Turning Stone - rip off

BeiberLvr said:

Except the entry fee isn't a stipend.

It's not paid to Mike Zuglan. It's paid to the prize pool, and it should remain there regardless of whether or not the person that paid shows up.

Click to expand...

BeiberLvr said:

Except the entry fee isn't a stipend.

It's not paid to Mike Zuglan. It's paid to the prize pool, and it should remain there regardless of whether or not the person that paid shows up.

Click to expand...

ideologist said:

This thread was the first time I heard you couldn't sell or transfer your spot.

I get not being allowed to profit off of your tournament spot, but if no refunds are permitted, I should certainly be allowed to transfer my spot to another player with the TD's approval.

Click to expand...

BeiberLvr said:

The proper way to do things would be to instate a cancellation/processing fee. Let's say 30% as that would be reasonable.

Click to expand...

BeiberLvr said:

The proper way to do things would be to instate a cancellation/processing fee. Let's say 30% as that would be reasonable.

So if Player A pays their $200 entry fee, and then has to cancel. They would only get back 70% of their entry ($140). The other 30% ($60) could then go towards whatever Zuglan deems appropriate as that money is no longer attributed to the prize pool.

Click to expand...

Straightpool_99 said:

... This man knows a thing or two about pool players, I'll tell you that.

Click to expand...

Slim Limpy said:

AzHousePro,

Now you've really confused and befuddled me. I'm still trying to piece together everything in this thread in order to try and figure out exactly what Cleary's opinion on this matter is. Beat's me. And what does a dead horse have to do with any of this? Now you're just complicating matters further.

Until my mind is made up and all potential converts have lined up on the appropriate side, I would greatly appreciate it if all previous posters would take the time to carefully and most appropriately elaborate on all their past statements and all appropriate future statements and opinions were opined in a most thorough and detailed fashion so those of us who can't fathom exactly what Cleary's opinion is on this matter get a better gist of just what the subtle nuances are that go into making up one's mind when making a final determination as to what really matters regarding all the proposed scenarios and possibilities regarding the humanity and morality of Mike Zuglan's business ethics when it comes to taking a direct and unambiguous stance concerning the proper moral business structure for using the two hundred dollar deposit or earnest money needed to enter this here tournament we're talking about which, in my mind, could still go either way when it comes to considering the issues involved, depending on the responses I expect to read in regards to the above aforementioned propositions proposed as the correct resolutions to the predicament previously presented prior to my commentary asking for further elaboration on past and future commentary by posters in order that I may take the necessary time to clarify my own understanding of the details involved and figure out exactly what Cleary's unambiguous belief is regarding these issues.

Click to expand...

cardiac kid said:

This is my final post in this thread. Andrew, my guess is, if you had started a thread titled "Unfair Tournament Policy" or even "Unfair Turning Stone Policy" instead of "Turning Stone - Rip Off", more posters may have come to your side of the discussion. You immediatedly set off most everyones defense mechanism. Particularly mine.

IMHO, it took the final authority on this forum way too long to step into the discussion. Can only be thankful no poster was banned for their thoughts on this thread. Yes, everyone does have the right to their opinion. Thankfully it is still "The American Way". At least for the moment.

Lyn

AKA The Judge :grin-square: . Thankfully not the executioner :wink:.

Click to expand...

KMRUNOUT said:

I've heard the phrase "to be human" before, and in almost every case, it typically translates to "relax principles, make mistakes, choose worse over better, do the wrong thing because it seems nice" etc. Humans are stupid and riddled with errors and screw ups. Trying to be human is a terrible goal. I'd much rather behave like Data from Star Trek...perfectly logical and rational. This doesn't stop me from having feelings and emotions, it just stops me from being stupid and making bad decisions because of those emotions.

Sorry the "being human" thing is becoming a pet peeve of mine.

KMRUNOUT

Click to expand...

watchez said:

Hey Lyn - I checked a very reliable source. MZ doesn't pay a nickel to have the tables brought in for the event. The casino foots the bill. So his justification - which still doesn't hold water - that he gives the double dipped entries to Diamond, well that just doesn't happen.

Click to expand...

Poolplaya9 said:

While they can be and often are used synonymously, quite a few people other people see a small distinction and use the terms at different times in different manners. Someone should see if Webster's gives the same definition for both but I'm guessing they are slightly different. I don't feel like looking it up at the moment.


What he does with his money isn't your business. After the player has forfeited what was to be their entry fee, it is no longer an entry fee, because an entry fee requires an entrant. It is now simply a penalty fee and it is Mike's personal money just like any other money that Mike earns through any of the various revenue streams related to the tournament. The only exceptions to what is his personal money are the added money that was advertised/promised, and 128 entry fees (or however many people end up playing if the field doesn't fill up). Unless you had an agreement with Mike as to what he was to do with his money/your penalty fee, then he is free to do with his money whatever he chooses, just like anybody else is free to do with their money what they want. Where or how he chooses to spend his money isn't your business in the least.

Click to expand...

Straightpool_99 said:

The more i read, the more I sympathize with Mike Zuglan! Pool players are the absolute worst. If you can't keep a commitment, then that is your problem why do you insist on making it everyone elses? All ready we have seen examples of pro layers wanting special treatment in this thread. Every God damned tournament there are more people wanting special treatment and considerations than in a special needs childrens summer camp, the difference being the pool players having no other reasons than their egos and selfishness. "I'm to flaky to make any commitments/too important to follow regular procedure, why can't you redraw the entire tournament, bump someone less important off the list or expand the bracket?"

Then it's the bum who believes he's got a masters degree in accounting, there is always one in every tournament, crying: "They stole my 5 dollars". This whining goes on even if the tournament clearly is a break even proposition at best.

I've never met Mike Zuglan, but I think I'd like him. He stands by his own rules and principles, even if the nagging and pressuring must be enormous. I have no problem with his no refund policy, because it is expressly stated and applies to everyone. This man knows a thing or two about pool players, I'll tell you that.

Click to expand...

Poolplaya9 said:

You obviously don't know what shady means. By definition if you are open and upfront about something then it isn't shady. If two people voluntarily agree to something they are both fully aware of then it generally isn't unethical either. What specific lemon laws and renters rights laws do you think cover scenarios similar to this one where both parties were fully aware of something and voluntarily agreed to it and then one of them wants to complain about it later?

Click to expand...