O.T. Phil Mickelson on International Politics and Human Rights

[JohnVDB]

Kalen,


The tour has started paying for showing up.  Any player who plays in 15 or more events gets $50K just for showing up.



According to an article on ESPN.con, only 1 of the top 150 on the FedEx cup list last year failed to play in 15 events.


The US Open, the Masters and I presume other majors pay a few thousand dollars to every pro who plays.  The USGA also reimburses all the amateurs expenses at the US Open.


[size=78%]I believe they have very beneficial health care plans, a van at every event for workouts, free food, free cars and plenty of other perks.[/size]


And then they all have endorsement contracts.  Those logos on their shirts and hats don’t come for free.


This reminds me of the player a few years ago who complained about his life and said he thought he quit if he can find another job that pays $200k a year. 


The top 200 players earned over $175K in “official” earnings and probably a lot more overall.

[Paul Stephenson]

I dislike the Saudis and I refused to go to Saudi Arabia when I had the chance, but all of the sponsors cancelling contracts with Phil seems a bit excessive to me.  What about all of the guys that have gone over to Saudi to play in tournaments?  Are they not just as culpable as Mickelson in turning a blind eye to a murderous regime to line their pockets.  That includes DJ, Justin Rose, Finau, Reed, Poulter, Dechambeau, Garcia, Bubba, Harold Varner III, etc.

I don't think it's about the Saudis at all.
Many/most of his sponsors do business there, as do many of his peers.
It's about bashing the hand that fed him for 30 lucrative years, and personally bashing its Commissioner, then turning around and bashing the tour/sponsoring country that you admit using for leverage against your own tour.
Regardless of his intentions, the sponsors came to the conclusion that their dollars might be spent better elsewhere.Quite an easy decision given that Phil gave them the option.
Phil gave them the option and they made a decision.

Well said.  I didn't think you could burn a bridge from 3 ends but PM has managed to find a way.

[Peter Pallotta]

Paul, that to me is the most poignant and telling aspect of all this. If life were a US Open, PM needed only to bunt a little three wood down the middle of the 18th and the crown would've been his. Instead, he slashed away with a 47 inch driver and sliced it into the trees -- from where he still would've won, if only he could've taken his medicine and limped his way in; but he couldn't, and he didn't, because that's not his way. Some get hair plugs and a red convertible, some climb Mt Everest, some have torrid affairs with the secretary -- PM self destructs. He's the scorpion stinging the frog while riding atop it across the river -- about to drown because of it, but staying true to his nature. It seems clearly to me a cautionary tale, if we're willing to look at it that way.

[Kalen Braley]

John,

I'm glad to hear the Tour has stepped up to do a form of appearance fees, it would seem a much better use of money than the PIP program where a guy gets paid $8 mill for not even hitting one ball on tour all year.

A free lunch and shuttle van is something I guess, even if a tiny pittance compared to their other costs like caddy, hotel, air travel, etc.  Between that and all the tax implications of being a true C2C org, you'd need a full time accountant for the annual tax returns and filing and writing checks in half the states across the country.  I'd think $200k would barely be breaking even....

While the top 50 on Tour no doubt are doing well between winnings and lucrative endorsements, hope they do more for the other guys.  No doubt athletes who are 51-200 in the NBA, NFL, MLB, etc are doing far far better financially than those on Tour.

P.S.  Peter, I'd love to see a Phil meme doing all the stuff!

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I agree with your comment in principle...but...PGA Tour players still have by-laws they must adhere too in terms of what they can wear, minimum # of events, interaction with other players and media, etc.

Of course. That's a far cry, as you know, from the other sports and the requirements they place on your time and the limitations on your freedoms.

Seems long overdue that anyone who shows up to an event and misses the cut should get enough to at least cover costs of traveling, lodging, caddy costs, etc. and I'd bet the PIP money alone would be enough to cover most of this.

They give players who play 15 events $50k.

[David_Elvins]

While the top 50 on Tour no doubt are doing well between winnings and lucrative endorsements, hope they do more for the other guys.  No doubt athletes who are 51-200 in the NBA, NFL, MLB, etc are doing far far better financially than those on Tour.

NBA Broadcast revenue is 4 times that of the pga tour.  Of course their athletes earn more than golfers.

[Peter Flory]

Total NBA revenues are about $8.3B and the PGA Tour revenues are about $1.5B.  But there are 530 players in the NBA and only 175 + exemptions on the PGA tour.  So the revenue per player disparity isn't as big as the total revenue disparity.   

In the NBA, the players got 50% of the total revenues and for the PGA Tour, 55% of the revenues went to purses.   

It is interesting looking at the Tour's financials though. 
https://www.causeiq.com/organizations/view_990/520999206/86c3bd9f7c2e515bb1bf0a90dead1996

This one is from a couple years ago, but shows a $1.2B excess (assets- liabilities) with growth in the equivalent of retained earnings by $70M for that year.  > $2B held in cash and securities.  Isn't surprising that the players thought that an excess of more than a billion dollars should go to them instead of sit in the Tours accounts.  The PIP seems like a pittance when you see this and realize that it was only a fraction of the investment income that the Tour made on investing the excess cash.  i.e. the PIP is the equivalent of paying the players a 3% interest rate on the excess that they are holding in reserve (when they are growing it in the market at a greater rate than they are giving it out in PIP even). 

2.7% of the Tour revenues that year went to charitable giving, with the World Golf Foundation getting the most by a huge margin with $12.5M.  East Lake Foundation got $2.6M.  It looks like Shark Shootout Charities was next highest with $475K.  Lots of small amounts, like $5K to Special Olympics in FL. 

The salaries, wages, and benefits paid out by the tour were more than 3x what was given out to charities ($141MM vs $41MM). 

It is also interesting to look at the governance structures.  Players are represented, but it doesn't appear to me that they have control.  It looks like the policy board is comprised of 4 players who are elected, 4 independent directors who name their successors, and a PGA of America director.  Unless I'm not understanding it, it appears that the players are the minority on the board. 

Rory is one of the 4 players currently on the Policy Board, so it's no surprise that he wasn't approving of Phil's maneuvering. 

And the chairman of the Board supposedly shot down a proposal for a way to fend off the Saudi league (although the proposal sounds shady too):
https://nypost.com/2022/02/20/pga-tour-nixed-league-that-would-have-squashed-saudi-rivals/

[David_Elvins]

This one is from a couple years ago, but shows a $1.2B excess (assets- liabilities) with growth in the equivalent of retained earnings by $70M for that year.  > $2B held in cash and securities.  Isn't surprising that the players thought that an excess of more than a billion dollars should go to them instead of sit in the Tours accounts.  The PIP seems like a pittance when you see this and realize that it was only a fraction of the investment income that the Tour made on investing the excess cash.  i.e. the PIP is the equivalent of paying the players a 3% interest rate on the excess that they are holding in reserve (when they are growing it in the market at a greater rate than they are giving it out in PIP even). 

For better or worse, The Tour owns and operates 30+ TPC courses.  You can't take a serious look at the tour's income/expenses/ assests/liabilities without seperating these out.  They are significant assetts that generate signifcant revenue and have significant expenses.  There is no billion dollars sitting in the tour accounts. 

[Peter Pallotta]

It's remarkable how much attention we're paying to a televised sport that most of us apparently never watch, "except maybe for the majors". Most stops, even on a Sunday, with one always pampered vanilla flavoured tour pro trading mid irons and lag putts with another, is like watching paint dry for 'excitement' -- except worse because at least paint drying doesn't have try-hard announcers constantly peddling banal narratives at me. If it wasn't for the fact that many American CEOs are middle aged white men who love to play golf and to mingle and play pro-ams with the greats of the game, and so funnel undue amounts of their marketing budgets into making that happen sponsoring tournaments, there'd hardly even be any televised golf to watch in the first place (which hardly anyone is watching anyway, in any event); Sunday afternoons would just as easily be filled with figure skating, Rangers games, curling and equestrian show jumping instead. Which is to say: PM, Rory, the 18th ranked golfer in the world, Brooks and Bryson, numbers 24 to 155 in the race to the Fed Ex Cup standings -- they all should be thanking their lucky stars, and God, and Tiger Woods to be earning the kind of money that they already do, and thanking too compliant corporate boards for signing off on the folly of CEO golf-related spending. And the PGA Tour should in turn stop pretending they came into being along with the Ten Commandments as a gift to human kind, and admit they're just a greedy little corporation like every other, except for their great good luck in having a near monopoly to peddle a product beloved by fellow CEOs.

[John Kavanaugh]

From a pure union busting standpoint; many of these same arguments were used against Curt Flood.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curt_Flood


I would love for Cavalier to paint of picture of the Labor Law ramifications if Phil could get himself declared an employee of the Tour.

[Kalen Braley]

Peter F,

Thanks for posting up the various comparisons between the NBA and The PGATour.  The other thing the Tour seemingly gets a huge break on is staffing at events as its my understanding most of the ground workers are volunteers, not paid staff like the other leagues.

Overall, I think the players do have gripes/issues that need to be addressed on Tour, even if going about it the way Phil did was counter-productive.

P.S.  The 50th highest paid player in the NBA makes over $20 mill per year.  At most only one player on Tour is even coming close to that, the Fedex cup champ, (unless they have a beyond Tiger-good year and win 15-20 tournies...in one year.)

[John Kavanaugh]

How is the pay in the NBA Senior League?

[Kalen Braley]

How is the pay in the NBA Senior League?

Touche John,

But even if you're a 2nd stringer in the NBA for 10 years, averaging 10-15 minutes per game, you can still easily make $10 mill per season and not need to play BBall into your 40s...much less 50s.

[Peter Flory]

This one is from a couple years ago, but shows a $1.2B excess (assets- liabilities) with growth in the equivalent of retained earnings by $70M for that year.  > $2B held in cash and securities.  Isn't surprising that the players thought that an excess of more than a billion dollars should go to them instead of sit in the Tours accounts.  The PIP seems like a pittance when you see this and realize that it was only a fraction of the investment income that the Tour made on investing the excess cash.  i.e. the PIP is the equivalent of paying the players a 3% interest rate on the excess that they are holding in reserve (when they are growing it in the market at a greater rate than they are giving it out in PIP even). 

For better or worse, The Tour owns and operates 30+ TPC courses.  You can't take a serious look at the tour's income/expenses/ assests/liabilities without seperating these out.  They are significant assetts that generate signifcant revenue and have significant expenses.  There is no billion dollars sitting in the tour accounts.

On the balance sheet that I linked to, they showed $140MM in cash, $40MM in A/R, $430MM in notes receivable, $1.5B in marketable securities, and $694MM in other securities. 

I assumed that their golf course holdings were in that $694MM figure and not in the marketable/ publicly traded securities figure.  However, that is a separate entity/ subsidiary called the TPC Network and doesn't qualify for the not-for-profit status.  So, I don't think that any of the revenues or expenses from that operation is in the Form 990.  Maybe the assets and liabilities are also separated.  Most of the TPC courses are just operated by them, not owned. 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Isn't surprising that the players thought that an excess of more than a billion dollars should go to them instead of sit in the Tours accounts.

Even after David's corrections I still don't think you're reading that correctly. There's not $1B liquid sitting around.

The salaries, wages, and benefits paid out by the tour were more than 3x what was given out to charities ($141MM vs $41MM).

Almost all of the charitable givings are by the tournaments, which are almost all set up as separate entities. The PGA Tour doesn't run the Phoenix Open, the Firebirds do.

And the chairman of the Board supposedly shot down a proposal for a way to fend off the Saudi league (although the proposal sounds shady too):
https://nypost.com/2022/02/20/pga-tour-nixed-league-that-would-have-squashed-saudi-rivals/

Supposedly Phil was the "source" for that article.

Thanks for posting up the various comparisons between the NBA and The PGATour.

Except he didn't post the proper understanding/interpretation of it.

P.S.  The 50th highest paid player in the NBA makes over $20 mill per year.  At most only one player on Tour is even coming close to that, the Fedex cup champ, (unless they have a beyond Tiger-good year and win 15-20 tournies...in one year.)

NBA players also:

• Don't get to play when and where they want.
• Have significantly shorter careers on average.

[Kalen Braley]

Erik,

I don't work in the financial sector, but my understanding of a "Marketable Security" is similar to what Pete is implying...an easily liquidable asset that can be converted to cash quickly on public exchanges (maturities of 90 days or less).  This is their primary characteristic/selling point as cash equivalents because yes it would be dumb for an org their size to have $1 Bill in cash laying around. 

So IMO, its not an inaccurate description to say they have that amount "on hand"

P.S.  As for a significantly shorter playing career, are you claiming that making $20 million over say 8-10 years is less favorable than making same over 25-30 years?  Because I sure as hell wouldn't pick the latter...

[JohnVDB]

This one is from a couple years ago, but shows a $1.2B excess (assets- liabilities) with growth in the equivalent of retained earnings by $70M for that year.  > $2B held in cash and securities.  Isn't surprising that the players thought that an excess of more than a billion dollars should go to them instead of sit in the Tours accounts.  The PIP seems like a pittance when you see this and realize that it was only a fraction of the investment income that the Tour made on investing the excess cash.  i.e. the PIP is the equivalent of paying the players a 3% interest rate on the excess that they are holding in reserve (when they are growing it in the market at a greater rate than they are giving it out in PIP even). 

For better or worse, The Tour owns and operates 30+ TPC courses.  You can't take a serious look at the tour's income/expenses/ assests/liabilities without seperating these out.  They are significant assetts that generate signifcant revenue and have significant expenses.  There is no billion dollars sitting in the tour accounts.

On the balance sheet that I linked to, they showed $140MM in cash, $40MM in A/R, $430MM in notes receivable, $1.5B in marketable securities, and $694MM in other securities. 

I assumed that their golf course holdings were in that $694MM figure and not in the marketable/ publicly traded securities figure.  However, that is a separate entity/ subsidiary called the TPC Network and doesn't qualify for the not-for-profit status.  So, I don't think that any of the revenues or expenses from that operation is in the Form 990.  Maybe the assets and liabilities are also separated.  Most of the TPC courses are just operated by them, not owned.

The NCGA has a separate for-profit company called Poppy Holding for the golf courses that has one share which is held by the NCGA so I’d assume the PGA Tour does something similar.

[Sean_A]

Erik,

I don't work in the financial sector, but my understanding of a "Marketable Security" is similar to what Pete is implying...an easily liquidable asset that can be converted to cash quickly on public exchanges (maturities of 90 days or less).  This is their primary characteristic/selling point as cash equivalents because yes it would be dumb for an org their size to have $1 Bill in cash laying around. 

So IMO, its not an inaccurate description to say they have that amount "on hand"

P.S.  As for a significantly shorter playing career, are you claiming that making $20 million over say 8-10 years is less favorable than making same over 25-30 years?  Because I sure as hell wouldn't pick the latter...

Even though I hate the cheating based criminally infested NBA, it's far more popular than golf so it shouldn't be surprising their players earn more money. Golf is a minor viewing sport and to be honest, golfers are well compensated for their rather meager contribution to sports entertainment. The guys who make a splash have the opportunity to be filthy rich.

Ciao

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I don't work in the financial sector, but my understanding of a "Marketable Security" is similar to what Pete is implying...an easily liquidable asset that can be converted to cash quickly on public exchanges (maturities of 90 days or less).  This is their primary characteristic/selling point as cash equivalents because yes it would be dumb for an org their size to have $1 Bill in cash laying around.

I can only say what I've heard from others, as I too am not a financial guy. Also, they have quite a bit less now because they had to fund a lot of the pandemic stuff.

P.S.  As for a significantly shorter playing career, are you claiming that making $20 million over say 8-10 years is less favorable than making same over 25-30 years?

I'm not claiming one is more "favorable" than the other, only that while you can earn $5M being a scrub NBA player, you only do so for 2 or 3 or 4 years, often. So it's not like the scrubs are staying in the NBA for 30 years and then playing the Senior NBA.

[Niall C]

Peter/Kalen/John,
 
Many thanks for that explanation of the financial situation. So in essence Mickelson was correct about the tour and the scale of the funds it has available even if he wasn't completely accurate to the last dollar and cent.
 
And correct me if I'm wrong, but the football and basketball contracts are for a number of years and they still pay out even if the player gets injured and can't play during the period of the contract ? In contrast a golfer doesn't even need to get injured, he/she just has to have a downturn in form and they don't make anything in winnings. Of course, if the player is high-profile enough they will still attract an audience for the benefit of the tour.
 
When people talk of "freedom" what they really mean is the freedom to make the most you can in the good days knowing that you could be making hee-haw in the bad days. That's why many people in different walks of life prefer to be employed rather than be a freelancer. Are we seriously suggesting that Mickelson shouldn't be looking to make the most of it when he can?
 
Niall

[Steve Lapper]

In this otherwise enlightened conversation about the finances of the PGA Tour, no one has yet to describe the multi-billion dollar retirement plan that the Tour creates and manages for its players. It is immensely lucrative, even for those who've had their card for even a few seasons as well as the journeymen who rarely crack the top twenty.


The Tour's funding and administration of this plan rivals the NFL, NBA, and MLB.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Many thanks for that explanation of the financial situation. So in essence Mickelson was correct about the tour and the scale of the funds it has available even if he wasn't completely accurate to the last dollar and cent.

No, he wasn't. And even if you want to claim that he was "right" about this one very specific thing, he was wrong about the percentage paid out to players (he said something like 26%), the value of the "digital assets," and plenty of other things. Additionally, he was still working with the Saudi Arabian government.

Are we seriously suggesting that Mickelson shouldn't be looking to make the most of it when he can?

No. We're suggesting he (and you) are really far off-base with a lot of his "facts" and ignoring the context in which those comments are made (i.e. taking Saudi blood money).

In this otherwise enlightened conversation about the finances of the PGA Tour, no one has yet to describe the multi-billion dollar retirement plan that the Tour creates and manages for its players.

I thought I had but I looked back and you're correct… and yes… Phil is going to pull down many, many $M in pension.

[Niall C]

Erik


I suggested that in essence he was correct, do you dispute that ?


And in terms of context, I have previously suggested on more than one occasion that his interaction with the Saudi's or their representatives (you can call it "working with" or negotiating, it doesn't really matter) was a means of gaining leverage with the tour in order to get a better deal, which judging by his comments to the journalist seems like his preferred outcome. That's the context that's relevant for this discussion.


Niall

[Erik J. Barzeski]

I suggested that in essence he was correct, do you dispute that?

Do you dispute that he was incorrect about almost everything else he said?

You realize you're saying "Yeah, but he was right that Jay Monahan is the commissioner, right? So he was not completely wrong about everything he said, right?"

I don't know if he was correct about how much $ the PGA Tour has on reserve, particularly after they had to spend a good bit of it in 2020/2021. But I do know he was wrong about almost everything else he said. And that, at the end of the day, he was looking to get into bed with the Saudis. Do you acknowledge that?

And in terms of context, I have previously suggested on more than one occasion that his interaction with the Saudi's or their representatives (you can call it "working with" or negotiating, it doesn't really matter) was a means of gaining leverage with the tour in order to get a better deal, which judging by his comments to the journalist seems like his preferred outcome. That's the context that's relevant for this discussion.

Apparently you do not. The fact that you still believe that says quite a bit. The context is the whole bit, not just the bits the gullible people want to think are relevant.

[Niall C]

Erik


Here’s the context in terms of Mickelson using the proposed Saudi tour as leverage against the PGA Tour;


“We know they killed [Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi] and have a horrible record on human rights. They execute people over there for being gay. Knowing all of this, why would I even consider it? Because this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reshape how the PGA Tour operates. They’ve been able to get by with manipulative, coercive, strong-arm tactics because we, the players, had no recourse. As nice a guy as [PGA Tour Commissioner Jay Monahan] comes across as, unless you have leverage, he won’t do what’s right. And the Saudi money has finally given us that leverage. I’m not sure I even want [the SGL] to succeed, but just the idea of it is allowing us to get things done with the [PGA] Tour.”


Now you may argue he still might have joined the Saudi tour, and I wouldn’t dispute that, but I think even a febrile Mickelson hater like yourself would acknowledge that isn’t his preferred outcome.


Niall