Question:
Just an editorial: I used to be of the opinion that these WGC events were extremely good for promoting the game around the world. Still do. But just read an article at Golfweek. The article quoted N. Price "In retrospect, … long way to come for just 16 holes". The article went on to say that Price was in AU for 72 hours after spending 24 hours to get there and probably another 24 hours to get back. Just thought about that for a moment. Tried to put myself in a player’s prospective. Realizing that the event is match play and knowing that such could be the result (or even worse), I decided in my own mind, why would anybody go through that? Then, still using player prospective, my next reaction was "how could anybody with *any* player prospective even consider scheduling such a potential result?". I decided there must be alot of "feeling" towards the PGA today, by alot of players … not just TW. And, I think TW probably said it best when he said Finchem only calls when he (Finchem) needs something. How could anybody support an organization that exhibits such an attitude toward its "assets", i.e., its people. In todays corporate world, such an attitude/culture would eventually result in non-existence, or at least, a change in CEO. This "error in scheduling" is just the tip of the iceberg. IMO this exhibits an underlying attitude/culture in the PGA that history says will eventually lead to its demise, unless there is a CEO change (in attitude or otherwise). Let’s not let history take its toll. cc: Dave Seanor, Editorial Director, Golfweek.com
Response:
Just an editorial:
Since noone has responded to your post, I’ll make a few points. I used to be of the opinion that these WGC events were extremely good for promoting the game around the world. Still do. But just read an article at Golfweek. The article quoted N. Price "In retrospect, … long way to come for just 16 holes". The article went on to say that Price was in AU for 72 hours after spending 24 hours to get there and probably another 24 hours to get back. Just thought about that for a moment.
BTW, the Price playing in the WGC was Philip Price of the UK, not Nick Price of Zimbabwe. That Nick Price didn’t turn up after bleating quite a bit in the past about the way Americans don’t like travel was a bit surprising. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tried to put myself in a player’s prospective. Realizing that the event is match play and knowing that such could be the result (or even worse), I decided in my own mind, why would anybody go through that? Then, still using player prospective, my next reaction was "how could anybody with *any* player prospective even consider scheduling such a potential result?". I decided there must be alot of "feeling" towards the PGA today, by alot of players … not just TW. And, I think TW probably said it best when he said Finchem only calls when he (Finchem) needs something. How could anybody support an organization that exhibits such an attitude toward its "assets", i.e., its people. In todays corporate world, such an attitude/culture would eventually result in non-existence, or at least, a change in CEO. This "error in scheduling" is just the tip of the iceberg. IMO this exhibits an underlying attitude/culture in the PGA that history says will eventually lead to its demise, unless there is a CEO change (in attitude or otherwise). Let’s not let history take its toll.
There are a number of colluding factors that made the World Matchplay Championship just completed a problem. The major one was certainly the timing, particularly the way they tried to slot it into a "blank" week. The secondary ones are varied, but include: 1. The disincentive of American pros to travel generally, because of the enormous strength of the USPGA Tour. The USPGA season is now so long, rich and all-encompassing that other countries have little hope of "incentivating" USPGA Tour players to go elsewhere, even during what off-season there is. 2. Related to the timing, the need for players to return to the US quickly after the event to get ready for the season opening next week. 3. The non-appearance of the world’s best gave lie to the media hype before the event about it being the "pinnacle" of world golf. Clearly it wasn’t. 4. I just wonder whether a lot of pros, particularly Americans but quite a few Europeans as well, are really committed to "world golf" events and the concept. Life is just too comfortable at home to bother. Also, the on-again off-again acceptances of players like Duval, Furyk and defending champion Clarke had organisers tearing their hair out, especially when these players featured in pre-event publicity on the basis that they were turning up. To give Tiger his due, at least he said early on he wasn’t coming. I suspect that the next President’s Cup in South Africa in 2002 will attract the same lack of commitment. I also don’t think you can tie it back solely to Tim Finchem, although he admitted the scheduling mistake was his. Presumably he doesn’t work in a total vacuum (does he?). In terms of the future, there has been a general agreement, apparently, that Australia will get another WGC event in the next few years. Not the World Matchplay, but probably the teams event that was played in Argentina recently. I think given the circumstances of the Matchplay, Australia (which, for example, provides the largest international contingent to the USPGA Tour) is entitled to some form of consideration when they held up their end of the bargain so well this time. The idea currently being floated would be to hold a WGC event in November, at the end of the US PGA season, and in the week before the Australian Open (last week in November). Provided the Australian Open prizemoney was attractive enough (the Aus dollar has recovered to 57 US cents in the last two weeks!), it would entice the visiting pros to stay around for another week, make their long travel more worthwhile, give them a shot at more prize money and maybe a nice national title for their CV. It might attract even Tiger to try to win a title that Jack Nicklaus has won six times. It would also raise the profile of the Australian Open back towards what it was a few decades ago. The only downside might possibly be the fewer positions open to fringe Australian professionals and maybe some top amateurs. Overall though, I think the idea has some merit. If the same idea had been followed this time, a lot of potential early losers might have been more encouraged to come "down under" if they knew there was some additional reason to visit the "best city in the world for golf". After all, I think in all this the last thing you can criticise is the event organisation or the magnificent presentation of the course, both of which were world class, or the Australian people and golfing fraternity for providing their typical hospitality and friendship. It’s just a pity that this was not reciprocated to the same degree by some of the world’s elite golfers. Cheers Colin Wilson RSG Roll Call: http://u1.netgate.net/~kirby34/rsg/wilsonc.htm Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Response:
<snippoo Although TW had declared early in the piece that he would not be coming to the WGC event in Melbourne, Australia (for whatever reason)…I got the impression from Tony Roosenburg (organiser of the Metropolitan GC WGC event) that given the right appearance money TW would have turned up. According to Roosenburg "….it is no secret now that the asking appearance money for TW is (AUS)$3,000,000…..we just don’t have that kind of money here!….". It seems that we have now to wait until TW is rich enough to dismiss ‘appearance money’ as unimportant……and hope that he will make an annual pilgrimage here during our summer season just for the pleasure of playing the ‘best golf courses in the world’……amateurs the world over will travel extraordinary distances to do just this…why can’t the pros think this way..or have they totally lost sight of just what the game of golf is all about? david
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snippoo Although TW had declared early in the piece that he would not be coming to the WGC event in Melbourne, Australia (for whatever reason)…I got the impression from Tony Roosenburg (organiser of the Metropolitan GC WGC event) that given the right appearance money TW would have turned up. According to Roosenburg "….it is no secret now that the asking appearance money for TW is (AUS)$3,000,000…..we just don’t have that kind of money here!….". It seems that we have now to wait until TW is rich enough to dismiss ‘appearance money’ as unimportant……and hope that he will make an annual pilgrimage here during our summer season just for the pleasure of playing the ‘best golf courses in the world’……amateurs the world over will travel extraordinary distances to do just this…why can’t the pros think this way..or have they totally lost sight of just what the game of golf is all about? david Seems to me T.W. is just a bit greedy, if the 3 mil is true. I wonder
what ge got to play in the Johnny Walker in Thailand. Stricker got a mil US gross for his win. Who does he owe the tax to. How much (percentage) to national, state/provincial and local? Just curious. Bogie
Response:
david, i agree with much of what you said with the exception of "It seems that we have now to wait until TW is rich enough to dismiss ‘appearance money’ as unimportant….." I don’t think it’s a matter of him not being rich enough – he simply wants to share in the incremental revenue his appearance undeniably generates – a small difference yes, but important in my mind. Whether he had $4 or $4 trillion in the bank I would bet his stance would be the same, and it amounts to little more than a power struggle. to me it seems the excuses from the US and euro tour players are to mask the bad blood that exists between the Tours and the players. between sharing the big $$$ generated by the game and the well documented scheduling issues i believe there’s a alot of group-think going on – once a few players take a stance many others follow. i won’t pretend to really understand what makes these millionaire golfers ‘tick’ but the next time i hear one of them state that "it’s all about winning, it’s the competition that motivates me" i’ll have to call "bull****". for the record i enjoyed watching the WGC when there were several matches going on at once, but i passed on watching the final match. but i could not watch last year’s final between woods and clarke either, it’s just too much commentary for so little golf. i found it bizarre that ABC was showing 5 hours of the final match on a TAPE DELAYED basis – talk about a programming gamble. obviously he who pays the piper calls the tune, but right now there’s considerable blurriness between the corporate world and the star players themselves as to who is paying who (or who is paying whom, grammar lesson welcome), and the middlemen (PGA Tours) are catching it from both sides I’m sure. in a perfect world all the stars would have gone over to australia and competed – for god’s sake certainly the ones that lost early in the 1st or 2nd match could have amused themselves with a little fishing or partying or whatever. lumpy. It seems that we have now to wait until TW is rich enough to dismiss ‘appearance money’ as unimportant……and hope that he will make an annual pilgrimage here during our summer season just for the pleasure of playing the ‘best golf courses in the world’……amateurs the world over will travel extraordinary distances to do just this…why can’t the pros think this way..or have they totally lost sight of just what the game of golf is all about?
Response:
Why does every thing have to be a great conspiracy? He said the wanted to take some time off and didn’t want to travel over the holidays. He, like any of us, is entitled to a life. Tiger Woods can play any course in the world any time he wants. — Ball Marks: Fix yours and one more
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snippoo Although TW had declared early in the piece that he would not be coming to the WGC event in Melbourne, Australia (for whatever reason)…I got the impression from Tony Roosenburg (organiser of the Metropolitan GC WGC event) that given the right appearance money TW would have turned up. According to Roosenburg "….it is no secret now that the asking appearance money for TW is (AUS)$3,000,000…..we just don’t have that kind of money here!….". It seems that we have now to wait until TW is rich enough to dismiss ‘appearance money’ as unimportant……and hope that he will make an annual pilgrimage here during our summer season just for the pleasure of playing the ‘best golf courses in the world’……amateurs the world over will travel extraordinary distances to do just this…why can’t the pros think this way..or have they totally lost sight of just what the game of golf is all about? david
Response:
Wasn’t really looking for a response. Just manufactured the editorial and sent it to a couple of golfnews mag editors. It was really an after thought throwing it into the newsgroup. Thanks for your comments though. I’m beginning to have strong feelings about Finchem, however. Not that my feelings matter. See below. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Just an editorial: Since noone has responded to your post, I’ll make a few points. I used to be of the opinion that these WGC events were extremely good for promoting the game around the world. Still do. But just read an article at Golfweek. The article quoted N. Price "In retrospect, … long way to come for just 16 holes". The article went on to say that Price was in AU for 72 hours after spending 24 hours to get there and probably another 24 hours to get back. Just thought about that for a moment. BTW, the Price playing in the WGC was Philip Price of the UK, not Nick Price of Zimbabwe. That Nick Price didn’t turn up after bleating quite a bit in the past about the way Americans don’t like travel was a bit surprising.
At time I wondered about that. Why it took 24 hours to AU. But just thought oh well issue still the same. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Tried to put myself in a player’s prospective. Realizing that the event is match play and knowing that such could be the result (or even worse), I decided in my own mind, why would anybody go through that? Then, still using player prospective, my next reaction was "how could anybody with *any* player prospective even consider scheduling such a potential result?". I decided there must be alot of "feeling" towards the PGA today, by alot of players … not just TW. And, I think TW probably said it best when he said Finchem only calls when he (Finchem) needs something. How could anybody support an organization that exhibits such an attitude toward its "assets", i.e., its people. In todays corporate world, such an attitude/culture would eventually result in non-existence, or at least, a change in CEO. This "error in scheduling" is just the tip of the iceberg. IMO this exhibits an underlying attitude/culture in the PGA that history says will eventually lead to its demise, unless there is a CEO change (in attitude or otherwise). Let’s not let history take its toll. There are a number of colluding factors that made the World Matchplay Championship just completed a problem. The major one was certainly the timing, particularly the way they tried to slot it into a "blank" week.
I agree on the surface the major problem was the timing. But underlying all this, is the evidence of a lack of respect for the players – this is my current gripe. The secondary ones are varied, but include: 1. The disincentive of American pros to travel generally, because of the enormous strength of the USPGA Tour. The USPGA season is now so long, rich and all-encompassing that other countries have little hope of "incentivating" USPGA Tour players to go elsewhere, even during what off-season there is.
I agree. But, short of selecting U.S. sites for all major tournaments because the majority of top seeds are in the U.S., you have to create other incentives – you have to do it wisely. Traveling all over the place is tough on the players. I’m well aware of that. USPGA officials, primarily Finchem, should show some evidence of recognizing that, too. For example, this tournament was match play. Obviously, there will be the first round drop outs – you could be in that group no matter how good you are. But, to help reduce some of the sting, there could be other tournaments scheduled around this… just a simple example and thought. Maybe that wasn’t possible. So maybe, the WGC shouldn’t have been scheduled for this time period at all; or, maybe, AU shouldn’t have been given the tournament for now – until a more realistic schedule could have been put together. Tough decision, but that’s what he gets paid for. 2. Related to the timing, the need for players to return to the US quickly after the event to get ready for the season opening next week.
Compounds the problem I agree. That’s why I think these guys Finchem primarily have to get a little more creative about these things. When you run a global business, you can act local all you want, but it’s still a global business. 3. The non-appearance of the world’s best gave lie to the media hype before the event about it being the "pinnacle" of world golf. Clearly it wasn’t.
Right, but it was supposed to be. And, in my view with some better planning and decision-making, it would have been. 4. I just wonder whether a lot of pros, particularly Americans but quite a few Europeans as well, are really committed to "world golf" events and the concept. Life is just too comfortable at home to bother. Also, the on-again off-again acceptances of players like Duval, Furyk and defending champion Clarke had organisers tearing their hair out, especially when these players featured in pre-event publicity on the basis that they were turning up. To give Tiger his due, at least he said early on he wasn’t coming.
Lot to be said for this, I sure. Really can’t get a feel for it. Clearly, TW thinks globally. Others … I’m not so sure. I suspect that the next President’s Cup in South Africa in 2002 will attract the same lack of commitment.
Very possibly. However, there is a certain amount of national pride in such events. But, they certainly better think this through. They have been forewarned by the results of the WGC. I also don’t think you can tie it back solely to Tim Finchem, although he admitted the scheduling mistake was his. Presumably he doesn’t work in a total vacuum (does he?).
Why not? He’s the CEO, the buck stops there. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In terms of the future, there has been a general agreement, apparently, that Australia will get another WGC event in the next few years. Not the World Matchplay, but probably the teams event that was played in Argentina recently. I think given the circumstances of the Matchplay, Australia (which, for example, provides the largest international contingent to the USPGA Tour) is entitled to some form of consideration when they held up their end of the bargain so well this time. The idea currently being floated would be to hold a WGC event in November, at the end of the US PGA season, and in the week before the Australian Open (last week in November). Provided the Australian Open prizemoney was attractive enough (the Aus dollar has recovered to 57 US cents in the last two weeks!), it would entice the visiting pros to stay around for another week, make their long travel more worthwhile, give them a shot at more prize money and maybe a nice national title for their CV. It might attract even Tiger to try to win a title that Jack Nicklaus has won six times. It would also raise the profile of the Australian Open back towards what it was a few decades ago. The only downside might possibly be the fewer positions open to fringe Australian professionals and maybe some top amateurs. Overall though, I think the idea has some merit.
This is exactly the type of creativity that is necessary. Furthermore, there are other tournaments en route before and after that would reduce the sting and impact of travel. They have done the same sort of this in the USPGA. Look at the way they have scheduled the West Coast, South Eastern U.S., South Central U.S. tournments. Someone, namely Finchem, needs to thinks in these terms. They need to think about how to minimize the impact on the players. If the same idea had been followed this time, a lot of potential early losers might have been more encouraged to come "down under" if they knew there was some additional reason to visit the "best city in the world for golf". After all, I think in all this the last thing you can criticise is the event organisation or the magnificent presentation of the course, both of which were world class, or the Australian people and golfing fraternity for providing their typical hospitality and friendship. It’s just a pity that this was not reciprocated to the same degree by some of the world’s elite golfers.
These guys have a hell of a schedule in my view. They don’t get the 2 to 3 months off that other pro athletes are given. Even for those who only play 20 events a year, the events are scheduled so that they only get a week or two or maybe 3 off in between. Then, in November and December, they have commitments. All of a sudden it’s January and you start the whole thing over again. And, frankly I think it’s going to get worse for them as golf gets more global. Just compare it to the way businesses have to operate these days. That’s why I left the CPA business. The travel even in 1992 was getting horrendous. And the travel takes alot out of you. Again, appreciate your comments, especially since they come from down under, mate.
Response:
<snip Stricker got a mil US gross for his win. Who does he owe the tax to. How much (percentage) to national, state/provincial and local? Just curious.
The only tax on earnings in Oz is at national level…there are no such taxes at state/provincial or local level. That does bring up another point….I do not know what the percentage withholding tax is in Oz, but there are special tax arrangements for International sportsmen and entertainers and the like in the Oz Tax Act. I understand that the Oz ‘take’ is quite hefty compared with other countries…..this point was made by one of the Oz pros (I think it was Craig Parry) in a TV interview that was discussing why the top pros were reluctant to come here. Any CPA’s here who can enlighten us as to tax arrangements on ‘winnings’ by international pro golfers in various different countries?? david
Response:
snip… for the record i enjoyed watching the WGC when there were several matches going on at once, but i passed on watching the final match. but i could not watch last year’s final between woods and clarke either, it’s just too much commentary for so little golf. i found it bizarre that ABC was showing 5 hours of the final match on a TAPE DELAYED basis – talk about a programming gamble.
ABC/ESPN is clueless when it comes to sports programming. I watched the first two rounds of the matchplay, and enjoyed them greatly, live, in the evening. With NFL playoffs, and weekend afternoons, who is going to watch golf in the afternoon in any event? I sure didn’t, but I enjoyed playing golf! The WGC is a very good idea. Accenture really has developed some name recognition as Andersen Consulting (is Accenture a realy dumb name or what?) for not that much of an investment compared to other forms of advertizing that really don’t reach their particular target market as well as golf. Who cares if TW, or DLIII or others don’t show? It still, apparently, would rank 13th in quality of field for a 2000 PGA Tour event. I personally enjoyed what I saw, expecially Els v van de Velde. Hype aside, the British Open and the US Open were quite boring runaway wins, and the British Open was covered in such a way that the only story was the runaway win. The WGC match play was far more interesting than either of the major open championships. If certain US pros don’t want to play Valderama, so be it. Same holds for playing in Australia. Maybe consumers in Spain, Japan and Australia should think about purchasing US golf equipment when the message goes out that their market is somehow worthless. Maybe if such consumers stop giving away their business, there might be some pressure to recognize golfers other than the apparent 25 million in the US. Rob