|
I strongly believe people should go to korea just for the experience. As FXOpen stated, you have not seen true e-sports until you go to korea. Maybe if some top foreign players visit, they might be more influenced by the competitiveness.
|
On February 01 2011 07:59 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 07:21 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 07:04 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:55 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:35 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:10 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:02 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 05:54 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 05:27 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 05:21 ptbl wrote:
[quote]
You bring up a good point about the financial aspect in terms of risks and rewards. But, I think the big fish in a big pond applies to teams, too. Let's take Huk for example. He was on the team Millenium for a while then signed with Team Liquid because TL was able to offer the opportunity to go to Korea, so he sign with TL after his contract expired with Millenium.
Even with Teams there are tiers. I'm saying that teams who send players to the GSL has more exposure, prestige, and recognition. This leads to better players wanting to join your team, this leading to more exposure for your sponsors.
Yes, again, common sense. The part you fail to address over and over, which is the basis of your entire argument, is how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards? If I spend $5000 sending a player to Korea for 2 months and he gets a little recognition, how much of that will I see back? You make it seem like a dollar invested is two received. First, I will address your question of "how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards?" It depends how much monetary value you put on exposure, whether it's through viewers, media, or other types of platforms. Of course, it's up to the teams. How much reward was it when Jinro was a trending topic on twitter after his match against Idra where tens and tens of thousand of people followed the result? How much monetary value do you put on Husky mentioning you in his casts? Yes, those two things are worth next to nothing. More brand recognition means more people buying your products... There's three groups here that you're confusing: 1. The player 2. The team 3. The sponsor The team and the sponsor are not the same. So when you say "brand recognition means more people buying your products", that is the team investing money, and the sponsor getting money. So you're arguing, that when the contract is up between the sponsor and the team, that the team is going to go "Hey, remember that time Jinro was mentioned in a Husky cast? Now we want $2,000 / month instead of $1,500." No. Those two things are next to meaningless. Brand recognition isn't a one-time thing, it takes consistent results to stay in the forefront of people's minds. K, I see where you are coming from. Though, If we applied your line of reasoning, Jinro wearing the TLAF shirt and appearing on gom tv has no value to the sponsor when it comes to exposure. Or in interviews where the player thanks the sponsor. I think there is some value in that to the sponsor. Here's how I would envision the exchange: Team: Our team has proved itself at this tournament and this tournament, I would like us to take it to another level and send some players to the GSL. Also, we lost 2 top notch players to another team because we couldn't guarantee them a trip to Korea for the GSL. If we want to continue our high level of play and continue to recruit top caliber lvl players, then it's important we have some funds that we can use to send players to the GSL Sponsor: How much are we talking about here? Team: GSL is providing free room, board, and utilities for those who want to compete in the GSL. We would have to cover travel, food, and basic amenities. Sponsor: How long would the players stay in Korea Team: It would be a long term investment of a minimum of 4 months. Sponsor: I don't think we could fully fund the GSL trips, perhaps 50% of it. Team: How about we sacrifice these two other tournaments and use the funds to pay for the other 50%? Sponsor: I'm not oppose to it. Seeing how you guys are 100 percent behind it, I'd say we go for it. In this scenario, the sponsor gets exposure and the team gets (?) Nothing? A cut of the GSL winnings? The hope of resigning the sponsor for more money? Ahhh, I see what you did there  . Well, what is a team? A team consists of players and it's support staff. They would get monthly salaries that is paid by the sponsors. If you see a team as a business/enterprise, then one doesn't have to limit their revenue stream from one source. For example, they can partner with Justin.tv for a revenue streaming sharing agreement. Off of the top of my head, Root gaming has an agreement in place with Justin.tv. Or they could do something similar as EG by doing the Hyper Crew Pro tip series. Of course, any money earned from tournaments about 20% goes to the teams. Now we've come full circle because a team can do any of that while not sending a player to Korea.
Which is exactly why it is not holding the team back from going to Korea. You have debased your own argument, as I understand it after reading through the thread once.
The core question is what is the purpose of a team. For him the answer to that is to support the players, to dominate other teams and to earn enough status to be recognized widely. GSL arguably is the best stage to compete in in order to gain that. Because it has the most solid structure, consistency, price money, production value, best athletes and toughest competition.
Your answer seems to be that the primary goal of a team is to make money. I strongly disagree with that, though to each their own.
You could make the argument that going for Korea isn't effective, because your chances of placing high are not as good as in other venues. When you do that though you are admitting that GSL is more competitive than what your team can handle, that your team is weak sauce and you also cripple your own potential. Who wants to follow and cheer for a team which doesn't give its best and doesn't even believe in themselves. That's not the spirit of competition.
It has a pragmatic aspect, but also one that is shooting yourself in the foot.
|
I think there is plenty other smaller tournament in korea, i've seen some team leagues and other with the top pros, the competion is fierce tho.
My point is i also think all of them should go to korea even if they might not make some money they would have a good life experience. practice and improve in life and gaming wise. Take it like studying abroad for a few months.
If you enjoy it and have success you stay and if you want to go, i'm sure you will be a better player and would have a good life experience. I mean who wouldn't want to live in a asian country? I visited asia and love it!
The guys that talk about euros and americans setting up team houses in their countrys is also very productive, because they talk about the game and practice way more and can participate in smaller tournaments, while staying more countable in a similar culture.
|
Totally agree with the OP. I still respect the Dimagas and the WhiteRas of the world, but I'll never be like "holy shit this guy might be one of the best players in the world" like I do for Jinro and IdrA. None of the players really care about my opinion either, just sayin'.
|
On February 01 2011 08:47 War Horse wrote:
Also if you think IEM is equally prestigious to GSL you need to rewatch GSL
the player quality is not even close. Most IEM players wouldn't even make it into Code A.
IEM finals are easily on par with Code A GSL and probably if it was the same format (where you could study/prepare builds for sniping people) it'd easily be as "high tier" as GSL S.
|
On February 01 2011 07:38 FlashIsHigh wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 03:29 Backpack wrote:I think White-Ra put it nicely in his recent interview after winning the TSL qualifier. GSL is just one tournament, if you put your time and money to go there for one tournament, yes GSL is very good but you lost too much time and investment. You can't play EU online leagues, Black Dragon, and many others. Also I make commitment to all these leagues and I can't just turn my back and refuse. There are many tournament in USA and Europe too, like MLG, IEM, Dreamhack, Assembly, and England too. If you live in Korea you just play one. GSL is only big because of the money. If it were anywhere other than Korea, it would be much more popular. On February 01 2011 03:29 Xeleron wrote:On February 01 2011 03:23 rift wrote:
A lot of foreigners value money more than fame or "legendary status", and would prefer to live in their own countries and make more playing regional/Western tournaments without giving up everything they have and going to Korea. gsl is most money than any other tournament 1st place is winning middle class yearly pay in america like 50grand ppl work 8 hours a day all year to make that much :l Only one person wins first place though. More tournaments = more chances to win. One GSL = Putting all your eggs into one basket. Yea agreed, this may be the most "prestigious" tournament to win but its not smart for foreigners to forgo the chance to be competing in all the other tournaments going on in the world. Look at how much time all the players spent in Code A and the most any of them made was a lil more than 1000 dollars and not even a guaranteed spot in Code S. As much as I want to see more foreigners in GSL, I understand that its not practical for all of them to go and compete in Korea
I think GSL is not only price money
Code A/S players receive salary from gom just for being code A/S.
+ sponsor money
|
Calgary25980 Posts
On February 01 2011 09:05 enzym wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 07:59 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 07:21 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 07:04 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:55 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:35 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:10 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:02 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 05:54 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 05:27 Chill wrote:
[quote]
Yes, again, common sense. The part you fail to address over and over, which is the basis of your entire argument, is how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards? If I spend $5000 sending a player to Korea for 2 months and he gets a little recognition, how much of that will I see back?
You make it seem like a dollar invested is two received. First, I will address your question of "how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards?" It depends how much monetary value you put on exposure, whether it's through viewers, media, or other types of platforms. Of course, it's up to the teams. How much reward was it when Jinro was a trending topic on twitter after his match against Idra where tens and tens of thousand of people followed the result? How much monetary value do you put on Husky mentioning you in his casts? Yes, those two things are worth next to nothing. More brand recognition means more people buying your products... There's three groups here that you're confusing: 1. The player 2. The team 3. The sponsor The team and the sponsor are not the same. So when you say "brand recognition means more people buying your products", that is the team investing money, and the sponsor getting money. So you're arguing, that when the contract is up between the sponsor and the team, that the team is going to go "Hey, remember that time Jinro was mentioned in a Husky cast? Now we want $2,000 / month instead of $1,500." No. Those two things are next to meaningless. Brand recognition isn't a one-time thing, it takes consistent results to stay in the forefront of people's minds. K, I see where you are coming from. Though, If we applied your line of reasoning, Jinro wearing the TLAF shirt and appearing on gom tv has no value to the sponsor when it comes to exposure. Or in interviews where the player thanks the sponsor. I think there is some value in that to the sponsor. Here's how I would envision the exchange: Team: Our team has proved itself at this tournament and this tournament, I would like us to take it to another level and send some players to the GSL. Also, we lost 2 top notch players to another team because we couldn't guarantee them a trip to Korea for the GSL. If we want to continue our high level of play and continue to recruit top caliber lvl players, then it's important we have some funds that we can use to send players to the GSL Sponsor: How much are we talking about here? Team: GSL is providing free room, board, and utilities for those who want to compete in the GSL. We would have to cover travel, food, and basic amenities. Sponsor: How long would the players stay in Korea Team: It would be a long term investment of a minimum of 4 months. Sponsor: I don't think we could fully fund the GSL trips, perhaps 50% of it. Team: How about we sacrifice these two other tournaments and use the funds to pay for the other 50%? Sponsor: I'm not oppose to it. Seeing how you guys are 100 percent behind it, I'd say we go for it. In this scenario, the sponsor gets exposure and the team gets (?) Nothing? A cut of the GSL winnings? The hope of resigning the sponsor for more money? Ahhh, I see what you did there . Well, what is a team? A team consists of players and it's support staff. They would get monthly salaries that is paid by the sponsors. If you see a team as a business/enterprise, then one doesn't have to limit their revenue stream from one source. For example, they can partner with Justin.tv for a revenue streaming sharing agreement. Off of the top of my head, Root gaming has an agreement in place with Justin.tv. Or they could do something similar as EG by doing the Hyper Crew Pro tip series. Of course, any money earned from tournaments about 20% goes to the teams. Now we've come full circle because a team can do any of that while not sending a player to Korea. Which is exactly why it is not holding the team back from going to Korea. You have debased your own argument, as I understand it after reading through the thread once.
So I have:
Option 1) Spend nothing extra and make X.
Option 2) Spend extra and still make X.
How has that debased my argument at all? Unless these teams are operating as not-for-profits...
|
On February 01 2011 09:28 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 09:05 enzym wrote:On February 01 2011 07:59 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 07:21 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 07:04 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:55 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:35 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:10 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:02 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 05:54 ptbl wrote:
[quote]
First, I will address your question of "how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards?" It depends how much monetary value you put on exposure, whether it's through viewers, media, or other types of platforms. Of course, it's up to the teams. How much reward was it when Jinro was a trending topic on twitter after his match against Idra where tens and tens of thousand of people followed the result? How much monetary value do you put on Husky mentioning you in his casts? Yes, those two things are worth next to nothing. More brand recognition means more people buying your products... There's three groups here that you're confusing: 1. The player 2. The team 3. The sponsor The team and the sponsor are not the same. So when you say "brand recognition means more people buying your products", that is the team investing money, and the sponsor getting money. So you're arguing, that when the contract is up between the sponsor and the team, that the team is going to go "Hey, remember that time Jinro was mentioned in a Husky cast? Now we want $2,000 / month instead of $1,500." No. Those two things are next to meaningless. Brand recognition isn't a one-time thing, it takes consistent results to stay in the forefront of people's minds. K, I see where you are coming from. Though, If we applied your line of reasoning, Jinro wearing the TLAF shirt and appearing on gom tv has no value to the sponsor when it comes to exposure. Or in interviews where the player thanks the sponsor. I think there is some value in that to the sponsor. Here's how I would envision the exchange: Team: Our team has proved itself at this tournament and this tournament, I would like us to take it to another level and send some players to the GSL. Also, we lost 2 top notch players to another team because we couldn't guarantee them a trip to Korea for the GSL. If we want to continue our high level of play and continue to recruit top caliber lvl players, then it's important we have some funds that we can use to send players to the GSL Sponsor: How much are we talking about here? Team: GSL is providing free room, board, and utilities for those who want to compete in the GSL. We would have to cover travel, food, and basic amenities. Sponsor: How long would the players stay in Korea Team: It would be a long term investment of a minimum of 4 months. Sponsor: I don't think we could fully fund the GSL trips, perhaps 50% of it. Team: How about we sacrifice these two other tournaments and use the funds to pay for the other 50%? Sponsor: I'm not oppose to it. Seeing how you guys are 100 percent behind it, I'd say we go for it. In this scenario, the sponsor gets exposure and the team gets (?) Nothing? A cut of the GSL winnings? The hope of resigning the sponsor for more money? Ahhh, I see what you did there . Well, what is a team? A team consists of players and it's support staff. They would get monthly salaries that is paid by the sponsors. If you see a team as a business/enterprise, then one doesn't have to limit their revenue stream from one source. For example, they can partner with Justin.tv for a revenue streaming sharing agreement. Off of the top of my head, Root gaming has an agreement in place with Justin.tv. Or they could do something similar as EG by doing the Hyper Crew Pro tip series. Of course, any money earned from tournaments about 20% goes to the teams. Now we've come full circle because a team can do any of that while not sending a player to Korea. Which is exactly why it is not holding the team back from going to Korea. You have debased your own argument, as I understand it after reading through the thread once. So I have: Option 1) Spend nothing extra and make X. Option 2) Spend extra and still make X. How has that debased my argument at all? Unless these teams are operating as not-for-profits... There's a flaw in your comparison. 1) and 2) do not both make X, at least if you are not only talking about money, which then comes down to the question of the purpose of a team, which you have not answered.
1) Spend nothing extra and admit that your team is only mediocre on the world stage and that your team does not aspire to compete with the best nor to be the best.
2) Spend extra and maintain your integrity in the form of your spirit of competition, the core value of all sports. That is the least you get. If your results are in your favour than you additionally get status. Winning the superbowl means more than winning a college league, I hope you can agree with that.
My point was that going to korea doesn't cut into these sources of income, which I thought was your point against going there, but your argument was just that going to Korea doesn't earn you anything you couldn't also get outside of Korea, my bad.
I strongly disagree with that though. It doesn't seem to be an accurate depiction of reality. An answer to that one question would be welcome and probably the only way to resolve the issue.
|
Im sorry to say but all this talk about money, doesnt husky like make more money a year then any sc2 gamer not counting GSL champion?
|
On February 01 2011 09:05 enzym wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 07:59 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 07:21 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 07:04 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:55 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:35 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:10 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:02 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 05:54 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 05:27 Chill wrote:
[quote]
Yes, again, common sense. The part you fail to address over and over, which is the basis of your entire argument, is how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards? If I spend $5000 sending a player to Korea for 2 months and he gets a little recognition, how much of that will I see back?
You make it seem like a dollar invested is two received. First, I will address your question of "how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards?" It depends how much monetary value you put on exposure, whether it's through viewers, media, or other types of platforms. Of course, it's up to the teams. How much reward was it when Jinro was a trending topic on twitter after his match against Idra where tens and tens of thousand of people followed the result? How much monetary value do you put on Husky mentioning you in his casts? Yes, those two things are worth next to nothing. More brand recognition means more people buying your products... There's three groups here that you're confusing: 1. The player 2. The team 3. The sponsor The team and the sponsor are not the same. So when you say "brand recognition means more people buying your products", that is the team investing money, and the sponsor getting money. So you're arguing, that when the contract is up between the sponsor and the team, that the team is going to go "Hey, remember that time Jinro was mentioned in a Husky cast? Now we want $2,000 / month instead of $1,500." No. Those two things are next to meaningless. Brand recognition isn't a one-time thing, it takes consistent results to stay in the forefront of people's minds. K, I see where you are coming from. Though, If we applied your line of reasoning, Jinro wearing the TLAF shirt and appearing on gom tv has no value to the sponsor when it comes to exposure. Or in interviews where the player thanks the sponsor. I think there is some value in that to the sponsor. Here's how I would envision the exchange: Team: Our team has proved itself at this tournament and this tournament, I would like us to take it to another level and send some players to the GSL. Also, we lost 2 top notch players to another team because we couldn't guarantee them a trip to Korea for the GSL. If we want to continue our high level of play and continue to recruit top caliber lvl players, then it's important we have some funds that we can use to send players to the GSL Sponsor: How much are we talking about here? Team: GSL is providing free room, board, and utilities for those who want to compete in the GSL. We would have to cover travel, food, and basic amenities. Sponsor: How long would the players stay in Korea Team: It would be a long term investment of a minimum of 4 months. Sponsor: I don't think we could fully fund the GSL trips, perhaps 50% of it. Team: How about we sacrifice these two other tournaments and use the funds to pay for the other 50%? Sponsor: I'm not oppose to it. Seeing how you guys are 100 percent behind it, I'd say we go for it. In this scenario, the sponsor gets exposure and the team gets (?) Nothing? A cut of the GSL winnings? The hope of resigning the sponsor for more money? Ahhh, I see what you did there . Well, what is a team? A team consists of players and it's support staff. They would get monthly salaries that is paid by the sponsors. If you see a team as a business/enterprise, then one doesn't have to limit their revenue stream from one source. For example, they can partner with Justin.tv for a revenue streaming sharing agreement. Off of the top of my head, Root gaming has an agreement in place with Justin.tv. Or they could do something similar as EG by doing the Hyper Crew Pro tip series. Of course, any money earned from tournaments about 20% goes to the teams. Now we've come full circle because a team can do any of that while not sending a player to Korea. Which is exactly why it is not holding the team back from going to Korea. You have debased your own argument, as I understand it after reading through the thread once. The core question is what is the purpose of a team. For him the answer to that is to support the players, to dominate other teams and to earn enough status to be recognized widely. GSL arguably is the best stage to compete in in order to gain that. Because it has the most solid structure, consistency, price money, production value, best athletes and toughest competition. Your answer seems to be that the primary goal of a team is to make money. I strongly disagree with that, though to each their own. You could make the argument that going for Korea isn't effective, because your chances of placing high are not as good as in other venues. When you do that though you are admitting that GSL is more competitive than what your team can handle, that your team is weak sauce and you also cripple your own potential. Who wants to follow and cheer for a team which doesn't give its best and doesn't even believe in themselves. That's not the spirit of competition. It has a pragmatic aspect, but also one that is shooting yourself in the foot.
Chill and I have different definition of what it means to be a team. I think this is where the root of our disagreement lies. He looks at it more of an entrepreneur and business perspective, while I see a team as a supporting unit that mainly exist for the players. I don't see teams as profit driven, but led by team spirit and camaraderie. Teams exist for fame, glory, and prestige. If money comes as a result of fame and glory, all the better .
|
I think Starcraft players and fans fetishise Korean way, wayyyyyyy too much.
Having an entire sport based in just one country is not healthy and if every good player moves to Korea it will be a massive setback for western esports. Don't get me wrong, GSL is a great league, but it is not the be-all end-all of Starcraft II, let alone esports.
Maybe people have this Korea fetish because they don't follow other esports games and don't see that they work in the West, i don't know. But every other non-BW esports game has had, or still has, a solid scene outside of Korea and SC2 is the same. GSL is surely the big kahuna right now but there are other tournaments which aren't so far behind, and there will be more in future.
SC2 will really have 'made it' imo (i know that sounds ridiculous but i'm tired and can't think of a better way to phrase it right now) when Koreans come over here to play in tournaments as well. That represents a much healthier sport than the brain-drain that is currently the trend.
|
imo sc2 players should maintain their focus on expanding coverage for sc2 in the western world and just ignore the GSL (unless for monetary reasons). The massive network of sc2 tournaments, though patchwork, makes for a strong competition circuit that is inclusive to a large variety gamers. Though it's hard to see now, I have real hope that the reach/prestige/power of such a network will eventually grow stronger and maybe even consolidate into a single gaming league. It's never been done before in the West, sure, but it could happen: the rise of professional BW in Korea followed a similar grassroots approach, with small local tournaments teaming up and eventually forming a network strong enough to sustain the critical mass of interest in competitive BW.
IMO, this sort of approach is the correct way to developing a professional league: start from the bottom, be inclusive to most, and eventually foment a critical mass of dedicated gamers and viewers that will serve proof positive to advertisers that sc2 is a lucrative advertising venture. Following this pattern allows for more organic prize moneys as well; instead of pegging a prize money in hopes of overshadowing a competitor (like the GSL does with BW) and being forced into ridiculous payouts, prize moneys will be competitive as each tournament competes with one another. This will allow accurate representation of the demand of both players and viewers alike. The current GSL prize system is ridiculous simply because it does not match the current demand for sc2. If one day SC2 garners such an explosive amount of competitive and spectator interest that an 80,000 dollar prize is necessary, then so be it. But that's not where the demand is right now.
So in short, stay West young gamer and work tirelessly to contribute and improve the competitive scene there. The GSL, unless it moves locations or drastically changes its business strategies, isn't going to last all that long. Remember that even in these formative stages of the Western Competitive Scene, even if there's no guarantee that a professional western league may happen, that you're always on stage for the advertisers. The advertisers are the key: if a proleague is to happen, they are the ones that will finance it, so try to not make a dick of yourselves in front of the corporate world.
(Someday I'm going to make a super long post that fully fleshes out my theory of Tournament Prize Money and its relationship with spectator demand. One part of the theory that consistently shows itself in the GSL is how artifically high prize moneys encourage participants to "game" the system by attracting money-hungry players and playstyles)
|
That's the way it is right now because no other company or anything has stepped up to rival what GOM can do. I think it will be a while before we see other tournaments come close to rivaling the GSL, but I think it will happen eventually. In my opinion it's too early to come to conclusions about this. Certainly Korea is the pinnacle of SC2 at this moment, but with the strength of a lot of foreign players I think it may not be the 'only' place to go to prove yourself as SC2's legacy continues. Seems like BW is really only in Korea as far as the best-of-the-best goes, but I think Starcraft 2 will be a more international game as we advance into year 2 and beyond.
But no one really knows, we'll just have to see.
|
ok so you are saying that the best hockey players can only come from the NHL?
Obviously the best players are playing the GSL (biggest tournament in the world), so what?
|
10387 Posts
On February 01 2011 03:29 NearPerfection wrote:
I think your counting chicks before they hatch. Just because Koreans dominated Sc1 doesn't mean they will dominate Sc2. Using Wc3 as an example Grubby was considered the best in europe and Moon was considered the best in korea and even tho for much of 2004-2007 they didn't compete in eachothers leagues they were both still considered "the best". That aside, there is still a very huge room for improvement as far as sponsorships and financing so far as NA esports is concerned. But it definately as improved by a huge amount with several NA pro teams and MLG.
in regards to Koreans not dominating WC3, that's only because WC3's proscene in Korea was crippled quite early on by a map scandal and some charismatic players leaving the Korean scene (and then the money left WC3 in Korea lol). Would've been interesting to have seen a flourishing Korean WC3 scene if it those things didn't happen.
|
On February 01 2011 10:01 ptbl wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 09:05 enzym wrote:On February 01 2011 07:59 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 07:21 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 07:04 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:55 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:35 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:10 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:02 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 05:54 ptbl wrote:
[quote]
First, I will address your question of "how does that exposure translate into tangible rewards?" It depends how much monetary value you put on exposure, whether it's through viewers, media, or other types of platforms. Of course, it's up to the teams. How much reward was it when Jinro was a trending topic on twitter after his match against Idra where tens and tens of thousand of people followed the result? How much monetary value do you put on Husky mentioning you in his casts? Yes, those two things are worth next to nothing. More brand recognition means more people buying your products... There's three groups here that you're confusing: 1. The player 2. The team 3. The sponsor The team and the sponsor are not the same. So when you say "brand recognition means more people buying your products", that is the team investing money, and the sponsor getting money. So you're arguing, that when the contract is up between the sponsor and the team, that the team is going to go "Hey, remember that time Jinro was mentioned in a Husky cast? Now we want $2,000 / month instead of $1,500." No. Those two things are next to meaningless. Brand recognition isn't a one-time thing, it takes consistent results to stay in the forefront of people's minds. K, I see where you are coming from. Though, If we applied your line of reasoning, Jinro wearing the TLAF shirt and appearing on gom tv has no value to the sponsor when it comes to exposure. Or in interviews where the player thanks the sponsor. I think there is some value in that to the sponsor. Here's how I would envision the exchange: Team: Our team has proved itself at this tournament and this tournament, I would like us to take it to another level and send some players to the GSL. Also, we lost 2 top notch players to another team because we couldn't guarantee them a trip to Korea for the GSL. If we want to continue our high level of play and continue to recruit top caliber lvl players, then it's important we have some funds that we can use to send players to the GSL Sponsor: How much are we talking about here? Team: GSL is providing free room, board, and utilities for those who want to compete in the GSL. We would have to cover travel, food, and basic amenities. Sponsor: How long would the players stay in Korea Team: It would be a long term investment of a minimum of 4 months. Sponsor: I don't think we could fully fund the GSL trips, perhaps 50% of it. Team: How about we sacrifice these two other tournaments and use the funds to pay for the other 50%? Sponsor: I'm not oppose to it. Seeing how you guys are 100 percent behind it, I'd say we go for it. In this scenario, the sponsor gets exposure and the team gets (?) Nothing? A cut of the GSL winnings? The hope of resigning the sponsor for more money? Ahhh, I see what you did there . Well, what is a team? A team consists of players and it's support staff. They would get monthly salaries that is paid by the sponsors. If you see a team as a business/enterprise, then one doesn't have to limit their revenue stream from one source. For example, they can partner with Justin.tv for a revenue streaming sharing agreement. Off of the top of my head, Root gaming has an agreement in place with Justin.tv. Or they could do something similar as EG by doing the Hyper Crew Pro tip series. Of course, any money earned from tournaments about 20% goes to the teams. Now we've come full circle because a team can do any of that while not sending a player to Korea. Which is exactly why it is not holding the team back from going to Korea. You have debased your own argument, as I understand it after reading through the thread once. The core question is what is the purpose of a team. For him the answer to that is to support the players, to dominate other teams and to earn enough status to be recognized widely. GSL arguably is the best stage to compete in in order to gain that. Because it has the most solid structure, consistency, price money, production value, best athletes and toughest competition. Your answer seems to be that the primary goal of a team is to make money. I strongly disagree with that, though to each their own. You could make the argument that going for Korea isn't effective, because your chances of placing high are not as good as in other venues. When you do that though you are admitting that GSL is more competitive than what your team can handle, that your team is weak sauce and you also cripple your own potential. Who wants to follow and cheer for a team which doesn't give its best and doesn't even believe in themselves. That's not the spirit of competition. It has a pragmatic aspect, but also one that is shooting yourself in the foot. Chill and I have different definition of what it means to be a team. I think this is where the root of our disagreement lies. He looks at it more of an entrepreneur and business perspective, while I see a team as a supporting unit that mainly exist for the players. I don't see teams as profit driven, but led by team spirit and camaraderie. Teams exist for fame, glory, and prestige. If money comes as a result of fame and glory, all the better .
Until you realize that sponsors aren't in it for glory, you're not going to understand the issues at hand at all.
|
I kinda get the feeling that the OP has. I see all these foreigners get tournament wins but I still doubt how good they are compared to the koreans. I feel like the people outside Korea is second tier compared to Koreans who seem to be first tier in skill.
|
edit- replied to wrong post
|
On February 01 2011 10:17 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On February 01 2011 10:01 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 09:05 enzym wrote:On February 01 2011 07:59 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 07:21 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 07:04 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:55 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:35 Chill wrote:On February 01 2011 06:10 ptbl wrote:On February 01 2011 06:02 Chill wrote:
[quote]
Yes, those two things are worth next to nothing. More brand recognition means more people buying your products... There's three groups here that you're confusing: 1. The player 2. The team 3. The sponsor The team and the sponsor are not the same. So when you say "brand recognition means more people buying your products", that is the team investing money, and the sponsor getting money. So you're arguing, that when the contract is up between the sponsor and the team, that the team is going to go "Hey, remember that time Jinro was mentioned in a Husky cast? Now we want $2,000 / month instead of $1,500." No. Those two things are next to meaningless. Brand recognition isn't a one-time thing, it takes consistent results to stay in the forefront of people's minds. K, I see where you are coming from. Though, If we applied your line of reasoning, Jinro wearing the TLAF shirt and appearing on gom tv has no value to the sponsor when it comes to exposure. Or in interviews where the player thanks the sponsor. I think there is some value in that to the sponsor. Here's how I would envision the exchange: Team: Our team has proved itself at this tournament and this tournament, I would like us to take it to another level and send some players to the GSL. Also, we lost 2 top notch players to another team because we couldn't guarantee them a trip to Korea for the GSL. If we want to continue our high level of play and continue to recruit top caliber lvl players, then it's important we have some funds that we can use to send players to the GSL Sponsor: How much are we talking about here? Team: GSL is providing free room, board, and utilities for those who want to compete in the GSL. We would have to cover travel, food, and basic amenities. Sponsor: How long would the players stay in Korea Team: It would be a long term investment of a minimum of 4 months. Sponsor: I don't think we could fully fund the GSL trips, perhaps 50% of it. Team: How about we sacrifice these two other tournaments and use the funds to pay for the other 50%? Sponsor: I'm not oppose to it. Seeing how you guys are 100 percent behind it, I'd say we go for it. In this scenario, the sponsor gets exposure and the team gets (?) Nothing? A cut of the GSL winnings? The hope of resigning the sponsor for more money? Ahhh, I see what you did there . Well, what is a team? A team consists of players and it's support staff. They would get monthly salaries that is paid by the sponsors. If you see a team as a business/enterprise, then one doesn't have to limit their revenue stream from one source. For example, they can partner with Justin.tv for a revenue streaming sharing agreement. Off of the top of my head, Root gaming has an agreement in place with Justin.tv. Or they could do something similar as EG by doing the Hyper Crew Pro tip series. Of course, any money earned from tournaments about 20% goes to the teams. Now we've come full circle because a team can do any of that while not sending a player to Korea. Which is exactly why it is not holding the team back from going to Korea. You have debased your own argument, as I understand it after reading through the thread once. The core question is what is the purpose of a team. For him the answer to that is to support the players, to dominate other teams and to earn enough status to be recognized widely. GSL arguably is the best stage to compete in in order to gain that. Because it has the most solid structure, consistency, price money, production value, best athletes and toughest competition. Your answer seems to be that the primary goal of a team is to make money. I strongly disagree with that, though to each their own. You could make the argument that going for Korea isn't effective, because your chances of placing high are not as good as in other venues. When you do that though you are admitting that GSL is more competitive than what your team can handle, that your team is weak sauce and you also cripple your own potential. Who wants to follow and cheer for a team which doesn't give its best and doesn't even believe in themselves. That's not the spirit of competition. It has a pragmatic aspect, but also one that is shooting yourself in the foot. Chill and I have different definition of what it means to be a team. I think this is where the root of our disagreement lies. He looks at it more of an entrepreneur and business perspective, while I see a team as a supporting unit that mainly exist for the players. I don't see teams as profit driven, but led by team spirit and camaraderie. Teams exist for fame, glory, and prestige. If money comes as a result of fame and glory, all the better . Until you realize that sponsors aren't in it for glory, you're not going to understand the issues at hand at all.
Of course not. Sponsors have different motives and incentives. I've detailed in previous posts throughout this thread regarding exposure for the sponsors.
|
Money wise, it's arguable that a pro could earn more by playing in Europe or NA league.
However, there are 2 things that Korea surpasses anyother places in the world - infrastructure (training & teams) and sponsorship. (skipping fame/skill part, since that's obvious)
Korean players are better simply because they train more hours & effectively than the foreigners.
They have team houses where they train together for 8-10 hours a day.
Training oversees from Korea, it'll be very difficult if not impossible that match such degree of efficacy.
and sponsorship is what makes such infrastructure possible to establish.
Until those 2 elements get established here in NA or in Europe, Korea will continue to be the 'pinnicle' of SC2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
