[Show] Inside The Game - Official Thread - Page 60

On June 29 2011 17:53 algorithm0r wrote:
The facts as I understand them:

SotG almost got sponsored by one of Complexity's sponsors.

EG (or its sponsors) did not want EG members participating to be co-hosts in of SotG if this deal went through.

EG tried to get one of their sponsors to sponsor SotG so that EG members would not have a conflict with the show.

SotG did not accept any sponsorship deal EG's offer.

EG gave a raise to InControl about what he would have made if SotG was sponsored (which it wasn't) and told him they would create a new show for him created a new show along with landing new sponsoring (that justifies the raise). This show was ItG.

SotG ended up not taking Complexity's offer as well.

Eventually InControl realized he had bitten off more than he could chew and something had to go.

EG and InControl decided that the most reasonable thing to go would be SotG for the obvious reason that InControl was being paid and for his other legally binding obligations (ItG, NASL, progaming) and that EG had no vested interest in SotG.

InControl left SotG.

InControl left NASL.

InControl now has "permission" to return to SotG.

On June 29 2011 17:53 algorithm0r wrote:My issue with how EG handles its sponsors and the SotG situation:

EG's management or EG's sponsors (I suspect the management) is not very subtle in how they want their sponsorship promoted. Case in point:
- EVERY interview with and EG member ends with a list of every sponsor.
- EVERY SotG ends with a list of every EG sponsor. (The fact that I know that Intel, Steelseries, Bigfoot Networks, Monster Energy, Kingston Hyper X are all sponsors of EG is from this policy.)

In contrast other teams are not so aggressive with their sponsors. My speculation is that this is because of different team policies or because of different types of sponsorship contracts.

EG's management (and they claim their sponsors) have strong exclusivity feelings about sponsorship. That is, because EG is sponsored, they cannot appear on shows not sponsored by EG's sponsors, or at the least, they can't appear on shows that have sponsors in direct competition with one of their sponsors.

On June 29 2011 17:53 algorithm0r wrote:- While it was made to seem this is a perfectly obvious or reasonably policy on ItG, it is certainly not common, and I'd wager not even that common of EG.
- Would EG not participate in a tournament (say MLG since it is sponsored by Astro equipment) because of a sponsor conflict? No. Because the sponsorship agreement between MLG and its sponsors does not prevent EG members from promoting their sponsors in interviews and the like.
- Further, regardless of the potential sponsorship conflict on SotG, it is hard to argue that SotG is not one of the best venues for EG's sponsors (since the shout outs at the end of every show). So even the sponsorship answer does not seem 100% true to me.

On June 29 2011 17:53 algorithm0r wrote:I think integrity of character demands that the people at EG be up front with the real reasons behind this conflict, and my only thought on why they weren't is because there is something that would not be received well by the public in this case.

InControl: I'm sure he wanted to say that his place on the team was the reason that he could not be on SotG as a pillar. He was unable to say it, presumably because of pressure from the team. I think the strongest character would come right out and say "I am leaving SotG due to conflicts between the wishes of my team and the show. While I wish to both be on SotG and maintain good standing with EG, EG is my employer and their wishes for me must take precedence. If they request I leave SotG I must." If this frank statement complicated things with EG then a strong character would stand up for their opinion (that he wanted to remain on SotG) and if the ramifications of being truthful cost him the job, I REALLY question the quality of EG.

EG: I'm even willing to believe that the EG wanted to let InControl remain on SotG, but here I find it harder to believe that somewhere in the management there wasn't a desire to have things their way. I believe integrity on the part of EG would demand that if they were getting strong pressure from their sponsor to remove EG members from SotG due to content issues, or their affiliation with members of other teams possibly sponsored by competitors, or the fact that SotG itself may be sponsored by a competitor, they should take every effort to explain to the sponsor that SotG is a great venue for their promotion, and barring that, come out and say that a sponsor EG was unwilling to lose was applying strong pressure for InControl to leave. Further, I think any agreement with a sponsor that provided the sponsor with that much control over their team was shortsighted.

To conclude I think that EG made a major faux pas possibly due to bad decisions made in management of their sponsor and players. I also think that InControl may have handled the situation a little better himself, but in his case I can understand the pressure that is placed on you by your employer. I am glad that EG has "allowed" InControl to return to SotG and I hope that he will do just that. He was a great part of that show. I also hope that if there comes a conflict between ItG and SotG that they make a reasonable attempt to accommodate both.