What'd Shaw say after the Derby?
- Thread starter AJ12345
- Start date
So what does that translate to in terms of the MotT payout and profit for Diamond?
Lou Figueroa
I have mixed feeling about the top pros not playing. On one hand, for some, it would be nice to be able to say you got to play one of the world's best. On the other hand, for someone like me, it's pretty much a guaranteed loss. So there's also something to be said about having a better chance to be competitive, play more matches, and even cash in these events.
If they don't want to play, I say don't let the door hit them in the ass on their way out. More fun and money for the rest of us. If I were them, I would learn to take the good with the bad. Tell them to ask Johnny Archer would easy it is to make a living having to work instead of playing a silly game part-time. Some people would cry with a loaf of bread in their hands.
I don’t know much about Diamond’s business, but I assume the revenue it generates from this event is nothing compared to its core business? That they do this only for positive branding and not to eke out $20k in extra entry fees?
Let's decrease the size of goal posts, golf cups, soccer goals, hockey goals, basketball rims, baseball bats and on and on.
I know what you're saying, some things are sacred and should not be changed. I agree. Some things can be improved though (look at what the 3-point line did for the NBA).
don't they often sell the tables from the event?
You can buy tournament used tables, I almost did years ago until realizing the price is basically no different than new.
MattPoland, you're correct, based on the info on Derby's event info page: https://derbycityclassic.com/event-info/ buy back money goes to Master of Table fund and promotion of Derby.
Oh boy...bad example. It could be argued that the evolution of the 3 point shot and its increased importance has ruined the NBA. I get your point though. Can't imagine basketball without it now, but the game used to be more interesting before the game became largely about shooting and defending 3's.
Back to pool...
That’s like 40 tables? That’s nothing compared to Diamonds total business isn’t it? Seems like DCC is increasingly being viewed as a dumpster fire (at least online, I wasn’t there) and not serving any point for Diamond.
dendweller
Well-known member
I read that entry for the week is about the same as entering the banks and getting any access the players do. If that's true it's kind of silly.
smiling_Hans
Well-known member
That would be so easy. 5” pockets lol
Here is an interview I did with Greg several years ago talking about buy back vs double elimination and the money for master of the table (starts about 13 minute in.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQCWA9LFhu0
Lou, I'll answer your question by repeating a post from Bob Jewett from earlier in this thread, then I'll add a concrete example to show what is going on.
EXAMPLE
Prize Fund
Assume that the number of entrants for one of the main 3 events is 500. The prize fund for each of the DCC's 3 main events is equal to $150 times the number of entrants plus $25,000. So with 500 entrants, the prize fund will be 500 x $150 + $25,000 = $100,000.
The $150 per player comes from the basic entry fee of $160. A $10 "registration fee" is part of that $160, but that $10 does not go into the prize fund.
The $25,000 is what DCC calls "Guaranteed Added" money. So that amount is part of the prize fund regardless of the number of entrants. If only 100 people entered, the $25,000 would still be in the prize fund. DCC bears that risk, as slight as it may be. [And if the entrants fell way off like that, we would certainly see some future adjustments to the finances.]
Buy-BacksI have counted the number of players who enter, and the number who buy back, for each event for many years now using the "Completed Matches" lists (that's not a fun job). The percentages of buy-backs I have seen for an event have ranged from about 60% to about 80%, with two-thirds being a reasonable overall figure for all 3 events over those many years. Each buy-back now costs $100. So, for the example here, and assuming that two-thirds of the players bought back (333) , the buy-back money would be 333 x $100 = $33,300.
Total Player Entrance Money
Counting the basic entry fee of $150 per player, plus the "registration fee" of $10 per player, plus the buy-back money (which is essentially another entry fee to continue playing after the first loss), the total money paid by the players in this example is 500 x $160 + $33,300 = $113,300.
Added Money
How much, then, is the added money for this example event? That depends on how you view it. As shown above, the prize fund is $100,000 and the players paid in a total of $113,300. So, in the true sense of added money for any event being the excess of the prize fund over what the players paid in, added money for this example is negative $13,300. [For other numbers of entrants and buy-back percentages, the "true added money" will be different.]
But DCC views it differently, at least publicly. The "registration fee" is not added to the prize fund, nor is the buy-back money, and DCC then provides $25,000 in "Guaranteed Added" money. So what happens to the players' money that is not added to the prize fund? I think it is reasonable to view it as just part of DCC's overall revenue from the event used for their untold expenses of putting on the event. One such expense is the $25,000 paid for Master of the Table prizes. Another is $16,000 added to the prize fund for the Bigfoot event. Another is money added to the Banks ring game. I don't know whether they contribute anything to the Mini's, although any added money for those is said to come from "outside sponsors."
The DCC has, of course, many expenses other than the prize money in the various events. And they have sources of revenue other than player entry fees. How the revenue compares to the expenses overall, I have no idea. In an interview years ago, Greg Sullivan said he lost about $100,000 on the first three events (combined). I imagine losses have not been the case now for many years.
Edited 1/30 to use the correct buy-back amount now of $100 rather than the incorrect amount of $60.
Last edited:
I don't know how that works, Lou. In some similar situations I think the promoter is committed to hitting a certain number of room nights. If it goes under that number, the promoter owes them money. If it goes over that, he probably benefits some how, possibly including some free nights to be used as he pleases. How all the space needed for the pool tournaments is handled would be part of the negotiations as well, of course.
Last edited:
You’ll lose a considerable number of entries thereby losing any payout gains.
Lou Figueroa
but you would
definitely finish
earlier lol