EPTNo you just accept a new business started up and see what they have to offer, you might go back and give them more service or you might just continue on and never go back. Who cares how they got the money, the only thing we should care about as consumers is how good the product is.
NASL Prize Pool? - Page 2
| Blogs > SlipperySnake |
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
No you just accept a new business started up and see what they have to offer, you might go back and give them more service or you might just continue on and never go back. Who cares how they got the money, the only thing we should care about as consumers is how good the product is. | ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:01 SlipperySnake wrote: You don't think people who invest in a league are entitled to verify that it is legit? I don't feel like I am asking for an arm and a leg especially when I a huge supporter. I just want a little more explanation for behavior that seems outside the norm when it comes to the running of tournaments. You're not investing in the league, you're a paying customer. You have the right to what they promised you (games, commentary, production) when you bought your season pass. Nothing more, nothing less. The people that are putting up the money for this are the ones investing, and it seems like they have sufficiently convinced the players/teams to join in, which should be enough for you, seeing how they have way more to loose then you. How they manage to finance it all isn't something you have a right to know. | ||
|
yoshi_yoshi
United States440 Posts
(speculation) My guess is that it all comes from a private investor, most likely Russ(?) who Incontrol has mentioned as owner and also to be very involved in the league. He put up 400k + operation costs (probably another few hundred thousand due to team and studio costs), and expects to get back some revenue: - season tickets (every 10,000 subscribers = 200-250,000) - justin.tv ads (no idea, I'll wildly guess $20 per ad, 24 ads/day, 5 days/wk, 12/wks ~ 30,000) I think it's pretty common for investors to expect to lose money at the start. If NASL grows in subscribers and viewers, and manage to land a sponsor for future seasons, they could very well make a profit. | ||
SlipperySnake
248 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:11 Derez wrote: You're not investing in the league, you're a paying customer. You have the right to what they promised you (games, commentary, production) when you bought your season pass. Nothing more, nothing less. The people that are putting up the money for this are the ones investing, and it seems like they have sufficiently convinced the players/teams to join in, which should be enough for you, seeing how they have way more to loose then you. How they manage to finance it all isn't something you have a right to know. If you want to be super literal with the word invest then that is fine but customers in the sense I was using it are investors in that they are support the league. We can argue semantics if you want but even just as a fan I think we deserve a little more information. Just the fact that you talk about me having a right to know shows how black and white you see this situation as. I am simply a fan asking for more information and I was saying that as a fan and customer I have put a lot of effort into supporting the NASL so I would like to know that it is legit. Now this same argument is tiring me out, NASL promised not just a so nebulous amount of games but the money behind it. The prize is what makes it a tournament, it isn't just some random trivial fact that I am prying at. The fact that the players are winning this money is what adds all the tension, don't get me wrong I am not going to stop watching the NASL but I would feel a lot better if I knew a little more. | ||
|
Zlasher
United States9129 Posts
| ||
Chill
Calgary25961 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:01 SlipperySnake wrote: You don't think people who invest in a league are entitled to verify that it is legit? I don't feel like I am asking for an arm and a leg especially when I a huge supporter. I just want a little more explanation for behavior that seems outside the norm when it comes to the running of tournaments. You want an explanation but they've stated they don't want to give one. That's basically it. If you wanted to know artosis' gf's name you could want it but you're not entitled to it. Same thing here. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13729 Posts
The thing is is that ever sence 9/11 tech companies have slowly been making large warchests of cash and now that the storm of the recession is over they are slowly buying up stuff that they can use (Microsoft buying skype for 6 BIL?) The bit tech companies have billions and billions of cash lieing around and it wouldn't be too far out of the picture if one of them is lead by a guy who likes video games and would want his name to be on the start of it in america. And for only a half a million shouldn't be too much of a stretch for them. What I want to know is what kind of profit schedule that they have running. How much do they get for the free streamers and how many subs they are getting. No real company in the business has shared this so I guess I'll still be left wondering. | ||
|
SlipperySnake
248 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:35 Chill wrote: You want an explanation but they've stated they don't want to give one. That's basically it. If you wanted to know artosis' gf's name you could want it but you're not entitled to it. Same thing here. You don't get what you want by forgetting about, I think it is important to keep asking. NASL has proven they respond to pressure and the will of the community (which is one of the best qualities) in the past so why not with this issue. If it is important enough then at least I hope they will accommodate. | ||
|
Primadog
United States4411 Posts
Okay, I think we all are in agreement that the source of funding is probably an unnamed angel investor. If so, the answer to why he/she/they is unnamed is actually quite simple - he asks NASL to not name him. It should be obvious just from this thread, that NASL stood to benefit from announcing their financially backer, but they didn't. Frankly, I would not be surprised if Russ & Co actually argued hard to making it public, but was refused by the man who holds the purse. If you think a little about it, there are plenty of reasons why they don't want the publicity. Sponsors care about publicity because what they buy are exposure, but what good is exposure when your business is other businesses? In fact, exposure can be quite detrimental - venture capital by nature often fails. Will you, as an angel investor, prefer to see your name tied to a 80pt font front page article about the latest business failure? That kind of exposure can very well cost you far more than whatever you put in the startup in the first place. It makes more sense to keep it anonymous then publicize once the start-up succeed, if you really want the pat in the back. The angel investor I worked with also asked to remain anonymous, but for a different reason - he fears competition. A public announcement just invites others in the industry to notice a potential market. Additionally, he fears backlash from his customers who may see it an aggressive incursion into their market. | ||
|
Derez
Netherlands6068 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:34 SlipperySnake wrote: If you want to be super literal with the word invest then that is fine but customers in the sense I was using it are investors in that they are support the league. We can argue semantics if you want but even just as a fan I think we deserve a little more information. Just the fact that you talk about me having a right to know shows how black and white you see this situation as. I am simply a fan asking for more information and I was saying that as a fan and customer I have put a lot of effort into supporting the NASL so I would like to know that it is legit. Now this same argument is tiring me out, NASL promised not just a so nebulous amount of games but the money behind it. The prize is what makes it a tournament, it isn't just some random trivial fact that I am prying at. The fact that the players are winning this money is what adds all the tension, don't get me wrong I am not going to stop watching the NASL but I would feel a lot better if I knew a little more. The point was that your sense of entitlement isn't justified at all. Just because you want information doesn't mean that you should get it, or that 'the community' should try and pressure the NASL into providing it. This question has been brought up in multiple threads, and it's pretty clear that whomever is putting the money up for it doesn't want to be identified. If anything, you should respect the decision that individual/organisation/whatever it is made, and be content that the NASL is providing what it promised so far. The group of people the NASL needs to convince of their financial capabilities are the players, the teams, and the team managers. They have obviously managed to do this, and I think the community should accept this too. You won't be missing out on the prizemoney if things fall through, players/teams will, so I say that we trust their judgement and give the NASL the benefit of the doubt (if you have any). I don't see this as black and white, all I'm saying is that there is absolutely no reason to doubt anything the NASL has promised so far. As others have pointed out, in the world of venture capitalism, it's often not a good idea to have your name published until after something has become a succes. | ||
|
SlipperySnake
248 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:53 Primadog wrote: Again, conjunctures, et al Okay, I think we all are in agreement that the source of funding is probably an unnamed angel investor. The answer to why he/she/they is unnamed would actually be fairly simple - he asks NASL to not name him. It should be obvious just from this thread, that NASL stood to benefit from announcing their financially backer, but they didn't. Frankly, I would not be surprised if Russ & Co actually argued hard to making it public, but was refused by the man who holds the purse. If you think a little about it, there are plenty of reasons why they don't want the publicity. Sponsors care about publicity because what they buy are exposure, but what good is exposure when your business is other businesses? In fact, exposure can be quite detrimental - venture capital by nature often fails. Will you, as an angel investor, prefer to see your name tied to a 80pt font front page article about the latest business failure? That kind of exposure can very well cost you far more than whatever you put in the startup in the first place. It makes more sense to keep it anonymous then publicize once the start-up succeed, if you really want the pat in the back. The angel investor I worked with also asked to remain anonymous, but for a different reason - he fears competition. A public announcement just invites others in the industry to notice a potential market. Additionally, he fears backlash from his customers who may see it an aggressive incursion into their market. Yeah I think I am in absolute agreement with your reasoning all the way down to the reasons for anonymity. I guess then the next question becomes, will there be some sort of dramatic unveiling when he thinking NASL has become successful enough? Or will he just stay anonymous and will that be a bigger issue over time? I know this isn't what you really touched on but as fans I feel we deserve to know more than just having this sort of man behind the curtain. Now I know it could be argued that at least we know he isn't trying to bilk us for advertising dollars but I feel like not knowing what his motives are is worse. I guess I will always just feel a that the league is a little shady if the sponsor is unknown even after the put up the prize money for season 1. | ||
|
divito
Canada1213 Posts
On May 18 2011 10:11 SlipperySnake wrote: I guess then the next question becomes, will there be some sort of dramatic unveiling when he thinking NASL has become successful enough? Or will he just stay anonymous and will that be a bigger issue over time? Ultimately depends, but I would say the strong likelihood will be that nothing will ever come to the forefront. Just think of most companies and products. The majority of them will have received some aspect of capital through investment during the course of their existence, and you hear nothing of those contributors in almost 100% of those instances. | ||
|
SlipperySnake
248 Posts
On May 18 2011 09:59 Derez wrote: The point was that your sense of entitlement isn't justified at all. Just because you want information doesn't mean that you should get it, or that 'the community' should try and pressure the NASL into providing it. This question has been brought up in multiple threads, and it's pretty clear that whomever is putting the money up for it doesn't want to be identified. If anything, you should respect the decision that individual/organisation/whatever it is made, and be content that the NASL is providing what it promised so far. The group of people the NASL needs to convince of their financial capabilities are the players, the teams, and the team managers. They have obviously managed to do this, and I think the community should accept this too. You won't be missing out on the prizemoney if things fall through, players/teams will, so I say that we trust their judgement and give the NASL the benefit of the doubt (if you have any). I don't see this as black and white, all I'm saying is that there is absolutely no reason to doubt anything the NASL has promised so far. As others have pointed out, in the world of venture capitalism, it's often not a good idea to have your name published until after something has become a succes. First I think there is very good reason to doubt what NASL has promised so far. Not because anything personal but because of the unpaid prize money from other leagues in combination with their lack of transparency when it comes to funding. I feel this is the major reason why I, as a paying customer, feel entitled to know that the competition is legitimate. I am not saying that they have to give me this information I am just saying that I think they should and that I will push for them to and try to change their mind. The reason I think they should is outlined in my concern, they can decide whether they will release the information but that is how I feel about it and my opinion. If whoever is putting up the money doesn't want their name out there then ultimately they probably have the final say but I don't think just because they are in the position of power that I as a fan just have to give in. I think it is important to let them know that I think they should be more transparent. As I have said previously the NASL is very in tune with the community and if the community wants more transparency then I think they will work towards it. If you don't care that is totally fine but I do and that is why I brought the issue up, because it is one of my concerns and I want to do something about it. | ||
|
Bortlett
United States302 Posts
For the funding that you've received how many seasons is that money going to go towards? We're already sold on three seasons. The money has been budgeted and secured. There's no like, “well gosh, if season one does really well then season two will be fine.” It's completely secure for three seasons. It's all insured and backed by Blizzard, that kind of stuff. And the idea again is that we laid down the infrastructure, it grows, gets easier as we go, and then if it's a profitable venture we can continue on for four, five, six seasons and beyond. I guess he could be lying, but Blizzard wouldn't stand for that I'm sure. | ||
|
DexLick
Indonesia4 Posts
| ||
|
divito
Canada1213 Posts
On May 18 2011 11:27 Bortlett wrote: In the G4 interview iNcontroL did back when the league was announced, he said that the money is insured/backed by Blizzard (http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/710588/North-American-Star-League-Exclusive-Interview-with-Geoff-iNcontroL-Robinson.html). I guess he could be lying, but Blizzard wouldn't stand for that I'm sure. That turned out to be false, but there was never any big discussion about it. See the image: ![[image loading]](http://i52.tinypic.com/2vwgsq9.jpg) Most people that remember initially going to the website saw the Blizzard logo in the right-hand box. After someone at Blizzard was notified, the logo mysteriously disappeared from the site. In context, being "insured and backed by Blizzard" was probably meant more for a licensing deal, and allowance for the game to be used in competition for the NASL; not that the money was coming from them and that they were partnered. (which is why the image was removed, it gave a false sense of partnership and association) | ||
|
Bortlett
United States302 Posts
On May 19 2011 05:39 divito wrote: That turned out to be false, but there was never any big discussion about it. See the image: Most people that remember initially going to the website saw the Blizzard logo in the right-hand box. After someone at Blizzard was notified, the logo mysteriously disappeared from the site. In context, being "insured and backed by Blizzard" was probably meant more for a licensing deal, and allowance for the game to be used in competition for the NASL; not that the money was coming from them and that they were partnered. (which is why the image was removed, it gave a false sense of partnership and association) Hmm, did they say anything official as far as that information being incorrect? I think they still display the Blizzard logo during their broadcast at some point (the end I think?), would that be different from displaying it on their web site? I'm not saying I don't believe you, this was just the first I had heard about it  . | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
The money isn't blizzards. We are backed by blizzard in the sense that we have a license with them and they work with us on details. That is all. | ||
|
vnlegend
United States1389 Posts
On August 18 2010 04:48 KlNGANSADl wrote: I often laugh (silently) when mortals question the character and motivations of a King. Who are you to question why the sky is blue, why the Earth moves or why a King does as he will? To Kings like LeBron and Myself, you are a cockroach, bold enough to defy us in the darkness, but will scatter under cover when we bring light. It is beneath me to discuss this "Dan Gilbert", who weeps like a scorned mistress and gnashes her teeth through her tears. She should just feel relieved that Gracious King James didn't stoop lower to put her in her place like she deserves. It is most uncouth for us to discuss matters of money with the poor, but as a jest: do you really think the trifle few millions that make any shred of difference to a King? Peasants trade in money, Kings trade in power. You shame yourself with this public spectacle. Don't you have onions to farm or filthy children to spawn? One would be advised to keep one's snout to himself, lest it get cut off. Hmm... Perhaps I, myself, will summer next year in Miami, to party with a true King and absorb some of that premium Miami trim. | ||
|
infinity2k9
United Kingdom2397 Posts
On May 18 2011 07:56 udgnim wrote: 400K + costs for NASL team isn't much for a venture caplitalist maybe there's some rich investor that likes e-sports and/or Starcraft and is willing to give out some money to see how well the NASL setup can grow or maybe the owners of gosucoaching did one hell of a job pitching NASL to venture capitalists FX Open, a forex broker, has a SC2 team, and I can't imagine what value a forex broker gets out of being advertised through a SC2 team. anyways, people with money see potential in things and are willing to give some out to see where that potential goes. the objective is to gain a profit from the risk spent. e-peen doesn't translate to real life. I'm aware it's not much money to an investor, i'm very aware but there's no evidence this is the case until it's actually said at least. Nevertheless the figures don't even add up to me, how is putting up 400k just in prize money alone going to get a profit, any time soon? There's no sponsors (ones that seem to be massively endorsing and involved at least as far as i know), and the subscriptions for 3 months cannot add up to the prize money plus other costs. Maybe the stream ads help but still... you could say it's a more long term thing but still, i can't see this to be very good unless some changes happen in the future. They are putting up way more than established leagues like ESL and MLG, with i believe smaller audiences and focused on only 1 game. Not to mention SC2 eSports is already a crowded market. However this is just speculating on the business plan now so i'll stop When there's a history of non-payments and scams i don't think this is much of a big question though. If it's seriously an investor then why not say it, we don't need to know who or any details. The fact it's just being dodged as a question is weird. | ||
| ||
