LIV Golf Now Closed?

[eich41]

7 minutes ago, PatrickMurtha said:

Oh crap. Here is the problem with THAT…Everyone’s virtue is selective to a certain extent; no one does, or can, pick a fight on every issue. The implication here is that if you’re not 100% clean, you might as well be 100% dirty. I have taught ethics, and that is ridiculous. It is perfectly OK to make more of an issue of the Saudi money than the Chinese. I’m not especially keen on the Chinese money either, but they didn’t form a rival league, nor have they bought the existing one. I’m sure that if they did try to take over the PGA Tour, there would be PLENTY of questioning / critical voices. 

The essence of whataboutism is to demand a consistency of your opponents that you don’t demand of yourself.

The implication is that SA's human rights issues have been one of (if not THE) weapon to attack LIV and all those who made the jump by the PGA Tour, the media (in an effort to keep their golden goose happy), and players/fans who have gobbled up that narrative.  While I appreciate where you're coming from and your point, it's not black or white.  Where do you draw the line? I'm not sure, but it's not a stretch to say if you have a problem with SA and human rights, you would certainly have to have the same issues with China.  There may be a line but it's not between SA and China. 

[PatrickMurtha]

23 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Anyone can care about whatever they want.  However, I can certainly call out the dissonance in caring about SA and its issues, while happily ignoring others.  

 

You're correct that if you go far enough down the rabbit hole you can find anything.  For me personally, I choose to simply view this through the lens of golf as everything else becomes a slippery slope.  

Well, that is certainly convenient for you.

Your argument is weak. Treating the Saudi and Chinese issues differently is not especially dissonant. The form of sportswashing that the Saudis are engaged in here is more aggressive in the golf context than anything the Chinese have done in that same context. The Saudis have made themselves the story in golf. Now, if you want to talk about the Beijing Olympics, fine, there the Chinese WERE the story, but that is getting into another narrative. 

“Happily ignoring others” assumes facts not in evidence, and again, demands complete consistency of an opponent in order for them to have standing to say anything at all. A debate judge (I’ve been one many times) would rule this out of order.

Edited June 6, 2023 by PatrickMurtha

[chspeed]

Considering how rushed this announcement was, it seems unlikely to me that this was simply a financial decision that was beneficial to both parties. Will be interesting to unpack over the next few months.

I'm starting to feel like this will fall apart.

[Elmer]

13 minutes ago, turtleback said:

I'll wait to hear details, but I'm 99% sure I am completely done with pro golf.

Now it is definitely time for Tiger to retire rather than colluding with this.

Who runs the Champions tour and LPGA? Maybe that is what I watch from now on, on the the rare occurrence that I watch pro golf!

22 minutes ago, klineka said:

 

AFAIK China didn't fund a massive terrorist attack against the US on our own soil. 

 

China, unlike SA, also did not murder Jamal Khashoggi

[PatrickMurtha]

7 minutes ago, klineka said:

So if you get to define how you view things, why are you calling someone else out for how they choose to view things?

What if someone else is choosing to view this only from the perspective of the fact that the competing league was started and is funded by SA money? China didn't start a competing league and fund it with government money. 

Personally I have always hated the "what about X" takes that always seem to come up on here, on twitter, etc. They distract from the primary issue that is at hand/being discussed. There can be a separate conversation about China, but that's not what today/this topic is about.

Very true. What he is doing here is “If you care about this issue, then you must care equally about all issues that are closely or even remotely similar, because if you don’t, then you’re hypocritical and don’t get to say anything.”

That is fallacious, in part because anyone could make that argument against anyone else at any time. The line of attack needs to be much stronger to be worthy of consideration. I don’t think he is over that bar. 

[Beastie]

It’s lot cheaper to buy up a few administrators than a whole raft of talent.
A smart move by the Saudis. Can or will the players sack JM, and kill the deal. I expect the money will be too much to turn down, but not necessarily the sort of figures that Phil and others got.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Beastie

[eich41]

9 minutes ago, klineka said:

So if you get to define how you view things, why are you calling someone else out for how they choose to view things?

What if someone else is choosing to view this only from the perspective of the fact that the competing league was started and is funded by SA money? China didn't start a competing league and fund it with government money. 

Personally I have always hated the "what about X" takes that always seem to come up on here, on twitter, etc. They distract from the primary issue that is at hand/being discussed. There can be a separate conversation about China, but that's not what today/this topic is about.

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.

[PatrickMurtha]

3 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.

I can’t vouch for everyone HERE, but come on, millions of Americans have had serious issues with the Saudis for a long time, over 9/11, women’s rights, Khashoggi, etc ad infinitum. I would agree that, on the basis of what is happening now, the PGA Tour’s USE of the moral argument was hypocritical, but that doesn’t make the ARGUMENT invalid. 

[chspeed]

7 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.

[Killa]

4 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.

Exactly. I mean the USA does like a gazillion billion dollars of trade with SA, especially weapons and nobody bats an eye. But everyone is "disgusted" by the money when they pay for golf 🤣

 

[boogielicious]

3 minutes ago, Killa said:

Exactly. I mean the USA does like a gazillion billion dollars of trade with SA, especially weapons and nobody bats an eye. But everyone is "disgusted" by the money when they pay for golf 🤣

 

Of course we don’t like that. If I had my way I would tell SA to pound sand up their patooty. I can only control what the US Government does with my vote. I can only not watch the PGA Tour to voice my disagreement. I wish tomorrow Fusion power existed and the Saudis could then swim in their oil. So don’t act so sanctimonious and think we accept one thing and not another. Some things we have power over and some we do not. GEEEZ.

[eich41]

6 minutes ago, Killa said:

Exactly. I mean the USA does like a gazillion billion dollars of trade with SA, especially weapons and nobody bats an eye. But everyone is "disgusted" by the money when they pay for golf 🤣

 

Literally GC right now "I just don't know why Monahan has done a 180 seemingly overnight?"

 

Hello, because it was NEVER his stance, it was just the only angle he had to attack a rival golf league so he took the stance and mandated the media minions to push it.  It's easy to do a complete 180 when you were really already facing the other direction....

[iacas]

2 hours ago, Pretzel said:

while the PIF collects the profits as the largest financial stakeholder.

I do not think that’s accurate. They’re a sponsor more than an owner, and the PGA tour product and organization itself is valued at quite a high number itself. The PGA tour is essentially investing their sweat equity while the salaries are just putting in money equity.

[ChetlovesMer]

1 hour ago, eich41 said:

You can't have selective virtue.  You can't condemn SA and anyone who associates with SA, then turn a blind eye to the PGA Tour pushing partnerships with China, who certainly has plenty of their own human rights issues.  

I can and do.

I have friends who were murdered in the 9-11 terrorist attacks. 

I believe I'm aloud to condemn you if you murder my friends.

I can draw the line any old place I want. I choose to draw it at murdering my friends. 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, eich41 said:

 DJ wins the US Open and that's a pretty bad look for the PGA Tour who was adamant that it had the vastly superior talent. 

First, that’s a big if. Second, live has four or five really good players and the rest are trash.

Third, one of those good players who just won the PGA thought his career might almost be over, so it’s not weird that other people thought similarly.

1 hour ago, eich41 said:

Meh, you're hoping that we continue to have two watered down versions of professional golf, with only 4 true tournaments a year?  There is no denying that the PGA Tour in 2021 was far more compelling than LIV or PGA Tour in 2022 and beyond. 

I think the PGA Tour in 2023 has been one of the most compelling seasons yet. Hard disagree with you here buddy.

1 hour ago, eich41 said:

I'm fine if that's your stance.  Here is the problem with that.... You can't have selective virtue.

…

So if you're going to go down that road, go all the way down that road.

Uhhhhh, no.

They are not the same thing, and you don’t have to go all the way down that road.

You’re entirely wrong here.

42 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Where do you draw the line?

You don’t get to tell people where they draw their line. The simple fact is that those two things are not equivalent and so there is plenty of space between them to draw a line.

30 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?

I’m not going to speak for everyone else here, but for me, yes.

[Pretzel]

42 minutes ago, iacas said:

I do not think that’s accurate. They’re a sponsor more than an owner, and the PGA tour product and organization itself is valued at quite a high number itself. The PGA tour is essentially investing their sweat equity while the salaries are just putting in money equity.

The PIF can increase their investment stake. Outside organizations and even the PGA/Euro Tours cannot do the same without approval from the PIF due to the first right of refusal. They’re a sponsor, yes, but one that explicitly reserves all rights to expand their financial stake and block other investors in the arrangement as it’s been laid out so far to the public.

 

The PGA and Euro Tours are getting their initial financial stake in the merger by contributing their tours essentially, as you mentioned, because the PIF is the only one putting forth cash upfront in the deal the way it’s been described thus far. The issue for those tours is that the announcement specifically states the PIF reserves rights to both increase their financial stake in the created company AND prevent dilution of their financial stake through the first right of refusal. They’re the only ones with those powers, not the PGA or Euro Tour who could at a minimum have their stake heavily diluted or at worst also be barred from increasing their initial investment later on by the PIF itself. 
 

The parent company will get the revenue from all 3 tours, and the board will distribute it as deemed best for the company between the accounts payable, future year budgets, and profit for financial stakeholders. The only money that the PGA/Euro Tours would have available to expand their financial stake is their portions of the profits that get reinvested into the company and even then the PIF’s portion of reinvested profits offsets that. The PIF, on the other hand, has $600+ billion dollars of additional investments they can draw from to dilute the initial investment of the two Tours.
 

To clarify, I’m not talking about immediate effects of the merger. They could very well start out with equal financial stakes in the merged company, with the PIF essentially paying in cash what the PGA/Euro Tour have valued themselves at to enter as an equal partner (not likely since PGA and Euro Tours themselves are not equally valuable, but I digress). I’m talking about the effects down the road when the PIF exercises their exclusive rights to expand their initial investment or block additional investors from joining as the financial stake each partner has begins to change.  I’d very much like to be wrong about this, but it’s very weird to specifically call out in the announcement that the PIF has exclusive rights to increase their investment AND a first right to refusal for other investors. That’s borderline hostile-takeover merger terms right there.

Edited June 6, 2023 by Pretzel

[snapfade]

Lets all come to the agreement that neither SA nor China will win any humanitarian awards. We still have not addressed the topic of how this will affect beer prices next year, or why Chamblee's twitter remains silent. Heck, this was a Fox News Breaking Alert a little while ago, even the Donald chimed it. Golf is in the news, that got to be good for someone. TopGolf and Acushnet stocks jumped up a bit after the news. 

[Pretzel]

7 minutes ago, snapfade said:

We still have not addressed the topic of how this will affect beer prices next year

 

Saudi Arabia does, however, allow rose water in lieu of champagne at least (if you’re able to stomach the taste of it).

Edited June 6, 2023 by Pretzel