re: Rory's take

quote:

---

The PIF, a funding source, made these negations with the PGA and did not include LIV.

---

while technically correct, it’s just semantics. The guy who cut this deal for the PIF is the same guy that created LIV (which has been described as his baby). It’s really attempting to make a distinction where there is no significant difference.

LIV will be merged or dissolved into the PGA based on everything we’ve heard so far. So it’s definitely a merger in one sense. Rory doesn’t want to think of it that way at all and I understand that. He wants to keep hating those guys while being cool with taking the same money they take for the same reasons.

PIF continuing with LIV as it exists would make absolutely zero senses. Keep a few tournaments like Australia and such? Great idea

Keeping the LIv tour as it is now competing against the far better more popular product you just invested in? Why? Make one reasonable argument why

Did you listen to the interview? He mentioned there would likely be more “entertainment” style golf meant for TV while the competitive side remains as is. It sounded like he’s going to do both.

quote:

---

PIF continuing with LIV as it exists would make absolutely zero senses.

---

Is anyone suggesting that is a possibility? Clearly it will all look very different. Whether the LIV branded team tournaments will continue or whether they will be folded into the PGA or DP or morphed some other way, it will look much different post merger.

quote:

---

Keeping the LIv tour as it is now competing against the far better more popular product you just invested in?

---

I don’t think they will compete with each other as much as try to coordinate and compliment each other. LIV or whatever it is ultimately called could take the place of smaller tournaments weekends or WGC events.

There may be a competing tour event, just like with majors, but I’m sure scheduling will be coordinated effort with the leagues and tv partners.

WGC is now LIV but louder

quote:

---

It’s a distinction without a difference. The parent company is the parent company. The fact the wholly owned subsidiary didn’t have a representative at the table is irrelevant. The parent company owns and represents the subsidiary.

---

Without telling the subsidiary? "Hey, Mr. Subsidiary. I'm your parent company and I'm going to invest millions of dollars in your competitor, you know the one who suspended all your employees. And, remember that lawsuit we had going to rectify that? We are dropping that. Those suspensions we sued over; those stay in place. And, this new board of directors, yeah none of your guys are on it."

It's like the Pepsi stockholders investing in Coke, and then telling Coke to keep up those anti-Pepsi advertisements. No matter which way you slice it, the PIF totally threw LIV Golf under the bus. I cannot imagine Greg Norman is a very happy guy today.

quote:

---

Hey, Mr. Subsidiary. I'm your parent company and I'm going to invest millions of dollars in your competitor, you know the one who suspended all your employees. And, remember that lawsuit we had going to rectify that? We are dropping that. Those suspensions we sued over; those stay in place. And, this new board of directors, yeah none of your guys are on it."

---

You know you got almost all of these facts wrong, right? This analogy has all kinds of issues.

quote:

---

No matter which way you slice it, the PIF totally threw LIV Golf under the bus. I cannot imagine Greg Norman is a very happy guy today.

---

This doesn’t make sense. The PIF created LIV golf. LIV is its toy/tool to use to accomplish its larger objective. It wasn’t thrown under the bus, it was created and used for it’s created purpose.

Some of you are so caught up the the LIV Golf v PGA tour tournament format debate, that you can’t rectify what the business decisions are.

quote:

---

8. Thinks there still need to be some consequences for guys who left the PGA Tour. Said that Jay made that point in the meeting.

---

So what are Jay's consequences?

Rory still sticking up for Jay is pretty surprising and disappointing. He seems to be one of the only players that knew this was coming and already had his words lined up. That can't sit well with a lot of guys.

quote:

---

Without telling the subsidiary? "Hey, Mr. Subsidiary. I'm your parent company and I'm going to invest millions of dollars in your competitor, you know the one who suspended all your employees. And, remember that lawsuit we had going to rectify that? We are dropping that. Those suspensions we sued over; those stay in place. And, this new board of directors, yeah none of your guys are on it." It's like the Pepsi stockholders investing in Coke, and then telling Coke to keep up those anti-Pepsi advertisements. No matter which way you slice it, the PIF totally threw LIV Golf under the bus. I cannot imagine Greg Norman is a very happy guy today.

---

This is another false equivalence. The purpose of LIV was simply to compete with the tour just enough to stay relevant to force the tour to come to the table. It served its purpose. There was no reason to bring them to the table just like the PGA kept the players advisory board in the dark.