LIV Golf

Gutted I missed the Taylor Gooch shade by 48 hours 😢

Guy was apparently the best iron player in 20 years, even though he was never ranked Top 10 in approach in a single season on PGAT and hasn’t ever shown up in a major, where more often than not the top 10 are filled with people strong on approach that week
 
Dunesman said:
Update on the state of play from The Guardian, who can be taken as impartial, and certainly not trolling.
Takeaways :
- closing down LIV is a live topic in any deal, PGAT seemingly holding firm on that element
- a deal does not seem close, with PGAT confident enough to rebuff 1.5bn offer
- Yassir does not believe LIV has been respected (personal view - respect is earned, he needs to ask himself why it isnt respected rather than complain that it isnt)

www.theguardian.com

PGA Tour stands firm on golf reunification despite Saudi $1.5bn offer

Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund has failed in an attempt to persuade the PGA Tour to deliver serious concessions in exchange for a $1.5bn (£1.14bn) investment
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...
LIV was a negotiating tactic to allow Saudi access to (at least partial) ownership of the PGAT. Either let us into the ownership structure of your tour or we will destroy your tour by launching a rival with which it can not compete financially.

With LIV now at the point where the narrative is merely whether they can hold what they have, and not offering serious threat in terms of eyeballs on golf then the negotiating position is far weaker than it was in the first year where there was always the chance that initial leavers would trigger a chain reaction avalanche and decimate the PGAT. The PGAT doesn’t need LIV any more while LIV (if it is to be a sustainable product rather than a rich country’s vanity plaything) needs the PGAT.

The Saudi negotiating teamdon’t appear to appreciate that new reality though - hence feeling disrespected. They’ve come in thinking they still carry an existential threat to the PGAT when they don’t.
When they do realise their position, will the idea of pumping money in indefinitely to a venture which can only hold what little they have, and has no obvious path to a returns or sustainability still appeal?
Is it the most effective use of money to promote Saudi will they conclude? (at the moment it seems more effective at promoting Adelaide than Saudi…)

They could of course double down on killing the PGAT and throw yet more cash at it - but given the size of the Rahm deal, what are you going to have to offer the rest of the top 10 to head over now? x3, x5 or x10 the current budget still with no certainty of success? Take Scottie - he has all the money he ever needs and a young family - there is only so much you can do to tempt him to spend weeks in Riyadh and Singapore rather than Pebble Beach and Florida? The path to a sustainable effective product rather than a money pit that offers little return gets further away with every mega deal too. If you want to become a factor in world golf then is having Scheffler teeing up in Adelaide or the Home Counties really more effective than building, subsidising, transport-connecting and marketing a whole swathe of world class golf resorts so that they offer quality/price that can’t be matched anywhere else? The cost is about the same and as this realisation becomes ever more clear and obvious how might decision makers react…

The PGAT strategy makes sense. They can now just sit on the problem and wait for Saudi to lose interest in a project eating cash perennially for no further return or benefit (at which point LIV disappears with zero cost or concession on the PGAT part). It’s up to LIV to alter that dynamic somehow. Will they? Can they? Saudi has almost infinite cash but it is a national investment fund for which a golf tour is only a trivial sideline, not a core need. The amount that the PIF will apportion to LIV rather than projects and investments that do offer an ongoing return will not be infinite.
 
The Squirrel said:
LIV was a negotiating tactic to allow Saudi access to (at least partial) ownership of the PGAT. Either let us into the ownership structure of your tour or we will destroy your tour by launching a rival with which it can not compete financially.

With LIV now at the point where the narrative is merely whether they can hold what they have, and not offering serious threat in terms of eyeballs on golf then the negotiating position is far weaker than it was in the first year where there was always the chance that initial leavers would trigger a chain reaction avalanche and decimate the PGAT. The PGAT doesn’t need LIV any more while LIV (if it is to be a sustainable product rather than a rich country’s vanity plaything) needs the PGAT.

The Saudi negotiating teamdon’t appear to appreciate that new reality though - hence feeling disrespected. They’ve come in thinking they still carry an existential threat to the PGAT when they don’t.
When they do realise their position, will the idea of pumping money in indefinitely to a venture which can only hold what little they have, and has no obvious path to a returns or sustainability still appeal?
Is it the most effective use of money to promote Saudi will they conclude? (at the moment it seems more effective at promoting Adelaide than Saudi…)

They could of course double down on killing the PGAT and throw yet more cash at it - but given the size of the Rahm deal, what are you going to have to offer the rest of the top 10 to head over now? x3, x5 or x10 the current budget still with no certainty of success? Take Scottie - he has all the money he ever needs and a young family - there is only so much you can do to tempt him to spend weeks in Riyadh and Singapore rather than Pebble Beach and Florida? The path to a sustainable effective product rather than a money pit that offers little return gets further away with every mega deal too. If you want to become a factor in world golf then is having Scheffler teeing up in Adelaide or the Home Counties really more effective than building, subsidising, transport-connecting and marketing a whole swathe of world class golf resorts so that they offer quality/price that can’t be matched anywhere else? The cost is about the same and as this realisation becomes ever more clear and obvious how might decision makers react…

The PGAT strategy makes sense. They can now just sit on the problem and wait for Saudi to lose interest in a project eating cash perennially for no further return or benefit (at which point LIV disappears with zero cost or concession on the PGAT part). It’s up to LIV to alter that dynamic somehow. Will they? Can they? Saudi has almost infinite cash but it is a national investment fund for which a golf tour is only a trivial sideline, not a core need. The amount that the PIF will apportion to LIV rather than projects and investments that do offer an ongoing return will not be infinite.
Click to expand...

One problem.

The tour now has to return a profit to PGATE.

The TV numbers are down - the product hasn't improved one iota despite the SSG investment, so how secure is the PGAT? People are quick to question whether the LIV businesses model is sustainable, but never discuss whether the PGAT is sustainable with the increased purses they agreed to hold onto their players.

The money always wins.
 
Mel Smooth said:
One problem.

The tour now has to return a profit to PGATE.

The TV numbers are down - the product hasn't improved one iota despite the SSG investment, so how secure is the PGAT? People are quick to question whether the LIV businesses model is sustainable, but never discuss whether the PGAT is sustainable with the increased purses they agreed to hold onto their players.

The money always wins.
Click to expand...

The PGAT has a revenue of over £1.8bn

It’s more secure than a tour that makes losses of £400mil with a revenue of £30mil

The PGAT will be very secure financially when compared to a tour held up by one single source which is pouring money down the drain
 
What is the point of the ITV deal if they are playing tonight in prime time and it's only on ITVX? They are showing Heartbeat in ITV3.
 
Mel Smooth said:
He'd have been one of the first to sign up.
Click to expand...
What makes you think that? I always thought faldo was someone who liked competition.. Am not saying he wouldn't have, am just curious why you think he wouldve....
Am not a faldo fan to be honest... His commentary makes me want to mute the tele..
 
C7usk said:
What makes you think that? I always thought faldo was someone who liked competition.. Am not saying he wouldn't have, am just curious why you think he wouldve....
Am not a faldo fan to be honest... His commentary makes me want to mute the tele..
Click to expand...

There's plenty of competition through the LIV field - enough to satisfy Faldo's ego for sure - but the money would have easily won him over.
 
Arthur Wedge said:
Backsticks ? Am I thinking of someone else with the name back in it ?
Click to expand...
Don't know if you're thinking of me but I virtually never post on the LIV thread and don't have particularly strong opinions on LIV in either direction.
I don't watch it but that's mainly because it's not on TV but I don't watch that much pro golf anyway outside the Majors Ryder cup and a few big tournaments or if I'm on my own and there is some golf on.
 
Backache said:
Don't know if you're thinking of me but I virtually never post on the LIV thread and don't have particularly strong opinions on LIV in either direction.
I don't watch it but that's mainly because it's not on TV but I don't watch that much pro golf anyway outside the Majors Ryder cup and a few big tournaments or if I'm on my own and there is some golf on.
Click to expand...
Believe it was the poster referenced here, so not you 👍

Post in thread 'LIV Golf' https://forums.golfmonthly.com/threads/liv-golf.111261/post-2701692
 
The Squirrel said:
LIV was a negotiating tactic to allow Saudi access to (at least partial) ownership of the PGAT. Either let us into the ownership structure of your tour or we will destroy your tour by launching a rival with which it can not compete financially.

With LIV now at the point where the narrative is merely whether they can hold what they have, and not offering serious threat in terms of eyeballs on golf then the negotiating position is far weaker than it was in the first year where there was always the chance that initial leavers would trigger a chain reaction avalanche and decimate the PGAT. The PGAT doesn’t need LIV any more while LIV (if it is to be a sustainable product rather than a rich country’s vanity plaything) needs the PGAT.

The Saudi negotiating teamdon’t appear to appreciate that new reality though - hence feeling disrespected. They’ve come in thinking they still carry an existential threat to the PGAT when they don’t.
When they do realise their position, will the idea of pumping money in indefinitely to a venture which can only hold what little they have, and has no obvious path to a returns or sustainability still appeal?
Is it the most effective use of money to promote Saudi will they conclude? (at the moment it seems more effective at promoting Adelaide than Saudi…)

They could of course double down on killing the PGAT and throw yet more cash at it - but given the size of the Rahm deal, what are you going to have to offer the rest of the top 10 to head over now? x3, x5 or x10 the current budget still with no certainty of success? Take Scottie - he has all the money he ever needs and a young family - there is only so much you can do to tempt him to spend weeks in Riyadh and Singapore rather than Pebble Beach and Florida? The path to a sustainable effective product rather than a money pit that offers little return gets further away with every mega deal too. If you want to become a factor in world golf then is having Scheffler teeing up in Adelaide or the Home Counties really more effective than building, subsidising, transport-connecting and marketing a whole swathe of world class golf resorts so that they offer quality/price that can’t be matched anywhere else? The cost is about the same and as this realisation becomes ever more clear and obvious how might decision makers react…

The PGAT strategy makes sense. They can now just sit on the problem and wait for Saudi to lose interest in a project eating cash perennially for no further return or benefit (at which point LIV disappears with zero cost or concession on the PGAT part). It’s up to LIV to alter that dynamic somehow. Will they? Can they? Saudi has almost infinite cash but it is a national investment fund for which a golf tour is only a trivial sideline, not a core need. The amount that the PIF will apportion to LIV rather than projects and investments that do offer an ongoing return will not be infinite.
Click to expand...

Excellent post. The problem is even huge money won't tempt those on the PGAT across now. One aspect of LIV is it has increased the income on the PGAT, so it's essentially self harming. Any big name that was tempted would've already seen a huge rise in income and be less likely to step over.

Throw in the fact the vast majorty of players that went to LIV have seen their game tank badly and the reasons for moving are drying up. It's just a very mediocre product.

If anything good comes from LIV, I'd like it to be taking a major away from America and giving it to world golf. It's disgraceful 3/4 majors are based there when they didn't even invent the game.
 
4LEX said:
Excellent post. The problem is even huge money won't tempt those on the PGAT across now. One aspect of LIV is it has increased the income on the PGAT, so it's essentially self harming. Any big name that was tempted would've already seen a huge rise in income and be less likely to step over.

Throw in the fact the vast majorty of players that went to LIV have seen their game tank badly and the reasons for moving are drying up. It's just a very mediocre product.

If anything good comes from LIV, I'd like it to be taking a major away from America and giving it to world golf. It's disgraceful 3/4 majors are based there when they didn't even invent the game.
Click to expand...
The game had a bad reputation until the Americans made it cool.....

Bobby Jones, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus. Until Snead and others came over the Open was an after thought. IMO of course. America deserves three majors and a fourth if the players Championship is included.
 
cleveland52 said:
The game had a bad reputation until the Americans made it cool.....

Bobby Jones, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus. Until Snead and others came over the Open was an after thought. IMO of course. America deserves three majors and a fourth if the players Championship is included.
Click to expand...
WOW!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Some information about a few clubs
Replies
4
Views
4K
nadiayorc
N
TheBionicGolfer
LIV Golf Invitational Ticket Prices
2 3
Replies
51
Views
9K
samthom99
S
Golfnut1957
Premier Golf League
Replies
14
Views
3K
Jigger
J
virtuocity
Custom Fitting- The Evidence Base (VERY long post)
4 5 6
Replies
108
Views
29K
Backsticks
Backsticks
Crazyface
Why Is Golf On The Decline?
8 9 10
Replies
194
Views
25K
sunshine
S
Top