Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Tiger Woods appearance fee?

Jump to new
GumbyLearner said:
There's the tautology! I don't know Tiger Woods but I believe.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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? :eek: :eek:

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. ;)
 
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?
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Hands up :D

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

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
 
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
 
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
 
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Krusty the Klown said:
Even if these profits are generated in Victoria how does Victoria gain financially?
Click to expand...

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
 
Duckman#72 said:
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
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.
Click to expand...

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
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
Top