EPTMLG just asking for more support, nothing wrong right?
Seriously doesn't matter it's NASL, MLG or even GSL... we don't need a bunch of hypocrites
MLG Potential Prize Pool Increase - Page 26
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
rontol
71 Posts
MLG just asking for more support, nothing wrong right? Seriously doesn't matter it's NASL, MLG or even GSL... we don't need a bunch of hypocrites | ||
|
CursedRich
United Kingdom737 Posts
On July 30 2011 10:38 Sd9 wrote: I like how iNcontroL is somehow the one at fault here. He's playing in the fucking tournament. Go ahead and think he's trolling or being sarcastic, (or whatever else you want to say) but the heat he's getting from a few posts he's thrown out WHILE HE IS PRESENTLY AT MLG is ridiculous. More subscribers means more money? Sure. More money means... a large increase in the somewhat low prize pool? Sure. Sounds good. What's wrong with that? Nothing. Nothing is wrong with that. The only thing iNcontroL is commenting on is how Sundance sounded. It's got nothing to do with the tournament, and everything to do with the image of esports and Sundance himself. Get back to watching your HD with no advertisements all you haters. You paid money to enjoy MLG not to hate on your hater target, haters. What???? Have you any perspective? Just LOL not reading any hate myself; just the public again having to tell him where the line is, maybe you aren't aware of his history of being an over confident big mouth? | ||
|
Sakarabu
United Kingdom132 Posts
First they wanted the streams and fan service to be 100% top notch and so they spent shitloads working on that, then they (probably) spent money focusing on getting the best players in Korea over here. They then spent money getting soundproof booths because they fans demanded it. Finally they focused on getting SC2 as the main event and alot of SEATING lol. some people in this thread need a little bit of perspective of what truely matters, what good is an event with a huge prize pool if no one is watching? The prize money comes in time, it's only natural. | ||
|
HelloxD
378 Posts
On July 30 2011 02:41 SundanceMLG wrote: Months ago you gave me shit about the prize pool and now I'm putting a simple and obtainable goal out there for the entire community and you give me shit again - and that's fine. I still respect you and appreciate what you've done and will continue to do for the scene. My question is this - if the number was 50,000 would you take an issue with my approach? How about 15,000? What if I didn't say a thing and just watched my spreadsheets populate with numbers and kept the community in the dark? Shouldn't the people who love this have some insight into what is needed for success? You're either in or you're out. $30 a year from 100,000 people makes this company a real business and not just a passion project from a guy with a hippy name who refuses to quit. $30 a year from 10,000 people means that we're all wrong and there isn't enough fan support to sustain a business of scale. Less than a dime a day from less than 10% of the people who visit our site over the course of an event weekend allows me to flip a switch and change next year to a structure that supports 24 live events & 28 meaningful ladders. 52 competitions with nearly 2 million dollars of prize money and stipends. Again - I don't care if you think I'm an asshole or a money grubbing prick. I just want to find out if what we do is actually meaningful to enough of you to step up. Pwned! I would be more than happy to buy a gold membership if i had the money ( broke right now .. ) Can you, by any chance, tell us how much 'significantly' is? | ||
|
Oxb
199 Posts
Agreeing with Sundance here is personal, and so is getting a membership for any event, but we shouldn't get all angry with anyone over this. Just harmless tweets.. move along nothing special to see... | ||
|
McKTenor13
United States1383 Posts
| ||
|
groms
Canada1017 Posts
on a side note I hope the lag issues and naniwa's keyboard don't become a recurring theme. | ||
|
Greatness
United States450 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i52.tinypic.com/90r8fl.jpg) + Show Spoiler + I'm sure MLG staff works for free for this to actually happen.. User was banned for this post. | ||
|
Sylvr
United States524 Posts
I suppose that it's counter-intuitive though. We see this amazing production value and all of these great players coming from around the world to compete and many of us may not realize how much MLG is (apparently) stretching their budget to make it happen. Maybe the success of MLG Columbus hasn't had a chance to pay for itself yet? Will Anaheim be the same deal? Is MLG reaching too far too fast? Is NOT reaching that far even an option? If they aren't seen to be improving, are they in danger of losing the momentum and falling flat? Is that what this 100k promise/ultimatum means? Of course, as far as I know, 100k Subs might not be unreasonable for a tournament of MLG's caliber., especially coming off of the success of Columbus. But then... WAS Columbus successful? We know the SC2 section of it certainly was, maybe some other event(s) tanked hard and the SC2 success wasn't enough to offset it. If that last speculation is the case, then maybe picking up MORE games isn't the best move. Perhaps they should focus on what they know is working for a while before seeking new ventures. | ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
If MLG has more money, they will be able to spend more money. That's....kind of obvious. | ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On July 30 2011 12:19 Ribbon wrote: I can't believe this is controversial. If MLG has more money, they will be able to spend more money. That's....kind of obvious. But saying not having a certain amount of more money = lowering future prize pools is different. | ||
|
alexhard
Sweden317 Posts
On July 30 2011 12:19 Ribbon wrote: I can't believe this is controversial. If MLG has more money, they will be able to spend more money. That's....kind of obvious. MLG is probably the richest event organizer out there, with some of the smallest prize pools. So no, it's not very obvious. | ||
|
Greatness
United States450 Posts
On July 30 2011 12:21 Telcontar wrote: But saying not having a certain amount of more money = lowering future prize pools is different. Doesn't mean they'll be lowering the SC2 prizepool, that'd be horrendous and self-inflicted suicide. The problem some people have is why don't they raise the prizepool for SC2. Well...SC2 is a relatively new game, it might just be a bubble, they don't want to raise the prizepool prematurely because of a few good events, has to be a little bit longer, hence the 100k subscription goal. They want to see if it's economically viable. The productions you see is not cheap, neither is the new event in a different city every single time. The staff doesn't work for free. It costs money. | ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
On July 30 2011 07:29 hellsan631 wrote: What we don't need is for someone to shove t-shirts down our throats, products to buy, and being told that if your not buying, your not helping. Saying these things makes the value of your brand go down, and makes you seem a little bit obtuse. If you're not buying, you're not helping. It's a fact. Stop being entitled. It's not like they're taking away the option to watch TOTALLY FUCKING FREE or anything. MLG will succeed or fail, not due to the amount of people that throw money at you, but because of your sponsorships and viewer numbers. .... It doesn't matter how many people buy your product? Wha? (Which is something that you cannot ask directly for.) Increased viewer numbers (premium or not), will increase sponsorship interest, which will in turn help generate that 3 million you are asking for. Quick, how many viewers to you need to pull $3 million/year in sponsorship money? Jesus christ, people are self-entitled. How dare MLG ask more people to buy their products? How dare they adjust their spending based on their revenue? Assholes, clearly. | ||
|
Aetherial
Australia917 Posts
| ||
|
Telcontar
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On July 30 2011 12:32 Ribbon wrote: If you're not buying, you're not helping. It's a fact. Stop being entitled. It's not like they're taking away the option to watch TOTALLY FUCKING FREE or anything. .... It doesn't matter how many people buy your product? Wha? Quick, how many viewers to you need to pull $3 million/year in sponsorship money? Jesus christ, people are self-entitled. How dare MLG ask more people to buy their products? How dare they adjust their spending based on their revenue? Assholes, clearly. You're missing the subtlety of the issue being discussed here. No one is faulting MLG for asking for more subscriptions but the manner in which Sundance has done so. Holding the prizepool for ransom is not the way to go for many people. Even if it's 100% true and anything short of 100k subscriptions mean a possible decrease in the prizepool, no one likes being presented with ultimatums. | ||
|
Sandro
897 Posts
| ||
|
TheButtonmen
Canada1405 Posts
On July 30 2011 12:43 Sandro wrote: How expensive are spectator passes? I saw a tweet from Sundance saying that the SC2 stage has 5000 seats and they're bringing in an additional 160 tomorrow. He said there is 5k spectators total for Anaheim. | ||
|
GreatHate
United States73 Posts
| ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On July 30 2011 12:22 alexhard wrote: MLG is probably the richest event organizer out there, with some of the smallest prize pools. So no, it's not very obvious. I wasn't aware they released any financial information about the organization. Link? | ||
| ||
