Just for US players

more info

CreeDo said:
I stand corrected, I knew there's a minor league and whatnot in baseball but I didn't know it paid well. About the golf, isn't even the senior tour packed with worldbeaters and you gotta be awfully good to be 2nd ranker?

Also does gambling money factor into this or are we talking strictly IRS-reportable income? I guess other games have gambling income too... I'm just wondering if pool is the equivalent of having a waiter-style job with low pay on paper but decent pay after 'tips'. I know some great players never even tried to make gambling part of their income.


I'm waiting on a late night flight coming in at the airport so I did a little digging. The baseball information is from memory, I gave a link to the golf information.

Everything I am talking about is taxable income, nothing under the table or gambling.

Minor league baseball doesn't pay super salaries the last I knew but it is a respectable living wage. Years ago they made from about the same as a top class union worker to roughly twice that, maybe more if they were names. There were some sweet signing bonuses even for going to the minors too.

Wanna feel sick? follow the link at the bottom of each short list to 2006 golf earnings through early November. Tiger made almost ten million in winnings alone. The fifteenth ranked player had no wins, only made 2.75 million but maybe things picked up for him in the last month or two of 2006 after this table was created. Number 93 was the last one on the money list to make over a million. Number 200 made a stinking $163 thousand, he shoulda stayed home.

http://www.pga.com/tournaments/money-leaders/pga_money_leaders.cfm

I think the champions tour is the PC name for the senior tour now. Not nearly as well paid but if you follow the link I think you will see that pro pool players would be thrilled with the pay out. I didn't look at the women but I think they fall between the other two in earnings. The tables are there for anyone to check. There are a lot of people out there who would love to be on the golf tour so I am sure it isn't slouches playing. However I doubt that many of them are more gifted than our top pool players, they just chose a more lucrative path. Just for a comparison, I doubt seriously that the hundredth placed golfer has greater physical abilities than any of our top five pool players. He had one win and only made about $900K, no indication of how much he played or how small the event was.

I didn't check tennis mainly because I don't know the name of their association or how accessible their records are. I occasionally hear the purses for single events mentioned on TV and they are much closer to golf pay outs than pool purses.

Making a living at pool in the US usually requires more than competing. Gambling or other means of income are rarely an option, they are a requirement for survival. I have noticed that "Puyat Sports" from the Philippines seems to sponsor all of the major Filipino players. I often wonder just what that entails. Some other countries provide government backing. Easier to focus and perform well when you aren't playing for the groceries and rent money for this month.

Just at a guess, I would think a player on the road needs to gross a hundred thousand a year or a bit better to make a living wage after expenses. No idea what the numbers are but few US players are making that much in competition. For pool to be viable as a pro sport in the US we have to get at least 3/4 of an average big event's field to that yearly gross. A tall order and in the long term real sponsors and/or enough public interest that the networks will pay for broadcast rights seem to be the only hopes. Short term, I think we need tours for the US pool players to make a living in. I have never suggested that these be the only tours or events in the US but some just want to hit the hype button instead of reading what is written. I do much appreciate you and all of the people on either side of the discussion that engage minds before engaging keyboards.
 
TheOne said:
My avatar was an attempt to inject some much needed humor, some people still have a tumor in their humor.

That appeared right after Jam said she found such avatars offensive? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

TheOne said:
I didn't even realise you was in the other thread until u singled me out in this one. I simply agree with many other posters, the majority in this thread but I don't see u attacking anyone but me. Have I insulted u in this thread yet?

Proves my point once again. You are alleging that you missed over a dozen posts either by me or quoting me. If that is indeed the truth you really need to brush up on your reading skills.



TheOne said:
Anyway you got me, you're right I'm wrong, I can't read, I can't shoot, I'm a big wet sausage!

lets agree to disagree! :D

You are of course in the best position to judge your own abilities. I will agree to disagree with you whenever I choose. That doesn't necessarily mean I won't refute your posts that I disagree with.

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
That appeared right after Jam said she found such avatars offensive? :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:



Proves my point once again. You are alleging that you missed over a dozen posts either by me or quoting me. If that is indeed the truth you really need to brush up on your reading skills.





You are of course in the best position to judge your own abilities. I will agree to disagree with you whenever I choose. That doesn't necessarily mean I won't refute your posts that I disagree with.

Hu

Actually the cartoon is me playing devils advocate, it probably makes JAMs case far more than it does mine. Maybe I just have a flair for "reading" cartoons but can't read posts? lol

I try not to look at names, I just read the posts otherwise I find it clouds opinions ;) You posted 12 times you say, your posts in this thread make more sense now.

I disagree with your opinions, feel free to do what you wish with mine.
 
Would more people watch a tournament comprised of US players only or an internatiold field? Which is more appealing to sponsors? Which one could generate more money from the sponsors, viewers and player entrance fees? What is the long-term impact to the game and its players in and out of the US?

just some things to consider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm
possibly both are best

JohnPT said:
Would more people watch a tournament comprised of US players only or an internatiold field? Which is more appealing to sponsors? Which one could generate more money from the sponsors, viewers and player entrance fees? What is the long-term impact to the game and its players in and out of the US?

just some things to consider.


Very possibly both would appeal to different sponsors. An all US tour might be more appealing to a company that focuses on the US market and a more international field might be more appealing to a company that markets globally, an excellent reason for pool to offer both.

When I had local businesses I had people trying to sell me ad space in national and international publications that would only be seen by a tiny percentage of people in my market. I ignored them advertising where I got the most bang for the buck in my marketplace.

Hu
 
twisting things

(What you allege I said: )
TheOne said:
You posted 12 times you say, your posts in this thread make more sense now. .


(What I actually said: )
You are alleging that you missed over a dozen posts either by me or quoting me.

Of course you succeeded in running off a poster with thinner skin than mine by twisting her words. I can see why she tried to make her message stand out so you could comprehend it. What you don't know is that I owned a political forum for years and dealt with people like you every day. The only embarrassment for me here is that there isn't any spot I could give you to make this an equal battle of wits.


TheOne said:
I disagree with your opinions, feel free to do what you wish with mine.

I wish that was physically possible!! :D ;) :D

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
(What you allege I said: )



(What I actually said: )
You are alleging that you missed over a dozen posts either by me or quoting me.

Of course you succeeded in running off a poster with thinner skin than mine by twisting her words. I can see why she tried to make her message stand out so you could comprehend it. What you don't know is that I owned a political forum for years and dealt with people like you every day. The only embarrassment for me here is that there isn't any spot I could give you to make this an equal battle of wits.




I wish that was physically possible!! :D ;) :D

Hu

Don't fool yourself I did nothing of the sort, it wasnt just me, more like 50+ but hey we're all idiots compared to you. Most of them I respect much much more than you. Keep giving yourself raps it sounds good! ;)
 
Good thread filled with reasonable ideas and logic!

I understand the desire to protect the limited funds in American pro pool to help the meager incomes of American pros. Yes it might help some of them short term. Still I can't help but think that this proposal simply provides a bandaid to the real problem of far too small of a player base.

Money comes from big sponsors. Sponsors chase numbers. They chase popular sporting events, websites with lots of hits, and products that sell well. Pool has none of the above. IMHO, if you want to get more money into the pro pool scene here in the states, you need to expand the player base.

You need to get more parents willing to accept dropping their kid off at the local room for an afternoon session with more experienced players. You need to have more people trying to actively interest young people in the game. You need to peddle the art of the game to those who are young enough and hungry enough to get a taste of something they might actually get hooked on.

However, I do sympathize with today's pros financially. I'd be OK with 1 or 2 annual US National tournaments, perhaps with small money regional qualifiers. Keep the tour(s) open though, don't cut me off of my Efren fix. ;)
 
Speak for yourself

TheOne said:
Don't fool yourself I did nothing of the sort, it wasnt just me, more like 50+ but hey we're all idiots compared to you. Most of them I respect much much more than you. Keep giving yourself raps it sounds good! ;)


Speak for yourself! I'm in intelligent conversations with half a dozen or so members right now, young and old. Not one is an idiot. I could go back to the other thread and post how small a number what you claim were fifty plus posters actually were but I'll make a quick guess that you have multiplied the real number by at least ten. You haven't had your facts right on anything else yet, it would be foolish to think you would change now. Too, I actually read threads I post into, something you obviously can't or won't do. I know without going back that your number is just one more gross distortion.

Only most of them you respect much much more than me? I'd be flattered that you still rated me so highly except I rate you at the bottom of the list of current posters in terms of respect. Matter of fact I rate you a little lower than whatever was stuck to the bottom of my farm boot today. Manure of various types is run of the mill on a farm but whatever this was . . . . . . I threw the boot away! What you think or don't think of me matters not in the least. Pointing out how full of BS your posts are is light entertainment for me and kind of serves as a place marker to help me keep up with where I am at in my circuit of real conversations.

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
Speak for yourself! I'm in intelligent conversations with half a dozen or so members right now, young and old. Not one is an idiot. I could go back to the other thread and post how small a number what you claim were fifty plus posters actually were but I'll make a quick guess that you have multiplied the real number by at least ten. You haven't had your facts right on anything else yet, it would be foolish to think you would change now. Too, I actually read threads I post into, something you obviously can't or won't do. I know without going back that your number is just one more gross distortion.

Only most of them you respect much much more than me? I'd be flattered that you still rated me so highly except I rate you at the bottom of the list of current posters in terms of respect. Matter of fact I rate you a little lower than whatever was stuck to the bottom of my farm boot today. Manure of various types is run of the mill on a farm but whatever this was . . . . . . I threw the boot away! What you think or don't think of me matters not in the least. Pointing out how full of BS your posts are is light entertainment for me and kind of serves as a place marker to help me keep up with where I am at in my circuit of real conversations.

Hu

LOL just hilarious, very intelligent. Love the name calling, I havent done it once to you in this thread, very classy ;) In fact I didn't even flame u, I made a post similar to many others (yep the majority) in this thread and u bring your hate from another thread into this one to target me! In fact JAM made an attempt to bring the racist debate into this thread VERY early on and I chose to ignore it.

Isn't it ironic that the spelling police always make spelling mistakes, and the grammer police always f*ck up too. I still can't stop laughing at the fact that you, the new "comprehension police" completely missed the meaning of my avatar, oh the irony!

Nope I didn't exagerate anything btw, sorry to dissapoint. But it wouldn't matter if it was 10,000-1, it doesn't make racist comments correct.

PS
I just read one of your previous posts and discovered you grew up calling black people n*ggers, end of discussion!
 
racist comments

Originally Posted by TheOne
TheOne said:
I consider myself very fortunate to be born in a relatively rich country, if I was born in Poland or Mexico I sure as hell would want to move to another country to better my life.

TheOne said:
Nope I didn't exagerate anything btw, sorry to dissapoint. But it wouldn't matter if it was 10,000-1, it doesn't make racist comments correct.

I'm impressed, I honestly doubted you had this in you. It took dozens of posts but you finally said something true. Racist comments aren't correct. Why did you make them? (You defined comments like this as racist, not me.)

You are well into reruns and I have a good western coming on TV that I haven't seen but a dozen times or so. Far more interesting, later!

Hu
 
ShootingArts said:
Speak for yourself! I'm in intelligent conversations with half a dozen or so members right now, young and old. Not one is an idiot. I could go back to the other thread and post how small a number what you claim were fifty plus posters actually were but I'll make a quick guess that you have multiplied the real number by at least ten. You haven't had your facts right on anything else yet, it would be foolish to think you would change now. Too, I actually read threads I post into, something you obviously can't or won't do. I know without going back that your number is just one more gross distortion.

Only most of them you respect much much more than me? I'd be flattered that you still rated me so highly except I rate you at the bottom of the list of current posters in terms of respect. Matter of fact I rate you a little lower than whatever was stuck to the bottom of my farm boot today. Manure of various types is run of the mill on a farm but whatever this was . . . . . . I threw the boot away! What you think or don't think of me matters not in the least. Pointing out how full of BS your posts are is light entertainment for me and kind of serves as a place marker to help me keep up with where I am at in my circuit of real conversations.

Hu

After reading your posts in this thread I guess that the political forum you owned tolerated a lot :rolleyes:
 
MOMMIE DADDIE PLEASE DONT FIhGT!!@#~!!!!!1!1!!!!!!!!!!!!

lol I hate to see two posters I like end up taking potshots at each other. Let's avoid the unfinished business in other threads and stick to the subject. Though I do sorta get a laugh when two articular posters both try to take the high road while arguing.

"sir, I must respectfully disagree and I believe you missed my early point in post #1862920."
"I did actually see that, but it's clear you have chosen through ignorance or malice to pass over my own salient arguments on the matter."
"actually, all of your points are based on a fundamental lack of reading comprehension and there's no reason to address what are clearly the scribblings of a child"
"sir, I submit that you have your head up your ass"

Just teasing =)

If I read it right, hu's point is that we lack good sponsorship, and we have foreign players competing but we don't have foreign sponsorship for the events. Except what Bob Jewett mentioned, but that doesn't count so much because the amount of money invested doesn't even look like 6-digit amounts. So we have a situation where american money ends up overseas, and maybe if we could guarantee us sponsors that their money would end up in american pockets, they'd be more inclined to shell it out. Is that the thrust of it?

riley's point seems to be that if we make it friendlier for american sponsors by going 'closed', we'll be cutting off foreign sponsorship completely, and it will actually be much tougher to find sponsor money when you limit yourself to just american companies. He makes a pretty good case with snooker, and it's fair to compare them. We often use snooker as an example of pool done right, it's only fair we can use snooker scenarios to explain how it can go wrong.

So the fundamental question seems to be ... will it be a worthwhile trade to get more american sponsorship funds at the expense of cutting off all foreign funds?

I'm kinda leaning towards no but I dunno the numbers well enough to say. Maybe the foreign portion of the sponsorship is so small that it truly won't matter if it were eliminated. And it seems like there's more than enough money (even in the small world of american pool-related companies) to make some decent tournaments. Can we name some that aren't putting up the dough but really ought to be? Like... who the hell makes master chalk? That's american, right? Seems like it's the "official" number one chalk and it hardly gets a mention. They must have some money. Or maybe it's quietly sponsoring all sorts of events.
 
good post Creedo!

Good Post CreeDo!

First, I fully agree that the ya-yahing between me and what's his name has gotten past silly. His double standards for his posts and everyone else's has been hammered home more than enough.

Let me move on to the part of your post with real value, discussing sponsors. I doubt that any pool related company has enough advertising budget to be a major sponsor on the level of someone sponsoring a golf event, tennis event, or a Nascar team. If they have the money there is no need to spend it because they have reached their market already.

We need outside sponsors, meaning from outside the pool industry. Consider what soft drink advertisers spend on sponsorships in other areas or have in the past. How about automobile manufacturers? Pool players all drive just like golfers and tennis players. The list goes on and on.

As long as we are relying on entry fees and money from inside the industry we aren't really bringing in any new money, we are simply passing the same money around in a tight little circle. Ultimately outside money into the sport is it's only hope of success. Two fairly modest tours that paid enough to make it viable to join them for a decent sized group of players would probably cost over three million dollars a year and most or all of that money would have to come from a sponsor or sponsors initially.

I like watching competitions open to all and I like competing against the very best anywhere. However, I don't think that anyone can demonstrate that international players on US soil have been of any net benefit to the US sport in the last several decades. Leaving them free to play many events and tours while restricting two tours to citizens or people trying to become citizens simply would not impact dollars in the sport in the US in a significant way because there are no significant dollars at this time.

We need a sponsor or sponsors that think(s) in millions, not in terms of supplying a few dollars or equipment and then getting hundreds of thousands of dollars of free advertising from endless reruns of old pool events. No other sport's primary contributions to viewing time are very old events. Men's pool rarely airs something fairly current making payouts seem even smaller. Twenty-five thousand wasn't great in 1993, today it leaves an audience yawning. They are watching a competition that is almost fifteen years old being played for very small prizes. Any wonder that they find it boring? These events are proclaimed to be major events in the pool world and the pay outs are tiny. Any wonder that the general public watching this considers pool a bush league activity?

We need recent events, well produced, on the air. As we attract audiences we will attract bigger and bigger sponsors. The problem is we need money from sponsors to put on these events and create top quality footage.

I do wonder about the WPBA deal. By all reports they pay to air events that should stand on their own merit. Absolutely no reason for advertisers to not be happy to have their commercials aired during these broadcasts. Something seems wrong here. Unless the WPBA is stuck in a bad contract I think that they need to be shopping the events around to try to get some cash flowing in the other direction. The newly renamed VS would seem to be a prime target.

Pool competition in the US is not a viable pursuit at this time, not for youngsters who would like to compete as a professional, not for the vast majority of seasoned players out there. I seriously doubt that well ran restricted tours would be any less appealing to sponsors outside the industry than US pool, particularly men's pool, has been so far. The men's events being aired would be a very tough sell for anyone. I think the major problem with the profits in women's pool is a matter of poor marketing.

CreeDo said:
So the fundamental question seems to be ... will it be a worthwhile trade to get more american sponsorship funds at the expense of cutting off all foreign funds?

Note that I am not saying eliminate all open events and tours. With fewer open events and tours overseas sponsors that want to put dollars into events here might indeed choose to put their sponsorship into only the open tournaments. If they put their same US advertising budget into fewer events it could easily become a win/win deal for US players. However I have never seen advertisers shy away from restricted events that audiences watch even if their citizens aren't competing in an event. A foreign based company that is trying to market in the US might well pick the more focused event as most appealing to a US audience.

Hu
 
Thanks ^^

If it'll help get outside money in, I guess I don't care if there are a few us-only events in addition to the various international events.

But, isn't there a danger that if us-only event draw all sorts of outside cash, players will just abandon the cheap-o international events? The current sponsors of those events will want to get on the same bandwagon, and they only have limited money to toss around, they can't sponsor both...maybe the foreign players won't bother when they see all the money has jumped ship.

I mean, 5 digit payouts are not great given the work and expenses... but it's enough to get guys like efren here. Maybe the top US players won't be able to play in both types of event, and if they choose the richer event... the foreign players will just say "well, screw the american scene, all the good players are in their usa-only events so I'm not gonna fly down to compete in a less prestigious, lower paying event with lower level players."

Also, I feel like the scene's already kinda fragmented. We don't have an official super bowl of pool. Now we add two more major big money tours and we're a step further from having a unified pool league and world championship.

I like the idea of making it a school thing. Other sports have teams in high schools and colleges, we should too. Parental money would be a nice outside source of income too, it doesn't have to be coke or pepsi :)
 
Last edited:
Read through the thread and IMO all concerns were valid. All the negatives mentioned were present too here in the Philipines but promoters just plopped down the cash and bought primetime TV slots and presented the sponsorship/advertising packages to all level of corporations (mostly handled by ad agencies) before these corporations held their annual budget meetings.

If the Philippines can do it moreso the USA. Purchase the airtime before approaching the sponsors.
 
Does anyone know what an hour of air-time on ESPN cost? I guess you would have to buy more than one hour an also. Maybe if we got the mob involved. Johnnyt
 
bandido said:
Read through the thread and IMO all concerns were valid. All the negatives mentioned were present too here in the Philipines but promoters just plopped down the cash and bought primetime TV slots and presented the sponsorship/advertising packages to all level of corporations (mostly handled by ad agencies) before these corporations held their annual budget meetings.

If the Philippines can do it moreso the USA. Purchase the airtime before approaching the sponsors.

That sounds like a way to go but now we need a sponsor that has gamble in them. Johnnyt

PS. Who were your first few sponsores bandido?
 
Johnnyt said:
Does anyone know what an hour of air-time on ESPN cost? I guess you would have to buy more than one hour an also. Maybe if we got the mob involved. Johnnyt
The WPC in its entirety was shown live and I think airtime cost $600k. It wasn't shown in the USA and I'm guessing that the rates there are different. So this is also a contributory factor as to why pool is at its current state there.

Knowing the importance of being able to show advertising value to prospective sponsor. I back then was e-mailing Deno A. some TV coverage ideas since they, IPT, had the finances. Now, we know that I was talking to a brick wall.

Will you pay cable subscription if this cable channel will show live pool tournament coverage?
 
Johnnyt said:
That sounds like a way to go but now we need a sponsor that has gamble in them. Johnnyt

PS. Who were your first few sponsores bandido?
Back then? Sponsor: San Miguel Corporation Promoter: Puyat Sports

Now we have a variety of sponsors. Phil. Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR), Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office, Phil. Tourism, Liquor and beer, eye clinic, vacation resorts, hotels, newspaper, publishing cos., coffee, airlines, LG Electronics, Brunswick, Predator, Simonis, Aramith, etc.

Promoters need to show advertising value to recruit sponsors. They all already have a favourite charity.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top