MensTennisForums.com - Reply to Topic

Thread: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the MensTennisForums.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
01-06-2013 12:14 PM
Hewitt =Legend
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Didn't want to start a new thread but this is a great show of support from Tiley and the AO and a step in the right direction. From Ram's twitter:

Quote:
Rajeev Ram ‏@RajeevRam
Amazing gesture by @CraigTiley and Oz Open to give all players an extra 1k dollars to help cover travel expenses..take note other slams
12-24-2012 03:04 AM
Benny_Maths
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmf07 View Post
How is it a weak and unsubstantiated hypothetical at best? There are plenty of examples of players packing it in or coming very close to and focusing on something else. As an Australian you have to look no further than Matosevic and Ebden.
A few isolated examples doesn't provide justification for a widespread change. Moreover, there are numerous of examples of players achieving extremely good results at junior level but doing far worse at senior level. You need more than just potential as a reason if you want to lobby for higher pay across the board.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry Chinaski View Post
generous wages these guys pay themselves are a big problem too.

Patrick McEnroe takes home over $1m a year from the USTA and is still allowed to do his media work on the side.

USTA Chief Exec Arlen Kantarian earned $9m in 2008.

The top suit at the dysfunctional LTA earns upwards of £600,000 per year.

At least with the players going after a bigger piece of the pie these organisations will be forced to run a tighter ship.
I agree with the general idea of your post. There's always the possibility of executives and especially media personnel being overpaid. But there's really no comparison between the bargaining power of executives and that of the average player.

When you start bringing money into the discussion, it's no longer about the subjective idea of quality of tennis and all about who can drive profits. It then becomes a question of who you can afford to let go of. There is a massive difference between a chief executive and some random player. As harsh as it sounds, the financial effect on a tournament of a lower ranked player dropping out will be less than that of a bee sting on a 1-metre thick block of titanium. OTOH the chief executive is responsible for the strategic direction of the tournament. They're hired on the basis that they have the experience, knowledge and business acumen required to make the tournament attractive to sponsors, spectators and sustain the profit that goes with it.
12-24-2012 12:45 AM
Alex999
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

the thing is a winner of the AO is getting more than all of poor guys who are trying to survive, what is it $130,000 more for the winner next year than this year. not really sure that Novak, Fed, Nadal care about extra #130K, they are beyond being wealthy (they can probably make more money doing something not even tennis related)... give it to 'little guys' ...
12-24-2012 12:28 AM
Henry Chinaski
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny_Maths View Post
The assumption is reasonable up to a certain point where you start to have significantly diminishing returns. The money available is finite.



Second point I agree with. The first point is more complicated. It's easy to just take the revenue figure and say that it's a lot of money. 25m or whatever the profit figure is looks big at first glance. But if that's what they have to work with the following year, when you spread it across facility upgrades and maintenance, marketing/advertisements, support staff (volunteers can't do everything), grassroots donations, taxes etc the profit figure starts to look a lot smaller.

generous wages these guys pay themselves are a big problem too.

Patrick McEnroe takes home over $1m a year from the USTA and is still allowed to do his media work on the side.

USTA Chief Exec Arlen Kantarian earned $9m in 2008.

The top suit at the dysfunctional LTA earns upwards of £600,000 per year.

At least with the players going after a bigger piece of the pie these organisations will be forced to run a tighter ship.
12-23-2012 11:49 PM
jmf07
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny_Maths View Post
Weak and unsubstantiated hypothetical at best. However, what you can say with a great degree of confidence, is that with the present and past pay structures, there have been and are plently of immensely talented players in the top 100.
How is it a weak and unsubstantiated hypothetical at best? There are plenty of examples of players packing it in or coming very close to and focusing on something else. As an Australian you have to look no further than Matosevic and Ebden.
12-23-2012 11:23 PM
Benny_Maths
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjurra View Post
There have been plenty of mugs in the top 100 too. Many of them deserve credit for fighting on lower levels and losing money year after year but I think the assumption "more money -> higher quality" is pretty reasonable.
The assumption is reasonable up to a certain point where you start to have significantly diminishing returns. The money available is finite.

Quote:
I think the players should get a larger piece of the Grand Slam revenue pie. Instead the national federations grab the money and pump it into their national tennis organization so players like Bogdanovic can get a top class coach. Not fair.
Second point I agree with. The first point is more complicated. It's easy to just take the revenue figure and say that it's a lot of money. 25m or whatever the profit figure is looks big at first glance. But if that's what they have to work with the following year, when you spread it across facility upgrades and maintenance, marketing/advertisements, support staff (volunteers can't do everything), grassroots donations, taxes etc the profit figure starts to look a lot smaller.

Quote:
As for the distribution between rounds, one could argue that the average fans cares mostly about the top players so they should get the lion share of revenue. Personally I would prefer a more equal distribution, the top 10 players are hardly going to quit tennis if their prize money is cut by 10%, they make most of their cash in other ways anyway.
Changing the distribution of the prize pool is a better 'first-solution' than simply demanding a greater prize pool - that should be an alternative solution. It at least makes sense for reasons such as the one you mentioned.
12-23-2012 10:47 PM
bjurra
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny_Maths View Post
Weak and unsubstantiated hypothetical at best. However, what you can say with a great degree of confidence, is that with the present and past pay structures, there have been and are plently of immensely talented players in the top 100.
There have been plenty of mugs in the top 100 too. Many of them deserve credit for fighting on lower levels and losing money year after year but I think the assumption "more money -> higher quality" is pretty reasonable.

I think the players should get a larger piece of the Grand Slam revenue pie. Instead the national federations grab the money and pump it into their national tennis organization so players like Bogdanovic can get a top class coach. Not fair.

As for the distribution between rounds, one could argue that the average fans cares mostly about the top players so they should get the lion share of revenue. Personally I would prefer a more equal distribution, the top 10 players are hardly going to quit tennis if their prize money is cut by 10%, they make most of their cash in other ways anyway.
12-23-2012 09:39 AM
Benny_Maths
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjurra View Post
Your reading comprehension is so poor I wont even bother replying to your silly statements.
You explicitly stated your argument in the bottom quote below. It coincides with what I had already identified as your argument. Look up the definition of phrases such as 'reading comprehension' before accusing others of not having it.

Quote:
I get the feeling you don't even like tennis, what are you doing in MTF GM?
Having an interest in tennis doesn't preclude having an understanding of the basic fact that you simply can't demand money from another person/entity if you can't offer something to them in return which they deem adequate.

Quote:
With the current prize money structure, tennis risks losing out on talents, to other sports and to 9-5 jobs. So many tennis players don't break into the top 100 until well after turning 25 these days. Imagine how many talents we will never see in ATP events because they did not have the money to keep going playing challenger events until they were solid enough to play ATP events. If the ITF/ATP wants a good pool of players ranked 40-80 (you cant have events with only top 40 players), they need to make sure more players can sustain their pro tennis financially.
Weak and unsubstantiated hypothetical at best. However, what you can say with a great degree of confidence, is that with the present and past pay structures, there have been and are plently of immensely talented players in the top 100.
12-23-2012 05:17 AM
Henry Chinaski
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Exactly and goes back further than that.

If you have a extremely gifted 11 year old kid, the chances are he's a prodigy in at least one other sport as well.

There's no reason for parents to push their kids towards tennis when you have to reach such a worldwide elite level to even break even.
12-22-2012 11:39 PM
bjurra
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny_Maths View Post
You think the financial needs of someone who chooses to hit a ball are above those of people who need to work a normal job (pretty much everyone). You're a moron.

As for the underlying assumption of your ridiculous post, there's no shortage of players. You're implicitly assuming that the present financial incentives aren't enough to sustain a pool of decent players. There's no significant evidence to suggest that the persistence of the current pay structure will result in sufficiently many good players quitting so that the slams will be unable to showcase a good quality field.

Hypocrisy at its finest. Mate, you're the senseless and immature cretin who abides by the philosophy that someone is entitled to money simply because they happen to like hitting balls.

You can make a case for tennis players being able to market themselves better and hence demand greater pay. But to say that they deserve money merely because they hit balls across a net just reflects how much of a moron you are.
Your reading comprehension is so poor I wont even bother replying to your silly statements. I get the feeling you don't even like tennis, what are you doing in MTF GM?

If anyone here with sense and a brain happens to read this, here is my point:

With the current prize money structure, tennis risks losing out on talents, to other sports and to 9-5 jobs. So many tennis players don't break into the top 100 until well after turning 25 these days. Imagine how many talents we will never see in ATP events because they did not have the money to keep going playing challenger events until they were solid enough to play ATP events. If the ITF/ATP wants a good pool of players ranked 40-80 (you cant have events with only top 40 players), they need to make sure more players can sustain their pro tennis financially.
12-22-2012 03:56 PM
TBkeeper
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny_Maths View Post
Nice misrepresentation of what I said. Financial decisions aren't a matter of good and evil. It's about compromise. Think about your own job. You do enough for your company to make a profit and they pay you an amount which doesn't bankrupt them.
I Understood you pretty good just it is the thing that the following phrase is one of the most accurate in the world: "Money is the root of all evil" .
12-22-2012 08:06 AM
Benny_Maths
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by bjurra View Post
Exactly that is the the problem here.
You think the financial needs of someone who chooses to hit a ball are above those of people who need to work a normal job (pretty much everyone). You're a moron.

As for the underlying assumption of your ridiculous post, there's no shortage of players. You're implicitly assuming that the present financial incentives aren't enough to sustain a pool of decent players. There's no significant evidence to suggest that the persistence of the current pay structure will result in sufficiently many good players quitting so that the slams will be unable to showcase a good quality field.

Quote:
Funny how you nailed the essence of the problem despite being a complete moron.
Hypocrisy at its finest. Mate, you're the senseless and immature cretin who abides by the philosophy that someone is entitled to money simply because they happen to like hitting balls.

You can make a case for tennis players being able to market themselves better and hence demand greater pay. But to say that they deserve money merely because they hit balls across a net just reflects how much of a moron you are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TBkeeper View Post
thanks now i understand why there is no more a single human being that is good nor does good things good to know
Nice misrepresentation of what I said. Financial decisions aren't a matter of good and evil. It's about compromise. Think about your own job. You do enough for your company to make a profit and they pay you an amount which doesn't bankrupt them.
12-21-2012 11:46 PM
Corey Feldman
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

boycott should be saved for French Open

bet dull would love that
12-21-2012 11:30 PM
bjurra
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by duong View Post
in the article by Cochennec, he says that the profit was around 50 million euros in 2012.

Anyway, I think it's pretty clear that if the French Tennis Federation didn't have to finance the new stadium, things would be much easier : it's the conjunction of both situations which seems to be very worrying for the French Tennis Federation. And the article also says that they took a bad decision to want to keep the decision by staying in Roland-Garros instead of moving outside of Paris where they could have made more benefits.
The problem with the RG management is that they just keep blaming the physical limits instead of actually trying to maximize the potential of their current grounds. Anyone with half a brain can see the grounds are poorly utilized and RG is the only Slam where spectator experience hasn't been improved one bit in the last 5-6 years.

In the long run, I hope FFT get a permit to extend the tournament grounds into the Bois de Bolougne. Nobody will miss the South East corner of that park anyway.
12-21-2012 11:24 PM
bjurra
Re: Australian Open averts player boycott with increased prizemoney

Quote:
Originally Posted by Benny_Maths View Post
I sincerely hope that you don't genuinely need an explanation. What do 'normal' people do when one job doesn't work out financially? They *gasp* look for another one. If they think that's below them, then they need to grow up.
Exactly that is the the problem here. Funny how you nailed the essence of the problem despite being a complete moron.
This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome