Accu-Stats vs TAR - paying the players

Roy Steffensen

Roy Steffensen

locksmith
Silver Member
From the thread about "Earl's mistake", the discussion is about a mistake that Earl did in his US Open match against Rodney Morris. The match can be seen here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGTFPSjzfms

Anyway, the purpose of this thread is not Earl Strickland, but if this is true or not:

mr8ball said:
I have seen him do things like this on the TV table a few times and i ask Earl what was going on.

I was told by Earl that he does not like playing on the TV table because the players do not get any money out of the DVD;s that are sold. He also said that he would never try if he was put on the TV table again.

I am not sure if they get paid or not but i think they should (JMHO)
Click to expand...

I am curious too. Do they get paid or not?

I do know that TAR helps putting some $$ in the players pockets if the DVD sells, and I seem to remember that JCIN once posted that when one of the top American players received a check from TAR he said he got more from TAR than he had ever got from Accu-Stats. (I could be wrong here, but I am very seldom wrong;))

Anyone have any details about and if and how much etc., when it comes to Accu-Stats?

If they do not get paid, this is another thing that a PLAYERS ASSOCIATION should work with...
 
I had a pro living with me for about a year and a half. He is on several Accu-Stats tapes. I don't recall him ever getting any kind of jelly from sales of the tapes he is on.
 
Just talked to one of the top players and he just laughed when I asked him this question, and he said "the players are NEVER protected. Put up a players union and you will get all the top players to join. Players needs to have a voice to discuss rules, money in escrow, breakrules and things like that"
 
Shane has told me that he does get paid for both TAR & Accu-stats videos. The percentage he gets with TAR is higher than the Accu-stats videos but I don't know if this is true for all players that they tape, nor do I know if they sign any type of agreement with them before it's taped. I also know that Sheragon Entertainment (who is now also providing the video coverage of events thru InsidePool) does plan to pay the players for DVD sales as well, not sure on the percentage though.

This is a funny topic though because it all depends on the tournament you are playing in and what type of agreement they have with the company providing the taping. I know when Shane plays in Matchroom sports events he signs a contract that ensures he is paid for attending the event but also gives rights to the tournament promoters or organizers for all footage they take.

I believe that the legal way to look at it (which may not be something everyone wants to hear) is that if a production company is contracted to cover an event, you agree to the media coverage terms by paying your entry fee and playing in the tournament as long as the media coverage is advertised beforehand. You don't charge the magazines for using your pictures on the cover of them do you? They make money off of that...It's kind of the same thing. It sucks but hopefully in the future this new boom in online streaming will provide additional sponsorship for the events so the players will eventually see some financial benefits of the video coverage. I know this is the approach we are taking for events I am involved with...selling commercial spots on the online stream to add money to the tournaments.
 
Thanks for your detailed inputs Cris!

CrisDeLaGarza said:
Shane has told me that he does get paid for both TAR & Accu-stats videos. The percentage he gets with TAR is higher than the Accu-stats videos but I don't know if this is true for all players that they tape, nor do I know if they sign any type of agreement with them before it's taped. I also know that Sheragon Entertainment (who is now also providing the video coverage of events thru InsidePool) does plan to pay the players for DVD sales as well, not sure on the percentage though.

I find it weird that some players do get paid and some don't. Maybe the player I just talked to is just on DVD's that doesn't sell :o Will talk with some other players about this topic too

This is a funny topic though because it all depends on the tournament you are playing in and what type of agreement they have with the company providing the taping. I know when Shane plays in Matchroom sports events he signs a contract that ensures he is paid for attending the event but also gives rights to the tournament promoters or organizers for all footage they take.

Matchroom is atleast paying a fee to the players, but they don't do that if they make DVD's from for example the World Pool Championship. What if Shane wins the World 9-ball Championship, and the DVD turns out to be a best-seller. Shouldn't he get something for it? Pro Baseball, Basketball, Soccer etc., all have deals that protect the clubs (players), not only the promotors and the tv-companies

I believe that the legal way to look at it (which may not be something everyone wants to hear) is that if a production company is contracted to cover an event, you agree to the media coverage terms by paying your entry fee and playing in the tournament as long as the media coverage is advertised beforehand. You don't charge the magazines for using your pictures on the cover of them do you?

Unfortunately I think you are right, and the main-problem is that there are hundreds of different events and promotors. If there was just one promotor, like the WPBA for women's pool, deals that helped the players could be negotiated. the way pro-pool for men is run it is nearly impossible.

They make money off of that...It's kind of the same thing. It sucks but hopefully in the future this new boom in online streaming will provide additional sponsorship for the events so the players will eventually see some financial benefits of the video coverage. I know this is the approach we are taking for events I am involved with...selling commercial spots on the online stream to add money to the tournaments.
Click to expand...

Crossing my fingers for more money to the pros because of the live streaming!
 
Good thread - and a good topic - Accu-stats has been selling tapes for long time and they have expanded into pay-per-view - nice going Ragnar
 
I have not seen Jose Parica in recent times. That said, on two occasions when we were at tournaments, Jose received a check from Pat Fleming for over 800 bucks. And those are just the times that I have been with Jose. He told me that he has received thousands from Pat Fleming over the years. Every time he sees him at an event, Pat hands him a check.

One year at the DCC, Pat Fleming was handing out checks to all the players. I remember seeing Jeanette Lee standing in line with several others, receiving a check from Pat.

Accu-Stats most definitely pays royalties to the players. :smile:

Just because the amounts of Accu-Stats' payments to players in the form of royalties is not published does not mean it doesn't happen. Accu-Stats doesn't publicize on this forum in the same manner as others may. However, they don't come any better than Pat Fleming. He is as honest as the day is long and has a good memory. He doesn't forget.

What has Earl Strickland upset in the above-referenced post is not Accu-Stats. I think -- and I may be wrong -- Earl was referring to BCN's live coverage of the TV table at the U.S. Open. Earl likes Accu-Stats and Pat Fleming. :smile:
 
Last edited:
JAM said:
I have not seen Jose Parica in recent times. That said, on two occasions when we were at tournaments, Jose received a check from Pat Fleming for over 800 bucks. And those are just the times that I have been with Jose. He told me that he has received thousands from Pat Fleming over the years. Every time he sees him at an event, Pat hands him a check.

One year at the DCC, Pat Fleming was handing out checks to all the players. I remember seeing Jeanette Lee standing in line with several others, receiving a check from Pat.

Accu-Stats most definitely pays royalties to the players. :smile:

Just because the amounts of Accu-Stats' payments to players in the form of royalties is not published does not mean it doesn't happen. Accu-Stats doesn't publicize on this forum in the same manner as others may. However, they don't come any better than Pat Fleming. He is as honest as the day is long and has a good memory. He doesn't forget.

What has Earl Strickland upset in the above-referenced post is not Accu-Stats. I think -- and I may be wrong -- Earl was referring to BCN's live coverage of the TV table at the U.S. Open. Earl likes Accu-Stats and Pat Fleming. :smile:
Click to expand...

Thanx for the heads up re - Accu-stats giving back to the players .
 
RoyBoy,
I have no idea about the TAR arrangements; but I believe that Pat Fleming does pay royalties to the players for each tape he sells of one of their matches. I do not believe the royalties are large, or even very significant to the players income; but several players of my acquaintance believe that his efforts are great for the game, and appreciate that his policy acknowledges and in some small ways rewards their professionalism.

Many players would do well to realize that their performances are all they really have to market (and could be a main source of revenue since tournament purses are very small). The widespread circulation of uncompensated "internet and YouTube videos" can only lower their marketability and decrease their attractiveness to potential sponsors.

I know several pro's that try to avoid appearing on internet video. Why would anyone buy a video if they can see it for free on the internet? In my view, the players need to make a living, and I do not discredit the ones who try to enhance their marketability - it is their job.
 
JAM said:
I have not seen Jose Parica in recent times. That said, on two occasions when we were at tournaments, Jose received a check from Pat Fleming for over 800 bucks. And those are just the times that I have been with Jose. He told me that he has received thousands from Pat Fleming over the years. Every time he sees him at an event, Pat hands him a check.

One year at the DCC, Pat Fleming was handing out checks to all the players. I remember seeing Jeanette Lee standing in line with several others, receiving a check from Pat.

Accu-Stats most definitely pays royalties to the players. :smile:

Just because the amounts of Accu-Stats' payments to players in the form of royalties is not published does not mean it doesn't happen. Accu-Stats doesn't publicize on this forum in the same manner as others may. However, they don't come any better than Pat Fleming. He is as honest as the day is long and has a good memory. He doesn't forget.

What has Earl Strickland upset in the above-referenced post is not Accu-Stats. I think -- and I may be wrong -- Earl was referring to BCN's live coverage of the TV table at the U.S. Open. Earl likes Accu-Stats and Pat Fleming. :smile:
Click to expand...

Thanks for your inputs! It makes me happy to know that the players are getting paid also from Accu-Stats.

Williebetmore said:
RoyBoy,
I have no idea about the TAR arrangements; but I believe that Pat Fleming does pay royalties to the players for each tape he sells of one of their matches. I do not believe the royalties are large, or even very significant to the players income; but several players of my acquaintance believe that his efforts are great for the game, and appreciate that his policy acknowledges and in some small ways rewards their professionalism.

Many players would do well to realize that their performances are all they really have to market (and could be a main source of revenue since tournament purses are very small). The widespread circulation of uncompensated "internet and YouTube videos" can only lower their marketability and decrease their attractiveness to potential sponsors.

I know several pro's that try to avoid appearing on internet video. Why would anyone buy a video if they can see it for free on the internet? In my view, the players need to make a living, and I do not discredit the ones who try to enhance their marketability - it is their job.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that it is a pity that complete matches are available on youtube, as long as the matches on youtube are also available on DVD.

But if the matches on youtube are not available on DVD (recorded from ESPN for example) I think it is ok, and as a player I would consider it free advertising! If there are like 5 matches of Jasmin Ouschan on youtube, and none of them are available on DVD, they will only trigger the interest of finally buying a DVD or more when new matches would be available through for example Accu-Stats.

The same goes for live-streaming. If I were a top-player gambling at for example DCC, I wouldn't turn down a request to gamble on the TAR tv-table, and instead play on another actiontable.

To play on the live-stream mean more fans could get interested in the player which could result in more sold DVD's from Accu-Stats + if it is a good match, TAR would make a DVD and sell that also, which would bring royalties to the players.

So, I feel that live-streaming and non-dvd-matches on youtube are perfect for the players, and can create interest and more dvd-sales.
 
JAM said:
What has Earl Strickland upset in the above-referenced post is not Accu-Stats. I think -- and I may be wrong -- Earl was referring to BCN's live coverage of the TV table at the U.S. Open. Earl likes Accu-Stats and Pat Fleming. :smile:
Click to expand...

Has Earl had a change of heart after refusing to play on the Accu-stats table in the US Open a several years ago? Because I know first hand this happened and won't try to repeat his unflattering comments at the time. Maybe something changed?

I'm glad to hear players are getting paid.
 
just cuz earl might be upset with a company, I wouldn't assume that company does anything wrong... getting upset is kinda what he does. It sounds like Pat does the right thing. I was curious to see if pro golfers get the same kind of deal and it looks like they do. I just wish there were that much money to spread around in pool.
 
unknownpro said:
Has Earl had a change of heart after refusing to play on the Accu-stats table in the US Open a several years ago? Because I know first hand this happened and won't try to repeat his unflattering comments at the time. Maybe something changed?

I'm glad to hear players are getting paid.
Click to expand...

I think it was the BCN live -- I repeat LIVE -- coverage of the TV table that BCN was selling to Internet viewers that upset Earl. Again, I could be wrong.

Accu-Stats, however, recording DVDs and videos is a different animal. They are recording to sell after the fact, not LIVE but after the fact.

BCN is recording LIVE, selling the stream to viewers at that very moment. :wink:

Me personally, I like BCN and Accu-Stats both, as both entities have been very good to "mine." :smile:


ETA: I may be speaking to Earl in the near future about a business venture, and so I will ask him!
 
Roy Steffensen said:
The same goes for live-streaming. If I were a top-player gambling at for example DCC, I wouldn't turn down a request to gamble on the TAR tv-table, and instead play on another actiontable.

To play on the live-stream mean more fans could get interested in the player which could result in more sold DVD's from Accu-Stats + if it is a good match, TAR would make a DVD and sell that also, which would bring royalties to the players.

So, I feel that live-streaming and non-dvd-matches on youtube are perfect for the players, and can create interest and more dvd-sales.
Click to expand...


RS,
I will have to disagree with your conclusion in bold type above. There are MANY advertisers/sponsors who continually bring up this point in negotiations with players seeking sponsors. The desire of the players should not be to "create interest and (sell) more dvd's" (the royalties to them are quite small), but to attract high-paying sponsors/advertisers. Such sponsors and advertisers will strongly disagree with your contention (though perhaps you have some marketing data of which they are not aware); they wish to control the appearances of the player; and benefit from the limited availability of the players image. The more widespread the availability of the player's image, the less they will pay for it (and the dollars are SUBSTANTIAL).

I think the often heard "oh, let's just tape the players, they won't mind because it will make them more popular" reasoning is fallacious; often used by people that just want to watch for free. JMO. (though as a pool fanatic, I WISH it was true...I love to watch great pool, and free would be nice).
 
Last edited:
Williebetmore said:
RS,
I will have to disagree with your conclusion in bold type above. There are MANY advertisers/sponsors who continually bring up this point in negotiations with players seeking sponsors. The desire of the players should not be to "create interest and (sell) more dvd's" (the royalties to them are quite small), but to attract high-paying sponsors/advertisers. Such sponsors and advertisers will strongly disagree with your contention (though perhaps you have some marketing data of which they are not aware); they wish to control the appearances of the player; and benefit from the limited availability of the players image. The more widespread the availability of the player's image, the less they will pay for it (and the dollars are SUBSTANTIAL).

I think the often heard "oh, let's just tape the players, they won't mind because it will make them more popular" reasoning is fallacious; often used by people that just want to watch for free. JMO. (though as a pool fanatic, I WISH it was true...I love to watch great pool, and free would be nice).
Click to expand...

I always thought companies would want that their object (team, player, rally driver etc.) to get as much good attention as possible, to create a buzz about the player.

Example: If someone watch a match of Ralf Souquet on youtube, I think the percentage of that viewer to do a random search for that player on google are pretty good. This can result in

1) that the viewer buys dvd's from Accu-Stats with this player
2) the viewer visits this players website, buys the products available (like t-shirts, cues, bags, etc, sign up for newsletter etc).
3) talk to other poolfans about the great match, which can result in more people watching and ending up doing 1), 2) and 3)

If I were a pro-player I would try to get on the tv-table as often as possible. I would wear my sponsor-logos, I would have a well updated website with products, newsletters, schedule, a big section for my sponsors and what they do, pictures etc.

I can't see how more attention is bad, but it seems that you have more knowledge than me when it comes to negotiations with possible sponsors, and I have to admit that I know very little about that. So I could be wrong, but if a company I owned/managed were to work together with a pro-player I would rather sponsor a player who are on several youtube-videos with 300,000 views each, than a player who have few and less viewed youtube-videos, if any. (Not that youtube is that important for a sponsor, but it gives you a hint about popularity)

My general impression about live-streaming and youtube-videos is that it's great for pool. We need all the good attention we can get, to make pool popular.
 
JAM said:
I think it was the BCN live -- I repeat LIVE -- coverage of the TV table that BCN was selling to Internet viewers that upset Earl. Again, I could be wrong.

Accu-Stats, however, recording DVDs and videos is a different animal. They are recording to sell after the fact, not LIVE but after the fact.

BCN is recording LIVE, selling the stream to viewers at that very moment. :wink:

Me personally, I like BCN and Accu-Stats both, as both entities have been very good to "mine." :smile:


ETA: I may be speaking to Earl in the near future about a business venture, and so I will ask him!
Click to expand...

I'm talking about a mid 90's thing. It was most definitely Accu-stats. Earl absolutely refused to play and they changed his table assignment.
 
unknownpro said:
I'm talking about a mid 90's thing. It was most definitely Accu-stats. Earl absolutely refused to play and they changed his table assignment.
Click to expand...


Okay, here's the skinny! :grin-square:

Earl had his table assignment changed because the person he was supposed to play had just finished playing on that TV table, and Earl did not want to play on the TV table with this player because, as most know, the TV table play differently due to the lights and set-up. The balls roll differently, et cetera, et cetera.

One time, my boyfriend was competing in the U.S. Open, and his next match was to take place on a designated table. At the last minute, right before his match, they wanted him to play on the TV table. He kind of didn't want to, but some pool folk persuaded him to do it. He knew the TV table rolled funny but decided, against his better judgment, to just go along with the flow. He lost the match and regretted his decision to play on the TV table for several weeks. It knocked him out of the tournament from the B side of the charts.

Now, as far as Accu-Stats goes, Earl loves Accu-Stats. Make no mistake about it. His relationship with Pat Fleming is strong, and he has always had pleasant dealings with him. In fact, it is so strong today that a little birdie told me that Accu-Stats and Earl Strickland may be in the very early stages of negotiations about an upcoming happening. I don't want to release the details quite yet, as it is still in the very, very early stages. :wink:

Hope this helps to clarify things. :smile:
 
JAM said:
Okay, here's the skinny! :grin-square:

Earl had his table assignment changed because the person he was supposed to play had just finished playing on that TV table, and Earl did not want to play on the TV table with this player because, as most know, the TV table play differently due to the lights and set-up. The balls roll differently, et cetera, et cetera.

One time, my boyfriend was competing in the U.S. Open, and his next match was to take place on a designated table. At the last minute, right before his match, they wanted him to play on the TV table. He kind of didn't want to, but some pool folk persuaded him to do it. He knew the TV table rolled funny but decided, against his better judgment, to just go along with the flow. He lost the match and regretted his decision to play on the TV table for several weeks. It knocked him out of the tournament from the B side of the charts.

Now, as far as Accu-Stats goes, Earl loves Accu-Stats. Make no mistake about it. His relationship with Pat Fleming is strong, and he has always had pleasant dealings with him. In fact, it is so strong today that a little birdie told me that Accu-Stats and Earl Strickland may be in the very early stages of negotiations about an upcoming happening. I don't want to release the details quite yet, as it is still in the very, very early stages. :wink:

Hope this helps to clarify things. :smile:
Click to expand...

I just saw this post, JAM. I'm not saying that didn't happen, but that is not what happened in the incident I referenced. I know what happened. Earl refused to play because he said he wouldn't make anything off the tapes. Maybe he was exaggerating, but his refusal was entirely about money and his opponent had not played on that table. I'm glad to see they have that worked out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
unknownpro said:
I just saw this post, JAM. I'm not saying that didn't happen, but that is not what happened in the incident I referenced. I know what happened. Earl refused to play because he said he wouldn't make anything off the tapes. Maybe he was exaggerating, but his refusal was entirely about money and his opponent had not played on that table. I'm glad to see they have that worked out.
Click to expand...

I have received several phone calls about this thread that Roy from Norway initiated in reference to Earl Strickland, Pat Fleming, and Accu-Stats. :sorry:

I have my own STRONG opinion about some topics on this thread. The only thing I can say is that it's a small community, and some folks will realize that the hard way down the road. :angry:

Other than having Earl speak to you on the phone, I don't know how else I can disseminate his opinion about the subject matter that initiated this thread. But he ain't coming on this forum to express his feelings. ;)

Pat Fleming and Accu-Stats enjoy a sterling reputation with pro players. Pat Fleming is an industry member who does pay pro players for their time in front of a camera. He also has an excellent memory and doesn't forget those who helped him along the way. Pat Fleming has put money in the pro players' pockets. Earl Strickland knows it, as do other pro players. :)

One more time, second verse same as the first. Earl Strickland likes Pat Fleming. Earl Strickland likes Accu-Stats. Earl Strickland is currently in negotiations with an Accu-Stats-related project. There is no problem between Earl Strickland and Pat Fleming.

The incident referenced in this thread has nothing to do with Earl Strickland's feelings towards Pat Fleming. He is, however, of the opinion that pro players should not dance like monkeys for free. I agree with Earl Strickland.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top