LIV Golf

Many will be pleased to see it go but also many will be very disappointed.

Australian and South African golf fans in particular will be gutted to lose the liv golf events that genuinely brought some of the worlds best golfers to their country for the 1st time in decades.

Im grabbing my popcorn waiting to see this play out and where players end up and what stance each tour takes.
Does this also mean the Asian tour loses its backing as well for its international series ?
 
If Liv does finish up the PGA and DP tours will unlikely be under threat of any other rival tour forming in the future. Liv had financial backing that no other group could provide surely. If they don't succeed I can't see why any other group would take a chance with a very slim possibility of making it a success.
 
Many will be pleased to see it go but also many will be very disappointed.

Australian and South African golf fans in particular will be gutted to lose the liv golf events that genuinely brought some of the worlds best golfers to their country for the 1st time in decades.

Im grabbing my popcorn waiting to see this play out and where players end up and what stance each tour takes.
Does this also mean the Asian tour loses its backing as well for its international series ?

They went to LIV to grow the game hopefully they'll continue and play the SA DP events or Aussie PGA/Open
 
They went to LIV to grow the game hopefully they'll continue and play the SA DP events or Aussie PGA/Open
Its not just their responsibility though right.

It would be great to also see the top PGAT players go and play the Aussie Open and PGA or make them co sanctioned events.
Liv has highlighted what a great opportunity there is over there for some fantastic golf events with insane crowds and atmosphere.
 
That really is quite a pathetic comment. Regardless of whether people like LIV or not and regardless of how much these guys earn. Nobody should gloat over things like this and highlights then bitterness of people that can’t accept different things!
Fella, have to say i think you've taken the post completely wrongly. This thread has been running a long time, and was more commentary on what may be coming along on mainly US based social media sites with the "anti" bias.
Appreciate written media on forums can be prone to misinterpretations, so am not losing sleep over it.
 
Fella, have to say i think you've taken the post completely wrongly. This thread has been running a long time, and was more commentary on what may be coming along on mainly US based social media sites with the "anti" bias.
Appreciate written media on forums can be prone to misinterpretations, so am not losing sleep over it.
Not at all taken as it’s written! Like you say forums can be misinterpreted, but even so, I’ll stand by my points because of how it comes across , and people potentially losing livelihoods isn’t something to be flippant about imo👍
 
Last edited:
I'd be highly delighted if LIV stopped.
Other than make some very rich golfers even more wealthy, it has brought nothing worthwhile to professional golf.

Nobody remembers or cares who won the last LIV event.
Weird attitude to me. I don't know why you would find it so upsetting that another tour formed and some players went to play on it to earn some money. Who cares?

My view was one of indifference really. I didn't hate the idea of them coming in and shaking things up. But when I did watch it I just couldn't bring myself to care who won, so I switched it off. I personally think that's the single biggest issue they've faced and why not many have tuned in - it simply doesn't matter who wins.
 
Weird attitude to me. I don't know why you would find it so upsetting that another tour formed and some players went to play on it to earn some money. Who cares?

My view was one of indifference really. I didn't hate the idea of them coming in and shaking things up. But when I did watch it I just couldn't bring myself to care who won, so I switched it off. I personally think that's the single biggest issue they've faced and why not many have tuned in - it simply doesn't matter who wins.
Not weird at all.
I want to see all the best players competing.in one tour.
LIV had harmed the competitiveness of all who went except maybe a couple.
LIV has brought nothing good to the game
I hope it closes down.
 
My view was one of indifference really. I didn't hate the idea of them coming in and shaking things up. But when I did watch it I just couldn't bring myself to care who won, so I switched it off. I personally think that's the single biggest issue they've faced and why not many have tuned in - it simply doesn't matter who wins.

Pretty much my view, although I haven't watched a single shot. :ROFLMAO:
 
Pretty much my view, although I haven't watched a single shot. :ROFLMAO:
I tried to watch half hour or so and found it confusing.
I didn’t know who was were on the course and the team thing just made it more confusing.
Admittedly that is my fault for not finding out beforehand but to be honest It didn’t interest me enough to bother.
Think I watched the bill on uk gold instead.
 
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.

No idea what will happen over the coming week, but everything I said above a year ago still applies.

Any org relying on a wealthy benefactor to keep it alive lives entirely based on the interest of that benefactor. One change of heart, or change of leadership and it ceases to exist. Such an organisation is ALWAYS one week away from closing as the benefactor can close the tap at any time.

The counterargument to this was ‘the money always wins’ which always seemed nearsighted. Take a similarly parlous local sport (rugby league) whose clubs (maybe except Leeds) all lose money and exist at the behest and thanks to the finance of benefactors. Literally every season a few go bust when owners lose interest or have a change of circumstances and a buyer for a money pit can’t be found - it’s the only possible result. Not hard to see the parallels.

So in the end, the ‘money’ always loses; loses interest and goes elsewhere - generally once they realise they’re now bleeding cash just to maintain an unsatisfying status quo. It may or may not be this week (nothing official ans I write this after all) but that is the only possible end result for any unsustainable organisation run on charity; the only question is when.
 
According to some reports, all the executives have been summoned to a meeting in Manhattan.

That was yesterday. The PIF also released approved their 2026-2030 investment strategy (Yasir himself chaired it). Quite clearly, whatever the execs were told at the meeting has some bearing on the announcement of the investment strategy.
 
Top