LIV Golf

[Deleted member 1147]

https://www.livgolf.com/

I don't care what anyone says - LIV know how to make a hype video!

Sleek edits, sick music - its pretty obvious that they're going younger than older with their target demographic.

Also not going to lie - Rippers is a sick name for the Aussie squad

Rangegoats is tragic Only Bubba

I think you’ll find that eventually, when the term Goat is used, people will think of Bubba instead of Tiger or Jack

 

[BubbaP]

I think you’ll find that eventually, when the term Goat is used, people will think of Bubba instead of Tiger or Jack

GOAT of golf hovercraft piloting perhaps

 

[Bdill93]

GOAT of golf hovercraft piloting perhaps

Not going to lie - that's sick

 

[JonnyGutteridge]

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/i...e-lawyers-say-2022-revenue-was-virtually-zero

 

[Bdill93]

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/i...e-lawyers-say-2022-revenue-was-virtually-zero

For what the headline suggests, they don't really discuss or provide any facts at all regarding income.

Obviously it was run at a MASSIVE loss in year 1, but the revenue was not virtually zero at all.

They'd have made plenty on catering alone. The fan village was heaving in London!

 

[Deleted member 1147]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1623214872258392064

 

[Swango1980]

For what the headline suggests, they don't really discuss or provide any facts at all regarding income.

Obviously it was run at a MASSIVE loss in year 1, but the revenue was not virtually zero at all.

They'd have made plenty on catering alone. The fan village was heaving in London!

I think it is all relative

If I personally, or a small company, received revenue the amount the LIV catering brought in, I think we'd be quite happy.

However, in a very large business, with high costs, I'd imagine any revenue from catering would be deemed insignificant. Even a revenue of a few hundred thousand / few million can be seen as virtually zero in such an organisation. For example, I'm not sure I've ever heard the PGA Tour boasting about revenue they get from catering?

Also, do LIV earn money from catering, or is it the club / catering company in charge of each event?

 

[PJ87]

I think it is all relative

If I personally, or a small company, received revenue the amount the LIV catering brought in, I think we'd be quite happy.

However, in a very large business, with high costs, I'd imagine any revenue from catering would be deemed insignificant. Even a revenue of a few hundred thousand / few million can be seen as virtually zero in such an organisation. For example, I'm not sure I've ever heard the PGA Tour boasting about revenue they get from catering?

Also, do LIV earn money from catering, or is it the club / catering company in charge of each event?

Yet if sports washing is the main aim of Liv the cost and loss of events is irrelevant. They are rich as hell and will write off the costs to wash their image no?

That's what I don't get it's one or the other..if people are so 100% saying it's sports washing then the costs really don't matter. Its a imagine Lauder fee.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

For what the headline suggests, they don't really discuss or provide any facts at all regarding income.

Obviously it was run at a MASSIVE loss in year 1, but the revenue was not virtually zero at all.

They'd have made plenty on catering alone. The fan village was heaving in London!

Most of that would have gone to the club not LiV

 

[MiurasFan]

https://www.espn.com/golf/story/_/i...e-lawyers-say-2022-revenue-was-virtually-zero

Lack of significant income was surely predictable and certainly not, imo, caused by PGAT. Likewise, asserting that it would be PGAT's fault if Jones's and Uihlein's decisions to go to LIV turn out to be poor ones seems daft! But I guess that's how anti-trust submissions work.

 

[Swango1980]

Yet if sports washing is the main aim of Liv the cost and loss of events is irrelevant. They are rich as hell and will write off the costs to wash their image no?

That's what I don't get it's one or the other..if people are so 100% saying it's sports washing then the costs really don't matter. Its a imagine Lauder fee.

I still don't get the sports washing element. I've always felt that all they are doing is investing in huge sums of money in other areas of business, popular within the developed world, so that they can ultimately make their own economy more diverse. Their own cultural believes are simply a barrier to this, hence having to invest way more money for them to get in on the act. Certainly don't think they do it because they want to send out the message "he, look at us and all the horrible ways we treat marginal groups and women, aren't we fantastic, you should do the same".

So, yes, we all know that revenue will not be that important to them in the initial stages. But, at some point, it will become very important. For 2 reasons:

1. I'm sure they will want it to become sustainable somewhere down the line?
2. If they start making significant revenue, it is a good sign that LIV is actually popular.

 

[Bdill93]

I think it is all relative

If I personally, or a small company, received revenue the amount the LIV catering brought in, I think we'd be quite happy.

However, in a very large business, with high costs, I'd imagine any revenue from catering would be deemed insignificant. Even a revenue of a few hundred thousand / few million can be seen as virtually zero in such an organisation. For example, I'm not sure I've ever heard the PGA Tour boasting about revenue they get from catering?

Also, do LIV earn money from catering, or is it the club / catering company in charge of each event?

Most of that would have gone to the club not LiV

I'm just giving a very small example of how this article is wrong. They provided zero evidence about the lack of income but claim it to be virtually zero, I have provided first hand evidence that it is not the case. It doesn't matter on the size of the companies outgoings, the article has glaring holes. Its clickbait and nothing more.

You don't know the venue takes the catering fees you are merely assuming - as am I, I suppose, but at least I have a first hand account of a LIV event. And no the PGA tour wouldn't talk about catering - but neither are LIV - I am Augusta's catering is always talked about being cheap! Liv wasn't Common practice at sports events in the UK is for the vendors to pay a fee per meal served to the event holder.

They also sold merch - (Majestics stuff actually sold out by day 3) - at high costs! It was like £40 for a cap with a team logo..... Hoodies were like £80..

They also sold beers a plenty

They didn't however, sell many tickets! Not in London anyway.

But really the biggest income they could as for is TV money and as we all know they're sorting TV now.

I've stated time and time again, start ups don't tend to make money for years.

 

[Whereditgo]

I still don't get the sports washing element. I've always felt that all they are doing is investing in huge sums of money in other areas of business, popular within the developed world, so that they can ultimately make their own economy more diverse. Their own cultural believes are simply a barrier to this, hence having to invest way more money for them to get in on the act. Certainly don't think they do it because they want to send out the message "he, look at us and all the horrible ways we treat marginal groups and women, aren't we fantastic, you should do the same".

So, yes, we all know that revenue will not be that important to them in the initial stages. But, at some point, it will become very important. For 2 reasons:

1. I'm sure they will want it to become sustainable somewhere down the line?
2. If they start making significant revenue, it is a good sign that LIV is actually popular.

Isn't it more like "hey, look at us and all the money we pour into professional sports", then "see, everybody ignores all the horrible things we do"

 

[Swango1980]

I'm just giving a very small example of how this article is wrong. They provided zero evidence about the lack of income but claim it to be virtually zero, I have provided first hand evidence that it is not the case. It doesn't matter on the size of the companies outgoings, the article has glaring holes. Its clickbait and nothing more.

You don't know the venue takes the catering fees you are merely assuming - as am I, I suppose, but at least I have a first hand account of a LIV event. And no the PGA tour wouldn't talk about catering - but neither are LIV - I am Augusta's catering is always talked about being cheap! Liv wasn't Common practice at sports events in the UK is for the vendors to pay a fee per meal served to the event holder.

They also sold merch - (Majestics stuff actually sold out by day 3) - at high costs! It was like £40 for a cap with a team logo..... Hoodies were like £80..

They also sold beers a plenty

They didn't however, sell many tickets! Not in London anyway.

But really the biggest income they could as for is TV money and as we all know they're sorting TV now.

I've stated time and time again, start ups don't tend to make money for years.

I should point out, I didn't say the venue takes the catering fees. I was simply asking the question whether they do or do not, for anyone that may know what usually happens.

I'd have thought the venue, or catering companies brought in to do the job, will get the revenue? If someone was to buy a hot dog and a beer at a Premier league match, I'd my money goes to the Premier league?

I'd have thought LIVs revenue would ultimately be from broadcasting rights, sponsorship and some of the gate receipts from the events. Not sure how much they'd make from merchandise, as I'd have thought the manufacturers of the merchandise get a good chunk of it.

As I said, "virtually zero" does not mean zero. It is all relative. If their revenue was £5 million, then it is so relatively low that it could be subjectively classed as virtually zero. If the PGA Tour revenue fell from $1.59 billion to $5 million, people could be forgiven by saying that their revenue fell to "virtually zero".

Btw, I just used $5 million as an example, no idea what the LIV revenue actually is. But wouldn't be surprised if it was very low.

 

[PJ87]

Isn't it more like "hey, look at us and all the money we pour into professional sports", then "see, everybody ignores all the horrible things we do"

Have you seen or come across one single person who thinks omg the Saudis those guys are alright with all this?

 

[Swango1980]

Isn't it more like "hey, look at us and all the money we pour into professional sports", then "see, everybody ignores all the horrible things we do"

But, they don't ignore them. Which is why they have to put so much money in to even join the party. If they just paid the going rates, I don't think they'd get a foothold at all.

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I'm just giving a very small example of how this article is wrong. They provided zero evidence about the lack of income but claim it to be virtually zero, I have provided first hand evidence that it is not the case. It doesn't matter on the size of the companies outgoings, the article has glaring holes. Its clickbait and nothing more.

You don't know the venue takes the catering fees you are merely assuming - as am I, I suppose, but at least I have a first hand account of a LIV event. And no the PGA tour wouldn't talk about catering - but neither are LIV - I am Augusta's catering is always talked about being cheap! Liv wasn't Common practice at sports events in the UK is for the vendors to pay a fee per meal served to the event holder.

They also sold merch - (Majestics stuff actually sold out by day 3) - at high costs! It was like £40 for a cap with a team logo..... Hoodies were like £80..

They also sold beers a plenty

They didn't however, sell many tickets! Not in London anyway.

But really the biggest income they could as for is TV money and as we all know they're sorting TV now.

I've stated time and time again, start ups don't tend to make money for years.

1. The venue provided the catering and took the money

2. The TV money - they are not being given any money by CW to host the events , they are “sharing” and advertising streams , providing they get some advertising

3. starts up - why can other start ups make money from the start - Hundred and multiple other T20 start up crickets comps , darts comps , snooker etc - many other start ups can make money from the start. And the reason why - because all those start ups were able to get - media and commercial deals in place before they start it

 

[MiurasFan]

They also sold merch - (Majestics stuff actually sold out by day 3) - at high costs! It was like £40 for a cap with a team logo..... Hoodies were like £80..

Perhaps anticipating future increase in value from rarity value.

 

[Bdill93]

Perhaps anticipating future increase in value from rarity value.

I did actually try and buy a cap for this very reason - thought Micklesons team cap could be worth something but they had none - and I wasn't spending £80 for the hoodie on a gamble

1. The venue provided the catering and took the money

2. The TV money - they are not being given any money by CW to host the events , they are “sharing” and advertising streams , providing they get some advertising

3. starts up - why can other start ups make money from the start - Hundred and multiple other T20 start up crickets comps , darts comps , snooker etc - many other start ups can make money from the start. And the reason why - because all those start ups were able to get - media and commercial deals in place before they start it

1) Source?

2) Yeah we know - but its a start and we don't know of any other deals yet other than Americas.

3) We've been through this before - because they had the capital to begin with so didn't need investment to get off the ground, they have the luxury of time and being able to make losses. Better to provide the product and let the sponsors come to you in time rather than delay and go through rounds of sourcing funding when you don't initially need it. Players aren't thick, they wouldn't move if this had no chance of success.

 

[TheDiablo]

I'm just giving a very small example of how this article is wrong. They provided zero evidence about the lack of income but claim it to be virtually zero, I have provided first hand evidence that it is not the case. It doesn't matter on the size of the companies outgoings, the article has glaring holes. Its clickbait and nothing more.

You don't know the venue takes the catering fees you are merely assuming - as am I, I suppose, but at least I have a first hand account of a LIV event. And no the PGA tour wouldn't talk about catering - but neither are LIV - I am Augusta's catering is always talked about being cheap! Liv wasn't Common practice at sports events in the UK is for the vendors to pay a fee per meal served to the event holder.

They also sold merch - (Majestics stuff actually sold out by day 3) - at high costs! It was like £40 for a cap with a team logo..... Hoodies were like £80..

They also sold beers a plenty

They didn't however, sell many tickets! Not in London anyway.

But really the biggest income they could as for is TV money and as we all know they're sorting TV now.

I've stated time and time again, start ups don't tend to make money for years.

You understand that this was a verbatim statement from Liv lawyers, right? So are you claiming the lawyers representing Liv are lying? Out of interest, what other glaring holes do you see in the article?

And venue catering doesn't touch the balance sheet of anyone other than the caterers (which may be the venue, or may be outsourced). If, for some reason, they paid Liv to be the caterers of choice, then that money paid to Liv would qualify as Liv revenue. Merch and ticket would qualify as revenue, which were probably their only income streams last year. This really is simple Business 101 I'm afraid.

A majorly high estimate of 10,000 fans per event paying $100 each on these items would make up $7m revenue, which probably qualifies as 'virtually zero' in the context of a spend approaching $1bn. In reality, I would imagine it be somewhere around the $2m mark based on the free tickets given out and lack of fans at some venues.