2014 us open unpaid prize money

If Barry has an account, then it isn't in escrow...

Poolplaya9 said:
Good point. And while stiff penalties would certainly be fully deserved, I think the players and fans alike would be completely happy with and perhaps also best served by the WPA just simply making advance escrow of all guaranteed prize funds a condition for any future sanctioning of any of Barry Behrman's events for all of eternity (because he has proven he can never be trusted again, even if he were to do it the right way with no problems for a year or two).

And to be clear, by escrow I mean an account that Barry has no control over, as was apparently the case in 2013. If Barry has any control over the account then it does not in any way serve the purpose for which it is needed and intended.
Click to expand...

Escrow is set up so that once conditions are met, the money is released to the other party.

The only conditions in this case is that the players place in the preallocated slots for the monies.

As soon as money is put into escrow it should be touchable by no one except the persons who place in the money for the preset amount.

The only access Barry should have is to report who placed in what position.

If that means having preprinted checks for the various positions, then there needs to be a secondary party who validates who those checks are payable to and signs them verifying it.

Jaden
 
bfdlad said:
Although adding penalties is common with most governing bodies in this case I don't think its realistic. If the players cant get paid what makes you think the WPA would get its penalty money?
Click to expand...

Unlike the players the WPA can keep a record of money owed.

If Barry doesn't want to pay he won't worry about losing sanctioning, his event won't be worth points in the rankings.

If players still want to compete in his event without getting points on the WPA rankings that will be their decision to make.
 
Jaden said:
Escrow is set up so that once conditions are met, the money is released to the other party.

The only conditions in this case is that the players place in the preallocated slots for the monies.

As soon as money is put into escrow it should be touchable by no one except the persons who place in the money for the preset amount.

The only access Barry should have is to report who placed in what position.

If that means having preprinted checks for the various positions, then there needs to be a secondary party who validates who those checks are payable to and signs them verifying it.

Jaden
Click to expand...

Agreed. I wanted to be more specific simply because I can see Barry trying to pull a fast one in regards to claiming something is an "escrow" when it is neither an escrow nor meeting the intended needs or serving the intended purpose.

For example, when an apparently proper escrow type arrangement was used in 2013, per accounts in this thread Barry tried to get the administrator of it to grant him control and access so that he could be the one to pay out the funds to the players. Fortunately and to their credit they refused. If Barry has any access or control of an escrow account whatsoever, other than the ability to deposit funds, then that is not meeting its intended purpose, nor is it a true escrow. Barry already tried to get access to an escrow once, and he will certainly try to pull that move again. And for the record the only reason he would have needed access was so that he could decide to not pay out some of the prize money as he saw fit--exactly what needs to be prevented.

Another example was Barry's early 2014 promise to "escrow" the prize fund for the 2014 event, which he didn't follow through with but which was not really an escrow to begin and would have done nothing to serve the purpose of protecting the players. He essentially promised to allow the public to be able to see the funds in his bank account prior to the event. Even if he had done this, which he didn't, it still does nothing to ensure that said funds actually get paid out into the player's hands at the time promised and in the amounts promised. Barry would still have control over actually paying out the funds, and this is exactly what needs to be prevented due to his untrustworthy track record.

Anything that falls short of the full prize fund (including all guaranteed added money) being in escrow well in advance would not serve the needed purpose and should not be accepted. Anything that allows Barry any access or control of the escrow account whatsoever, aside from the ability to deposit funds, would not serve the needed purpose and should not be accepted. Anything other than the players getting paid in full prior to the end of the tournament, with the checks being cash-able that very same day (no post dated checks or future payment arrangements), defeats the purpose and should not be accepted.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
Agreed. I wanted to be more specific simply because I can see Barry trying to pull a fast one in regards to claiming something is an "escrow" when it is neither an escrow nor meeting the intended needs or serving the intended purpose.

Barry would still have control over actually paying out the funds, and this is exactly what needs to be prevented due to his untrustworthy track record.
Click to expand...

The US Open organization will always have control if they have to collect ticket sales to fill in the prize money fund.

The only money that can be secured early is the entry fee by players.

An escrow is a honeypot, it looks and sounds good but if you need the bees to bring money, they can decide they won't bring it.

Would international level players still attend if the event was not sanctioned? The promise of the prize money is enough, thats what the IPT did it.

If the WPA can fine or penalize they enforce and maintain standards that are reasonable. The US Open is the only troublemaker. Everyone else does fine.
 
Last edited:
Johnnyt said:
Hopefully there will be NO next year do to no fans or players going. Johnnyt
Click to expand...

But Barry is too big to fail. The history (late payment) and tradition (excuse making for late payments) is just the best example in billiards.

Of how one of the best paying events can afford to not play by the rules.

Too bad there is no organization that can do anything about it.
 
For those still siding on here with Barry, I ask. Is this the way you want the worlds players and fans to see our only WORLD and biggest tournament? It doesn't help American pro pool players from filling fields, and promoters getting the worlds best players. I hope no fans go, no one buys streams, no sponsors buy into this joke, no one even runs a press release from Barry or his people. Johnnyy
 
justnum said:
The US Open organization will always have control if they have to collect ticket sales to fill in the prize money fund.
Click to expand...
If they have to collect ticket sales, or food or drink sales, or anything of the like to cover the "guaranteed added" money that they promised, then it was never actually guaranteed money at all, now was it? Guaranteed means that it will be paid out come hell or high water. It isn't dependent on anything that is beyond your control having to happen or not happen. If it is, then it isn't guaranteed, and shouldn't be claimed as such.

Which is exactly my point. It is a flat out lie to call it "guaranteed" added money when you are just hoping that the money comes through, but don't really know for sure if it will, and have no control over it. You don't know for sure how many people will show up and buy tickets. You don't know how much food or drink the people that do show up will end up buying. You don't know when something like the next bad weather system will happen for example that keeps fans away (one of Barry's many past excuses for not having the gate and food/drink sales to be able to cover the promised "guaranteed" added money amount).

I will say it again. There is nothing "guaranteed" about money that is dependent on something else happening or not happening that is beyond your control. To claim this type of money as "guaranteed" is dishonest and is nothing short of a scam. Now if you want to say something like "$75,000 added if we get enough gate and food and drink sales" then there is no problem because you made it clear that it isn't actually guaranteed at all but instead dependent on something else beyond your control having to happen.

It is no different than a local tournament that puts out a tournament flyer that says "$200 added" and you show up for the tournament and play in it and eventually find out they aren't adding any money at all. Their excuse is that they didn't fill the field. Well you would be mad as hell because they never specified the money was dependent on anything in their advertising. Now if they had said something like "$200 added with a full 32 player field" like everybody else does then you would have no problem with it because they were honest and upfront instead of dishonest and scamming.

justnum said:
The only money that can be secured early is the entry fee by players.
Click to expand...
This isn't exactly true. You can cover the added money yourself up front, and take the risk yourself on whether or not you will make enough gate sales to get yourself paid back. Some people might not want to do this for obvious reasons, so why on earth would they or anyone else think it would be ok to instead put that risk on the players without their knowledge or consent? And some promoters do actually take that risk themselves and cover it up front from their own pocket, because that is what promoters with integrity do. The guaranteed added money could also be covered up front by sponsors, or through a loan. There are a number of ways it can be done. But the bottom line is that if the money is dependent on something having to happen or not happen that is beyond your control then it isn't guaranteed money and you shouldn't be claiming it as such. If it is guaranteed, then escrow it.

justnum said:
The US Open is the only troublemaker. Everyone else does fine.
Click to expand...
Which is why I am only pushing for escrow of all promised purse money from Barry Behrman or the other promoters who have failed to deliver promptly and as promised in the past. Although we should really be wanting first time promoters to use escrow also, because they have no track record and a disproportionate number of them ending up screwing the players. Not that long time promoters don't end up doing it too, Tony Annigoni being a good example. And really there isn't a good reason for full purse amounts to be escrowed no matter who it is. If you have it, and intend to pay it, then you can escrow it. But mostly I am worried about those with proven bad records like Barry Behrman.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Bond said:
American Billiard Radio will once again address the issue(s) at hand with Barry himself.
To hear what he has to say, tune in tonight at 9pm CST
www.americanbilliardradio.com
Click to expand...


Yes, informative interview. As I say in the interview Barry is the only guy who can give me the 5 in talking too much. However there is a a lot of info in the interview and I ask some tough questions and keep on them as best as I could without being rude. I'm sure I missed some points that you want to hear about but asked about most of the important questions.
 
bfdlad said:
Yes, informative interview....
Click to expand...

what a crock of shit - Barry, that is.
yes, it was very informative - if you read between the lines & listen very carefully.... there are so many cliff notes, that it'd be a short story. here are a few, IMO:

- 4 players have not been paid/paid in full; SVB is apparently not 1 of them
- all 4 will be paid before he leaves for DCC
- he can afford to go to DCC
- he had to get a loan to payout
- he lost $30-$40K, but wouldn't state how/why/where
- he needs to hire "honest" employees
- he's had issues @ Q Masters
- the Marriott caused lots of problems
- he never knew of Quan Do's bounced check, till last THU
- he's been using an inhaler 1/day for breathing problems due to stress
- he expects to live another 20-30 years
- he's upset that the previous winners don't wear their US Open jackets onsite
- he's got a BIG name bank to be sponsor & hold funds for next Open, as well as Pepsi in his pocket
- 2015 Open will be @ Sheraton Norfolk
- he's sorry

Mark - the only question you didn't ask, (not that you would have gotten a straight answer) was:

"över the past 90 days, have you & your employees been paid?"
 
PINKLADY said:
what a crock of shit - Barry, that is.
yes, it was very informative - if you read between the lines & listen very carefully.... there are so many cliff notes, that it'd be a short story. here are a few, IMO:

- 4 players have not been paid/paid in full; SVB is apparently not 1 of them
- all 4 will be paid before he leaves for DCC
- he can afford to go to DCC
- he had to get a loan to payout
- he lost $30-$40K, but wouldn't state how/why/where
- he needs to hire "honest" employees
- he's had issues @ Q Masters
- the Marriott caused lots of problems
- he never knew of Quan Do's bounced check, till last THU
- he's been using an inhaler 1/day for breathing problems due to stress
- he expects to live another 20-30 years
- he's upset that the previous winners don't wear their US Open jackets onsite
- he's got a BIG name bank to be sponsor & hold funds for next Open, as well as Pepsi in his pocket
- 2015 Open will be @ Sheraton Norfolk
- he's sorry

Mark - the only question you didn't ask, (not that you would have gotten a straight answer) was:

"över the past 90 days, have you & your employees been paid?"
Click to expand...

2015 is the year he makes good or there will be a huge change in the wind... Aside from the honest emplyees I pretty much know the points one by one....
 
Lunacy-

bfdlad said:
Yes, informative interview. As I say in the interview Barry is the only guy who can give me the 5 in talking too much. However there is a a lot of info in the interview and I ask some tough questions and keep on them as best as I could without being rude. I'm sure I missed some points that you want to hear about but asked about most of the important questions.
Click to expand...

_________________________________________________

when someone shows you who they are-
BELIEVE THEM!!

"just the tip, I swear!"

Since I know my pool history-I implore you to do your own exploration of the archives-
Google Barry Behrman
'actions' speak louder than words-so I'll save you all the trouble.

proof meet pudding-

http://www.billiardsdigest.com/current_issue/sep_04/

http://www.billiardsdigest.com/curre...04/story_8.php

http://www.sporttaco.com/rec.sport.b...jail_3810.html

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/07/bill...ays-chesapeake

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/...p-joint-128493

http://new.poolroom.com/behrman-free...rsee-u-s-open/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXXFWmQ3WRY


:angry:
 
Last edited:
Barry said he never knew of Quan Do's bounced check, till last THU? What a joke!
Roberta knew it and promised to the US pro at leat 2 months ago. In addition, the total amount of prize money is X and the fund available is Y. How can he not know?
 
Chicagoplayer said:
_________________________________________________

when someone shows you who they are-
BELIEVE THEM!!

"just the tip, I swear!"

Since I know my pool history-I implore you to do your own exploration of the archives-
Google Barry Behrman
'actions' speak louder than words-so I'll save you all the trouble.

proof meet pudding-

http://www.billiardsdigest.com/current_issue/sep_04/

http://www.billiardsdigest.com/curre...04/story_8.php

http://www.sporttaco.com/rec.sport.b...jail_3810.html

http://hamptonroads.com/2012/07/bill...ays-chesapeake

http://www.casinocitytimes.com/news/...p-joint-128493

http://new.poolroom.com/behrman-free...rsee-u-s-open/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXXFWmQ3WRY


:angry:
Click to expand...

almost none of those links seem to be working except the first one
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top