I don't think Chinese has anything to do with it...
I didn't either. China has many evil aspects but it didn't make sense to me to bring that into this discussion.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
I don't think Chinese has anything to do with it...
its common when sponsors put up significant money and dont feel they should give out free advertising. i can understand that.
its a business deal. the players can play with the rules or not. it is their choice.
their own sponsors should have an option to pay to have their emblems on the players shirts.
and matchroom could let them maybe have one small patch that is approved.
if it was my tournament and i was adding money, i wouldnt let a player show up all dressed in ads for my competitors would you.
My assumption is those players that dropped out first checked with their main sponsors for their approval, and were refused. It is surprising that all the Euro Mosconi Cup players were approved to play, with the lone exception being Fedor Gorst.its common when sponsors put up significant money and dont feel they should give out free advertising. i can understand that.
its a business deal. the players can play with the rules or not. it is their choice.
their own sponsors should have an option to pay to have their emblems on the players shirts.
and matchroom could let them maybe have one small patch that is approved.
if it was my tournament and i was adding money, i wouldnt let a player show up all dressed in ads for my competitors would you.
It was discussed yesterday on Billiard Network live chat by Mike Panozzo, Karl Boyes, Darren Appleton, Allison Fisher, and Raj Hundal. The video is on the Billiard Network Facebook page.Where did you see that?
Yes, we have to assume that if these players had originally planned to play and then dropped out, it’s because they checked with their sponsors and were not given approval to play under these conditions, without them potentially violating their contract / risk losing their sponsor.So, what if these payers have contracts with their personal sponsors stating they must play wearing the logo of that sponsor?
Sort of a "do you wish to be hanged or do you prefer the firing squad?"
Just speculation on my part, but this could well be the case.
So, what if these payers have contracts with their personal sponsors stating they must play wearing the logo of that sponsor?
Sort of a "do you wish to be hanged or do you prefer the firing squad?"
Just speculation on my part, but this could well be the case.
From the Billiards Network podcast the OP referred to:Yes, we have to assume that if these players had originally planned to play and then dropped out, it’s because they checked with their sponsors and were not given approval to play under these conditions, without them potentially violating their contract / risk losing their sponsor.
If so, can't blame the players...personal sponsors giving a known...predator only offering the opportunity to a payout on prize money. Gorst & SVB are cuetec, Woodward is Meucci, if I'm not mistaken.Probably exactly the case of the players dropping out. The event sponsor won't budge and neither will theirs. The player has no option but to not compete in the event since they are Catch 22'ed. I have seen this when sponsors have a real animosity between them.
Hu
Where are these rules you reference and has Pool agreed to them?This is a challenge that occurs when the title sponsor actually owns the event. If they are merely a title sponsor for an event, they would be limited in terms of what they can control and the means to activate their sponsorship would be limited by the event organizer. The event organizer would likely not give them the latitude to dictate what participants wear, but the organizer might have uniform rules (such as; logos on shirts are limited to 2x4 inches regardless of what those logos are).
When the title sponsor actually owns the event they can create these kind of rules (not only telling participants what they can't wear but also telling them what they MUST wear). Players then have to decide whether that is consistent with their needs, and the needs of the companies that they endorse.
I think the players have to be careful here. Is it a slippery slope to say that if they sacrifice the right to wear the logos of companies that pay them, they will next be told they must wear the event sponsor's logos? And what if Predator went a step further and said that participants must play with a Predator cue?
If Predator has a meaningful activation plan for this event, the viewer should walk away think about Predator and a size-limited logo on a polo shirt from a competing company shouldn't change that.
A lot of folks here bought cuetecs after svb signed on.If so, can't blame the players...personal sponsors giving a known...predator only offering the opportunity to a payout on prize money. Gorst & SVB are cuetec, Woodward is Meucci, if I'm not mistaken.
What makes it silly is that I doubt many amateurs select their equipment based on what the pros use. I mean, who could think buying a cue that the pros use will suddenly have them playing like the pro?
The majority of amateur players pick their cues based on what pros are playing. Why do you think every league player on the planet has a break cue, jump cue, backup jump/break cue, an extension, $20 Chalk, etc.If so, can't blame the players...personal sponsors giving a known...predator only offering the opportunity to a payout on prize money. Gorst & SVB are cuetec, Woodward is Meucci, if I'm not mistaken.
What makes it silly is that I doubt many amateurs select their equipment based on what the pros use. I mean, who could think buying a cue that the pros use will suddenly have them playing like the pro?
Needless to say, the fighters were mostly pissed because they lost a ton of sponsorship money. UFC's stance was along the lines of "you don't see nfl, nba, or mlb, etc. players s with "condom depot" splattered all over their jersey!
What part of the "People's Republic of China" is in error?Predator cues is part of Predator Group. FYI they are based in Jacksonville, Fl. Yes, they do have manuf. sites in Asia but they are not a Chinese company.
Yep, they are considered independent contractors. they have been trying to organize for the past couple of decades....Where I would disagree with the UFC is that the analogy is false. Those leagues have unions and bargain collectively and part of the CBA is revenue sharing, so they all benefit from league-wide sponsorship deals for uniforms. UFC fighters, to my knowledge, are not in a union and do not have a negotiating process and probably have little to no say in the percent of total revenue that they are guaranteed.
I dont, my player is also my break cue and pigs will fly before I spend $20 on a cube of chalk.The majority of amateur players pick their cues based on what pros are playing. Why do you think every league player on the planet has a break cue, jump cue, backup jump/break cue, an extension, $20 Chalk, etc.