|
Post by beavis on Jan 3, 2018 5:39:45 GMT -5
Hey Jim - have heard you are a great guy, and some folks at AVP events have made it a point to tell me to say hello to you in person sometime, so I will try to do so out in California sometime this summer at an event!
JB - you are right - way off topic. Back on it, I still naively hope that, at some point, maybe Al B and Kerri will sit down with Donald and figure out a way to work together - I think it would be good for the growth of the sport.
One of the reasons I am not overly concerned with the AVP staying at 7 tournaments is, again, due to my naïve hope that some more might be added, maybe even this summer. In addition, they have all been really good tourneys over the past few years, and seem to be getting better. I can't ever remember getting a firm schedule before New Year's, so maybe there are a few more in the works that just have not been announced yet? We can only hope!
Lastly, I think that before simply criticizing everything and everyone, it is important to actually go to a tournament once in awhile. I know that some folks simply can't, and that is cool. But I think that you cannot actually see and feel the vibe and activities and player intensity that exists when simply watching the live stream or a replay. Just my personal thought, and one that comes to light when I read Guest2 saying stuff about players on here that he would never, in a million years, have the nuts to say to them in person, as well as making comments about player desire and effort that he knows nothing about.
Happy New Year from negative 10 degree Indiana!
|
|
|
Post by bigjohn043 on Jan 5, 2018 12:41:53 GMT -5
If you talk to anyone that really understands the economics of the AVP you will learn a couple of things:
1) Historically, the AVP has lost money on most of its tournaments. The only real money makers are the big events in CA that draw well and are reasonably cheap to put on. Beaches on the east coast generally want big fees to host tournaments. In middle america you have to create a beach and that is very expensive. If you only want to do events that have the potential to make money on their own you are stuck at maybe 8-10 events.
2) Big brand name national sponsors don't want to sponsor a 8-10 event tour. They want 20 weeks and a tour that is going to be all around the country and on TV. But per #1 a bunch of those events are going to lose money so you need a sponsor to pony up a bunch of money to make it work. This is essentially how the old AVP worked.
3) If beach volleyball wants to get back to a 20 stop tour they need the biggest name in beach volleyball (KW). I just can't see big sponsors stepping up without her. The alternative is to wait for another Olympic cycle and if another america wins the gold and is as telegenic at Kerri. Unlikely in my view.
4) Pretending that it was sponsors who demanded that players sign a non-compete and commit to only the AVP is a joke. This was a power play by the AVP that has blown up in their face. KW is at the end of her career and frankly has limited earning potential. Not getting to play in the AVP is hurting her but not that much. On the other hand it is killing the AVP.
5) If I was the new tour I would go to Manhattan and Hermosa. Make it clear that while the AVP is sponsoring the MB/HB Opens they aren't really Opens at all. Players have to sign a very punitive contract to play in these evens. Why no go back to the good old days where you could just sign up and play. Losing either of these tournments kills the AVP.
6) If the AVP was smart they would cave on the whole non-compete thing and get KW back.
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Jan 5, 2018 12:54:58 GMT -5
beavis: (408) 504-2345 - Text me sometime at Huntington, SF or Manhattan and would love to trade some Volleytalk stories...It's nice to be able to go to VT and get SOME inside info at times, where else would you get ANY info?
|
|
|
Post by volleyballjim on Jan 5, 2018 12:59:36 GMT -5
bigjohn043: Hopefully when the court case (AVP v KW) is heard, we can gain SOME insight into who is "unreasonable"... You're right though, BOTH sides do in fact lose, but sometimes you "just can't make a deal". Like dealing with Trump or similar situation, you JUST can't do something amicably...
|
|
|
Post by downtheline on Jan 5, 2018 13:15:52 GMT -5
Casey J makes a trip to Netherlands to pitch the new tour to an audience at the FIVB event.
We shall see whom attends & the message.
No need to continue to beat the dead horse story about a return to the AVP, why the AVP is dead without her, etc, etc.
If she was the answer to financial survival, sponsor retention, & fan growth over the past 12 years why did the AVP fail or not grow fast enough for her as she was the lead star in the rebirth? What’s is ironic & never discussed, is she was a hold out in the Shamrock Holdings acquisition of the LA managed AVP. But you cannot rewrite history only reword it.
More Bvb, more $$, competition is healthy for business. Bring on the new events. Hopefully at a minimum it forces others to raise the value point for the athletes.
However since part of the pitch is to provide a base salary, winnings/bonuses, and become an employee, won’t you then be bound by another set of rules, limitations, & bosses?
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Jan 5, 2018 13:48:26 GMT -5
If the AVP was smart they would cave on the whole non-compete thing and get KW back. Sun bows to no player.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jan 5, 2018 14:18:46 GMT -5
If you talk to anyone that really understands the economics of the AVP you will learn a couple of things: 1) Historically, the AVP has lost money on most of its tournaments. The only real money makers are the big events in CA that draw well and are reasonably cheap to put on. Beaches on the east coast generally want big fees to host tournaments. In middle america you have to create a beach and that is very expensive. If you only want to do events that have the potential to make money on their own you are stuck at maybe 8-10 events. 2) Big brand name national sponsors don't want to sponsor a 8-10 event tour. They want 20 weeks and a tour that is going to be all around the country and on TV. But per #1 a bunch of those events are going to lose money so you need a sponsor to pony up a bunch of money to make it work. This is essentially how the old AVP worked. 3) If beach volleyball wants to get back to a 20 stop tour they need the biggest name in beach volleyball (KW). I just can't see big sponsors stepping up without her. The alternative is to wait for another Olympic cycle and if another america wins the gold and is as telegenic at Kerri. Unlikely in my view. 4) Pretending that it was sponsors who demanded that players sign a non-compete and commit to only the AVP is a joke. This was a power play by the AVP that has blown up in their face. KW is at the end of her career and frankly has limited earning potential. Not getting to play in the AVP is hurting her but not that much. On the other hand it is killing the AVP. 5) If I was the new tour I would go to Manhattan and Hermosa. Make it clear that while the AVP is sponsoring the MB/HB Opens they aren't really Opens at all. Players have to sign a very punitive contract to play in these evens. Why no go back to the good old days where you could just sign up and play. Losing either of these tournments kills the AVP. 6) If the AVP was smart they would cave on the whole non-compete thing and get KW back. I think you are correct about 1 and 2, but the rest? "Blown up in their face?" How? Also I don't know if sponsors demanded it or not but the idea that you need the athletes exclusively to make deals with sponsors is common sense. If April were playing six AVPs and six KWP (or whatever that tour is called) why sponsor the AVP as opposed to April or the KWP? I think you miss the point you made initially that the AVP is now a money loser and will be for a while. The players saying, "you aren't paying us enough for the non-revenue we generate" becomes silly when you take that into account. Finally, Kerri could not play a 20 event tour if her 17th child's access to homeschooling depended on it. First her body can't hold up. In the last four years she has had two major injuries and she hasn't played much, especially if you don't count the left handed quota events. She is 40 this year and she isn't playing. Second her priority has always been FIVB and next year, the pre-Olympic year, she will be trying to qualify for Tokyo. The idea that anything is going to get a 41 year old Kerri Walsh playing 10 + events on US soil next year is not realistic.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jan 5, 2018 14:21:19 GMT -5
Casey J makes a trip to Netherlands to pitch the new tour to an audience at the FIVB event. We shall see whom attends & the message. No need to continue to beat the dead horse story about a return to the AVP, why the AVP is dead without her, etc, etc. If she was the answer to financial survival, sponsor retention, & fan growth over the past 12 years why did the AVP fail or not grow fast enough for her as she was the lead star in the rebirth? What’s is ironic & never discussed, is she was a hold out in the Shamrock Holdings acquisition of the LA managed AVP. But you cannot rewrite history only reword it. More Bvb, more $$, competition is healthy for business. Bring on the new events. Hopefully at a minimum it forces others to raise the value point for the athletes. However since part of the pitch is to provide a base salary, winnings/bonuses, and become an employee, won’t you then be bound by another set of rules, limitations, & bosses? Casey went to the Netherlands to pitch US players? Is that true? I hope that isnt a demonstration of his business acumen. Also why Casey is making these pitches as opposed to Leonard is confusing. Why would players trust the business expertise of Casey/Kerri v Leonard?
|
|
|
Post by haze on Jan 5, 2018 14:51:05 GMT -5
From what I understand Jennings pitched the idea to anyone who would listen. Kinds of sounds like they are just trying to throw out vague information about the tour to anyone in the world (literally) who would listen. Can't imagine it's going very well considering absolutely no specific information has been announced. He better have a good sales pitch to even get people to listen to what he has to say, let alone buy into it.
|
|
|
Post by JB Southpaw on Jan 5, 2018 14:52:21 GMT -5
From what I understand Jennings pitched the idea to anyone who would listen. Kinds of sounds like they are just trying to throw out vague information about the tour to anyone in the world (literally) who would listen. Can't imagine it's going very well considering absolutely no specific information has been announced. He better have a good sales pitch to even get people to listen to what he has to say, let alone buy into it. Is he coaching Bill and Evans?
|
|
|
Post by haze on Jan 5, 2018 15:27:03 GMT -5
From what I understand Jennings pitched the idea to anyone who would listen. Kinds of sounds like they are just trying to throw out vague information about the tour to anyone in the world (literally) who would listen. Can't imagine it's going very well considering absolutely no specific information has been announced. He better have a good sales pitch to even get people to listen to what he has to say, let alone buy into it. Is he coaching Bill and Evans? Not sure that could very well be the real reason why he's over there.
|
|
|
Post by ajm on Jan 5, 2018 18:25:59 GMT -5
I think you are correct about 1 and 2, but the rest? "Blown up in their face?" How? Also I don't know if sponsors demanded it or not but the idea that you need the athletes exclusively to make deals with sponsors is common sense. If April were playing six AVPs and six KWP (or whatever that tour is called) why sponsor the AVP as opposed to April or the KWP? If April's presence is your motivation for sponsoring a tour, why not sponsor both? Now you have 12 opportunities to reach her fans instead of 6. Better yet, if sponsorship funding is so dependent on a few top players, maybe sponsors should fund those players directly rather than the tour(s) they play on.
|
|
|
Post by guest2 on Jan 5, 2018 18:47:25 GMT -5
I think you are correct about 1 and 2, but the rest? "Blown up in their face?" How? Also I don't know if sponsors demanded it or not but the idea that you need the athletes exclusively to make deals with sponsors is common sense. If April were playing six AVPs and six KWP (or whatever that tour is called) why sponsor the AVP as opposed to April or the KWP? If April's presence is your motivation for sponsoring a tour, why not sponsor both? Now you have 12 opportunities to reach her fans instead of 6. Better yet, if sponsorship funding is so dependent on a few top players, maybe sponsors should fund those players directly rather than the tour(s) they play on. Accepting your premise for a minute (and here you would also need to assume a sponsor wants to deal with two tours, sees value in sponsoring both etc.) it still is worse for the AVP. You have a sponsor splitting money that would otherwise go solely to the AVP. There is a very small market for BVB, even at its height this was true, I don't see why, other than altruism, Sun would forego an opportunity to maintain his effective monopoly
|
|
|
Post by donnyw on Jan 5, 2018 19:07:52 GMT -5
From what I understand Jennings pitched the idea to anyone who would listen. Kinds of sounds like they are just trying to throw out vague information about the tour to anyone in the world (literally) who would listen. Can't imagine it's going very well considering absolutely no specific information has been announced. He better have a good sales pitch to even get people to listen to what he has to say, let alone buy into it. I’ve asked this question a few other times on different threads, but I just don’t seem to get any really good response as to why so much negativity surrounding a another potential tour coming to the USA? I would think the possible 3, 4, 5 or more events that Kerri her team could bring to the USA, not to mention the media exposure & mores eyeballs would be fantastic. Some of you are probably saying “your just a Kerri fan/supporter”...Yeah I am but I am also a big fan of this sport and I would be happy to have some more domestic events. We should all be a fan of hers is she can bring more exposure & fans to this game. We need to let go of the fact that Kerri & Sun will work together to grow this sport. Sun is doing it his way...Lets give her a break & see if there is the potential to raise this game beyond 7 or 8 events a year...
|
|
|
Post by donnyw on Jan 5, 2018 19:11:19 GMT -5
If April's presence is your motivation for sponsoring a tour, why not sponsor both? Now you have 12 opportunities to reach her fans instead of 6. Better yet, if sponsorship funding is so dependent on a few top players, maybe sponsors should fund those players directly rather than the tour(s) they play on. Accepting your premise for a minute (and here you would also need to assume a sponsor wants to deal with two tours, sees value in sponsoring both etc.) it still is worse for the AVP. You have a sponsor splitting money that would otherwise go solely to the AVP. There is a very small market for BVB, even at its height this was true, I don't see why, other than altruism, Sun would forego an opportunity to maintain his effective monopoly [ Do we know what sponsors Kerri is approaching or has approached? Knowing her, she is targeting the big guns. Just my opinion...
|
|