|
On November 23 2016 04:01 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2016 02:51 RvB wrote:On November 23 2016 02:06 palexhur wrote:On November 22 2016 19:22 Arceus wrote:
$60k/year is great considering the popularity of sc2 in Korea. Pointless to quote BW salaries unless OP wants to point out that BW is 4 times more popular than Sc2 in Korea (which is true) You said everything, 60k for a game that was never popular in Kr. is a great salary, I am sure that even without the cap there woulndt be anyone above that money. Then why have the cap? to make sure the money is spread more evenly amongst the players? imagine the team has 150k available to pay salaries. without a cap they might be tempted to give the best player 100k a year and the other players like 10k a year. With a cap the most a single player can get is 60k and the other players get more.
These numbers are not exactly realistic but ok, lets go with that.
By paying 100k to the best player and 10k to the rest they incentivize the weaker players to do better so they have negotiative power and can make more than 10k. It ensures that they'll practice and analyze as much as the best player to catch up to him because they know they will get rewarded. At the same time the low salary of the other players incentivizes their best player to continue to outperform everybody which is also important because he raises the average skill of the team.
By having significantly uneven salaries according to results/fame the entire team will perform better in the long run which makes the team more money. It could at some point even lead to an increase of the salary for the worst players.
Again, I think 10k for the worse players is unrealistic, the players would probably collectively negotiate and threaten to leave together if they don't get more. This would lead to the best player getting "only" 4-5x more than the rest, the financial incentive would remain.
|
I think the real question is what happens when a team breaks the collusion and offers more money? That team could then have any player they wanted and with that a very good chance to produce good results. All it takes for that to happen is one money man who doesn't give a shit.
I mean that's how it goes in the west, except it's more expensive here because no caps. I don't understand how this mechanism is enforced. KeSPA exclusion? Is it in their official regulations? Guess not, otherwise we wouldn't have learned about this from Flash's stream.
|
On November 23 2016 03:57 nimdil wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2016 02:51 RvB wrote:On November 23 2016 02:06 palexhur wrote:On November 22 2016 19:22 Arceus wrote:
$60k/year is great considering the popularity of sc2 in Korea. Pointless to quote BW salaries unless OP wants to point out that BW is 4 times more popular than Sc2 in Korea (which is true) You said everything, 60k for a game that was never popular in Kr. is a great salary, I am sure that even without the cap there woulndt be anyone above that money. Then why have the cap? So poorer teams can be competetive in terms of salary? Maybe there were thinking about eSF teams as well or I don't know.
Did this actually happen? I can only think of life but was Afreeca a poor team? I dunno. The eSF teams could never pay top players anyway. They could hardly pay for their teamhouses.
On November 23 2016 04:01 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2016 02:51 RvB wrote:On November 23 2016 02:06 palexhur wrote:On November 22 2016 19:22 Arceus wrote:
$60k/year is great considering the popularity of sc2 in Korea. Pointless to quote BW salaries unless OP wants to point out that BW is 4 times more popular than Sc2 in Korea (which is true) You said everything, 60k for a game that was never popular in Kr. is a great salary, I am sure that even without the cap there woulndt be anyone above that money. Then why have the cap? to make sure the money is spread more evenly amongst the players? imagine the team has 150k available to pay salaries. without a cap they might be tempted to give the best player 100k a year and the other players like 10k a year. With a cap the most a single player can get is 60k and the other players get more.
And what reason does a team have to pay more to other players? Their value won't suddenly increase because a top player gets paid less. The team will pocket the difference between 100k and 60k for itself.
|
On November 22 2016 23:11 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2016 22:03 Kevin_Sorbo wrote:
I cant believe some people think this is okay... $60K per year is roughly five times what I get. Surely, I live in a cheaper country, but by far not by that much. So pardon me if I find it difficult to feel sorry for this terrible exploitation. Again, it's completely pointless for anything and anyone but those selected few individuals to pack so much money into a handful of progamers, when there are hordes or non-paid or severly underpaid ones. If someone should support the limitation on top-heavy salaries in esports, it is the progamers in the first place.
its not the numbers that matter. its the collusion.
|
Eh, depends what they do with the salary caps. If orgs were just pocketing the change instead of compensating appropriately, then that's scummy, but if they were doing it to provide more stable distribution of player salaries across all members of their respective teams and to prevent inflated pricing via outside investment and top talent poaching, then that's not really different from salary cap concepts in traditional sports.
|
And what reason does a team have to pay more to other players? Their value won't suddenly increase because a top player gets paid less. The team will pocket the difference between 100k and 60k for itself.
You don't know that, that's just speculation on your part.
I don't know either but I think it's possible that the sponsors say something like "Hey, you get 150k for salaries, spread that amongst the players".
|
we're gonna need a lot of time until players get the respect they deserve
|
I highly doubt that when teams are colluding to cap salary, they are doing out of notions of pay equality between individual players, but are rather pocketing the money for themselves.
|
On November 22 2016 15:11 Probe1 wrote:Is it really? $60,000 USD is a very comfortable salary. What would be better for everyone? Why are we upset ProLeague is gone? Well for that last one there's two parts. 1. No ProLeague games  2. Players no longer have stable income and it will be difficult for some to continue being progamers without it. Having a salary cap (which is ubiquitous in sports) spreads the money a team has to more players. How would we address this if it was revealed from the opposite side? "Report: Flash receives $120,000 yearly salary, next highest teammate receives $20,000". We'd be bothered by that too right?
Sales Teams figured this out millennia ago by simply having target goals each season/year.
Base Salary of X, Performance Bonus of Y, Company Performance Bonus of Z
You make at least this much, you get this much more if you do well, and everyone gets something more if team does well.
Top players naturally move to the front of the earnings pack based on meritocracy, new guys still have value by being good practice partners/snipers with an emphasis on team performance over personal performance.
|
I'm absolutely shocked by some of the reactions here. How do you guys justify something like this by saying "it is still good money"? It's an absurd point of view to take. If Flash is worth hundreds of thousands then he should get paid hundreds of thousands. That is life changing money he would be missing out on. Comparing it to traditional wages is fucking stupid. Athletes that are the absolute best in their sport should be compensated fairly for it. The guy has taken infinitely more risk in picking his career than anyone you know and achieved infinitely more than some random $60K desk job clerk will ever do.
I'm not necessarily against salary caps. I definitely think that it can be good for a sport to have them (soccer is insane). However the way to do a salary cap is to have a player union sign off on it for the betterment of the sport. A player union has all player rights in mind and when a potential top player is still a rookie he will have to be a part of the player union and thus everything is organized in a way where it benefits the vast majority of players (except the very best like Lebron James) and teams. This way they can protect the guys at the bottom who otherwise might be getting fucked from a completely open market. A mutually agreed upon (between companies) salary cap without proper agreements in place would be nothing more than an anti trust cartel behavior violation.
|
9071 Posts
Money laundry, match fixing, cartel agreements - esports is like 1930s new york
|
On November 23 2016 17:40 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
I'm absolutely shocked by some of the reactions here. How do you guys justify something like this by saying "it is still good money"? It's an absurd point of view to take. If Flash is worth hundreds of thousands then he should get paid hundreds of thousands. That is life changing money he would be missing out on. Comparing it to traditional wages is fucking stupid. Athletes that are the absolute best in their sport should be compensated fairly for it. The guy has taken infinitely more risk in picking his career than anyone you know and achieved infinitely more than some random $60K desk job clerk will ever do.
I'm not necessarily against salary caps. I definitely think that it can be good for a sport to have them (soccer is insane). However the way to do a salary cap is to have a player union sign off on it for the betterment of the sport. A player union has all player rights in mind and when a potential top player is still a rookie he will have to be a part of the player union and thus everything is organized in a way where it benefits the vast majority of players (except the very best like Lebron James) and teams. This way they can protect the guys at the bottom who otherwise might be getting fucked from a completely open market. A mutually agreed upon (between companies) salary cap without proper agreements in place would be nothing more than an anti trust cartel behavior violation.
And I am honestly shocked by those shocked reactions. Are you people really so ingrained with capitalist thinking that you can't see anything else? Everything has to follow the free market rules we have in place for business? The teams aren't "companies", they aren't really competing on a market, they are jointly running a show for us to watch.
Saying that Flash is "worth" something is equally absurd. He is worth exactly the kind of money someone wants to pay him. There is no deeper moral principle forcing us to compensate someone for playing a game unless your morals and logic are completely blinded by the status quo of our society. "Infinitely more risk than anyone you know" is almost childish level of exaggeration. I know people whose career is far more screwed, because they invested their time into caring about a sick family member full time or trying to put their hands towards solving whatever terrible issue our civilization caused in places like Africa. Comparing the "sacrifices" of someone who decided to fuck school and play a game full time to such people is actually offensive. And as even Scarlett (the fucking progamer Scarlett, not a keyboard warrior nobody, but someone who IS in the situation!) noted that you can actually study at an older age - and you can do that probably much more comfortably than anyone coming from a poor family at 18, if you had been making $60K for years before.
I think that a lot of argumentation in this thread comes from the illusion of self-importance. Yeah, sc2 is fun, but it's just a game, get over it. Those terribly exploited progamers are maybe worse off in some aspects than some of their other friends who decided to pursue a great career, but at least they might have enjoyed some of it - and are till better off than half of the world's population because of the luxury of not being born in an shithole without drinking water. A well-paying job isn't everything (this comes from someone who gets paid $800 a month and would never trade it for life).
|
On November 23 2016 18:38 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2016 17:40 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
I'm absolutely shocked by some of the reactions here. How do you guys justify something like this by saying "it is still good money"? It's an absurd point of view to take. If Flash is worth hundreds of thousands then he should get paid hundreds of thousands. That is life changing money he would be missing out on. Comparing it to traditional wages is fucking stupid. Athletes that are the absolute best in their sport should be compensated fairly for it. The guy has taken infinitely more risk in picking his career than anyone you know and achieved infinitely more than some random $60K desk job clerk will ever do.
I'm not necessarily against salary caps. I definitely think that it can be good for a sport to have them (soccer is insane). However the way to do a salary cap is to have a player union sign off on it for the betterment of the sport. A player union has all player rights in mind and when a potential top player is still a rookie he will have to be a part of the player union and thus everything is organized in a way where it benefits the vast majority of players (except the very best like Lebron James) and teams. This way they can protect the guys at the bottom who otherwise might be getting fucked from a completely open market. A mutually agreed upon (between companies) salary cap without proper agreements in place would be nothing more than an anti trust cartel behavior violation. And I am honestly shocked by those shocked reactions. Are you people really so ingrained with capitalist thinking that you can't see anything else? Everything has to follow the free market rules we have in place for business? The teams aren't "companies", they aren't really competing on a market, they are jointly running a show for us to watch.
They certainly are companies trust me. I have no clue why you would even imply that they are not companies. I'm competing out there on the market for staff and players every day, so I feel I would know. For purposes of this discussion this is a sport just like anything else. The idea that what I'm saying is ingrained with capitalist thinking is pretty much the exact opposite of what this is about. Companies coming together to artificially control the market is capitalism gone wrong and it is about controlling everyone at the bottom so that they can make more money at the top.
Saying that Flash is "worth" something is equally absurd. He is worth exactly the kind of money someone wants to pay him. There is no deeper moral principle forcing us to compensate someone for playing a game unless your morals and logic are completely blinded by the status quo of our society. "Infinitely more risk than anyone you know" is almost childish level of exaggeration. I know people whose career is far more screwed, because they invested their time into caring about a sick family member full time or trying to put their hands towards solving whatever terrible issue our civilization caused in places like Africa. Comparing the "sacrifices" of someone who decided to fuck school and play a game full time to such people is actually offensive. And as even Scarlett (the fucking progamer Scarlett, not a keyboard warrior nobody, but someone who IS in the situation!) noted that you can actually study at an older age - and you can do that probably much more comfortably than anyone coming from a poor family at 18, if you had been making $60K for years before.
He's worth what someone wants to pay him you are entirely right about that, hit the nail on the head. That is of course assuming that they aren't participating in anti trust behavior to keep his salary artificially down. And yes it is infinitely more risk to become a progamer than it is following the typical go to study earn $60K desk jobs. I'm not sure what people caring about sick family members has to do with it, but my heart goes out to them as well.
I think that a lot of argumentation in this thread comes from the illusion of self-importance. Yeah, sc2 is fun, but it's just a game, get over it. Those terribly exploited progamers are maybe worse off in some aspects than some of their other friends who decided to pursue a great career, but at least they might have enjoyed some of it - and are till better off than half of the world's population because of the luxury of not being born in an shithole without drinking water. A well-paying job isn't everything (this comes from someone who gets paid $800 a month and would never trade it for life).
It is a game that has become a sport. Just because the best of the best are getting fucked over and are still better off than the world's population doesn't mean they aren't getting fucked. If you used the world's population to determine who can and cannot complain about the law this would become a funny place. Imagine getting robbbed or your house gets broken into and you ask for the burglar to be held accountable, then someone comes along and says he should go free because you are still living above the poverty line.
|
On November 23 2016 17:40 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
If Flash is worth hundreds of thousands then he should get paid hundreds of thousands. That is life changing money he would be missing out on. Comparing it to traditional wages is fucking stupid. Athletes that are the absolute best in their sport should be compensated fairly for it.
So all the writers and graphic artists working for this site are worth $0 and are paid exactly what they are worth which is $0? After all this is what the "market rate" has determined for them.
People who contribute to the financial health of this site should be fairly compensated for it after all the owners have just been written a minimum 6 and even 7 figure cheques for the sale of TL.
|
On November 23 2016 18:50 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2016 18:38 opisska wrote:On November 23 2016 17:40 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:
I'm absolutely shocked by some of the reactions here. How do you guys justify something like this by saying "it is still good money"? It's an absurd point of view to take. If Flash is worth hundreds of thousands then he should get paid hundreds of thousands. That is life changing money he would be missing out on. Comparing it to traditional wages is fucking stupid. Athletes that are the absolute best in their sport should be compensated fairly for it. The guy has taken infinitely more risk in picking his career than anyone you know and achieved infinitely more than some random $60K desk job clerk will ever do.
I'm not necessarily against salary caps. I definitely think that it can be good for a sport to have them (soccer is insane). However the way to do a salary cap is to have a player union sign off on it for the betterment of the sport. A player union has all player rights in mind and when a potential top player is still a rookie he will have to be a part of the player union and thus everything is organized in a way where it benefits the vast majority of players (except the very best like Lebron James) and teams. This way they can protect the guys at the bottom who otherwise might be getting fucked from a completely open market. A mutually agreed upon (between companies) salary cap without proper agreements in place would be nothing more than an anti trust cartel behavior violation. And I am honestly shocked by those shocked reactions. Are you people really so ingrained with capitalist thinking that you can't see anything else? Everything has to follow the free market rules we have in place for business? The teams aren't "companies", they aren't really competing on a market, they are jointly running a show for us to watch. They certainly are companies trust me I would know. I have no clue why you would even imply that they are not companies. I'm competing out there on the market for staff and players every day. For purposes of this discussion this is a sport just like anything else. The idea that what I'm saying is ingrained with capitalist thinking is pretty much the exact opposite of what this is about. Companies coming together to artificially control the market is capitalism gone wrong and it is about controlling everyone at the bottom so that they can make more money at the top. Show nested quote +Saying that Flash is "worth" something is equally absurd. He is worth exactly the kind of money someone wants to pay him. There is no deeper moral principle forcing us to compensate someone for playing a game unless your morals and logic are completely blinded by the status quo of our society. "Infinitely more risk than anyone you know" is almost childish level of exaggeration. I know people whose career is far more screwed, because they invested their time into caring about a sick family member full time or trying to put their hands towards solving whatever terrible issue our civilization caused in places like Africa. Comparing the "sacrifices" of someone who decided to fuck school and play a game full time to such people is actually offensive. And as even Scarlett (the fucking progamer Scarlett, not a keyboard warrior nobody, but someone who IS in the situation!) noted that you can actually study at an older age - and you can do that probably much more comfortably than anyone coming from a poor family at 18, if you had been making $60K for years before. He's worth what someone wants to pay him you are entirely right about that, hit the nail on the head. That is of course assuming that they aren't participating in anti trust behavior to keep his salary artificially down. And yes it is infinitely more risk to become a progamer than it is following the typical go to study earn $60K desk jobs. I'm not sure what people caring about sick family members has to do with it, but my heart goes out to them as well. Show nested quote +I think that a lot of argumentation in this thread comes from the illusion of self-importance. Yeah, sc2 is fun, but it's just a game, get over it. Those terribly exploited progamers are maybe worse off in some aspects than some of their other friends who decided to pursue a great career, but at least they might have enjoyed some of it - and are till better off than half of the world's population because of the luxury of not being born in an shithole without drinking water. A well-paying job isn't everything (this comes from someone who gets paid $800 a month and would never trade it for life). It is a game that has become a sport. Just because the best of the best are getting fucked over and are still better off than the world's population doesn't mean they aren't getting fucked. If you used the world's population to determine who can and cannot complain about the law this would become a funny place. Imagine getting robbbed or your house gets broken into and you ask for the burglar to be held accountable, then someone comes along and says he should go free because you are still living above the poverty line.
The "sport" argument is pointless - my attitude would be the same if we were talking about soccer: the fact that it is on a large scale and more well-known doesn't change the observation that the super-high salaries of top stars are stupid, the claim of those players to them is not worth protection by the rest of the society and I won't consider the "fucked over" if they got half the money instead.
Now tell me, why did the korean scene essentially end? Was it something about money? Because at the end, I find it hard to imagine that the actual reason for closing down everything was anything than the lack of money. We liked the scene, right? We liked watching those teams and proleague. So why should we be against a move that saved them money at the expense of a handful of already-rich players? I just don't get this logic at all. I find it hard to believe that the money saved on not overpaying Flash even more specifically ended up in a pocket of a CEO - well, it might have happened, but then the same could have happened with any other money. So who is the evil "them" who save the money on the salaries of the players? Who is the evil "them" who "colluded" to this terrible wrongdoing? I think it is the teams we fucking loved and wanted to be financially viable ...
|
9071 Posts
They dont want ya makin dough playin Starcraft
|
On November 22 2016 19:15 KT_Elwood wrote:
What Kespa could have done is a minium Wage/Healthcare/Retirementplan for Progamers. Like every progamer is paid 10$/hour, and gets paid for 5 years after the contract ends to go back to school.
Yeah and finance that with a tax on salaries over 60k$
RoninKenshin wrote :
With a cap, you have no incentive to drive yourself to mental exhausting to be a tier above everyone else. Instead it's fine to be just good enough and earn your paycheck
I disagree with this. You speak like all there was to get in life was $$$. Why do these guys play this video game so much in the first place?
|
So to those who would be ok with a salary cap on progamers, would you be ok with a salary cap on your own job?
Are you really that petty that you would rather see people who earn more than you get their salary cut, than having the chance to earn more than the salary cap yourself?
I earn under 20k a year, but if someday my job is worth 60k+ to society, I'll be fucking happy instead of think "Oh no I should be earning 20k like I did, better salary cap this shit so everything is fair".
|
What a stupid point, the landscape of your industry is completely different from that of a competitive esports game. The salary cap forces parity, prevents it from becoming the same few teams winning every time (European football anyone?) and gives smaller teams a chance. Not saying I agree or disagree with this collusion (surely it's illegal, as a cartel agreement?) but they're clear advantages to it. Maybe a couple high-flyers have to suffer a bit for the betterment of the sport.
|
On November 23 2016 20:30 Espers wrote:
What a stupid point, the landscape of your industry is completely different from that of a competitive esports game. The salary cap forces parity, prevents it from becoming the same few teams winning every time (European football anyone?) and gives smaller teams a chance. Not saying I agree or disagree with this collusion (surely it's illegal, as a cartel agreement?) but they're clear advantages to it. Maybe a couple high-flyers have to suffer a bit for the betterment of the sport.
So your answer is no, you would not salary cap your own job. But progamers must agree to it because "the landscape of their industry is completely different". Yes that's right, it's different, it's worse lol. Basically kids who work in this industry for a few years and then GL you need to find a different job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
