# Tiger Woods appearance fee?



## Wysiwyg (10 November 2009)

What does this say for a gifted golfer who has everything and still accepts money for turning up to play golf? It would be wonderful to hear news he has donated the money to a school or children's hospital.

What is worse in my opinion is a state government paying a famous golfer to come here and play. 


> When Woods confirmed his participation, it sparked heated debate in Australia about how much taxpayers should contribute to his appearance fee.
> 
> *The golfing superstar will reportedly be paid $3 million to turn up, with the Victoria government chipping in half.*





> He's not so much a golfer as a phenomenon, one of the greatest athletes of our age, a multicultural role model and cash register on legs.





> Appleby said having Woods in the field would give a huge boost to the game in Australia and the Victorian government's gamble was a good bet. "This week's very unique," Appleby said. "You've got a guy on a big price-tag, a big roll on a colour - a red or black and bang, put it all down and it's an odds-on payer. It's a big investment but I think it's a real smart one. It's done right - ticket sales are through the roof, something we've not seen for a long time.


----------



## robots (10 November 2009)

hello,

yeah ordinary stuff Wys

11yrs since here in Aus

on the bandwagon, Hammer here as well

thankyou
Doctor Robots


----------



## johnnyg (10 November 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> What does this say for a gifted golfer who has everything and still accepts money for turning up to play golf? It would be wonderful to hear news he has donated the money to a school or children's hospital.
> 
> What is worse in my opinion is a state government paying a famous golfer to come here and play.




Good on the government and tour management for getting him to come down under. And I have absolutely no dramas with the amount of money he's getting.

If you seen his interview on 60 minutes you'd see he has quite a big charity/organization in the states that helps disadvantaged kids.


----------



## Vizion (10 November 2009)

From a financial point of view it makes sense. In one sense its exactly the same as paying to bring out a rock band, people want to see him. The tournament is sold out. End of discussion really. 

If you are talking about the amount of money that is paid to people to run about chasing a ball or riding a bike, being all out of proportion to what they do I think it's bloody disgraceful. While research scientists & doctors get paid a pittance in comparison, unless of course the doctor is a cosmetic one.
I don't care how good someone is at a sport, we have our values way out of wack on how we treat them and venerate them.


----------



## Macquack (10 November 2009)

johnnyg said:


> Good on the government and tour management for getting him to come down under. And I have absolutely no dramas with the amount of money he's getting.




If Woods was a true gentleman of the game he would at least throw his $3 million appearance fee into the prize money pool and probably win it back anyway. Woods is favourite to win (Sportsbet $2.60). 

I believe paying appearance fees turns golf tournaments into *exhibitions* rather than *competitions*.


----------



## Wysiwyg (10 November 2009)

Vizion said:


> From a financial point of view it makes sense. In one sense its exactly the same as paying to bring out a rock band, people want to see him. The tournament is sold out. End of discussion really.




All good if anyone wants to see a rock band. All good if the tax payer isn't paying for the rock band to come out. All good if anyone enjoys chasing the dimpled white ball around.

Tax payer funds to encourage a famous golfer to play here is blatant abuse of the power entrusted in government. Why not come here and play for free under invitation and if not interested then no problem. Alternatively if golfers want to see a famous golfer then open up a contribution line to "bring Tiger to Australia". Don't use tax payer's money.


----------



## nunthewiser (10 November 2009)

I would have done a strip for less.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (10 November 2009)

What a joke!

Shouldn't appearance fee's be paid for by sponsors that paste all there crap propaganda all over the event site? Since when did governments get involved with my tax money to pay some overseas anybody to come here regardless if it draws a crowd or not.
That money should stay in Australia for Australians.

How are Keven 07 computers for all crap going?

G


----------



## Vizion (10 November 2009)

nunthewiser said:


> I would have done a strip for less.




I would pay you more NOT too


----------



## Happy (10 November 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> ...
> *Tax payer funds to encourage a famous golfer to play here is blatant abuse of the power entrusted in government*. Why not come here and play for free under invitation and if not interested then no problem. Alternatively if golfers want to see a famous golfer then open up a contribution line to "bring Tiger to Australia". *Don't use tax payer's money*.





Exactly my point too, homeless people, would agree with me.

For $3,000,000 quite few places of residence could be built here.
We have nothing form payment to charity in US.


----------



## schnootle (10 November 2009)

I fundamentally disagree with the appearance fee, you would think he could just play because it is somewhere different that he hasn't played before and enjoy himself.

Another way of looking at it that it is a prudent way of spending tourism advertisement money, a lot of people the world over will consume information about Melbourne and Australia which may pay off in the long run.


----------



## Tink (10 November 2009)

schnootle said:


> Another way of looking at it that it is a prudent way of spending tourism advertisement money, a lot of people the world over will consume information about Melbourne and Australia which may pay off in the long run.




Yep thats how they look at it.

Advertising Australia, for anyone that comes out, not just him.


----------



## nomore4s (10 November 2009)

johnnyg said:


> If you seen his interview on 60 minutes you'd see he has quite a big charity/organization in the states that helps disadvantaged kids.




He does plenty to give back imo.

The issue isn't the appearance fee or even how much it is, the issue is who has paid for it. If a private promoter had paid the fee it probably wouldn't have caused a stir at all.

The other way to look at it is what return are the government getting for the investment? If Tiger being here creates more for the economy then they outlayed it is a good investment and everyone wins, how you would measure that though I'm not sure.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 November 2009)

Tink said:


> Yep thats how they look at it.
> 
> Advertising Australia, for anyone that comes out, not just him.




Bring back Hoges!


----------



## stockt12 (11 November 2009)

absolutely money well spent...

wonderful for the event to have him there, wonderful for the tourism it will bring/tickets it has sold , wonderful from an international press standpoint as well...

i'd expect people disliking this who are on a greenpeace forum[ie], but cetaintly not a stock forum  :


----------



## Wagyu (11 November 2009)

The Vic government would see that $3 million bucks appearance fee generate $15 million for the state over 1 week. Not a bad investment.
From TWs' perspective, if someones going to make $15 million off my back I would want to be paid accordingly.

For all you doomsayers out there, pick up a golf club play nine holes and unwind a bit. Otherwise, build a bridge...


----------



## Nyden (11 November 2009)

schnootle said:


> I fundamentally disagree with the appearance fee, you would think he could just play because it is somewhere different that he hasn't played before and enjoy himself.
> 
> Another way of looking at it that it is a prudent way of spending tourism advertisement money, a lot of people the world over will consume information about Melbourne and Australia which may pay off in the long run.




Absolutely. It's an investment; an investment that will pay off. It also adds a higher level of legitimacy to the tournament - which may now attract a more International audience.


----------



## Mr J (11 November 2009)

Many people seem quick to judge. A few of you may change your minds if you were presented with the same opportunity, and how do any of you know what he will do with it? He doesn't just give to charity, he has his own charity organisation. Finally, it is his money, he can choose what he wants to do with it. Who are we to pass judgement on how someone spends their own money?


----------



## rock86 (11 November 2009)

One word... WOW. All the naysayers out there really sit back and have a look at why this money is being spent, the generated income from this $3 mil the government will recoup 10 folds, also by this event being sold out there are alot more staff being hired at this event.

As with the money, he donates more to charity then any of us will earn in our lifetime, that $3 mil his charity organisation has probably donated that this year.

Geez his a greedy man for taking the $3 mil


----------



## lasty (11 November 2009)

rock86 said:


> One word... WOW. All the naysayers out there really sit back and have a look at why this money is being spent, the generated income from this $3 mil the government will recoup 10 folds, also by this event being sold out there are alot more staff being hired at this event.
> 
> As with the money, he donates more to charity then any of us will earn in our lifetime, that $3 mil his charity organisation has probably donated that this year.
> 
> Geez his a greedy man for taking the $3 mil




It makes you wonder on here some people questioning the appearance fee and not understanding the revenue intake.
Especially in a "traders" forum...
Perhaps this should have been started in the beginners thread


----------



## Happy (11 November 2009)

We should start to do things differently so we don't have another global financial meltdown. And not for a moment I think that this one is over.

Having one person earning insane amount of money and another (their fault or not) in absolute poverty.

Fees and wages should have a limit and no person in a lifetime should be allowed to earn 1 BILLION DOLLARS


----------



## Nyden (11 November 2009)

Happy said:


> We should start to do things differently so we don't have another global financial meltdown. And not for a moment I think that this one is over.
> 
> Having one person earning insane amount of money and another (their fault or not) in absolute poverty.
> 
> Fees and wages should have a limit and no person in a lifetime should be allowed to earn 1 BILLION DOLLARS




Why the hell not? Are you a socialist, or something? (Fine if you are)

What motivation is there to work long hard nights, study for 5 years longer than most, and sacrifice many aspects of personal life? Why would I work so hard, when my salary is going to be capped at $XXXX?

I would *love* to be a billionaire. The super-yachts, a big ol' beach house for every day of the week, a couple of helicopters, and perhaps even a private  jet. You, nor anybody else; has the right to tell me that I am not allowed to aspire to these possessions. Will I ever get these things? I might. The odds are certainly stacked against me, but I am very young, have no intent of children, and am already quite money savvy.

Everyone being a middle class family-man with 2.5 kids might sound like nirvana to you, but it sounds like hell to me.

What I will agree on, is that yes - something needs to change. Salaries need to become more performance based; individually assessed. But, guess what? What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. This rule should not only be applied to white-collars, but to all employees. Abolish unions, and let people negotiate based on their own merit.


----------



## Wysiwyg (11 November 2009)

I did allude to the moral values on this topic but the money aspect overrides. It would be interesting to see a show of hands across Victoria on whether they want to pay a professional to play a game of golf in their state.


----------



## Wysiwyg (11 November 2009)

Nyden said:


> Abolish unions, and let people negotiate based on their own merit.



I'm sure a thread with this topic would generate a health debate.


----------



## rowie (11 November 2009)

I have no issue with his appearance fee - he generates huge demand that his asking fee is simply a percentage of the finances that he generates. 
The govt paying for it though is totally unacceptable. The main sponsors and tournament organisers as well as tv networks are the main beneficiaries of his appearance - they are the ones that should be paying for it. Just appears too much like business interests and govt working together at the expense of the tax payer. 
Tiger has given alot back in charity (alot more than most) so I wouldnt hang it on him being greedy or anything. Like I said before, its simple case of supply and demand - him being hugely in demand.


----------



## Wysiwyg (11 November 2009)

rowie said:


> I have no issue with his appearance fee - he generates huge demand that his asking fee is simply a percentage of the finances that he generates.
> *The govt paying for it though is totally unacceptable. The main sponsors and tournament organisers as well as tv networks are the main beneficiaries of his appearance - they are the ones that should be paying for it.* Just appears too much like business interests and govt working together at the expense of the tax payer.
> Tiger has given alot back in charity (alot more than most) so I wouldnt hang it on him being greedy or anything. Like I said before, its simple case of supply and demand - him being hugely in demand.




And that is the meat in the sandwich. 

The total prize pool is (just) $1.5 million. The Wood`s camp set the fee and the organisers and government had to stump up or otherwise a no show. Maybe 5 or 10 million next time. Australia happy hunting ground.


----------



## Mr J (11 November 2009)

Nyden said:


> What I will agree on, is that yes - something needs to change. Salaries need to become more performance based; individually assessed. But, guess what? What's good for the goose, is good for the gander. This rule should not only be applied to white-collars, but to all employees. Abolish unions, and let people negotiate based on their own merit.




This is actually socialism. There are a number of quotes to draw from, but the essence is that you are fairly compensated for your value.


----------



## bloomy88 (11 November 2009)

rowie said:


> The govt paying for it though is totally unacceptable. The main sponsors and tournament organisers as well as tv networks are the main beneficiaries of his appearance - they are the ones that should be paying for it. Just appears too much like business interests and govt working together at the expense of the tax payer.




I'm sure the government wont do to badly out of it indirectly with all the extra money that is being spent on the event now that Tiger is invloved. It's possible that people will come from outside Victoria and spend money here while they are seeing him.
Im guessing the government would use the same argument that the use for having the F1s here....


----------



## Macquack (11 November 2009)

bloomy88 said:


> Im guessing the government would use the *same argument that the use for having the F1s here*....




I dont know if that is a good argument when it cost the Victorian taxpayer $40 million to bankroll the Australian F1 Grand Prix in 2009.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/me...-40-million-loss/story-e6frf7jo-1225787073775

When is the Victorian Government going to wake up to the fact they are getting rorted by the Australian Grand Prix Corporation, Bernie Eccelstone and co.


----------



## Happy (12 November 2009)

Decency comes to mind; also current remuneration rules do not seem to be right.

Not sure if: ‘you pay peanuts you get monkeys’ applied to all the billions paid to top CEO and Global Financial meltdown they produced, looks that peanuts got more expensive.


----------



## cornnfedd (12 November 2009)

1. The government will get back their $3 million tend fold or maybe more - they probably already have with the exposure it has generated.

2. Some of you have typical Aussie attitudes - if someone is successfull we love to bring em down. Woods can do what he wants with the money, he HAS earned it and its his cash. I doubt any of you would donate $1 to charity when you make money on stocks, so why bag other people - worry about yourself and what YOU are doing for the community, and what charities YOU are donating your $ to.

Tiger is a great role model for people, he never does anything wrong, doesnt drink, take drugs and all that **** and is a fantastic golfer, so good luck to Tiger.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (12 November 2009)

cornnfedd said:


> 1. The government will get back their $3 million tend fold or maybe more - they probably already have with the exposure it has generated.




So you, and the others previously, are saying the $1.5 million (only half of the $3 million) spent on the appearance fee by the Victorian State Government will generate at least $15 million in STATE taxes/revenue?

Any tax on profits is paid to the federal government.

Just curious how the state revenue will be recouped?


----------



## johnnyg (12 November 2009)

I still cannot get my head around some of the responses.  I'm almost lost for words. 

Who gives a #%$@ about the 1.5 Million the Victorian Goverment put up, Imagine all the publicity Victoria and Melbourne are getting on the world stage from this.

There is 414,000 online articles for ' Tiger Woods Melbourne ' in the last week alone, to get that sort of exposure, with possibly the worlds best athlete for 1.5 Million.........Cheap .


----------



## Julia (12 November 2009)

Vizion said:


> From a financial point of view it makes sense. In one sense its exactly the same as paying to bring out a rock band, people want to see him. The tournament is sold out. End of discussion really.
> 
> If you are talking about the amount of money that is paid to people to run about chasing a ball or riding a bike, being all out of proportion to what they do I think it's bloody disgraceful. While research scientists & doctors get paid a pittance in comparison, unless of course the doctor is a cosmetic one.
> I don't care how good someone is at a sport, we have our values way out of wack on how we treat them and venerate them.



Great summary, Vizion.

Good for Tiger Woods.  If he has the capacity to draw that kind of money, good luck to him.  It's just as good an investment for Australia as any other sporting event.

None of our business how he spends it or doesn't.  Do any of you who are critical of him like the idea of someone coming out and telling you how you should allocate your financial resources???

The funding of our medical researchers is a whole other question.  Yes, it's just pathetic.  If our society fairly allocated resources in terms of civic and humanitarian value, then there would be no need for all the fund raising activities of the Heart Foundation, Cancer Society etc etc.


----------



## EverNothing (13 November 2009)

At first I thought the price tag was a little extreme. That amount of cold hard cash would buy you a grand army of golf buggies. However, as I begun pondering about the decision I realised it's probably justified due to the event selling out and the massive amount of publicity Tiger's appearance is bringing to Melbourne. It's not everyday the greatest golfer in the world turns up on your doorstep and decides to play a few rounds. Wehey!

Having said that, how embarassed would the Victorian government be if he plays really ****house and misses the cut. 

Chin up Brumby, it's only...







*THREE MILLION DOLLARS!!!*


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

Ridiculous IMVHO! Money wasted.
He'll make more from merchandising in Australia because of this funding.
Total conjob, total waste of taxpayer money.

Make you're own money like the rest of us. You're own name is sus too!
If you like Australia, you would come and play for the money/trophy. If that's not meritorious enough. Please choose another location IMVHO. I mean even Greg Norman in his prime would choke against you on the 17th or 18th hole of any major in the world. But seriously, taxpayers money is better spent on the many than on you!

Tiger Woods you are a great golfer. But maybe you need to attract enough private money to really prove it as opposed to accepting handouts that could be spent in other more constructive ways.

Do it your own way.


----------



## Miner (13 November 2009)

Why people are not crying on stiumlus money when crying for Tiger Wood's appearance fee of $3 M/

IMO when Paris Hilton charges appearance fee to promote businesses with her presence, we have skimpy bar maids in Digger and Diller and some of the raunchy pubs why not take Wood as entertaining the public ?

Tiger has proved that with his appearnace the ticket has been well sold. I heard many in ABC radio today that they felt money was well spent. 

THe hype and publicity from Tiger's presence has generated lot of revenue through media hype. increased sales of merchandise (some goes to Tiger), advertisement - all positive. 

If we do not mind to dole out multi million dollars to failed super fund managers and lot of the crap CEOs, open ended dole system to refugees coming to this country, paying millions towards Royal Commission,  I think let us not cry wolf with Tiger. 

Disclosure : I will not buy any golf ticket to watch someone earning than me earning money at that time


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

Miner said:


> Why people are not crying on stiumlus money when crying for Tiger Wood's appearance fee of $3 M/
> 
> IMO when Paris Hilton charges appearance fee to promote businesses with her presence, we have skimpy bar maids in Digger and Diller and some of the raunchy pubs why not take Wood as entertaining the public ?
> 
> ...




If he's that good why does he need public money? What? The well-to-do don't want him here???  Heaven forbid! 

DISCLOSURE: I'm not disputing the fact that he is the greatest golfer in the world at present.

P.S. If your game is so great fellas. Cough up! Otherwise shut-up!


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 November 2009)

I don't know Tiger Woods though I believe he is a good quality human being that can play golf as good as the best of them. I'm sure all the golfers/sport fans would have enjoyed watching him on telly and live.

The End.


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> I don't know Tiger Woods though I believe he is a good quality human being that can play golf as good as the best of them. I'm sure all the golfers/sport fans would have enjoyed watching him on telly and live.
> 
> The End.




There's the tautology! I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe.
There are plenty of people doing it hard in the suburbs of Melbourne.

I can hear it now.

Mum can I have some corn flakes with milk before I go to school today, no sorry son/daughter but check out Tiger on the Tube! Bull****!


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 November 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> There's the tautology! I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe.




Perhaps I can put in there "I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe from media reports". This was something I briefly contemplated but decided an explanation of how I came to the belief would be understood.


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Perhaps I can put in there "I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe from media reports". This was something I briefly contemplated but decided an explanation of how I came to the belief would be understood.




I understand wysi.

But what should you think? 
I think Royal Melbourne and Huntingdale should come up with the cash for his Agent! If not, then so be it? 

Maybe they could sell off some of their land for private land development? Growing city like Melbourne, how is that possible? Oh heaven forbid?  

Let's turn to the taxpayer! 

Nah sorry I don't buy it and never will.

Get your own money Tiger and from your "friends" at Royal Melbourne and Huntingdale. 

Disputation solved.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (13 November 2009)

Mr J said:


> Many people seem quick to judge. A few of you may change your minds if you were presented with the same opportunity, and how do any of you know what he will do with it? He doesn't just give to charity, he has his own charity organisation. Finally, it is his money, he can choose what he wants to do with it. Who are we to pass judgement on how someone spends their own money?



I must agree with these remarks. Anything else would be socialistic.

Bringing big names to Melbourne can stimulate the economy perhaps making back the invested money. Though I would like governments to fund essential services first before investing in once off events.


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> I must agree with these remarks. Anything else would be socialistic.
> 
> Bringing big names to Melbourne can stimulate the economy perhaps making back the invested money. Though I would like governments to fund essential services first before investing in once off events.




I disagree. I don't think the money will ever come back through taxes, it's a total waste. Let the private clubs fund it! 

This is a total joke. Pay for it yourself. Whether it be Jack Nicklaus, Greg (Choker) Norman etc.. Why should PUBLIC money be involved? What a travesty of rubbish?

Do it your own way.


----------



## Tink (13 November 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> It would be interesting to see a show of hands across Victoria on whether they want to pay a professional to play a game of golf in their state.




Hands up 

I am not a golf person, but I think its great for Melbourne having international guests and events


----------



## Julia (13 November 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> There's the tautology! I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe.




How is this a tautology?


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 November 2009)

> There's the tautology! I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe.




Yes it could read.  "I don't know Tiger Woods or who he is."


----------



## bloomy88 (13 November 2009)

Macquack said:


> I dont know if that is a good argument when it cost the Victorian taxpayer $40 million to bankroll the Australian F1 Grand Prix in 2009.
> http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/me...-40-million-loss/story-e6frf7jo-1225787073775
> 
> When is the Victorian Government going to wake up to the fact they are getting rorted by the Australian Grand Prix Corporation, Bernie Eccelstone and co.




Beleive me, I think that Bernie is rorting our government big time. I was merely just saying that the government would use the same arguments, ie:
-Puts Melbourne on the map
-Money from tourism
-Keeps Melbourne as one of the sports capitals of the world

I agree, $40million is way over the odds for the GP


----------



## Mr J (13 November 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> Get your own money Tiger




If you're angry about how taxpayer money was spent, be annoyed with the politicians, not Tiger. Perhaps he'll put it to better use than the government?


----------



## Duckman#72 (13 November 2009)

If the Victorian Government had approached Tigers marketing team with the idea of doing a series of adverts around the world with Tiger saying "The golf courses here in Victoria's sandbelt are among the best in the world. They are designed for how golf was meant to be played. I love them".  

How much would that cost? Probably twice as much as his appearance fee. Yet that is exactly what he said - in front of an adoring media and was broadcast right across the globe. In Patrick Smith's column today he suggested that it is like "Michael Jackson mania" in Melbourne at the moment. 

Yes it would be lovely if he just came down here for nothing - but surely people here on the ASF site are pragmatic enough to understand economic principles.  

It is hard to put your finger on the exact $$$$ value to Victoria and Australia, but it is hard to believe that the figure will not be many times over the appearance fee. If you want to see 1/5th of the crowds attend and 1/20th of the international media exposure don't pay him to come........but at what underlying cost to the State Government, private businesses (and their workers), and tourism Australia.          

Duckman


----------



## Putty7 (13 November 2009)

Agree Duckman, in the past has Greg Norman not received appearance money and that is play in his own Country, Tigermania will be good for the State bringing in money and a great advertisement for tourism


----------



## Krusty the Klown (13 November 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> I disagree. I don't think the money will ever come back through taxes, it's a total waste. Let the private clubs fund it!
> 
> This is a total joke. Pay for it yourself. Whether it be Jack Nicklaus, Greg (Choker) Norman etc.. Why should PUBLIC money be involved? What a travesty of rubbish?




I agree, this is a non-goverment tournament, all profits go to the golfing community.

Even if ticket sales and merchandise are sold, mostly it will be to Australians, so there is no net gain in revenue to the country. 

Even if these profits are generated in Victoria how does Victoria gain financially?

Income tax on profits is paid to the Federal Govt.

But then I suppose all those people on surgery waiting lists in Victoria will have their pain relieved somewhat by knowing that Tiger is in the vicinity.


----------



## johnnyg (13 November 2009)

Wow, see his approach to the 2nd? Very nice.


----------



## Duckman#72 (13 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Even if these profits are generated in Victoria how does Victoria gain financially?




Hi Krusty

Quick - "yes or no" question for you?

Lets assume that Tiger was coming to play a tournament "somewhere" in Australia this summer. 

Would the State of Victoria be better off financially, if they had not paid the appearance fee for Tiger, and thereby letting Sydney grab him for their tournament? 

Duckman


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

The JBWere Masters should be renamed the JBWere Bailout Masters.


----------



## Krusty the Klown (13 November 2009)

Duckman#72 said:


> Hi Krusty
> 
> Quick - "yes or no" question for you?
> 
> ...




No! 

That's why I asked the question, as I can see no financial benefit for the "State". No State would benefit financially, only the Commonwealth.


----------



## Duckman#72 (13 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> No!
> 
> That's why I asked the question, as I can see no financial benefit for the "State". No State would benefit financially, only the Commonwealth.




I guess it depends upon your definition of "State". 

In my opinion the Government has a duty to do the best it can to promote Victorian restaurants, cafes, motels, convenience stores, service stations, taxi drivers, tourist destinations, bus companys etc not to mention all the shopping destinations that are frequented by the "tag along" partners. 

For me there is no doubt - the State of Victoria has been a big winner.

It is irrelevant to bring up an argument about sick queues. Tigers appearance fee has not been drained from the Health Budget. Every state government budgets for Marketing/Promotion and Publicity. The better question is "Where could the State Government have spent a couple of million bucks to generate the same income flow for Victoria?" A full page spread in The Australian for 2 weeks perhaps? Don't think so.

They have received full bang for their buck. 

Duckman


----------



## Krusty the Klown (13 November 2009)

Duckman#72 said:


> I guess it depends upon your definition of "State".
> 
> In my opinion the Government has a duty to do the best it can to promote Victorian restaurants, cafes, motels, convenience stores, service stations, taxi drivers, tourist destinations, bus companys etc not to mention all the shopping destinations that are frequented by the "tag along" partners.
> 
> For me there is no doubt - the State of Victoria has been a big winner.




Yes, I see what you are saying, but that will only have an effect if it brings in tourists from outside Victoria, otherwise there is no net gain in commercial revenue.

I really don't know if non-Victorians would travel all the way there just to see Tiger. There would be a few no doubt. The bulk of the people who show up at the course would be Melbournians.



> It is irrelevant to bring up an argument about sick queues. Tigers appearance fee has not been drained from the Health Budget. Every state government budgets for Marketing/Promotion and Publicity. The better question is "Where could the State Government have spent a couple of million bucks to generate the same income flow for Victoria?" A full page spread in The Australian for 2 weeks perhaps? Don't think so.
> 
> They have received full bang for their buck.
> 
> Duckman




If the Victorian state has a mandate to promote commerce in the state, and they have a budget for it, then fair enough. 

Yet, I can still see no financial benefit for the "State" to recoup their investment.

I don't think we can really say they have received bang for their buck yet, because the tournament is not over yet, so we don't know how much $$$$$ has been generated for Victoria.

To me the whole thing sounds like a few influential Victorian politicians are members of the Kingston Heath Golf Club.

If commerce in Victoria reaps so much financial benefit, then they should be stumping up the $1.5M.


----------



## Wysiwyg (13 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> To me the whole thing sounds like a few influential Victorian politicians are members of the Kingston Heath Golf Club.



 Now you're thinking like a politician.


----------



## Duckman#72 (13 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> To me the whole thing sounds like a few influential Victorian politicians are members of the Kingston Heath Golf Club.
> 
> If commerce in Victoria reaps so much financial benefit, then they should be stumping up the $1.5M.




This isn't about golf - it is all about marketing and advertising. The hundreds of cafe owners couldn't give a rats $%#@ about Tiger but they'll love the extra business. 

Not only are the eyes of the sporting world looking at Victoria at the moment, but Melbourne has once again extended its brand and positioned itself as THE SPORTING CAPITAL of not only Australia, but arguably, the southern hemisphere. 

Someone please tell me..... how else can a State Government possibly spend $1.5m to generate the same amount of advertising/publicity, additional income for the States thousands of local businesses, not to mention the lagging tourism effects.

Duckman


----------



## Macquack (13 November 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> If he's that good why does he need public money? What? The well-to-do don't want him here???  Heaven forbid!
> 
> DISCLOSURE: I'm not disputing the fact that he is the greatest golfer in the world at present.
> 
> P.S. If your game is so great fellas. Cough up! Otherwise shut-up!




I have to agree with GumbyLearner.

It is an indictment on the state of golf in Australia when the World's greatest golfer cannot generate enough money from ticket sales, corporate activities etc to cover his own fee.

I am not questioning Tiger's fee, but if the organisers can't afford it then don't go asking Jo Public to cough up. 

The Victorian Government paying Tiger Woods is effectively a form of social security for the wealthy.


----------



## GumbyLearner (13 November 2009)

Macquack said:


> The Victorian Government paying Tiger Woods is effectively a form of social security for the wealthy.




Spot on Macquack. It's a ridiculous situation. A major bank that has survived from bailouts from Joe Public and Tiger Woods obtaining money from Joe Public to play. A completely ludicrous situation. IMVHO!


----------



## Krusty the Klown (13 November 2009)

Duckman#72 said:


> Someone please tell me..... how else can a State Government possibly spend $1.5m to generate the same amount of advertising/publicity, additional income for the States thousands of local businesses, not to mention the lagging tourism effects.
> 
> Duckman




Duckman, please demonstrate the additional income for the State.

As I said earlier, the bulk of the income for commercial operators would come from inside Victoria, realising no net increase in commercial dollars, just a redistribution of the current expenditure of Victoria's population

Publicity does not always end up with an increase profit or revenue, often it results in a loss.

I would be happy to be proven wrong with some facts.


----------



## Tink (13 November 2009)

Duckman#72 said:


> This isn't about golf - it is all about marketing and advertising. The hundreds of cafe owners couldn't give a rats $%#@ about Tiger but they'll love the extra business.
> 
> Not only are the eyes of the sporting world looking at Victoria at the moment, but Melbourne has once again extended its brand and positioned itself as THE SPORTING CAPITAL of not only Australia, but arguably, the southern hemisphere.
> 
> ...




Yep well said Duckman, all the business owners are smiling $$, and good on them.

There is alot more than just Melbournites here

Aaaah we love it


----------



## Duckman#72 (14 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Duckman, please demonstrate the additional income for the State.
> 
> As I said earlier, the bulk of the income for commercial operators would come from inside Victoria, realising no net increase in commercial dollars, just a redistribution of the current expenditure of Victoria's population
> 
> ...




Bloody hell Krusty - do you want me to come down and count it for you!!! Are you in Melbourne? Look out your window, turn on the TV, listen to the radio, join society over the weekend. I'm in Qld and personally know of 8 people who have gone down to Melbourne for this. I know of 2 people who have come o/s for it.

You want a waste of money from a Govt - try living in Qld and watching year after year tens of millions of our tax $$$ go up in petrol fumes at the Gold Coast Indy (or whatever it is called these days). Good on the Vic Govt for having the smarts to know a real event  to promote. I think you are underestimating the significance of the tournament Krusty.

I asked the first question and no one wants to answer. What is a better way for the State to spend $1.5M to promote itself?

I'm hearing a lot of objections towards so-called wealthy elitists, plenty of comments about the poor state of golf in Australia, heaps of comments about the character of Tiger himself.......but I'm not hearing anything on a practical level about how the State could have spent the money more effectively on other advertising. 

Duckman


----------



## Krusty the Klown (14 November 2009)

Duckman#72 said:


> I think you are underestimating the significance of the tournament Krusty.




I must be, I'm not into golf.

You know, this is the first time I've actually thought about State Govt expenditure on tourism promotion, and how, if anything, it benefits the actual state.

I lived in QLD and remember Tourism QLD, I know NSW has something similar, so all states must have them.

Sure commerce gains dollars, but the tax proceeds don't end up in state coffers, they go to Mr Rudd and Mr Swan.

So what does the state gain?



> I asked the first question and no one wants to answer. What is a better way for the State to spend $1.5M to promote itself?




How about giving a cheque for $100 to the next 15,000 tourists to Victoria??? 



> I'm hearing a lot of objections towards so-called wealthy elitists, plenty of comments about the poor state of golf in Australia, heaps of comments about the character of Tiger himself.......but I'm not hearing anything on a practical level about how the State could have spent the money more effectively on other advertising.




See last response!

Now that I think more about it, I'm starting to come around to your point of view. If they HAVE to spend $1.5M it would just be wasted on TV or print advertising as no-one actually takes much notice of them.

Maybe Victoria should get Becks to come and play a soccer game!


----------



## Krusty the Klown (14 November 2009)

I've actually been watching this some of this tournament on TV today, to see what the fuss is all about.

Now, I believe from media reports that Tiges is a very nice guy and I'm not trying to stir or anything....

but I saw Tiger hook a drive off the tee in to the crowd and he actually threw the driver in to the crowd in anger.

The sound was down, so I did not hear what was said, but I did see the crowd passing the club back to him.

Is that normal behaviour for him? 

I don't think I've seen any professional sportsperson do something like that before.

Did anyone else see it?


----------



## prawn_86 (14 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> I don't think I've seen any professional sportsperson do something like that before.




You cant have watched much sport before then...


----------



## Wysiwyg (14 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> but I saw Tiger hook a drive off the tee in to the crowd and he actually threw the driver in to the crowd in anger.
> 
> The sound was down, so I did not hear what was said, but I did see the crowd passing the club back to him.
> 
> Is that normal behaviour for him?



He is a human being like the rest of us and letting off the frustration is more healthy than letting it eat away inside. 


> I don't think I've seen any professional sportsperson do something like that before.



It happens now and then, is normal (except if the innocent get hurt)  and is cathartic.


----------



## Putty7 (14 November 2009)

You want to see a guy get p..sed off playing golf, watch John Daly having a bad day lol


----------



## GumbyLearner (14 November 2009)

Putty7 said:


> You want to see a guy get p..sed off playing golf, watch John Daly having a bad day lol




LOL. So true. 

I remember as a kid using a CIG cardboard mirror telescope to watch above the gallery. It wasn't fun for the vertically challenged back then. But hey, Lee Trevino that guy was all class. Funniest and most entertaining bloke to ever to play golf. A true player for the crowds, even for the kids with cardboard telescopes.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 November 2009)

Tiger is worth every penny he's being paid. He's a great golfer and is a legend in his own time.

I'm allergic to "Imperial Leather Soap" though so the advertisers will get little from me.

gg


----------



## Krusty the Klown (15 November 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> You cant have watched much sport before then...




Of course I've seen sports people lose it before, but I mean actually throw things at spectators that could injure them.

Would make a juicy compo claim though.


----------



## Wysiwyg (15 November 2009)

Krusty the Klown said:


> Of course I've seen sports people lose it before, but I mean actually throw things at spectators that could injure them.
> 
> Would make a juicy compo claim though.



On the other side of the coin is in the Aust. v Oman soccer game where a spectator threw a flare near the player and ref. 

Looks like Tiger is a certain for the tournament now. Very accurate today.


----------



## nulla nulla (15 November 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> On the other side of the coin is in the Aust. v Oman soccer game where a spectator threw a flare near the player and ref.
> 
> Looks like Tiger is a certain for the tournament now. Very accurate today.




The bloke that backed him to win, with a wager of $100k, must be happy.


----------



## Wysiwyg (15 November 2009)

nulla nulla said:


> The bloke that backed him to win, with a wager of $100k, must be happy.




Yo fella,  he was right on the money there.


----------



## CanOz (15 November 2009)

Good on ya Tiger! 

CanOz


----------



## bloomy88 (5 January 2010)

Announcved today that Tiger's appearence in the masters generated $34million for the local economy. I think the $1million was worth it now...


----------



## Macquack (5 January 2010)

bloomy88 said:


> Announcved today that Tiger's appearence in the masters generated $34million for the local economy. I think the *$1million *was worth it now...




Tiger got paid $3 mill, not $1 mill.

Did the rest of the field in the Australian Masters contributed nothing to the economy?

Next year Tiger will play by himself as this will generates the maximum amount of money for the economy as the rest of the field are just a drain.


----------



## nulla nulla (5 January 2010)

They should pay him a bonus if he brings one of his girlfriends.


----------



## Nasser (5 January 2010)

How much if he brought them all? Would Melbourne Events pay for the 747?


----------



## Calliope (21 February 2010)

I've heard Tiger woods referred to as the world's greatest athlete. Apparently this judgement is based on his ability to to hit a white ball and place it with remarkable accuracy.

I know many snooker players who can do the same thing and none of them are athletes...just the opposite.


----------



## Whiskers (30 April 2010)

nulla nulla said:


> They should pay him a bonus if he brings one of his girlfriends.






Nasser said:


> How much if he brought them all? Would Melbourne Events pay for the 747?




lol 120 of them! 



> *Tiger Woods had 120 women in five years of marriage, claims mag  *
> April 29, 2010
> 
> If you thought the Tiger Woods sex story had been more or less put to bed, the National Enquirer has shaken it awake again.
> ...




Struth, just one would probably have got me going... 7, 8 or 9 whatever it was, certainly would have seen me divorced... and it took 120 for Elin to...


----------



## Wysiwyg (30 April 2010)

Whiskers said:


> lol 120 of them!
> Struth, just one would probably have got me going... 7, 8 or 9 whatever it was, certainly would have seen me divorced... and it took 120 for Elin to...




No probs with a sizable ummmm .... bank account.


----------

