AZHousePro:
THANKS for the information!!! Great news!!!
THANKS for the information!!! Great news!!!
World 10 Ball Silence
- Thread starter pro9dg
- Start date
finally paid
Halle frickin lujah
If he produces another tournament YEN MUST POST :bash: :angry:
Halle frickin lujah
If he produces another tournament YEN MUST POST :bash: :angry:
Jerry Forsyth
Well-known member
"Posting" tournament payouts
This comes up all the time. "This would not happen if they would just post the money." But it is not that easy. Most prize funds are garnered from sponsors. Most sponsors recoil at the thought of paying in advance. They want to make sure that the benefits they are being promised come through before they write the big check. Other funds come from the gate and the gate money does not come in until the tournament begins. In truth, most promoters do not have the cash up front to post. So this requirement could actually end in having fewer tournaments and tournaments with lower prize funds. I would like to see the players vote that promoters take a small amount out of the prize fund to purchase a bond on the purse. That might take 3% out of the prize fund but it would ease tensions. (If this is possible. I know it used to be but do not know if current financial climate allows such a thing.)
wahcheck said:
This comes up all the time. "This would not happen if they would just post the money." But it is not that easy. Most prize funds are garnered from sponsors. Most sponsors recoil at the thought of paying in advance. They want to make sure that the benefits they are being promised come through before they write the big check. Other funds come from the gate and the gate money does not come in until the tournament begins. In truth, most promoters do not have the cash up front to post. So this requirement could actually end in having fewer tournaments and tournaments with lower prize funds. I would like to see the players vote that promoters take a small amount out of the prize fund to purchase a bond on the purse. That might take 3% out of the prize fund but it would ease tensions. (If this is possible. I know it used to be but do not know if current financial climate allows such a thing.)
Darren Appleton has not received payment today. He told me 30 minutes ago.
Most likely it is because it is evening in Europe now, and hopefully he can pop the champagne when talking to his bank Monday morning.
Most likely it is because it is evening in Europe now, and hopefully he can pop the champagne when talking to his bank Monday morning.
Sorry Jerry, I have to disagree with you here. What you are talking about is producing a tournament on the "if come", meaning IF the money COMES in we pay. If not, too bad!
My feeling is that a responsible promoter makes sure all promised monies are on hand before starting to even promote an event. Let's say you are putting on a $25,000 Added tournament, you would need to have $25,000 secured before you begin to collect entry fees. To me it is not fair to the players to make them wait until you get your "sponsor" money to pay them. That is akin to saying to someone you owe money to that I will pay you when so and so pays me. One has nothing to do with the other. No other professional sport operates that way.
Let's see how far a promoter gets producing a professional tennis or golf tournament, and tells the players he will pay them within a few weeks. That would be his last event.
My feeling is that a responsible promoter makes sure all promised monies are on hand before starting to even promote an event. Let's say you are putting on a $25,000 Added tournament, you would need to have $25,000 secured before you begin to collect entry fees. To me it is not fair to the players to make them wait until you get your "sponsor" money to pay them. That is akin to saying to someone you owe money to that I will pay you when so and so pays me. One has nothing to do with the other. No other professional sport operates that way.
Let's see how far a promoter gets producing a professional tennis or golf tournament, and tells the players he will pay them within a few weeks. That would be his last event.
Jerry...I have to disagree. MOST sponsor endorsement fees are paid upfront, regardless of the sport or event.
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
Jerry Forsyth said:
jay helfert said:
I agree totally with Jay on this issue. The players will in time get the short end. In this scenario I am sure there would be fine print that gaurantees X amount of business for the sponsor, and "what if" the tournament didn't produce much for the sponsor. The players would always be at the mercy of maybe.
Kevin Vidal
I don't disagree, but on the other hand if you made a list of all the pool tournaments that would never have taken place if this were followed....jay helfert said:
Considering the "complications" surrounding the WTBC, I can see how an inaugural sponsor may have written a performance delay into their contract.
Bob Jewett said:
My point being if the "performance" clause is not met, should the players be penalized. They fulfilled their end of the bargain by showing up and playing (at their own expense I might add).
On the contrary Bob, I believe that the majority of major tournaments held in this country anyway, the added money was secure before a ball was struck. I'm referring to Turning Stone I & II (25K added), the Viking Tour Championship (25K Added), the Sands (26.5K added), U.S. Bar Table (20K Added), Derby City (50K Added), World Straight Pool (25K Added). I know that every tournament I personally promoted, I made sure the money was there before acting. And I think you did too Bob.
If you want me to fudge on this issue, that's not going to happen. I am on good terms with the promoters of the recent WTBC, but this delay in paying is not something I agree with. It just shouldn't have happened for any reason!
Last edited:
Jerry Forsyth
Well-known member
We agree, sorta
Jay,
When it comes to $25-40,000 added events I can agree with you that it is reasonable to believe a promoter can get all of that upfront and post it. But when you are doing a really big tourney with $100,000, $200,000 or more added I believe the odds go way down. Big sponsors, particularly governments, are not particularly impressed with when you demand the money. They will cut the check in a reasonable time and if that is not OK you may be advised to go elsewhere. I know for certain that the promoter of the largest event on US soil has told player organizations that posting the prize fund beforehand is simply not possible.
-Jerry
jay helfert said:
Jay,
When it comes to $25-40,000 added events I can agree with you that it is reasonable to believe a promoter can get all of that upfront and post it. But when you are doing a really big tourney with $100,000, $200,000 or more added I believe the odds go way down. Big sponsors, particularly governments, are not particularly impressed with when you demand the money. They will cut the check in a reasonable time and if that is not OK you may be advised to go elsewhere. I know for certain that the promoter of the largest event on US soil has told player organizations that posting the prize fund beforehand is simply not possible.
-Jerry
Jerry Forsyth said:
Once again with all due respect Jerry, my feeling is the bigger the event, the more responsible the promoter must be in staging it. Matchroom has promoted many very large professional pool tournaments and I'm certain the money has been in place for each one, PRIOR to play beginning. And yes they depend on television revenue and sponsors to make their profits. But if for some reason the television audience was not as big as expected and sponsor money shrunk, I will still wager all players will be paid promptly.
In business sometimes you take your lumps and go on. But you MUST honor your agreements with the participants if you want to continue in this business. That is why the recent actions of the IPT dismay me. This is an organization that has proven they cannot be trusted. Personally I put on the 1993 Los Angeles Open with $60,000 in added money. We fell short at the end for various reasons. I went to the bank and withdrew over $20,000 from my personal account (with less than 50K total in savings) and put that money into the tournament account so that all players got paid.
I knew I had some back up money if I needed it and I did. I wasn't happy but I damn sure wasn't going to owe anyone any money. This doesn't make me a good guy or anything, just honest and responsible for what I take on.
By the way, I have done large added money events at casinos in the past. And I made sure that they put the added money into the tournament account well before we got underway. What's that saying? "Trust, but verify".
Last edited:
I still don't disagree with you. My own feeling is that any sanctioning organization should do something like escrow for the prize fund, but that seems to be impossible in the present world of pool. As I recall, about the time it started, the UPA was trying to escrow all US tournaments, but that had its own problems. The Sands, for example, had been adding piles of money to tournaments for twenty years, and I don't think they took well to the UPA demand.jay helfert said:
One destructive result of prize money being in question is that people will tend to not support the organizer in the future. Several such cases in the US come to mind.
Jerry Forsyth said:
This year Sterling Gaming and Fury and CueSight and Milliken Cloth sponsored the EnjoyPool 9-Ball Tournament in Charlotte. We had bid on the sponsorship and to pay all the sponsor money up front.
We were not particularly happy that some sponsors who had spent A LOT less than we did got equal billing and equal air time when displaying the logos on the rotating banners.
We didn't get or somehow missed the option where we could pay based on the performance of the event, what we felt our exposure was, or any other criteria.
If a tournament promoter advertises a prize fund and it is guaranteed then that means the money is there to pay the finishers. There should be no delay whatsoever that is not agreed upon.
Who really cares if tournaments take place if they are going to always be mired in controversy? This year the WTBC was marred by controversy before, during and after it's staging. The US Open was all about controversy this year. We will see no World 9-Ball championship this year because of controversy.
You know why people in general watch Tennis and Golf and follow the stars somewhat? Because the events are consistent, the participants are consistently there, the rules are the same, and there is no drama to take away from the sport part of the competition.
Apologists for Yen can make all the excuses that they want to but the fact is that Raya sports should have had the entire prize fund sitting there ready to disburse when it was said that it would be. And the WPA backed this event with their statement that the prize fund was secure. There is no valid excuse for this delay and although I am really happy to see the players get paid I sincerely hope that they find a way to protect themselves from future incidents like this.
Bob Jewett said:
One notable case of an opposite example is when Barry Behrman shorted the prize fund in the 2001 US Open. He still enjoys vigorous support despite the fact that his guaranteed prize fund wasn't guaranteed.
In Germany the prize funds need to be secure before the event takes place in order to get DBU sanctioning. (at least this is how it used to be done) So what the promoters started doing was getting the sanctioning and then if the event didn't draw as many entries as they hoped they would cancel it a week before the event and presumably get their sanctioning fee back from the DBU.
I don't know what the answer is but apparently escrow doesn't seem to be hard to accomplish from what another poster has said.
My thoughts on this are that if you can't afford it beforehand don't bet the player's time, expenses, and effort on your own speculation.
Even if the players continue to go to events that do not have the purse money posted in some way, the stake horses that send a lot of the players are going to be very scarce to find. I know that is the first thing I look for. Who is the promoter, if the flyer says BASED ON 128 players, I look and see if they had 128 in past years. New tournaments I stay away from staking someone unless the promoter is Jay or someone like Allen Hopkins or someone else with a 100% payout record and has run a dozen or more tournaments. Johnnyt
Matchroom typically pays the players 1-2 weeks after the event is complete. And they put on what are arguably the best produced and most professional events in the game today.
Even they can not have all of the guaranteed prize money in place before balls are struck.
Mike
Even they can not have all of the guaranteed prize money in place before balls are struck.
Mike
jay helfert said:
Bob, can't agree with you on that one.
Barry was short in 01 and the players swarmed back to the tourney the following year.
Sixteen pro players rushed back to the IPT for this new venture after the debacle that they had. (In fairness, Sigel and Ellerby have pulled out and Hatch/Loree Jon took their places)
If the UPA were to announce another event, I suspect the players would rush to it.
And I imagine even after all of the worries over World Ten Ball, they will have a full field next year.
There is just not enough money in the pool world for players to turn down the chance of a payday.
Mike
Barry was short in 01 and the players swarmed back to the tourney the following year.
Sixteen pro players rushed back to the IPT for this new venture after the debacle that they had. (In fairness, Sigel and Ellerby have pulled out and Hatch/Loree Jon took their places)
If the UPA were to announce another event, I suspect the players would rush to it.
And I imagine even after all of the worries over World Ten Ball, they will have a full field next year.
There is just not enough money in the pool world for players to turn down the chance of a payday.
Mike
Bob Jewett said: