|
On July 23 2011 01:36 Silent331 wrote:First off dont sign your own post, its in the rules. I have a statement that i take issue with. Show nested quote +Give some thought to the players who are on the B-teams, with no formal contracts and are struggling to get by. Eventually, one day, the team decides to cull them. That's it - you're off the team. You can't stay in our house anymore, you can't practice with us. It's just not worth it, you're not good enough.
Get out.
Not everyone gets to win Dreamhack. What happens to the hundreds of players that don't make it?
This situation is not unrealistic at all. Some of you might be saying that the "Korean culture" would prevent such an undesirable situation from occurring. But the reality is that should events line up in a fashion where this could happen: it will happen - because this is a business, a cut-throat, no-holds barred, sport. First off you describe a theoretical situation without showing the entire situation. If a player gets let go in this way you have to look at why the team let them go, not just the fact that they did. They are a business, and like any business they must survive int he face of completion. A player may be let go because the team only has so many resources at their disposal, and in a world of competition they need to provide the best wages for their players and the best conditions for them, or else another team with a higher wage and better conditions will snatch them away. This is analogous to cars. If i make cars at 100$ a car, and another company can make the same car at 90$ a car, I am going to have to cut costs or go out of business, putting hundreds of workers out of work because I did not want to shut down 1 plant and move it somewhere cheaper. What I am trying to say by this is that even know a player being let go is never a good thing, for e-sports as a whole, it increases conditions for players and players wages through competition. Some players and teams will fail but the e-sports scene will progress, continuing to improve and become better and better. So if you attempt to protect players or teams in any way you are hindering the expansion and growth of e-sports on the corporate level. This is because by protecting them you are eliminating the need for constant improvement through competition, because you are weakening the competitive environment.
The OP is not claiming that contracted players never leave their team, even if they play badly. Just that for the length of their contract they have security. When their contract is expiring they can make plans for then, instead of 1 day being told that they're not on the team and have to move out.
I like the idea of a democratic global body to regulate ESports, but there also needs to be a players association so they can protect themselves.
|
On July 22 2011 13:03 Krehlmar wrote:
Explain it as whatever you want.
It was still subvert and wrong morally, "business", "Dog eat dog" and "Survival of the fittest" can go fuck itself, I don't like it and I don't care what explanation you'd give us.
If that is what you'd like eSports to become I don't want any part of it, nor do I want to spend any money on that.
Yes there needs to be a better standard, yes there needs to be contracts.
But I will never think what EG did was anything but sneaky and underhanded.
Posts like this are so embarrassing it's hard for me to tell if they are trolls or really just that ignorant.
Great OP. It think it is all very serious and important stuff, even if I think that people are blowing this whole Puma/TSL/EG matter WAAAAAAAAY out of proportion, because TL is just like every other internet community and loves stupid drama.
|
On July 23 2011 03:42 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 03:26 Shiori wrote:On July 23 2011 02:12 Hawk wrote:
while the whole think with milkis on the show wasnt exactly handled great, he absolutely has a responsibility as a writer of Teamliquid--which has starcraft progamming news very clearly under the banner--to reach out to EG for an official comment. Just because there's no official release doesn't mean you just drop one side of the story and let it be without any fact checking, even if you're a translator. Shit, even fucking deadspin adheres to the very basic news rule of reaching out for comment by the party that's about to be a subject in a big controversy
People keep on bringing up shit like ESPN reporting on rumors and saying this is one in the same. it's not. That happens because they at least reach out to the team or player in question for their side of the story. If the team denies it, you report that. If the team does not respond, or tells you to fuck off, you report that. As far as I know, and it's starting to get quite difficult to follow this whole thing, this did not happen.
Milkis is not just another forum member. he is representing TL, which is an ESPORTS news site. As such, he absolutely has an obligation to do that ground work, and in the event that he can't get any info, it is clearly explained as such. While the attack wasn't exactly the greatest thing, EG absolutely has a damn good reason to be pissed that one side of the story was reported on without even being contacted. It would have helped if they released a presser right after it broke, but they're not obligated to do so, and they did it within 24 hours which is quite standard in the world of sport. Is it defamation like Alex Garfield is claiming? No. Is it rude? Not really. Milkis was acting in his capacity as a translator, and he operated under the idea of breaking news being released as it happens. Quite frankly, I see no reason to allow time for damage control when I'm sure EG frequents these forums and could easily have given Milkis a statement, since this debacle has been going on for DAYS, not hours. No, defamation means the claim has to be bogus. It's shitty reporting to not seek out the other side of the story, or at least note that the source you are translating from did not do this and you are not capable of doing so. and just because EG people frequent the site doesnt mean you drop something like that and wait for them to see it. Good lord. I'm sure incontrol is within arms reach of a computer most of the day, and if you pm him saying this guy is saying this and we want a response, you'd get it or get someone who does. That's how it works. Just because the source he lifted it from was lazy in not getting the other side of the story doesnt mean that he should just parrot the information without making note of the lack of response, or seeking it out himself.
Do you think EG was in the right with their acquisition of Puma?
|
On July 23 2011 05:53 Sideburn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 13:03 Krehlmar wrote:
Explain it as whatever you want.
It was still subvert and wrong morally, "business", "Dog eat dog" and "Survival of the fittest" can go fuck itself, I don't like it and I don't care what explanation you'd give us.
If that is what you'd like eSports to become I don't want any part of it, nor do I want to spend any money on that.
Yes there needs to be a better standard, yes there needs to be contracts.
But I will never think what EG did was anything but sneaky and underhanded. Posts like this are so embarrassing it's hard for me to tell if they are trolls or really just that ignorant. Great OP. It think it is all very serious and important stuff, even if I think that people are blowing this whole Puma/TSL/EG matter WAAAAAAAAY out of proportion, because TL is just like every other internet community and loves stupid drama.
Exactly. People need to detach themselves from Puma/EG/TSL and realize this is MUCH bigger, broader, and more important than that.
|
just should clear something up: EG's Garfield never used the word defamation, not once.
i'm just implying that his "open question" and his follow-up reasoning (particularly the part about causing damage to the EG brand) is insinuating that.
|
On July 23 2011 02:50 Grimsong wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2011 02:46 Zocat wrote:On July 23 2011 01:17 Grimsong wrote:On July 23 2011 01:08 Zocat wrote:But the ball is currently in the hands of the Korean teams. Emergency SC2 Association meeting. Everyone agrees to have their players signed immediately ("or find your own EG right now!" - which might play into EG's hands, since the doubting players might switch to EG then). Team transfers to other members of the SC2 Association or "allowed" teams is ok. Transfers to teams outside of that circle is prohibited by contract aka: it's the team's decision (with player consent & a transfer sum). "Loaning" players, like MC / Nada to foreign teams still allowed (aka team decision). Then we have a mini Kespa. They could even force GOM to exclude players "marked" from their association ("or we will all pull our teams out") for example denying Puma a GSL entry. That's how I would do it  Why would you do it that way? Why would you promote restrictions in a market that wants to mix and match everyone on a global level? Korea creating a system to protect Korea? It seoems to be stunting the growth/health of pushing E-Sports to the next level. As a whole, it would be best bi-passing this whole Korean BW mindset. It's not 2000 anymore, and SC2 isn't a booming product in Korea. Time to move on. Of course Korean teams would create a system to protect themselves. Stuff like the oGs-TL or oGs-SK partnerships would still be possible. Managers of teams talking to other managers. Making deals which benefit all sides. Look at football (soccer) - there are multiple teams which basically recruit young not well known players and train them. Those teams of course arent playing for the championship. But when a player shows potential the big clubs knock at the door and are willing to pay large sums. So the training club gets something out from it (transfer sums). Sure sometimes contracts end and a player switches a team, bad luck. But that's not really the case for upcoming promising superstars since multiple big teams are interested in those (and approach the "selling" team prior to the end of the contract) Do you believe the oGs team isnt getting anything from the SK deal? That it's only benefitting the players & SK? Also sometimes players just arent for sale. i.e. the 1billion€ buyout clause for Ronaldo. So if Startale says "Bomber isnt for sale" and Bomber is ok with that (remember those contracts require the ok from the player) - then he just cannot be aquired. Do I fault EG? No, hell no. They saw an opportunity to aquire a top, trained, experienced player basically for free. And they probably (since he hasnt signed the contract yet) took that opportunity. But thinking that the Korean teams are okay with that and will not trying to protect their own interests is just stupid. Alex even said on WoC that their players have a "dont talk to other teams" clause in the contract (that they dont punish/fine the players if they reject those offers is fairly obvious). Protecting their own interests & have the ability to enforce them via contracts with "harsh" terms is actually "pushing E-Sports to the next level". No it isn't. That's going back to the old bw system that does NOT feasibly work on a global scale. That's pushing it back to the old, restrictive, rigid ways that alienated the bw crowd outside of Korea.
Please attack my proposed system - or the arguments / examples I bring. Dont just use a broadside argument "It's not feasable that this works" plz.
Especially since I basically described a system how global football works. Which clearly shows it DOES work on a global scale.
Korean teams have and foster talents. They want a compensation if those players switch teams. Contracts & transfer fees are a system to enforce those compensations. case in point: football.
It's retarded to think that Korean teams should just let their players (who they spent money on to train) switch to a team which is just able to offer more money without gaining anything from it.
|
On July 23 2011 01:08 Zocat wrote:But the ball is currently in the hands of the Korean teams. Emergency SC2 Association meeting. Everyone agrees to have their players signed immediately ("or find your own EG right now!" - which might play into EG's hands, since the doubting players might switch to EG then). Team transfers to other members of the SC2 Association or "allowed" teams is ok. Transfers to teams outside of that circle is prohibited by contract aka: it's the team's decision (with player consent & a transfer sum). "Loaning" players, like MC / Nada to foreign teams still allowed (aka team decision). Then we have a mini Kespa. They could even force GOM to exclude players "marked" from their association ("or we will all pull our teams out") for example denying Puma a GSL entry. That's how I would do it
On July 23 2011 10:35 Waxangel wrote:DRG FIGHTING!!!!!! Oh, here's a semi article I had written up before I stopped trying to make it any good: Did the EG's pursuit of TSL's Puma close the gates for many Koreans? As much as EG's Alex Garfield espoused the the need for Korea to open itself up to the international way of ESPORTS business, he may very well have become a detriment to his own cause. Following the the news of Puma's enticement by a foreign team, Korea's two major SC II media sites PlayXP and ThisIsGame wasted no time publishing editorials calling for the hasty implementation of protectionary measures from the Starcraft II Conference (S2Con) of Korea. In fact, ThisIsGame reported that GomTV and S2Con had already felt the need the create protectionary measures before the EG-TSL ordeal went down. If that were not enough, S2Con's own columnist also chipped in with his opinion, brutally criticizing his own organization for their failure to protect the interests of Korean teams and players in this regard. That's not to say that we won't see more deals like that between MVP and Complexity or oGs and SK. In those deals, the original Korean team retains effective 'ownership' of the player while the foreign company is merely subsidizing his overseas activities. But the line seems to be drawn at Korean players making complete moves to foreign teams, and it may soon become a very difficult one to cross. Sources: Starcraft II Conference: http://s2con.com/xe/column/8373ThisIsGame: http://www.thisisgame.com/board/view.php?id=710199&board=&category=13439&subcategory=&page=1&best=&searchmode=&search=&orderby=&token=PlayXP: http://www.playxp.com/sc2/news/view.php?article_id=3209931Weapon of Choice: http://www.onemoregame.tv/index.php/shows/weapon-of-choice.html
Are you a prophet? KeSPA 2 set in motion already 
|
so apt using the photo of Tevez..The man is money grabbing Cunt.
|
I think what people forget is Esports is about gaming! At the core and heart of our community is a game. Sure there needs to be more regulations and such, but i can rapidly see Esports becoming al about the $$$. Where nobody random public players can no longer try to qualify into major tournaments. The last thing we want is to see Esports become the NFL, with a CBA. While growing esports is the #1 goal for gamers, we must always remember that we play GAMES!
|
On July 22 2011 12:34 Milkis wrote:
I think one of the points I really failed to bring out was that it *is* unprofessional for SC2 in Korea to not have contracts. I just wanted to provide the background on why that was the case, and I guess it didn't go through very well. In no way does the Koreans do not want contracts -- this is what they want to aim for as the SC2 scene grows.
So I do apologize for butchering that. Very, Very, badly.
Edit this into the OP Please.
Great read, well researched and documented. Amazing similarities between Puma and the English cricket captain. Well written.
|
I think that teams should contract their players, but that some organization (like a union) should set some frame conditions on those contracts. Contracts with Kespa stated that you are not allowed to participate in other tournaments, that surely is not very nice. :-/
|
Great post, well though out
I think I probably agree with you on most points once you sit down and start arguing it out and I think what you are describing is somewhat inevitable.
the real problem is the cross country borders and the fact that contracts in one country will not be valid in another.
Then you ahve to consider that contracts really do not benefit employees all that much because there are already a lot of laws in place (in uk anyway) that you simply cannot sign away.
The key thing is having a notice period and terms of severance ... a months notice + or some kind of financial consideration
the key thing though is to avoid what i hear about in the sc1 world ... people are free to do what they want and a contract that prohibits a player leaving for another team is not in the interests of everyone.
the point is that a pro gamers profession is to play games for money - the systems you want are already in place, its just a case of formaliising the employer - employee relationship.
However it shoudl be noted that there is no way id agree to standard terms of employment in america. Those guys are insane ... i imagine most non-european countries would inspire the same thought in me tbh  Yanks are worked to the bone (whether they know it or not)
By the way i carry out a lot of business on the basis of handshakes and verbal agreements ... there is nothing wrong with them. they are legally binding, just make sure you have witnesses. The problem with written contracts is that lawyers have to get involved and then costs soar - adn the contracts still wont be water tight because ... well lawyers are bastards
the problem with setting unions up istha t they need to be paid ... they will end up essentially serving the people that pay them ... which will be the teams and so you will not achieve what you are intending. There is not enough money in epsorts yet to have unions imo ... much better to use existing systems in various countries.
The problem with a lot of business - which is not true with work over the internet - is that it is centralised and most laws reflect this. Right now things are beginning to be distributed to a much greater degree. What i am trying to say is that a lot of the struvtures and systems are in place but for them to work with international teams each team needs to respect the local laws and rights of its players - which may vary accross players. Its about being open, reasonable and honest with each other.
|
My main problem with all that is going on around professionnalism and contract is that, eventually, if the players are contracted in a way that prevent them from playing in particular foreign event whenever they want (even if it mean, for exemple, not going to GSL), then all the idea around making the scene more professionnal will in fact result in the same situation than BW: a korean pro SC2 scene who behave like a micro environment, closed in itself, and with no or almost no link with the foreign scene except the few foreigners who will try to go for the korean dream.
From this point of view, EG's move will have one and one only result : making the korean scene withdraw in itself.
|
My computer lagged and for some unknown reason, I posted the same thing two times...
Sorry, can someone just delete this ?
|
Honestly, e-sports is too small to apply cut-throat business guidelines like these.
No one seems to be arguing that EG's methods helped grow e-sports. The best argument put forth seems to be that if e-sports want to be big, then it needs to start acting big.
This is reminding me of a band thinking they become famous by trashing hotel rooms. You got it the other way around.
This is trying to put the bull before the horn.
|
There only seems to be one thing missing from the argument at hand, and that is the differences among cultures. I don't know what the standards are for things like this in Korea, but in the U.S. it is cut and dry. Contract, or no contract? No contract, do whatever the fuck you want. I'm currently living in China, and little things that are cut and dry in the states are a handful here, and vice versa. It's something to take into consideration. It's not always about laws, but about the general practices of people.
Sorry if someone already brought this up.
To summarize:
As players of Starcraft who love the community, the game, the mechanics, the units, the lore, and the players; it's easy to forget that maybe we're talking about rooted differences based on culture that have led to a misunderstanding.
|
It seems like a lot of people (not saying op... at all) are confusing "it was inevitable, this marks a point in esports, it's good for the growth of starcraft" as EG having acceptable behavior.
Yes, EG taught a lesson to esports that would inevitably happen if players were continually not on contracts. It was completely within legal bounds and as competition it is a logical move to make. It's still unethical. Really, the only thing EG sacrificed here, IMO, is respect. I will respect them much less as a company now, other companies will respect them less, and i'm sure a lot of other TL posters and the SC community will agree.
If they're out to make money and do it legally, i guess that shouldn't matter to them but there are other teams and organizations that wouldn't do this, and those teams have a much bigger place in meh heart. <3 TL!
On July 22 2011 12:49 ComusLoM wrote:
1. Buy Player disregarding the players native culture
2. Either leave him in Korea or bring him to an incomplete team house without coaching or suitably skilled practice partners (eg says they have something planned not sure what)
3. Have player represent you either in Korea (good luck) or foreign events where he will be beaten by Koreans on real teams.
I just don't understand what EG is thinking with this kind of move Puma will be terrible in 3 months if he stays outside of the Korean practice ethos with coach and partners. And they'll be left where they started.
I was wondering the same thing. Although more than this being a stupid move by EG, it seems like a stupid move by puma.
EG wants a player with fame, check.
A player that can help their players play well, check.
Lastly a player that is better than the ones they have recruited, check.
Puma doesn't have to keep winning tournaments, cause the players they have now aren't winning any as it is, but if he helps the team get better, bulks up their lineup and brings them attention, and even if he happens to drop in skill level, he can still maintain being better than a lot of the EG guys, and is all-in-all a great deal for EG.
Alex did say that he wouldn't sign him if he didn't believe that he could support and nurture his talent as well. I think the best option would be for him to stay in korea honestly, and that would still be worse than being in a house full of korean players... So ultimately, it would seem the SK deal is much more reasonable. I will be waiting to see what mystical practice plans they have lined up for Puma though.
|
This is a very well thought-out post and is very interesting. I agree with most of what you say. It is time for the eSports scene to get professional. And I mean real professional, not just acting professional but the way teams and players are run/managed needs to be professional. As you said this is no longer kids stuff, this is serious shit.
Now to all those who are saying, "well we didn't have this problem with Brood War so why are we worrying about this now?", I say the following. The way that SC2 has exploded in the foreigner scene has caused it to already be bigger than Brood War ever was in the foreigner scene. Look at all the tournaments and sponsors and foreign SC2 teams. Like holy shit, MLG Columbus had 22.5 million stream views in 3 days, when did Brood War ever come close to that? It didn't.
I'm excited for eSports and where it is going. I really want to see this be successful and I will personally do what I can to support the scene.
eSports FIGHTING!
|
On July 24 2011 15:12 OPL3SA2 wrote:
Honestly, e-sports is too small to apply cut-throat business guidelines like these.
No one seems to be arguing that EG's methods helped grow e-sports. The best argument put forth seems to be that if e-sports want to be big, then it needs to start acting big.
This is reminding me of a band thinking they become famous by trashing hotel rooms. You got it the other way around.
This is trying to put the bull before the horn.
I'm not so sure it is. Look at how many new people SC2 has introduced into the eSports scene in a year since it was released. Look at the viewer counts that the big tournaments get. Look at the big time sponsors coming into the scene that weren't here a year ago. This is serious shit.
I do keep in mind, however, that it is very possible for things to start going backwards if things are not handled right. These big tournaments need to continue to grow in quality and entertainment value. teams need to handle themselves professionally, as do players. And this is where the OP's post comes into play.
|
On July 23 2011 05:53 Sideburn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 22 2011 13:03 Krehlmar wrote:
Explain it as whatever you want.
It was still subvert and wrong morally, "business", "Dog eat dog" and "Survival of the fittest" can go fuck itself, I don't like it and I don't care what explanation you'd give us.
If that is what you'd like eSports to become I don't want any part of it, nor do I want to spend any money on that.
Yes there needs to be a better standard, yes there needs to be contracts.
But I will never think what EG did was anything but sneaky and underhanded. Posts like this are so embarrassing it's hard for me to tell if they are trolls or really just that ignorant. Great OP. It think it is all very serious and important stuff, even if I think that people are blowing this whole Puma/TSL/EG matter WAAAAAAAAY out of proportion, because TL is just like every other internet community and loves stupid drama.
They're a combination of Trolls and Idiots, so Troldiots. Since, obviously, they can't read but what they do read they don't understand.
Good OP, btw, but I did want to point out two things:
- SC2con won't become KeSPA 2.0.
SC2con is more like a player's union than KeSPA, which is the body making up the sponsors. That's going to be a big difference between SC:BW and SC2.
- You can get in legal trouble for statements you make in the Western world. It just depends on the jurisdiction.
As an American that keeps tabs on the UK, I know well enough that the UK doesn't have First Amendment protections and media outlets are constantly be hit up for Libel & Slander. And, the proof requirements are pretty low. The USA is generally the leader in the regard of making anyone posting on the Internet have the privileges of a Journalist, so there's no "fine line" between them anymore.
So, while Alex had a point, of which he probably didn't need to bring up with Milkis around (as it was going to come off as an attack, either way), he had a very legitimate point, one which could eventually come back to bite someone in the ass on one of these forums. As the "business" of Esports gets bigger, it'll eventually hit a point of being a big problem in some instance.
Still, EG really needs a community relationships "person". Doesn't even need to be a full-time person. They could probably pay a fan in Tshirts to keep a handle on the community.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
