On March 16 2013 01:16 Ctone23 wrote: As a businessman myself, I find it hard to look at this with a lot of objectivity.
Typically if you are in a financial situation where you wish to obtain a higher goal (I.E. Proleague) then you objectively identify weaknesses and efficiency of the entire company (team).
At the end of the day, EG can do whatever they want to. However, my opinion is that they should take a broader approach to identifying goals and pursuing them.
GL Puma
Subjectively, this makes very little sense
Are you saying that Proleague as a goal, is bad for EG?
No, but bad business management could be..
In the article Alex expressed that EG was focusing on Korean events such as Proleague, he then went on to go into how Puma had lackluster results, insinuating Pumas salary vastly overwhelmed his performance.
Meanwhile, back in the US, EG owns a very expensive house with at least two professional players that make absolutely no contribution tournament-wise, which was essentially the basis for letting Puma go (highly contradictory to EG business model, ex. Incontrol casting and what not).
The house costs ~36,000 USD/year to EG according to Scoots, which is "literally nothing". It's located in Phoenix which is why its way cheaper compared to other cities, the players split the costs of utilities and food.
On March 16 2013 01:16 Ctone23 wrote: As a businessman myself, I find it hard to look at this with a lot of objectivity.
Typically if you are in a financial situation where you wish to obtain a higher goal (I.E. Proleague) then you objectively identify weaknesses and efficiency of the entire company (team).
At the end of the day, EG can do whatever they want to. However, my opinion is that they should take a broader approach to identifying goals and pursuing them.
GL Puma
Subjectively, this makes very little sense
Are you saying that Proleague as a goal, is bad for EG?
No, but bad business management could be..
In the article Alex expressed that EG was focusing on Korean events such as Proleague, he then went on to go into how Puma had lackluster results, insinuating Pumas salary vastly overwhelmed his performance.
Meanwhile, back in the US, EG owns a very expensive house with at least two professional players that make absolutely no contribution tournament-wise, which was essentially the basis for letting Puma go (highly contradictory to EG business model, ex. Incontrol casting and what not).
The house costs ~36,000 USD/year to EG according to Scoots, which is "literally nothing". It's located in Phoenix which is why its way cheaper compared to other cities, the players split the costs of utilities and food.
Just listen to the part i pointed out. I quoted scoots when saying Phoenix is cheap to live, but he did mention comparisons, so maybe thats why it's "cheaper". Your argument about the "expensive team house" fails, according to the teams ex-COO.
People who fill these threads with stupid criticisms of other EG players should get warned, or banned outright. It's getting sickening to see every single EG related thread full of bullshit from people who have absolutely no concept of ROI, or don't give a fuck about anything except hating on players they have in their targets.
On March 16 2013 04:04 WolfintheSheep wrote: People who fill these threads with stupid criticisms of other EG players should get warned, or banned outright. It's getting sickening to see every single EG related thread full of bullshit from people who have absolutely no concept of ROI, or don't give a fuck about anything except hating on players they have in their targets.
Thats Teamliquid for you and it won't ever change. Another problem is when you won't bother checking few pages back, where something has most likely explained few times already and still keep spilling something utterly stupid (like stuff about Incontrol)
On March 16 2013 04:09 Ctone23 wrote: @ Grettin What proof do you have other than the "EX-COO" My argument was about the contradictory business model, not Phoenix, Arizona's housing market lol...
I rather believe someone who has worked in the company and who has actually handled things, rather than someone who claims to be a businessman(not that i don't believe you), who most likely won't know much about their (EG's) business.
Should've bolded the part from your previous post, i was simply trying to prove things (from Scoot's pov) concerning the expensive housing part.
Meanwhile, back in the US, EG owns a very expensive house with at least two professional players that make absolutely no contribution tournament-wise, which was essentially the basis for letting Puma go (highly contradictory to EG business model, ex. Incontrol casting and what not).
To be honest, i don't see how the housing part and two guys living there, who doesn't do as well in tournaments as others, has anything to do with Puma's release? It's been explained many times why InControl and even Machine are valuable to the team, despite lack of tournament results. Did i miss something from your post(s)?
On March 16 2013 01:16 Ctone23 wrote: As a businessman myself, I find it hard to look at this with a lot of objectivity.
Typically if you are in a financial situation where you wish to obtain a higher goal (I.E. Proleague) then you objectively identify weaknesses and efficiency of the entire company (team).
At the end of the day, EG can do whatever they want to. However, my opinion is that they should take a broader approach to identifying goals and pursuing them.
GL Puma
Subjectively, this makes very little sense
Are you saying that Proleague as a goal, is bad for EG?
No, but bad business management could be..
In the article Alex expressed that EG was focusing on Korean events such as Proleague, he then went on to go into how Puma had lackluster results, insinuating Pumas salary vastly overwhelmed his performance.
Meanwhile, back in the US, EG owns a very expensive house with at least two professional players that make absolutely no contribution tournament-wise, which was essentially the basis for letting Puma go (highly contradictory to EG business model, ex. Incontrol casting and what not).
The house costs ~36,000 USD/year to EG according to Scoots, which is "literally nothing". It's located in Phoenix which is why its way cheaper compared to other cities, the players split the costs of utilities and food.
If the assumption that Machine gets a fairly low salary is correct, it kind of confuses me why he would stay with EG. He is 25 and his skills even relative to the NA players has declined massively compared to 2010. I would think it would be a better plan to look in pursuing a career outside starcraft but thats not for me to decide. Feels like a massive waste of time unless his salary is not as low as some would assume.
I hate making a post like this but I can't see Machine willing to just stay in EG if he had a low salary like some mention in this thread.
My argument was about the contradictory business model, not Phoenix, Arizona's housing market lol...
Does ending a sentence with lol make you superior?
Do you really want Alex Garfield to bash Puma on how he never contributed to team exposure outside of the game and he isn't worth what he used to cost anymore? Can people not read between the lines? There is a difference between "no fluff" and "being an asshole".
On March 16 2013 01:16 Ctone23 wrote: As a businessman myself, I find it hard to look at this with a lot of objectivity.
Typically if you are in a financial situation where you wish to obtain a higher goal (I.E. Proleague) then you objectively identify weaknesses and efficiency of the entire company (team).
At the end of the day, EG can do whatever they want to. However, my opinion is that they should take a broader approach to identifying goals and pursuing them.
GL Puma
Subjectively, this makes very little sense
Are you saying that Proleague as a goal, is bad for EG?
No, but bad business management could be..
In the article Alex expressed that EG was focusing on Korean events such as Proleague, he then went on to go into how Puma had lackluster results, insinuating Pumas salary vastly overwhelmed his performance.
Meanwhile, back in the US, EG owns a very expensive house with at least two professional players that make absolutely no contribution tournament-wise, which was essentially the basis for letting Puma go (highly contradictory to EG business model, ex. Incontrol casting and what not).
The house costs ~36,000 USD/year to EG according to Scoots, which is "literally nothing". It's located in Phoenix which is why its way cheaper compared to other cities, the players split the costs of utilities and food.
Phoenix is an expensive place to live. On the flip side. They will get the money back when they sell at least.
All in all, good luck to Puma and I hope EG does well.
$36,000 a year is $3000 monthly. The house has at minimum 5 people living in it at a time, which equals to $600/monthly per person. That is beyond cheap for the quality of the living space and use they get out of it. Realistically, 5 college students could rent that place at that price with entry level jobs.
The house provides them with a number of uses, such as living space for players attending MLG from Korean, an international airport and media output. Considering it saves them the cost of hotel rooms and the man hours needed to book those hotel rooms, it is a net gain. It also saves EG money on salary for the US staff members, since they are providing cheap housing(they would need to pay them more to keep them on full time if the staff was renting).
But I am with Grettin, the amateur business experts of TL get annoying and really should be clamped down on. They just spread miss information.
Wow, my jaw physically dropped reading this. I hadn't been watching Proleague due to schedule constraints/HoTS binge-ing, but I didn't expect this. Pretty rough, but that's how esports works, I suppose.
EPT
