Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
I'm pretty sure that Gannon is contractually obligated to play a certain amount of tournaments during the season.
I don't think you can blame people for reading it as "G.B.'s departure would also leave PDI without a (single) high-profile PDGA athlete under contract for the quickly-approaching 2023 season." They definitely left the door open for misinterpretation of that sentence
Interesting speculation.... But we are hearing that they also tried to sue D!ckerson and Pierce. Was there a secret buyer then as well? If this is truly the third time (at least) that they've tried it - maybe they just believe in attempting to use the legal system to bully people. They wouldn't be the first (or last).Gannon could hold out.
[speculation]IMHO all Prodigy wanted to do was make Buhr stay. Someone said Prodigy might have had big plans with Buhr, and it makes a lot of sense. Prodigy overreacted in an extreme way (compared to historical DGers leaving contracts), so Buhr IS key too … something. But what's big enough to make this bad-publicity-business decision to block Buhr from leaving (for merely 8 months, btw)? Prodigy did have something in the oven, timer about to go off, with dinner guests at the table, so to speak. Hmmm… What if a company was going to buy Prodigy for enough money to set the ownership for a lifetime… Buhr leaving might sink Prodigy's value, leaving a low-ball offer? I literally have no idea, but something big was in the works. OR maybe prodigy is just vindictive. Could go either way. [/speculation]
I'll admit at the outset that I haven't been impressed by the way Prodigy has positioned or marketed itself from the beginning: it's like they can't keep from sharting all over themselves, and this lawsuit, IMO, is another example. (FWIW, my ambivalence regarding Prodigy hasn't kept me from trying their discs: I've been bagging the D3 and D4 since summer of 2014 and the PA4 since Spring 2015, and nothing I've tried in the meantime has come close to replacing any of them.)
I have to question the business acumen of whomever is advising Prodigy in this matter. Given that Gannon was under contract for 2023, I would think that they would have been better served to hold their fire until he actually signed with new sponsor then sue the sponsor for tortious interference, because the sports-watching public in general understand the concept of tampering, and, for the most part, accept that tampering is a no-no. At the very least, that would have avoided the optics of "Big bad Prodigy beating up on a 17 year old kid." Whatever the merits of their claim, even if Prodigy wins the current suit (which, if their point-by-point rebuttal to GB's claims in their filing is upheld, is more likely than not), it's difficult to envision a scenario in which this doesn't end badly for them.
Regardless of whether the phrase "without a high profile PGDA athlete under contract" was meant to be read narrowly or broadly, the perception is the reality, and the perception among the wider public, who aren't reading or hearing the phrase strictly in the context of a legal pleading, was always going to be that they don't consider the other team members, including KJ and IR, "high profile PDGA athletes." That can't help but be perceived as "disrespecting" those team members and is likely to be something other companies bring up, if only in passing, when their contacts are up for renewal.
Additionally, the lawsuit puts team members in an awkward position. Does anyone (other than, perhaps, the suits at Prodigy) honestly believe that the lawsuit isn't going to be a story—if not the top story—at every tour stop and that (dozens, if not hundreds, of) people aren't going to bring it up and ask team members for their take on it at every event and promotional event throughout the season? How many times and how many different ways can you say, "No comment" before it becomes a major distraction?
Third, unless Prodigy was set to launch a major marketing campaign featuring GB, throwing out the figure of $1.5 million in potentially lost revenue if Gannon bails has the strong potential to sow doubt in the minds of the likes of KJ and IR (not just in terms of the amount of they receive in royalty payments, but the number of "their" discs sold vs. the number of "GB's" discs that would need to be sold to reach $1.5 million in gross revenue and what that number implies in terms of Prodigy's marketing efforts on behalf of GB vs. KJ, IR, and the other top tier team members) and where they stand in Prodigy's pecking order: if you're KJ, for example, who's practically been the face of Prodigy* and a consummate ambassador for the past 3-4 year, would you be OK with playing a distant second fiddle in terms of marketing to a newbie who's got a grand total of 1 year on the Pro Tour under his belt?
* Yes Chris ****erson is arguably Prodigy's most successful player over that time frame, but I would wager that if you ask most people what the first thing they think of when they hear "Kevin Jones" they would say "Prodigy," whereas if you ask what they think of when they hear "Chris ****erson," they would say "Robochicken" or "C****."
And have they learn nothing from or forgotten about the fiasco that was the 2016 Paige Pierce tour. Do they really want to go through a season-long repeat of that cluster ****?
Can Prodigy recover from this latest (self-inflicted) PR disaster? Perhaps; but you can be sure that players will be watching the proceedings closely, and if the lawsuit undermines the trust of their current and prospective team members, I suspect it will be ****ably hard to do so.
All that said, GB doesn't exactly come off as blameless in this kerfuffle, either (but that's perhaps a topic for another post in a different thread). When all is said and done, I suspect my attitude is going to be, "A plague on both your houses."
Interesting speculation.... But we are hearing that they also tried to sue D!ckerson and Pierce. Was there a secret buyer then as well? If this is truly the third time (at least) that they've tried it - maybe they just believe in attempting to use the legal system to bully people. They wouldn't be the first (or last).
Can you link to the post it was under so I can go check that out? Very curious.Someone with Reddit lawyer credentials said they did a legal search and didn't find any court documents for Paige or ****erson- which makes me think Prodigy 'only' threatened them. Something about Gannon forced them into the business decision to sue this go around. Maybe they just learned about memes.
I'm pretty sure that Gannon is contractually obligated to play a certain amount of tournaments during the season.
Someone with Reddit lawyer credentials said they did a legal search and didn't find any court documents for Paige or ****erson- which makes me think Prodigy 'only' threatened them. Something about Gannon forced them into the business decision to sue this go around. Maybe they just learned about memes.
Edit… really? Forum bot censor, really? Can someone add the robot chicken's last name to the approved list?
:|
Can you link to the post it was under so I can go check that out? Very curious.
Got it. I'll call it inconclusive lol. Someone get etdefender in here.
Would be fun if he could fill those obligations with local C-Tiers.
One of his perks of being sponsored was to have discs to sell at events/clinics. He found those discs hard to sell with the flashing, and some so poorly trimmed from the factory that there were rough edges left (harder to remove than the flashing themselves). It's damaging to his brand to try to sell products that should have been considered seconds as new product.
Right, it's one thing when you order 3 drivers and they all have flashing and you have to remove it. It's another thing to get 1,000 discs as a pro (or as a retailer) and get faced with either removing all the flashing yourself, or pissing off customers with sub-par disc quality you're trying to sell.