More negotiating power, players or KT?

[jimmyg]

Rather than take the immediate, knee jerk position that KT has all the power to dictate the final outcome of this situation over the players, I suggest that the players are in a much stronger position than KT is with respect to the future of the IPT. Of course, if KT has already decided to completely bail out of the IPT there is nothing further to negotiate.

Without the cooperation and participation of the players, the IPT cannot exist and KT has no product to sell to either the public or to an investor, putting him in the weaker position.

The players can continue to do exactly what they did before the IPT came along. Without the actual delivery of the promises of huge purses coupled with additional sources of income, all that is lost is the dream.

Most of the players are owed $5k - $10K, which, while substantial, most can probably survive without. There is also the possibility that those sums will not be paid in full or at all. Of course the players that are owed the top prizes are in a much more difficult position and have much larger amounts of money to jeopardize, making it harder for them to draw lines in the sand by making demands of KT and the IPT. But look how much more KT has to lose if the players threatened to boycott the IPT! According to the deal that KT claims that he has in the works, this would jeopardize his $150M sale. If there isn't any sale and KT wants to continue the tour, without any players he would have no tour. Either way his losses would probably be in the millions, a fairly substantial loss, even for KT.

By doing nothing the players have literally handed KT all of the power.

Even without the top ten winners, why haven't the remaining players banded together, gained leverage, and hired an attorney to represent themselves from a position of strength?

 

[ScottW]

Even without the top ten winners, why haven't the remaining players banded together, gained leverage, and hired an attorney to represent themselves from a position of strength?

I can see a couple of reasons why not:

1) They don't want to throw good money (legal fees) after bad (expenses already paid for, plus winnings not collected), assuming nothing comes of hiring a lawyer;

2) Fear of 'rocking the boat' should things get worked out, and basically getting blackballed from future participation.

 

[mnShooter]

The players don't really have any power. They are basically getting a handout from KT. If they don't get the money from the IPT they won't get any money anywhere else either. So unless someone else starts a tour with substantial payouts KT will be able to do whatever he wants.

I agree that no one should play in the next tournament unless they get paid before then. If no one gets paid by then the IPT will most likely be over for good anyways.

 

[jjinfla]

Even without the top ten winners, why haven't the remaining players banded together, gained leverage, and hired an attorney to represent themselves from a position of strength?

Surely you are not so naive to think that several players have not consulted with an attorney.

They most likely were told: 1) You have no cause of action; or 2) you have a cause of action but it will be expensive to persue. 3) Just wait and see what unfolds.

Jake

 

[av84fun]

mnshooter...<<I agree that no one should play in the next tournament unless they get paid before then. >>

I hear ya but the players will behave like farmers who pray for a drought in the NEXT COUNTY! A LOT of players will show up for the PROMISE of that much money....hoping that many others will not. Just IMHO.

Regards,
Jim

 

[jimmyg]

Surely you are not so naive to think that several players have not consulted with an attorney.

They most likely were told: 1) You have no cause of action; or 2) you have a cause of action but it will be expensive to persue. 3) Just wait and see what unfolds.

Jake

No Jake, I don't believe that I am.

Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly enough, I never suggested that none of the players have consulted with their attorneys. That was not the heart of my suggestion.

One player owed three or five thousand dollars wanting to retain a competent attorney, either on a fee based or, especially, on a contingency basis, would probably hear remarks #2, or, perhaps #3. I wouldn't want and would be better off without the attorney that believed that non-payment of valid debt is not a cause of civil action.

But one attorney representing 100-150 players owed $1M - $2M combined debt would probably become very quickly interested. I would think most would even accept this case on a contigency basis, maybe 25%-33% of recovery, therefore not costing any player additional monies. It may also turn into a high profile case, which often adds interest to a slightly better grade of attorney.

I also believe that a qualified attorney, representing 100-150 IPT players, would be in a much stronger negotiating position than KT is in. He may also be able to negotiate other advantages and protections for the players, like payment guarantees in the event of future events. Banding together has enormous benefits, and an attorney having the ability to tell KT that he may have to advise his clients to boycott the IPT, jeopardizing any potential sale as well as the continuation of the tour would catch his attention for sure. Now we're talking leverage!

 

[Eydie Romano]

I can see a couple of reasons why not:

1) They don't want to throw good money (legal fees) after bad (expenses already paid for, plus winnings not collected), assuming nothing comes of hiring a lawyer;

2) Fear of 'rocking the boat' should things get worked out, and basically getting blackballed from future participation.

Two good reasons above, and here is #3 which continues from #2.

3) If this event continues, the fear of not being paid when others do get paid.