League Soccer: Bettman had earlier concluded that a luxury tax similar to the one used in Major League Baseball would not have satisfied the league's cost certainty objectives. While most sports commentators saw Bettman's plan as reasonable, some critics pointed out that a hard salary cap without any revenue sharing was an attempt to gain the support of the big market teams (such as Toronto, Montreal, Detroit, the New York Rangers, Vancouver, and Philadelphia) that did not support Bettman during the 1994–95 lockout. The NHLPA, under executive director Bob Goodenow, disputed the league's financial claims. According to the union, "cost certainty" is little more than a euphemism for a salary cap, which it had vowed never to accept. The union rejected each of the six concepts presented by the NHL, claiming they all contained some form of salary cap. The NHLPA preferred to retain the existing "marketplace" system where players individually negotiate contracts with teams, and teams have complete control of how much they want to spend on players. Goodenow's mistrust of the league was supported by a November 2004 Forbes report that estimated the NHL's losses were less than half the amounts claimed by the league. Several players also criticized the contracts that overpaid unproven players: one example was the 2002 Bobby Holik contract, in which the New York Rangers signed him to five years for $45 million. After two years, his contract was bought out by the Rangers: according to Glen Sather, the Rangers' president, "In the new world we live in, Bobby was just paid too much". Although the NHL's numbers regarding financial losses were disputed, there was no question that several franchises were losing money: some had already declared bankruptcy, and others had held "fire sales" of franchise players, such as the Washington Capitals. Some small-market teams, such as the Pittsburgh Penguins and the remaining small-market Canadian teams, were actually hoping for a lockout, since those teams would make more money by losing a season. The league did not have large television revenues in the United States, so the NHL was reliant on attendance revenues far more than other leagues: after the lockout of the 2004–05 season, NHL teams made on average only $3 million from television