MONTREAL – Had the NHL not invested a full year and $1 million in a publicity stunt called the Levitt Report last winter, perhaps the league and the Players’ Association would have already reached an agreement on the accurate financial picture facing the 30 teams.

Perhaps the league and union wouldn’t be spending time now on fundamental economic issues that should have been put to bed long ago.

But that, unfortunately, is where we are today, 13 days prior to the expiration of the current collective bargaining agreement and the beginning of a lockout that threatens to claim the entire 2004-05 season.

That’s where we are today following meetings of up to 16 hours over the last two days in which the league and the union not only dissected numbers but exchanged views regarding the unique circumstances and operations of each club.

In many of the previous meetings, the league blamed unwise club management decisions for the NHL’s financial plight.

These past two sessions – which coincided with the opening of the World Cup tournament – essentially were fact-finding missions conducted at the union’s request before it makes an amended offer to the league, which is expected when the sides convene next week.

A degree of progress, even if not substantive, can be inferred by looking at the length of the sessions, the civil exchange of information and the announcement that the sides will meet again today.

But the offer the union will construct as a result of these exchanges is expected to be based on a luxury tax and revenue-share system, which is unlikely to win friends or influence the people on the other side. The owners have insisted for years that the next collective bargaining agreement must contain cost certainty in the form of a percentage-of-the-gross link between revenue and payroll.

Indeed, the offer is certain to resemble the offer the union presented to the league in June 2003 that has since been ridiculed by the NHL as nothing more than an attempt to maintain the status quo.