Tiger Down Under.

[RichF]

Woods fee sparks Australian row
Tiger Woods will play his first tournament in Australia for more than a decade later this year but it has sparked a row over his appearance fee.
Woods is reportedly being paid $3m (£2.1m) to compete in November's Australian Masters but there is concern it will impact on other events.

Australia's former Open winner Peter Thomson said: "In my view it's going to damage our national Open. He won't be playing in that but it sucks up potential sponsorship."
The Australian Open takes place two weeks after the Masters in Melbourne.
But Stuart Appleby, one of Australia's leading players, said Woods would have a positive influence on the local circuit.
"It will be great for the game and bring out a lot of people who haven't seen him before, in person, not on a video game," he said.
"There's a lot of people hurting in Australia, and they might look negatively that one guy is paid $3m just to turn up. The common man won't understand the business model because the government is paying for it. They might not see the money he brings in."

The Victoria state tax payers will reportedly cover half the cost of Woods' visit via the government support for the event. But state premier John Brumby predicted Woods' appearance would earn $19m (£9m) in economic benefits.

It will be Woods' fourth tournament appearance down under and first since the 1998 Presidents Cup, when the US lost to the International team at Royal Melbourne.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/golf/7952090.stm


I think he's worth every cent, especially when you consider some of the SALARIES that some 'sportsmen' get paid per week for doing jack-sh!t.


Opinions, rants, thoughts?

[iacas]

I think they likely know what they're doing.

Tiger's never struck me as a guy who's going to "just show up" either. If he's there, he's not going to just go through the motions - he's going to try to win.

[neudi]

Australia is smart to pay him because they will make that money up quick, but I think Tiger should put that money towards a charity in Australia. That would help me respect him more at least. Hard to say I think he's a joke for making them pay him to show up, but if you can get the cash without doing anything except boarding a plane, then he must be doing something right. G'day mate.

[michaeljames92]

Jack Nicklaus never had to be paid to play in Australia. At one stage, Nicklaus, palmer and player all played at the Australian open at my home course. I think tiger needs to be more of an international player by pla ying around the globe, not just at pga tour events

[Lemay427]

Im sorry but I beleive Tiger has done more for the game than Jack Nicklaus has as far as getting people interested in golf. If Tiger quit today I am sure his contributions would be enough.

This is a good business decision by Australia in my book.

Kenny

[kafka01]

Tiger getting appearance fees isnt really new. He got paid 2 mil $ to play in Germany for the Deutsche Bank SAP Open, he also got paid 3 mil $ to play the Dubai Desert Classic and that are just two examples, there are numerous more and he performed very well in most of the tournaments he got paid for - he obv. doesnt take a laid back approach to it.

[Bluenoser67]

The European tour and Aussie tour both use appearance fees to attract the best players to there tournaments. Whats the difference here. If Monty is worth $500,000 then Tiger is worth $3,000,000 thats all there is to it. Cost of doing buisness.

[Trav]

Years ago I watched a promotional match between Nicklaus, in his prime, and Peter Oosterhuis outside Sydney. It generated a lot of fan interest and media attention, and was probably a good thing because Australian golf was not considered to be anywhere near US golf back then. But realistically, no noticeable economic benefit outside the parking and concession stands.

Normally I would say that while a local government probably is clueless about the hard facts of tangible economic return and such claims are normally made without any real evidence simply to justify a desired decision, it's their money to spend as they see fit (assuming the taxpayers don't object) and Tiger shouldn't object to taking a fee someone is willing to pay. However, Australia has just had a devastating series of fires wreaking enormous hardship and death, not to mention many people made homeless. A billionaire raking in a large appearance fee under these circumstances strikes me as closer to the ugly American image than it does the Promoter of Golf. I understand that his buddy Appleby wants to do a positive thing for his country, but I see no good reason why Tiger can't return the favor by waiving his fee in this case.

[LNCHBOX]

I understand that his buddy Appleby wants to do a positive thing for his country, but I see no good reason why Tiger can't return the favor by waiving his fee in this case.

I'm just gonna go ahead and call BS on that. Tiger has busted his butt to get to where his is, and deserves every penny that he gets paid. If they are willing to pay it, why shouldn't he?

Would you go to the other side of the world and do your job for free? I doubt it. And don't tell me Tiger has enough money. Wealth is not accumulated by providing a service for free, not to mention it would set a precedent that he may not feel like living up to. Once he waives one fee, there will be demand for him to waive more. Just my $.02

[flanagan]

Im sorry but I beleive Tiger has done more for the game than Jack Nicklaus has as far as getting people interested in golf.

No, by any standard, Tiger has not yet done more for the game of golf than Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer or a couple of others that could be mentioned.

Nicklaus didn't just play the Australian Open when he was down under and also played the Canadian. Nicklaus did play a limited schedule on the Tour, more so later in his career. Palmer was more likely to try and play all the events, but not necessarily all in the same year, of course. Both felt an obligation to THE GAME and the Tour and its cities and sponsors. Yes, they played in a lot of traveling, promotional stuff, as well, but still understood their part in promoting and respecting the game (and it didn't hurt their images or own interests, either). Appearance fees overseas have long been a part of the international game. I wish Tiger felt an obligation to the game to support events and travel to Australia, for example, without the need for appearance fees, but he doesn't. For now, that is an unfortunate example of things that still separate him from some of the greats in golf.

[flanagan]

Would you go to the other side of the world and do your job for free? I doubt it. And don't tell me Tiger has enough money. Wealth is not accumulated by providing a service for free, not to mention it would set a precedent that he may not feel like living up to. Once he waives one fee, there will be demand for him to waive more.

That's the point. He has plenty of money, many times over, hence no need to play in any tournament he doesn't want to or which interferes with his specific focus on certain events. Most of the players in the Australian tournament do not and would be playing in the hopes of winning some money to support their nonguaranteed life as a professional golfer. Tiger's got his own goals and agenda, that's his privilege, but it wouldn't hurt him a bit to occasionally not be seen as purely doing things on his terms.

[chipper2]

Rember the business saying "To maske money, you must spend money." Tiger is a business. He has staff, expenses, etc. He will not be playing golf forever. He has worked hard and developed an expensive life style. He deserves it. Now he must earn fees to keep it going and for the future. Look at the bonuses of AIG executives. Do they training and practice like Tiger?

[flanagan]

The fact that he is getting a fat appearance fee is apparently something Tiger is sensitive about. His website has a nice announcement about his playing in Australia and cites the millions he will generate in income for Australia, but no mention of the fact he's being paid to play there. Really should be announcing the "net" figure, i.e. $19m - $3m, if he's going to take credit.

If you are taking the money, put it on the website right by the credit you are taking for helping out their economy. Good, careful spin/PR, very Tigerlike.

[flap]

It is called the price for doing bussiness.Everybody gets fees for showing in europe so why should he be different.TW is a bussiness logo that is worth a lot of money and he put a lot of time into it so he deserves it.He also has the right to play or not to play according to how he feels.The PGA forbids appearence fees but if Europe keeps paying big fees then more of our players will go over and the lesser tourneys such as this week{transistions} will go the way of the dodo bird.As michael Coreleone said "strictly Bussiness".

[flanagan]

The Australian Masters is not part of the European PGA Tour, and Australia is not in Europe.

Nobody disputes Tiger can do what he wants, or that it is his "bussiness".

The point is that he is in a position to support the Australian Masters, without the millions, and I think has an obligation to do so. He doesn't feel that way, and I think that disconnect to the greater "game of golf" is unfortunate and what separates him from icons of the past.

If the U.S. wants to do something about any perceived or actual "buying" of golf overseas, then the PGA of America should announce early and often that if the Ryder Cup is moved out of the boundaries of Europe (i.e. Dubai), the U.S. will not participate, period.

[iacas]

The point is that he is in a position to support the Australian Masters, without the millions, and I think has an obligation to do so. He doesn't feel that way, and I think that disconnect to the greater "game of golf" is unfortunate and what separates him from icons of the past.

You clearly don't care a whole lot for Tiger Woods, so it seems to me that colors your view. There's no way to quantify it, but it strikes me that Tiger's already done more for the world in general - with his TW Foundation and the way his presence on the PGA Tour spiked charitable donations (and purses) - than Jack or others ever did.

And Jack and the others rarely played around the world, either. Not only was it a bigger pain in those days, but Jack - like Tiger - enjoyed spending time with his family. I don't think Tiger's under any obligation to do anything but play golf and take care of his family. He already does quite "a lot" for the world and golf in general. And what's better value: the Tiger we know today, who does what he does outside of play golf today, or a Tiger that wasn't nearly as effective because he was stretched too thin doing a bunch of off-course stuff? Not saying that'd happen, but it could.

[Chas]

Like the other poster, I too have a problem with the large appearance fees that Tiger insists upon, regardless of how the money is spent by him or how many golfers take them in Europe. European practice doesn't influence my own views as to how the game should be run, not in the least, even though I was brought up there and first played the game (very very badly) there. And I agree that greater transparancy is in order on Tiger's part; the lack of it does indeed suggest sensitivity to a PR problem by enterprise Tiger. I used to think that Tiger valued the great traditions of american golf above all else; I don't believe that any longer. I'm sure he can justify his behavior in his own mind and noone disputes his right to do what he wants within the rules - but he will take the consequences to his reputation among some in the golfing community. Well posted flanagan.

[Golf_Predictor_Guru]

If I was a tax payer in Victoria, I wouldn't be too happy at paying a guy $3 million to hit a ball around a field, particularly after so many people lost their lives and/or homes there in the awful fires lately.

Fair enough, he generates more money for the event, but I was him, I know what the smart/decent thing to do with that money would be. And it's not as if he needs it or anything. I'm sure the prize money he wins there will more than enough to compensate him for his long trip.