|
rabidsquid posted:I also have to say I am totally perplexed by this argument that MTG pros already don't get paid enough so it's good to pay them less. You see this is where we agree and disagree. I think they should be payed more, but by the people they are employed and sponsored by, not by WotC.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 01:12 |
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Did I argue there was a specific benefit to someone other than WOTC? WOTC is doing it for their bottom line; I'm just saying it's not that big of a deal to the average player and frankly, that $11K stipend could be made up by taking a part-time job which has no practical effect on your ability to play Magic unless you truly believe that Owen Turtenwald spends 8 hours a day researching metagames and poo poo. In what way does it benefit wotc to shift this money around when they are by their own accounts not saving money doing it? Also you are aware that most of wotc R&D have historically been ex pros, right.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:You see this is where we agree and disagree. I think they should be payed more, but by the people they are employed and sponsored by, not by WotC. Where exactly are those sponsors supposed to be getting all this money to pay non-essential personnel?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:Where exactly are those sponsors supposed to be getting all this money to pay non-essential personnel? LSV is non-essential for CFB with his content and marketing value?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
Apparently to the degree that they couldn't keep him from being hired away to work for a tcg start up that may never pan out
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:In what way does it benefit wotc to shift this money around when they are by their own accounts not saving money doing it? Also you are aware that most of wotc R&D have historically been ex pros, right. to not get sued for a bajillion dollars for paying sub-minimum wage in order to get people to play their game. That saves a shitload of money if you can limit your lawsuit obligations. Throwing the same amount of money into a prize pool is different because instead of getting checks win or lose, it turns into an actual contest and that falls under different laws.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
I am really skeptical that they could respond to that lawsuit this quickly, but I suppose it's possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:Where exactly are those sponsors supposed to be getting all this money to pay non-essential personnel? Yeah I'm really confused by this: wizards doesn't run ads on their stuff, and there's not a lot of ad space available on players in general due to most of the camera time being on arms and card tables. Outside of the scg route of going so deep as hosting tournaments or figuring out a way to monetize written content, what else is there? Wristbands like someone else mentioned? Maybe if modo was any good we'd see more good streamers and sponsors coming from that, but there's a popularity cap due to most streams being pretty unwatchable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:LSV is non-essential for CFB with his content and marketing value? That might be the one exception but I think you are severely overestimating how much actual cash money is going to come in from the average pro writing an article or wearing someone's t-shirt to an event.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
Not that any sponsor would ever care to do it but card sleeves are basically the perfect advertising space given the camera positioning of streams.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
little munchkin posted:That might be the one exception but I think you are severely overestimating how much actual cash money is going to come in from the average pro writing an article or wearing someone's t-shirt to an event. They can charge for the content and wearing the shirt on camera and off is a form of advertising. That's worth money. How good you are at it depends on how much it's worth. If you want to dedicate your life to Magic: the Gathering cardboard game and expect to make a bunch of money I think Owen can vouch that it's a bad financial decision. But again it's not Wizards responsibility to supplement your life choices with a paycheck. If you love magic that much try to work at Wizards and build the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
qbert posted:Not that any sponsor would ever care to do it but card sleeves are basically the perfect advertising space given the camera positioning of streams. I want pro magic sleeves to look like a race car driver's suit, so covered with sponsor logos that not a single one registers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:27
|
|
|
This seems relevant: http://www.lazygamer.net/gaming-news/esl-banned-team-youporn-competing/
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
qbert posted:Not that any sponsor would ever care to do it but card sleeves are basically the perfect advertising space given the camera positioning of streams. Make strict rules about custom playmat formatting and allow playmats on camera. Also scrap the stupid "no lands in front" on camera rule, especially since the old rulebooks taught you to loving play that way, and 20 year old habits are really hard to break for some people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:LSV is non-essential for CFB with his content and marketing value? LSV is the founder and co-owner of CFB
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
I agree pros do not innovate any deck lists for magic the gathering and an event for which pros prepared more did not feature more interesting decklists: http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=12179&f=ST http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=12131&f=ST
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
Xaerael posted:Make strict rules about custom playmat formatting and allow playmats on camera. Yeah this is fine but I can't see it really paying off. Anecdotally, there was a store at GPNJ that was selling their shirts for like $16 and they'd pay you if you appeared on camera with their shirt on. They payment? $10. So you had to show up twice on camera to make a $FOUR profit. Maybe you can get like $100 for being an actual good Magic player but that's still a pretty negligible amount of money. Xaerael posted:Also scrap the stupid "no lands in front" on camera rule, especially since the old rulebooks taught you to loving play that way, and 20 year old habits are really hard to break for some people. And you were just starting to make sense....
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:40
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I agree pros do not innovate any deck lists for magic the gathering and an event for which pros prepared more did not feature more interesting decklists: Weenie White
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I agree pros do not innovate any deck lists for magic the gathering and an event for which pros prepared more did not feature more interesting decklists: Ok setting aside all the other facets of this discussion it is totally ludicrous to suggest that it requires pro-players to innovate new decks
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Xaerael posted:Also scrap the stupid "no lands in front" on camera rule, especially since the old rulebooks taught you to loving play that way, and 20 year old habits are really hard to break for some people. Put your lands wherever you want, just don't be one of those hitlers who scoops up the necessary lands for a spell, gathers them all into a single pile and puts the pile down tapped so it's just a stack that you can't see anything but the top card of.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:42
|
|
|
Boco_T posted:Weenie White Yeah the second takeaway there is that mtgtop8 is trying to top wotc and scg coverage in terms of bad deck names.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Telex posted:The World Series of Poker company has no involvement whatsoever. They take the $10k from people who enter, they pay out cash at the end of the thing to people who win money. Clearly this is not how WotC operates. Instead of being a de-facto competition, it's a curated promotional experience. Totally different ideas. I've always wondered if "pro" magic could make the transition to a more poker-like system, where private organizations run buy-in based tournaments with no wotc affiliation. Wotc would absolutely never allow it, but I don't see how they can have their cake and eat it too on compensation. They have to subsidize the pay-outs heavily to make it worthwhile, and they can't do that at a level that allows for heavily invested pro players.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Ok setting aside all the other facets of this discussion it is totally ludicrous to suggest that it requires pro-players to innovate new decks ISD block constructed was the exact same decks with zero of the PT decks showing up online, literally ever. Maybe the pros don't innovate all of the new decks all of the time but this isn't like a controversial idea.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Ok setting aside all the other facets of this discussion it is totally ludicrous to suggest that it requires pro-players to innovate new decks But I could have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
There's no rule against altering every card in your deck to replace the artwork with a Mountain Dew logo, right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
qbert posted:There's no rule against altering every card in your deck to replace the artwork with a Mountain Dew logo, right? The head judge has to approve all alters beforehand. Edit: This post brought to you by Carl's Jr. suicidesteve fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Apr 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:48
|
|
|
stinkles1112 posted:Ok setting aside all the other facets of this discussion it is totally ludicrous to suggest that it requires pro-players to innovate new decks That's a deliberate strawman of the point being made which is that having people who are both incentivized and given the resources to focus on these formats produces results that are valuable to everyone. The weeks before the pro tour a very vocal group was willing to resign the format as bant-dominated but obviously everyone already knew how to build and play GB aristocrats and GB seasons and just didn't because
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
qbert posted:There's no rule against altering every card in your deck to replace the artwork with a Mountain Dew logo, right? Just say "do the dew!" Whenever you end your turn on camera.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:The head judge has to approve all alters beforehand. "You don't work for Wizards you can't tell me what to do!" *slams the door to my room*
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
kind of neat that the controversy over mtg pros having to live like college students erupts around the same time a bunch of judges sue over basically the same thing I think they see the vast quantities of money going into the organized play system and are suspicious about how little comes out
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
qbert posted:"You don't work for Wizards you can't tell me what to do!" *slams the door to my room* You're right, I don't work for WotC; I'm not a judge. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
Zoness posted:That's a deliberate strawman of the point being made which is that having people who are both incentivized and given the resources to focus on these formats produces results that are valuable to everyone. The weeks before the pro tour a very vocal group was willing to resign the format as bant-dominated but obviously everyone already knew how to build and play GB aristocrats and GB seasons and just didn't because Because there are a ton of other options for beating Bant Company. I've been watching people at FNM dunk on Bant Company with a variety of home brews for two weeks now. The pro community is very insular and self reinforcing. That's not to say that they don't contribute anything of value because they obviously do but there's also a degree of over-determinism in that argument because half of the innovations the pros make are designed solely in the context of beating the other things the pros are doing on the pro tour.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
Entropic posted:This seems relevant: http://www.lazygamer.net/gaming-news/esl-banned-team-youporn-competing/ To be fair though NO ONE should play Evolve so this seems like a favor to then
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
The argument that the players themselves are employees is super loving flimsy and even assuming there was a good-faith argument in favor of it, lowering the appearance fees for 30 specific people going forward would have very little impact on their potential exposure. Cutting prospective appeareance fees and such is a lot more likely to get them sued than avoid getting sued. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 23:09 on Apr 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:05
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:kind of neat that the controversy over mtg pros having to live like college students erupts around the same time a bunch of judges sue over basically the same thing Matt Sperling is often very whiny but he actually wrote a pretty good piece about this: http://sperlinggrove.blogspot.com/2016/04/platinum-pro-club-changes-corporate.html He says that it seems like Legal told them to clamp down on spending, to help defend against the Judges' suit.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:09
|
|
|
Speaking of the judges' suit. PAX just happened and it made me wonder about their Enforcer volunteers. That seems like a little less murky situation than the MTG judge one, but I'm no lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
odiv posted:Speaking of the judges' suit. PAX just happened and it made me wonder about their Enforcer volunteers. That seems like a little less murky situation than the MTG judge one, but I'm no lawyer. You cannot legally volunteer for a for-profit private organization.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:
Late but: trap sprung doobie spotted
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
And yes, its pretty loving scummy that they implicitly (not legally) promised to continue the payouts earned in the 15-16 season to the 16-17 season and just aren't doing it. It's a lot more eye-rolling when you consider their stance on the entirely made-up Reserved List promise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 01:12 |
|
|
itt goons struggle to understand basic marketing concepts and long term financial benefit of them
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:25
|
|
