I guess my question is who profits if such a pro tour, made possible by league players, flourishes; and who owns the tour? The league owner? The pro players? I mean, shouldn't the investors (i.e. the league players) get the benefit? Would a venture capital company be in interested throwing money at this idea because it's good for the sport? If you are asking the league players to invest then that's what it should be, an investment with an expectation of a monetary return. If not, and you're asking them to do it for the good of the sport, then I suggest that a donation is exactly what it is. I'm just not sure that a business, hopefully a profit making business, should be funded by donations from league players just because some of us would like to see pro pool succeed so are looking around at where to get the money and see this giant pool of league players as an easy source. Why not just have the ABP members stand out front of supermarkets with a bucket and a bell?
Go to the ownership of the APA with a business plan and ask them to take one dollar a week per member that they collect from the leagues and invest it in a professional tour. Think they'll do it without an ownership interest? I don't, so why should the local league players?
The return on investment, if it is successful, should be monetary, not some esoteric notion of providing "a clear path to go from rank beginner to professional player." First off, there already is a clear path - get good enough to compete with other professionals. Secondly, I doubt leagues as currently structured are the best path to greatness. I'm in one and it's a lot of fun but it is certainly not the most efficient way to become a great pool player.
Look, I'm not totally against the idea and if a league wants to offer a voluntary means of players donating, OK for those that want to, but again I'd like to know who will be profiting from the venture besides the players. And CSI's USAPL was set up as a new league with this system in place at the outset, and that's the way to do it. But if I'm just giving my money away I need to know why I should give it to professional pool rather than towards breast cancer or autism research.
Consider it this way. If I told you that you had to invest 30 million and in return you would get 500 million in revenue for 10 years would you be interested in what I have to say?
I don't know what The Color of Money cost to make. Let's say 30 million. The billiard industry reaped the reward from this visibility for a good 10-15 years.
The return on investment by having a financially sound tour that is featured on television every month or even every few weeks is quite simply more people playing pool. Which means more table sales, more cue sales, more table time, more league players, more hard core players, more fans who don't even play pool, more outside advertisers, more connections, more suitors who want to be a part of it. It's not a charity for the top players it's a business investment to entice the top players to perform on command and reward them for that performance. In return they inspire millions of people to take up the game which then means that more people end up as top players.
Golf and Tennis both have very structured paths to go from amateur to professional. You can't just walk in off the street and pay your entry fee and become a pro player. You have to earn that status in both sports. You have to prove that you belong in the professional ranks. In return when you get there the money is good. All you need to focus on is getting to the events and doing well.
Consequently both sports enjoy a solid base of amateur players who contribute to the professional base in a myriad of ways. And both sports have a huge base of fans who don't even play but are attractive to advertisers.
I would not donate to a group of pool players either. I have scuffled around the USA playing pool for money for a couple decades. Luckily I have a career where I don't have to rely on my pool skills to survive. But top level pool players are a pretty lazy bunch overall, with some very notable exceptions. However as we saw with the IPT they can be motivated by the right incentives. And those would be first some sort of guarantee that the payday is there if they show up and play. That is the bedrock of the whole thing. Once that is in place then you can layer other duties on top such as a certain amount of time dedicated to promotion.
As to who would own the tour. The league or leagues would own it. Just as the APA owns the APA League and runs it successfully right now. Pool players just simply don't have what it takes to own their own tour. They don't have the money, they don't have the base, they don't have the experience, and most of all they don't have the drive that it takes to do the work. They are a collection of individuals who have all scuffled for most of their lives hustling their way from event to event. And by hustling I mean finding sponsors and backers, robbing amateur events etc...not hustling in the "lying to get a game" sense although some pros still do that.
I think that the pros should have a percentage of the tour as a group. They should share in it's well being as fellow investors and not be made to feel like employees or subcontractors.
The fact of it is that every league player in this country pays money for things that they may not want to buy if given a choice. You can divide Jeanette Lee's salary by the total amount of APA players and that's how she is getting paid. When the APA sponsors a pro event that money comes from league fees. Terry Bell's huge house comes out of the fact that 250,000 people pay a little bit each week and he skims a tiny bit off of each person's payment.
The model is perfectly sound with not one bit of downside. There isn't even any reason whatsoever to to explain to the league players that .25cts of their league fees are funding a professional tour. The APA and other leagues do not explain their investment decisions to the members any more than AT&T explains theirs to their subscribers.
And if it were tried and didn't work then after two years they shut it down and reduce the fees to the players (or not) and life continues on.
And usually several posters seem to project the opinion that league players should do this, like they and they alone owe it to professional pool. That's what I disagree with.