2022 PGA Tour

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
12,107
The Paris of the 80s
So if I'm getting this right: if Pro X signs for $100M, he gets that money, but he has to "win" $100M in LIV events before he can earn more via tourney payouts. Is that correct?

Pretty sweet deal still.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
32,080
306, row 14
So if I'm getting this right: if Pro X signs for $100M, he gets that money, but he has to "win" $100M in LIV events before he can earn more via tourney payouts. Is that correct?

Pretty sweet deal still.
Yeah, it's kind of hard to nail this one down. Nobody knows what's going on.

At some point over the past moth or two, Chamblee had reported that LIV tournament prize money was drawn against the players guarantee. LIV denied and everyone called Chamblee an idiot. Then at the TRO hearing on Tuesday, the LIV lawyer answered a question basically saying that tournament prize money was recouped against the guarantee. So everyone apologized to Chamblee and laughed at LIV (even though it's still a good deal as you mention). Post hearing, LIV is still denying that this is the case. They are saying that the lawyer was answering a question from the judge about the lost FedEx Cup money and that the "tournament prize money" in his quote was referring to the FedEx Cup money and that the LIV contracts took into account the lost FedEx Cup earnings in their player contracts.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
18,329
So if I'm getting this right: if Pro X signs for $100M, he gets that money, but he has to "win" $100M in LIV events before he can earn more via tourney payouts. Is that correct?

Pretty sweet deal still.
Like I said above, it's like a book advance. You get paid X amount (say, $10,000) and that's guaranteed money in your pocket. But then you don't get any MORE money until the book sells enough for the company to recoup its costs, including your initial $10,000. THEN you start making royalties on sales after that. So the publisher is taking a bit of a risk giving you the $10,000 right off the top without selling anything. They have confidence (not always borne out of course) that they'll sell enough of your books to make money despite giving you that advance.

Sounds like LIV is operating the same way, but, uh, with much bigger dollars. You get an "advance" (or guarantee) of $100 million, and no matter how well or poorly you play, you're guaranteed that money. But then you win a tournament and get $4 million for first prize, and that comes "out of" your $100 million that's guaranteed. You won't see another dime beyond $100 million unless you play well enough to win $100 million on the LIV tour. Which would be winning 25 tournaments at $4m apiece (obviously there are lower prize amounts for lower finishes but that's the principle). Even at the inflated dollar figures for these LIV events, it'll take a guy like Cam Smith a long time to win $100 million, and then be able to collect more money from LIV.

Clearly for guys getting these huge guarantees, it's going to take a TON of great play over a long period of time to "win" enough money to cover their $100 million guarantee. So there's not a ton of incentive to really go for it. Cam's got his $100 million and that's more than he'd ever have made on the PGA Tour probably, so he doesn't have crazy incentives to really grind, other than the fact that he's a hell of a competitor.

But there are lesser guys on the LIV tour for whom the prize money DOES matter. The guys maybe getting guaranteed only like $10 million... if they can win a couple of LIV events, and relatively quickly cover their guarantee, all of a sudden they can start making a lot more money than that guarantee. So they won't view these events as glorified exhibitions. The money will actually matter to them because instead of it coming off their huge guarantee, for them they'll actually be earning more money.

Hope that all makes sense.

It's a weird system, but not terribly dissimilar from the publishing world.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
24,926
https://www.mediaite.com/sports/david-feherty-says-money-and-cancel-culture-drove-him-to-liv-golf-tour/

I don't know mate, Jamal Khashoggi was canceled pretty nicely by the Saudis. This boogeyman of "cancel culture" cannot die soon enough, Feherty is such a victim with his has-been announcer self failing upward to more money.
As I suspected upthread, timing his departure for the bedminister tournament was no coincidence.

His cancel reference is, at a minimum, his lingering juvenile resentment for having been criticized for something stupid he said 5(?) years ago. Or maybe it's more. Maybe all those pga/usga ads with not white people in them are triggering him. I look forward to him, dechambeau and gooch's next intallmemt of "foreign policy roundtable" on the orange juice can and strings network
 

Lose Remerswaal

Has a Gas Problem
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sounds like LIV is operating the same way, but, uh, with much bigger dollars. You get an "advance" (or guarantee) of $100 million, and no matter how well or poorly you play, you're guaranteed that money. But then you win a tournament and get $4 million for first prize, and that comes "out of" your $100 million that's guaranteed. You won't see another dime beyond $100 million unless you play well enough to win $100 million on the LIV tour. Which would be winning 25 tournaments at $4m apiece (obviously there are lower prize amounts for lower finishes but that's the principle). Even at the inflated dollar figures for these LIV events, it'll take a guy like Cam Smith a long time to win $100 million, and then be able to collect more money from LIV.

Clearly for guys getting these huge guarantees, it's going to take a TON of great play over a long period of time to "win" enough money to cover their $100 million guarantee. So there's not a ton of incentive to really go for it. Cam's got his $100 million and that's more than he'd ever have made on the PGA Tour probably, so he doesn't have crazy incentives to really grind, other than the fact that he's a hell of a competitor.


Hope that all makes sense.

It's a weird system, but not terribly dissimilar from the publishing world.
I snipped some stuff but left the meat for this question: Do we know how many tournaments a Cam Smith has to play a year and how many years he has to do this to keep that $100 million? And what if he gets hurt or just loses his game because the money doesn't matter so who needs to practice or keep in shape?

I wonder if there is a claw back on any of that and the Guarantee is more of a "guarantee"?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
24,926
I snipped some stuff but left the meat for this question: Do we know how many tournaments a Cam Smith has to play a year and how many years he has to do this to keep that $100 million? And what if he gets hurt or just loses his game because the money doesn't matter so who needs to practice or keep in shape?

I wonder if there is a claw back on any of that and the Guarantee is more of a "guarantee"?
Do most golfers have agents? Because if they're relying on their own smarts for advice and counsel, it would not surprise me if they've all signed up for something that turns out to be laughably one-sided.
 

jercra

No longer respects DeChambeau
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,988
Arvada, Co
Do most golfers have agents? Because if they're relying on their own smarts for advice and counsel, it would not surprise me if they've all signed up for something that turns out to be laughably one-sided.
Yes, they almost all have agents. However, because of the nature of the TOUR, the agents don't get a cut of a player's winnings. They only get paid from endorsement deals and it's not like there are too many of those on a recurring basis. In other words, agents don't really make that much off of TOUR players. While I have no actual knowledge of the situation, I'd be shocked if they didn't get their share of the LIV bonuses.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
715
Yeah I know. I just think PGA could’ve had a better plan here
I'm so impressed with the amount of young talent on tour (and the older guys like McIlroy are still great players). Little confused about what your criticism is. Some tournaments just aren't that good and they weren't that good even when Tiger was playing.

Also, what do you mean by no other marquee names? The top 12 in this tourney includes this year's US open winner, Finau, Cam Smith, Morikawa, and Jon Rahm.
 

Dave Stapleton

Just A Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2001
8,532
Newport, RI
I'm so impressed with the amount of young talent on tour (and the older guys like McIlroy are still great players). Little confused about what your criticism is. Some tournaments just aren't that good and they weren't that good even when Tiger was playing.

Also, what do you mean by no other marquee names? The top 12 in this tourney includes this year's US open winner, Finau, Cam Smith, Morikawa, and Jon Rahm.
My criticism is that you and I and hardcore fans are watching. Just doesn’t seem like the PGA has a plan for broader appeal post Tigre. Ratings seems to prove it out.