Just noticed this article regarding the World #1.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/golf/7952090.stm

Is his appearance fee justified considering the current economic climate? It seems that local taxpayers will foot half the bill.
I'd just like to hear your thoughts on the subject.

It costs 2-3 million to get him there and he brings in 9 million + surely a no brainer?

i think its good, He is going to bring in a lot of money to that area.

On a side note:

I'm loving the WITB set up, looks real nice.

Appearance fees are a mixed bag for me. Great for the tournament if they can get a good return on investment, but I've never felt that going somewhere just to tee it up because you are getting paid for it is in the spirit of true competitive fire.

But alot of pros do this sort of deal no-a-days so its just run of the mill. If it was me, I'd be happy for a shot at playing and would just ask they reimburse my expenses getting there and being there.

You would turn down $3 million if someone was offering it to you to come play a tournament?

Every person on this site would take that opportunity and they are lying if they say otherwise.

If you won the lottery but had to fly to London to collect it would you not go?

Tiger's a business man regardless of how much money he has, he's worked harder than anyone to build his "empire" he is right to ask for what he deserves to get being such a big name.

There is nothing wrong with this at all, he's a businessman and if your a business and turning down money your not going to be in business much longer.

I understand that, what I'm trying to say is that when someone plays because they are getting an appearance fee, it doesn't seem as genuine. Would T-dubs show up down under this week if they didn't offer it? Absolutely not. He probably forgot there was a place in the world where kangaroos, kola bears, and gum trees live in perfect blissful harmony.

He's obviously just going down there for the money, but I don't see why people think this is wrong?

Put it into your own terms and you can understand why anyone would do this.

He's bringing into $19M to the local economy in a tough economic time. you are gaining $16M to bring ONE guy to the area?

Every, city, state, county, region, province, etc would do this if given the opportunity.

Like I said in my first post "Great for the tournament if they can get a good return on investment..."

You're just missing my point it seems. TO ME, IN MY OPINION, its not genuine and lacks competitive fire. Not saying he doesn't have competitive fire (obviously he does), but at the end of the day he can come in dead last and still make more than the guy who came in first.

If I use you logic of TW being a business, he should do a cost-benefit analysis of the coming week. Costs: More wear and tear on his body which might limit his (money making) potential in the future. Why fight hard for that W when he's already got the $3 million.
Benefits: Another trophy for the case.

Seems like the answer is simple to me if he wants to stay in business




Oh, good luck to your Cardinals today. I go to Siena, I hope we pull the upset of the year and send you guys packing.

well, he does need the money since he was out of work for what, eight months?

I have no problem with this. As a professional golfer, it's his job to play golf for money. They're giving him money, he's playing golf.

As for the taxpayers footing the bill, I'm not exactly sure why this is. Is the Australian Masters gov't sponsored somehow? If so, wouldn't proceeds be reinvested towards taxpayer benefits (the way the lotto in America funds public education in most states)?

Don't think your cost/analysis is accurate to be 100% honest in my opinion.

On the basis of your cost-benefit analysis there are only 4 tournaments he should play; Obv. the 4 majors.

He needs no other money, no tournament would matter except the ones that help him get to Jack's record. So why fight hard for any other tournament?

If you don't think every golfer out there is his own businessman I think your highly mistaken, just look at the amounts of money they all make AWAY from the golf course. Tiger would still be the same golfer, but he would be nowhere near a billionaire if he didn't have the business side.

I personally think the competition has been gone for a while in the game of golf, ever since large endorsement deals, signing major deals with club companies and huge purses have been around (2000% increase on the from 1988 (Curtis Strange breaks $1M)-2007(TW breaks $20M) compared to a 1000% increase from 1963-1988 (Arnie's first year winning 6 figures as a PGA Tour player))

Again in my opinion we blow these things out of proportion, Tiger benefits, The purse of the tournament doesn't change, the local economy benefits, the players get to play against the best player maybe ever, the fans get what they've waited 10 years for...I don't see a negative for anyone?

Again, in my first post I said this is pretty much "run of the mill" for "alot of pros." I'm not singling out tiger in anyway here (Phil, AK you listening?)

I have already agreed with the fact the local economy benefits.

And right now, I think Tiger should just stick to the tournaments he's played in the past 2 years every year and thats it. No need to add more coming off an injury like that.

I'll just agree to disagree. I feel like I've repeated and restated my point enough.

I'll agree with that.

But go Cards! lol.