Two problems with the record industry analogy: 1. Discs aren't exclusive to players - and players sell more discs than just those with their names on them. They add value to the brand which sells stock stamps or even other players' discs. If pay is going to be predominantly based on sales, then they need a cut of ALL sales, not just named discs. 2. The record industry has a reputation of being exploitative of artists. Making all pay "advances" brings that predatory relationship into disc golf and I don't think that would be healthy for the sport. I think we have a myriad of other individual sports to look to for guidance before record labels. We live in the era of personal brands, and that is what the manufacturer is playing for. We've seen this in the contracts of players with large social media presence exceeding better performing but less active players.
Interesting point. The only issue I see with the correlation is the idea of brand exposure. If I’m a teen in 70’s I wasn’t more likely to buy a Boston Cd just because I like Led Zeppelin. However with disc golf, I gravitated to disc craft as a whole because of Paul McBeth. So I’m not sure if signature disc sales fully captures the impact the player is having on the brand.
I was a teen in the 90s and listened to a lot of punk and indie music. If I discovered a new band I liked, I would absolutely check out other bands that label signed.
@@tannermillican I agree man. I was exclusively Innova until Paul and then Brodie went to Discraft. So then I decided to try some Discraft. But not all the discs have their names on them. Some are just stock. Same with trying the Discmania P2 because of Simon. But I just bought the stock baseline discs. But those purchases were driven because of certain pros.
I don't agree with this video...... The comparison to the music industry is fundamentally wrong. Sony contracts a musician to create a product that sony will sell.... Where as Athletes are walking billboards for the manufacturer's own products. Athletes don't create items to be sold, they promote existing products. Both parties in a Music contract are expecting entirely different things than an Athlete contract. Music contract--- Sony: wants to gain royalties from the musicians creations. Musician: wants a large company to distribute and promote their products. Gains access to quality equipment that helps them create(studios/guitars). Gains a steady income to allow for product creation(music) Sports Contract--- Innova: Wants a popular person to use their equipment on the big screen. Wants their name on the TV/NEWS. Wants viewers to feel a link between a good athlete and the manufacturer's product. Athlete: wants to have a steady income that can allow them to compete at the highest level. Wants access to the best equipment to help them compete. Athletes are influencers...their core product is the number of fans they have, the views, the followers. The only thing a Sport manufacturer is sponsoring an athlete for is the advertising. The line of special discs is massively secondary compared to the advertising. So sports contracts should be just like advertising deals. It should be based on how many fans you have, and/or how often you put they brand name on the big screen.
I agree with much of what you said. Disc manufacturers main concern with the players should be that they are able to move product and represent the brand in an agreed and acceptable way. Players purses should be the realm of the player for their use outside of sponsors control. That is a perk of doing well, but it will indirectly benefit the sponsor with increased sales. Disc Golf is getting too far away from its roots, as the disc golf I experienced when I started playing in 1977. It needs to become more about the game and less about the business. I think it some management and oversight is taken to guide the whole pro tour toward stability, then the players will be able to play the game with the comradery that used to dominate the sport and let the business side concentrate on business and not player results.
A player’s union would make contract standardization easier. While I agree with the model similarities between industries, there is a huge sucking sound which is the tour/broadcast revenue side of things. While Atlantic records (I.e.) could schedule a stadium show tour and make bank on ticket and merch sales (conservatively 50k people at $75 a head just to get in the door for 15-20-30 dates), disc golf events are largely subsidized by the disc manufacturers, not ticket sales or viewing revenue. It’s a bit of a cannibalistic system. Getting alternate deep pocket sponsors would be a start (hotel chain, ford, etc) so there is revenue coming in to the system that is not just recycled in our terrarium
You call it cannibalistic, I call it a pyramid 😆 You make a great point tho, the manufacturers essentially provides all the money for everything minus whatever the DGPT chips in
I couldn't agree more that the athletes should know how many discs they are selling, I would even argue monthly reports given to the players would help them if they were inclined to promote their discs. I know a few of the players have started setting up booths at tournaments to help sell their signature products. I can never shake the thought of what McBeth said about Innova (Smashboxx ep 222 at the 51 minute mark) him never seeing his paycheck change once his name was on the Destroyer and he never received any reports on how many of his signature discs sold, that is wild to me.
@@McSlobo Stores and online shops do sell the majority of the discs, some pros will buy discs and have small runs of there own hot stamps. Ricky has done this with most of his sponsors over the past 5 years, Kona , Double G, Barsby, Alden, Adam Hammes and many others. My guess is they can make a larger percentage per discs which helps with day to day expenses. I met Barsby at BSF and while we were talking he mentioned that UpperPark gives him a certain amount of bags he can sell on tour for extra cash, which he said he really appreciated.
I agree with a lot of what you brought up, and thank you for your video. It brought up issues I'd not thought of, being just a fan myself, and not a touring pro. The one thing I'd like to see added to the discussion is the impact a player has on bringing new players to the sport. This is because I see the growth of disc golf and the increase in disc sales being directly associated with bringing new players to the sport. I think this has a greater impact than simply pumping out new molds and signature discs every 10 minutes. I think that established players don't buy that many new discs often. I think that most players, even if they are fans of certain players don't buy their signature discs that often unless they were interested in buying that disc to begin with. I think that veteran players rarely buy new discs. As a result, I think that the majority of disc and other accessory purchases are coming from new or newer players. So, bringing new players to the sport should be a very high, if not the highest, priority to all involved. I notice that a lot of the smaller (c-tier) tournaments don't even offer an MA4 divisions, nor do they offer many of the female divisions. This is exactly the divisions that new and newer players would be wanting. Getting the opportunity to win or podium in a division with people who are at a similar level of struggle as yourself is much more impactful than having to play against people who may be 100+ rating points higher than you and getting consistently clobbered. Overall, I think much more could be done to attract new players to the game. I think player contracts could help with this by putting more importance on the players interaction with social media and in person with fans showing up to the events. Such as tips and tricks and how to videos and in person clinics. Manufacturers could put out more of their own video series targeting new players on how to choose and throw discs, similar to how the youtube channel "six sided discs" does. It really helps new players sort through the thousands of new discs and find something that will actually work for them. Manufacturers could also initiate negotiations with schools to put disc golf programs in place, possibly giving them discounts on equipment. Thanks again for a great video.
Very thoughtful material as usual, thanks so much! As a growing content creator who is starting to talk to folks about sponsorships, this hits home and has me realizing how little I know or understand about the business side of disc golf. You have given me some great food for thought. Do you do consulting? Thanks
Good points for discussion, but there are certainly couple things I , let's say, see differently. 1. As someone already said, the artists are selling their albums and their brands, not that of the publisher. This also makes tracking their success rather straight forward. In disc golf, the players are primarily there to promote the disc golf brand while the signature / tour series discs are just an extra way to provide them additional income. Look at what McBeth or Simon did to their brand, long before their own signature lineups were as extensive as they are today. 2. I really feel like disc golf manufacturers are well aware of the difference between winning and selling discs. Look at the contracts that Simon, Eagle, Brody, Kona and Oakley, not to mention the content creators got. Also, while Paul and Kristin win they also sell their brands really well. I think Ricky and maybe some of the Prodigy guys are the ones who were paid more based on their success, but those are more of an exception than a norm. Personally I feel like the positive visibility is the key for DG sponsors, not so much direct disc sales of certain molds. Being active on social media, getting on lead cards and being open to media are better metrics. In general, having standard terms like duration, termination, exclusivity, etc. is good, but what comes to the more detailed payment terms, it should be negotiable as each player brings different benefits and requirements to the table. You can't apply Isaac Robinson's terms to Silas Schulz or Bodanza and vice versa.
Interesting comparison to music artists. How do disc golf athletes contracts compare to other professional athletes, especially individual sports like ball golf, tennis, etc.?
no no no. The comparison to the music industry is fundamentally wrong. Sony contracts a musician to create a product that sony will sell.... Where as Athletes are walking billboards for the manufacturer's own products. Athletes don't create items to be sold, they promote existing products. Musicians are creators of a product, that need a way to distribute their product. Athletes are influencers(advertisers) and they obviously both want access to money to keep them going, and quality equipment. Sony wants a musician to create and amazing product that they can sell. Innova wants an Athletes to put Innovas name infront of as many people as possible, and make the relation between Good==Innova.
This is fascinating. Standardization may be the answer but at least Representation and education to these athletes should be a given. i wonder how many of them signed starry eyed with the thought that "I'm a star now" and got bad contracts. I feel sad that a Sponsored Disc golfer would get the short end of the stick and not know what the consequences of their bonus are. great video. I wonder how this compares to Ball Golf Players?
Disc Golf is a sport, therefore a meritocracy. Royalties paid per merch bought is great, but I believe their salary should be based on how well they play on tour, much like most other professional sports. It will ultimately take a Player's Union, and sports agents to find that balance I think. NASCAR, Tennis, and PGA have a model that could be adapted and adjusted as needed, as they are individual sports as well.
I think golf is a good comparison where Tiger, Fowler, Phil, Speith, and Rory just are more popular even in if Koepka is more successful in the important events. Individual sports are just different interms of the popularity is more important for your earnings then the on course resume.
Interesting take. Also, love your content. I think when we talk about marketability, the general rule in business is value proposition, right? How can I market my product to solve people's problems better than the competitor's. There are 2 main ways these pros can market themselves: connect with their fans on social media and playing well enough to get on coverage. These factors play into why some players get what they get. But I really want to stress something- being sponsored is a privilege not a right. I will say I'm personally not a fan of Prodigy. Discs are discs and I'm not too whiny about how they feel/fly because you can fill all bag slots with any manufacturer. I spend most of my money on MVP/Axiom. I seriously considered building a Prodigy bag because I enjoyed watching Isaac's beautiful hyzer flips in the woods and how they seem to always stable up just at the right time to miss a tree.
Great job, I’ve seen some crazy contacts in my life but what happens when the manufacturer doesn’t release there sales numbers? And keeps the numbers secret.
It's wild that every sponsored player doesn't get an itemized report on their disc sales. WWE moves at least an order of magnitude more product than any disc golf company and gives quarterly itemized royalty reports to all of their athletes.
Love the content Chris! Keep it coming. This is an opinion piece and I don’t see the correlation between music and disc golf. You’re comparing something an artist creates (the actual music) to plastic moulds a manufacturer makes and slaps a players brand on. Apples to oranges on this one. Until there is more money in the sport through viewership this will always be a struggle. Manufacturers can only sell so many frisbees and what you’re asking for is a pipe dream I would venture for most companies, they’re not making enough money, cause there are only so many frisbees they can sell. The money is in advertising, as with any viewed content. As a loyal DGN subscriber for years i would pay more if i didnt have to sit through the same ads every weekend, gimme more non disc golf commercials. My two cents.
In general I don't think it's in either the fan's or the player's interest that we start implementing business practices from one of the most predatory industries in the world. A big issue in the music business is that the label gathers all money from sales, then reports sales to the artist and pays the artist accordingly. So if the label wants more money, they can easily report a smaller number than what has been sold. They count on the artist not knowing how much they have actually sold in order to take advantage of them. In music it's actually possible to track these sales, even as a fan, because we have the Billboard top 100, streaming numbers visible to everyone on spotify, etc. Now how do we guarantee a disc manufacturer doesn't do this in order to never pay over the advance? I think it's much more beneficial to our sport that we treat players as "employees" in marketing, rather than independent businesses, simply because there isn't enough money in the business. The players cannot afford management teams and lawyers to make sure they aren't being fucked by the manufacturers. I think the "X amount of money + royalties on signature disc sales" type of contracts we have now make much more sense in the context of disc golf. As many others have stated, the players are promoting the entire company, not just their own disc lineup. Metallica is not helping sell Katy Perry's music, just because they are both signed on EMI, so the business model to get paid only based on their own sales makes sense in that context. A record label also wouldn't have a product to sell without the band, whereas a disc golf manufacturer can make discs without any players representing them. Except for a few cases among the very top pros, the discs are always designed and made by the manufacturer. The player just gets to choose which product to put their name on. Essentially a record label is selling a product made by the artist, where a disc golfer is selling (mostly actually just helping sell) a product made by the manufacturer.
My main concern is this -- how much control does the player have over how well their discs are marketed such that they should be held directly accountable for how well they sell? I disagree with the idea of advances in general aside from for things like expenses of traveling to events. If the player takes money to go to an event and then fails to show up that's one thing and sure the company should be made whole for that lapse. But if a player is given a years pay and then has to pay back 50% of it because their disc sales floundered (perhaps because the mold their name is on isn't hot right now) that feels like a bait and switch.
I am not at all knowledgeable about business practices. I am wondering what most of these pro players would do if they had no sponsorship at all? Would they be able to survive on tour? Brodie Smith stated that he was about $15,000 in the red after a season of touring. No matter what, the cost to tour has to be made more affordable for everyone. Especially for the lower tiered players that are desperately trying to stay on tour. Robbie - C stated in one of his videos that he has gotten the impression that the Tour needs bodies...lot's of them on Tour. If a disc manufacturer wanted to sponsor me, I would want them to pay for my tournament registration fee + fuel to get to each event.
Winning is still relevant since it leads to heavy advertising airtime during media coverage from the players jerseys. Being a walking billboard on DGN/Jomez for hours at a time on lead card should have its own separate payment. Athlete is stimulating sales of discs for all players on the roster.
This is exactly what I was going to post. A player's boost to a company's sales absolutely goes beyond sales of their signature series of discs in a way that seems nearly impossible to fully calculate, so compensating for wins (especially for major broadcasted events) needs to be part the equation.
@@MeowChickenFish it costs money to advertise on DGN and Jomez. You may be saying that it doesn’t cost a lot of money to advertise on those channels due to low viewership. But the players on lead card with the brands on their jerseys for many minutes of coverage are generating some level of value that is greater than 0.
If you tie to disc sales the details on production would need to be sorted. For example, a manufacturer has two sponsored athletes but only production capacity for one disc during a period of time. Does the other athlete get compensation for production limitations? In the music industry the product isn't limited in the same ways. New molds, new plastics, there are a ton of logistics issues that can limit sales artificially from the player perspective.
A smart player would have a clause in his contract that he has direct access to the sales data for any of his signature discs. Do players receive a royalty on all their molds or only discs that directly feature their name or likeness? For example, does James Conrad get a percentage for every Trail sold or only those with his name, logo, likeness?
Weak correlation between disc golf and record companies. Also Lone Star requires a social media dedication presence of its players. While being a 4.3% infinitediscs total sales. Wont equate in the end
Well, the players don't make the disc and it's not their product per se. Usually they don't participate in designing of the disc (might have some say on what's in the label) and they don't put content on the disc like a recording artist would do. So I'd say it's not even remotely the same thing. Most buyers don't give single thought if there's some name on the disc, like Ken Climo or Eric McGabe or whoever. It doesn't depend on the person at all. If the player would die, they would get another name on the same product. Can't do that in music because the artist makes the product unlike in disc golf where the player is just a name on the product. I've bought KC and EMac discs without knowing what that means. Did the player sell the disc to me? No, definitely not. In disc golf, the disc someone purchases must meet some criteria like mold (comes from the manufacturer), color (some are very specific, most want bright colors to avoid losing the disc) feel (manufacturer's plastic), durability (manufacturer's plastkc), weight (manufacturer), details in shape (more or less domey), price (cheaper quality discs are more popular), it should be cool (thanks to the graphics artist, whoever that is). These criteria have mostly nothing to do with some certain players, besides some rare exceptions like discs designed by/for some noteworthy players. Most players don't have their own mold, just their own runs of stock products with their graphics. More like a CD in a case with somebody's signature, or maybe some custom art.
if i owned a disc golf company i would probably pay more for individuals with strong social media presences, for instance Simon Lizottes youtube channel is probably more valuable than his tournament results, its why i have a simon lizotte pixel in my bag... it is completely conceivable that a company would sponsor a youtuber or tiktoker who doesn't really compete with a bigger contract then an a top athlete.
I will happily debate you, in good faith, anytime about nearly every point you made because I think they are ultimately bad for nearly every player, if not all of them.
It's a sport. sports contracts across the board are not the same. Why follow along an industry (music) that has shown to be horrible and t6ake advantage of people ledt and right. That's why there are so many independent artists right now.
Comparing disc golf contracts to musician contracts does not make sense. comparison should be to other sport contracts. One difference is that Disc golfers do not design the discs that they sell with their name on them. Musicians create the music that is being sold by the record company. On the other hand tennis players put their name on products made by the sports companies and get a percentage. That is more similarto Disc Golf. Those are the contracts that should be used as a model.
You should never, ever be in debt to your 'employer'. NEVER. These advances are horrible. They were horrible for a lot of musicians they'd be horrible for disc golfers. Not only was this bad for musicians in the recent past it was bad for miners in the more distant past. Bad take, really bad.
I don’t really like the comparison of musical artist contracts and disc golfer contracts. Artists make a creative product. Athletes play a sport. Too many artists made art for people that are starving now while what they created is owned by labels cashing in.
Yeah, record labels are notorious for completely screwing over their artists. Steve Albini wrote a great article on this 30 years ago called “The Problem with Music” where he outlines how a seemingly-great record deal can end up costing the band more than they make. It still holds true today.
What about when a manufacturer puts out an inferior product and the athletes' ability to sell discs suffers as a result. Shouldn’t the athlete have some sort of recourse or out to hold the manufacturer responsible?
A company with the means of sponsoring a player has proven they have made money with the products they have. Saying a product is inferior is more than likely in the eyes of the beholder. People complain about Prodigy all the time even with multiple world titles proving their discs will get to the basket.
A different comment mentioned how pro athletes are basically walking billboards of a sponsor. They’re really just influencers at heart. If a non-pro also has that level of sway, then it would be in the manufacturer’s interest to sponsor them. (Kristofer Hivju comes to mind.)
I respect your freedom of opinion, but just because you’re a lawyer doesn’t endow you with common sense. Sometimes you say the most ridiculous crap. PLAYERS SHOULD RARN THEIR PAY BY WINNING. Manufacturers should “support” their players and insure them with medical and a stipend. But! Manufacturers should invest their money in design and creation of exclusive disc golf courses. Above all, manufacturers should put their money into tournament payouts (.) Players are “representatives” and can’t be responsible for product sales! People don’t just buy “one” disc! They buy “all” discs from that manufacturer. Naturally, an “exclusive” disc, for example, The General, is a completely different thing: it’s not a “stamp” it’s a specific disc design. Moreover, players shouldn’t be “sponsored” only by disc manufacturers, they should seek sponsorship with large companies like, alcoholic beverages, clothing manufacturers, automotive manufacturers, jewelry and other outside companies. Again, with all due respect, your perspective is myopic and closed minded. Disc golfers are athletes, not rock stars …
How is there a “should” with any of this? It sounds like you should represent these athletes when they negotiate their contracts and advocate for the things you argue for in this video.
So let’s use baseball as a example I hit 40 home runs with 100 RBI’s but my teammate hits 20 home runs and 70 RBI’s he should make more because he sells more merchandise or jerseys then me lol you let me know where in any sport that’s happening all give you a hint 0
@@michaelmaniloff9297 is it different with golf 👀is that a team sport 👀 you sound dumb and no Paul ulibarri will never be more valuable then Isaac Robinson
This has to be by far the worst video you have made you said “players who sell the most discs should make more then somebody who actually wins” players contracts should always be determined with there play it’s like that in any sport you get paid with how well you perform at the end of the day in any sport nobody cares about how much merchandise you sell it’s how you play the game are you a winner or a loser nobody ever says that guy is the goat because he sells the most jerseys or he’s my favorite player because he sells so many jerseys 🤣🤣you get my point
It's funny when people say stuff like this like an insult, when Brodie would be the first to hold up his hand. He mocks himself for being close to the bottom, yet he still sells more discs than almost anyone out there.
I disagree with the Advancements needing to be repaid bit. I understand business, and accept that disc manufacturers take far more risk. However, once you're good enough that a company wants to sign you, they should own the costs of Advancements. Baking this into the contract means the yearly salary will be lower to compensate, but it eases the worries and concerns of a touring athlete who has to deal with incredible variability regarding weather/health. Musicians don't deal with nearly as many variables, like injuries and "bad breaks" like insane wind ripping during their portion of a round compared to competitors. They make music and it either sells or it doesn't. Players, like musicians, get screwed over FAR more than any record label or disc manufacturer ever has, or will. These contracts seem insanely favorable to companies. Companies pay lawyers more than players...... see the connection?
I think this applies to team sports as well as music labels. Players like Parker Welck, Macie, and Sullivan Tipton can be solid to 50 players or elite series winners but they are overpaid because they likely don't recoup the investment for DGA. Players like Uli, Paul, Simon, Eagle, and Ricky are older players who have had time to show they are a mainstay and move discs long-term. If companies only sponsored players that made them money their would be no tour.
Musicians don't have variables? 😂 You're telling me they don't release bad albums that aren't well received or spend their careers fighting against being a one-hit-wonder?
Musicians don't deal with variables? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Easy to tell you've never done it. Stick 5 people with different personalities in a van together for a month and then tell me there's no variables...
@cup_and_cone Just like the other guy who misread my comment, I said, "Musicians don't deal with nearly as many variables." I didn't say zero variables. Also, most bands are unoriginal 4/4 piles of generic, mainstream, anti-intellectual noise that mocks real music. Most are lucky to even be a 1-hit wonders, and for good reason.
Two problems with the record industry analogy:
1. Discs aren't exclusive to players - and players sell more discs than just those with their names on them. They add value to the brand which sells stock stamps or even other players' discs. If pay is going to be predominantly based on sales, then they need a cut of ALL sales, not just named discs.
2. The record industry has a reputation of being exploitative of artists. Making all pay "advances" brings that predatory relationship into disc golf and I don't think that would be healthy for the sport.
I think we have a myriad of other individual sports to look to for guidance before record labels. We live in the era of personal brands, and that is what the manufacturer is playing for. We've seen this in the contracts of players with large social media presence exceeding better performing but less active players.
Beautiful job taking a boring topic and making it amazing. Your editor needs a raise.
Interesting point. The only issue I see with the correlation is the idea of brand exposure. If I’m a teen in 70’s I wasn’t more likely to buy a Boston Cd just because I like Led Zeppelin. However with disc golf, I gravitated to disc craft as a whole because of Paul McBeth. So I’m not sure if signature disc sales fully captures the impact the player is having on the brand.
What you just described is why manufacturers pay for these players
@@younggrobertwrldglobal5793 no I agree. I’m saying that’s why a straight royalty off of your series disc sales model isn’t a perfect fit
I was a teen in the 90s and listened to a lot of punk and indie music. If I discovered a new band I liked, I would absolutely check out other bands that label signed.
@@tannermillican I agree man. I was exclusively Innova until Paul and then Brodie went to Discraft. So then I decided to try some Discraft. But not all the discs have their names on them. Some are just stock. Same with trying the Discmania P2 because of Simon. But I just bought the stock baseline discs. But those purchases were driven because of certain pros.
Another video that has an impressive amount of interesting information and good background. Thanks for the great content!
I don't agree with this video...... The comparison to the music industry is fundamentally wrong.
Sony contracts a musician to create a product that sony will sell.... Where as Athletes are walking billboards for the manufacturer's own products. Athletes don't create items to be sold, they promote existing products.
Both parties in a Music contract are expecting entirely different things than an Athlete contract.
Music contract---
Sony: wants to gain royalties from the musicians creations.
Musician: wants a large company to distribute and promote their products. Gains access to quality equipment that helps them create(studios/guitars). Gains a steady income to allow for product creation(music)
Sports Contract---
Innova: Wants a popular person to use their equipment on the big screen. Wants their name on the TV/NEWS. Wants viewers to feel a link between a good athlete and the manufacturer's product.
Athlete: wants to have a steady income that can allow them to compete at the highest level. Wants access to the best equipment to help them compete.
Athletes are influencers...their core product is the number of fans they have, the views, the followers. The only thing a Sport manufacturer is sponsoring an athlete for is the advertising. The line of special discs is massively secondary compared to the advertising.
So sports contracts should be just like advertising deals. It should be based on how many fans you have, and/or how often you put they brand name on the big screen.
I agree with much of what you said. Disc manufacturers main concern with the players should be that they are able to move product and represent the brand in an agreed and acceptable way. Players purses should be the realm of the player for their use outside of sponsors control. That is a perk of doing well, but it will indirectly benefit the sponsor with increased sales. Disc Golf is getting too far away from its roots, as the disc golf I experienced when I started playing in 1977. It needs to become more about the game and less about the business. I think it some management and oversight is taken to guide the whole pro tour toward stability, then the players will be able to play the game with the comradery that used to dominate the sport and let the business side concentrate on business and not player results.
A player’s union would make contract standardization easier.
While I agree with the model similarities between industries, there is a huge sucking sound which is the tour/broadcast revenue side of things. While Atlantic records (I.e.) could schedule a stadium show tour and make bank on ticket and merch sales (conservatively 50k people at $75 a head just to get in the door for 15-20-30 dates), disc golf events are largely subsidized by the disc manufacturers, not ticket sales or viewing revenue. It’s a bit of a cannibalistic system. Getting alternate deep pocket sponsors would be a start (hotel chain, ford, etc) so there is revenue coming in to the system that is not just recycled in our terrarium
You call it cannibalistic, I call it a pyramid 😆
You make a great point tho, the manufacturers essentially provides all the money for everything minus whatever the DGPT chips in
I couldn't agree more that the athletes should know how many discs they are selling, I would even argue monthly reports given to the players would help them if they were inclined to promote their discs. I know a few of the players have started setting up booths at tournaments to help sell their signature products. I can never shake the thought of what McBeth said about Innova (Smashboxx ep 222 at the 51 minute mark) him never seeing his paycheck change once his name was on the Destroyer and he never received any reports on how many of his signature discs sold, that is wild to me.
Will you provide a link to vid where McBeth said that about Innova?
I thought stores sell discs, not players, but I may have misunderstood something.
@@McSlobo Stores and online shops do sell the majority of the discs, some pros will buy discs and have small runs of there own hot stamps. Ricky has done this with most of his sponsors over the past 5 years, Kona , Double G, Barsby, Alden, Adam Hammes and many others. My guess is they can make a larger percentage per discs which helps with day to day expenses. I met Barsby at BSF and while we were talking he mentioned that UpperPark gives him a certain amount of bags he can sell on tour for extra cash, which he said he really appreciated.
Smashboxx 222 at the 51 minute mark
@@TheGullibleSkeptic th-cam.com/video/BtO1PYCMov0/w-d-xo.html
I agree with a lot of what you brought up, and thank you for your video. It brought up issues I'd not thought of, being just a fan myself, and not a touring pro. The one thing I'd like to see added to the discussion is the impact a player has on bringing new players to the sport. This is because I see the growth of disc golf and the increase in disc sales being directly associated with bringing new players to the sport. I think this has a greater impact than simply pumping out new molds and signature discs every 10 minutes.
I think that established players don't buy that many new discs often. I think that most players, even if they are fans of certain players don't buy their signature discs that often unless they were interested in buying that disc to begin with. I think that veteran players rarely buy new discs.
As a result, I think that the majority of disc and other accessory purchases are coming from new or newer players. So, bringing new players to the sport should be a very high, if not the highest, priority to all involved.
I notice that a lot of the smaller (c-tier) tournaments don't even offer an MA4 divisions, nor do they offer many of the female divisions. This is exactly the divisions that new and newer players would be wanting. Getting the opportunity to win or podium in a division with people who are at a similar level of struggle as yourself is much more impactful than having to play against people who may be 100+ rating points higher than you and getting consistently clobbered.
Overall, I think much more could be done to attract new players to the game. I think player contracts could help with this by putting more importance on the players interaction with social media and in person with fans showing up to the events. Such as tips and tricks and how to videos and in person clinics. Manufacturers could put out more of their own video series targeting new players on how to choose and throw discs, similar to how the youtube channel "six sided discs" does. It really helps new players sort through the thousands of new discs and find something that will actually work for them. Manufacturers could also initiate negotiations with schools to put disc golf programs in place, possibly giving them discounts on equipment.
Thanks again for a great video.
Very thoughtful material as usual, thanks so much! As a growing content creator who is starting to talk to folks about sponsorships, this hits home and has me realizing how little I know or understand about the business side of disc golf. You have given me some great food for thought. Do you do consulting? Thanks
Good points for discussion, but there are certainly couple things I , let's say, see differently.
1. As someone already said, the artists are selling their albums and their brands, not that of the publisher. This also makes tracking their success rather straight forward. In disc golf, the players are primarily there to promote the disc golf brand while the signature / tour series discs are just an extra way to provide them additional income. Look at what McBeth or Simon did to their brand, long before their own signature lineups were as extensive as they are today.
2. I really feel like disc golf manufacturers are well aware of the difference between winning and selling discs. Look at the contracts that Simon, Eagle, Brody, Kona and Oakley, not to mention the content creators got. Also, while Paul and Kristin win they also sell their brands really well. I think Ricky and maybe some of the Prodigy guys are the ones who were paid more based on their success, but those are more of an exception than a norm. Personally I feel like the positive visibility is the key for DG sponsors, not so much direct disc sales of certain molds. Being active on social media, getting on lead cards and being open to media are better metrics.
In general, having standard terms like duration, termination, exclusivity, etc. is good, but what comes to the more detailed payment terms, it should be negotiable as each player brings different benefits and requirements to the table. You can't apply Isaac Robinson's terms to Silas Schulz or Bodanza and vice versa.
Interesting comparison to music artists. How do disc golf athletes contracts compare to other professional athletes, especially individual sports like ball golf, tennis, etc.?
no no no.
The comparison to the music industry is fundamentally wrong.
Sony contracts a musician to create a product that sony will sell.... Where as Athletes are walking billboards for the manufacturer's own products. Athletes don't create items to be sold, they promote existing products.
Musicians are creators of a product, that need a way to distribute their product.
Athletes are influencers(advertisers)
and they obviously both want access to money to keep them going, and quality equipment.
Sony wants a musician to create and amazing product that they can sell.
Innova wants an Athletes to put Innovas name infront of as many people as possible, and make the relation between Good==Innova.
Yup. This.
This is fascinating. Standardization may be the answer but at least Representation and education to these athletes should be a given. i wonder how many of them signed starry eyed with the thought that "I'm a star now" and got bad contracts. I feel sad that a Sponsored Disc golfer would get the short end of the stick and not know what the consequences of their bonus are. great video. I wonder how this compares to Ball Golf Players?
Disc Golf is a sport, therefore a meritocracy. Royalties paid per merch bought is great, but I believe their salary should be based on how well they play on tour, much like most other professional sports. It will ultimately take a Player's Union, and sports agents to find that balance I think. NASCAR, Tennis, and PGA have a model that could be adapted and adjusted as needed, as they are individual sports as well.
I think golf is a good comparison where Tiger, Fowler, Phil, Speith, and Rory just are more popular even in if Koepka is more successful in the important events. Individual sports are just different interms of the popularity is more important for your earnings then the on course resume.
Interesting take. Also, love your content. I think when we talk about marketability, the general rule in business is value proposition, right? How can I market my product to solve people's problems better than the competitor's. There are 2 main ways these pros can market themselves: connect with their fans on social media and playing well enough to get on coverage. These factors play into why some players get what they get. But I really want to stress something- being sponsored is a privilege not a right.
I will say I'm personally not a fan of Prodigy. Discs are discs and I'm not too whiny about how they feel/fly because you can fill all bag slots with any manufacturer. I spend most of my money on MVP/Axiom. I seriously considered building a Prodigy bag because I enjoyed watching Isaac's beautiful hyzer flips in the woods and how they seem to always stable up just at the right time to miss a tree.
I’m always excited for some new DiscGolf dot Law content, but was anyone else really amped up for a…different…topic?
Great job, I’ve seen some crazy contacts in my life but what happens when the manufacturer doesn’t release there sales numbers? And keeps the numbers secret.
You give the company less years for the sponsorship.
I'm interested in hearing a F1 driver manager hearing this and apply how the F1 driver contracts are made on the discgolf athletes.
Great video!
It's wild that every sponsored player doesn't get an itemized report on their disc sales. WWE moves at least an order of magnitude more product than any disc golf company and gives quarterly itemized royalty reports to all of their athletes.
Love the content Chris! Keep it coming.
This is an opinion piece and I don’t see the correlation between music and disc golf. You’re comparing something an artist creates (the actual music) to plastic moulds a manufacturer makes and slaps a players brand on. Apples to oranges on this one.
Until there is more money in the sport through viewership this will always be a struggle. Manufacturers can only sell so many frisbees and what you’re asking for is a pipe dream I would venture for most companies, they’re not making enough money, cause there are only so many frisbees they can sell. The money is in advertising, as with any viewed content. As a loyal DGN subscriber for years i would pay more if i didnt have to sit through the same ads every weekend, gimme more non disc golf commercials.
My two cents.
Love this 💪🏼
In general I don't think it's in either the fan's or the player's interest that we start implementing business practices from one of the most predatory industries in the world.
A big issue in the music business is that the label gathers all money from sales, then reports sales to the artist and pays the artist accordingly. So if the label wants more money, they can easily report a smaller number than what has been sold. They count on the artist not knowing how much they have actually sold in order to take advantage of them. In music it's actually possible to track these sales, even as a fan, because we have the Billboard top 100, streaming numbers visible to everyone on spotify, etc. Now how do we guarantee a disc manufacturer doesn't do this in order to never pay over the advance?
I think it's much more beneficial to our sport that we treat players as "employees" in marketing, rather than independent businesses, simply because there isn't enough money in the business. The players cannot afford management teams and lawyers to make sure they aren't being fucked by the manufacturers. I think the "X amount of money + royalties on signature disc sales" type of contracts we have now make much more sense in the context of disc golf. As many others have stated, the players are promoting the entire company, not just their own disc lineup. Metallica is not helping sell Katy Perry's music, just because they are both signed on EMI, so the business model to get paid only based on their own sales makes sense in that context.
A record label also wouldn't have a product to sell without the band, whereas a disc golf manufacturer can make discs without any players representing them. Except for a few cases among the very top pros, the discs are always designed and made by the manufacturer. The player just gets to choose which product to put their name on. Essentially a record label is selling a product made by the artist, where a disc golfer is selling (mostly actually just helping sell) a product made by the manufacturer.
My main concern is this -- how much control does the player have over how well their discs are marketed such that they should be held directly accountable for how well they sell? I disagree with the idea of advances in general aside from for things like expenses of traveling to events. If the player takes money to go to an event and then fails to show up that's one thing and sure the company should be made whole for that lapse. But if a player is given a years pay and then has to pay back 50% of it because their disc sales floundered (perhaps because the mold their name is on isn't hot right now) that feels like a bait and switch.
I am not at all knowledgeable about business practices. I am wondering what most of these pro players would do if they had no sponsorship at all? Would they be able to survive on tour? Brodie Smith stated that he was about $15,000 in the red after a season of touring. No matter what, the cost to tour has to be made more affordable for everyone. Especially for the lower tiered players that are desperately trying to stay on tour. Robbie - C stated in one of his videos that he has gotten the impression that the Tour needs bodies...lot's of them on Tour. If a disc manufacturer wanted to sponsor me, I would want them to pay for my tournament registration fee + fuel to get to each event.
What value are you brining to the company, though...? Very few players are worth the type of accommodations you are asking for.
Winning is still relevant since it leads to heavy advertising airtime during media coverage from the players jerseys. Being a walking billboard on DGN/Jomez for hours at a time on lead card should have its own separate payment. Athlete is stimulating sales of discs for all players on the roster.
This is exactly what I was going to post. A player's boost to a company's sales absolutely goes beyond sales of their signature series of discs in a way that seems nearly impossible to fully calculate, so compensating for wins (especially for major broadcasted events) needs to be part the equation.
Not that many people watch DGN. It's roughly around 35k subscribers.
@@MeowChickenFish it costs money to advertise on DGN and Jomez. You may be saying that it doesn’t cost a lot of money to advertise on those channels due to low viewership. But the players on lead card with the brands on their jerseys for many minutes of coverage are generating some level of value that is greater than 0.
@@mattmorgan7768 oh advertisers aren't getting their ROI. Ofc the value is greater than 0.
Good.
If you tie to disc sales the details on production would need to be sorted. For example, a manufacturer has two sponsored athletes but only production capacity for one disc during a period of time. Does the other athlete get compensation for production limitations? In the music industry the product isn't limited in the same ways. New molds, new plastics, there are a ton of logistics issues that can limit sales artificially from the player perspective.
Just look at Anthony Bodanza. His online presence and personality is enough to really sell discs.
A smart player would have a clause in his contract that he has direct access to the sales data for any of his signature discs. Do players receive a royalty on all their molds or only discs that directly feature their name or likeness? For example, does James Conrad get a percentage for every Trail sold or only those with his name, logo, likeness?
11:08 Eagle throwing - periods is spelled peirods. Just an observation.
Weak correlation between disc golf and record companies. Also Lone Star requires a social media dedication presence of its players. While being a 4.3% infinitediscs total sales. Wont equate in the end
Well, the players don't make the disc and it's not their product per se. Usually they don't participate in designing of the disc (might have some say on what's in the label) and they don't put content on the disc like a recording artist would do. So I'd say it's not even remotely the same thing. Most buyers don't give single thought if there's some name on the disc, like Ken Climo or Eric McGabe or whoever. It doesn't depend on the person at all. If the player would die, they would get another name on the same product. Can't do that in music because the artist makes the product unlike in disc golf where the player is just a name on the product. I've bought KC and EMac discs without knowing what that means. Did the player sell the disc to me? No, definitely not. In disc golf, the disc someone purchases must meet some criteria like mold (comes from the manufacturer), color (some are very specific, most want bright colors to avoid losing the disc) feel (manufacturer's plastic), durability (manufacturer's plastkc), weight (manufacturer), details in shape (more or less domey), price (cheaper quality discs are more popular), it should be cool (thanks to the graphics artist, whoever that is). These criteria have mostly nothing to do with some certain players, besides some rare exceptions like discs designed by/for some noteworthy players. Most players don't have their own mold, just their own runs of stock products with their graphics. More like a CD in a case with somebody's signature, or maybe some custom art.
Very interesting.
Mvp doesn’t say made in the USA. Are they making discs in china?
if i owned a disc golf company i would probably pay more for individuals with strong social media presences, for instance Simon Lizottes youtube channel is probably more valuable than his tournament results, its why i have a simon lizotte pixel in my bag... it is completely conceivable that a company would sponsor a youtuber or tiktoker who doesn't really compete with a bigger contract then an a top athlete.
I will happily debate you, in good faith, anytime about nearly every point you made because I think they are ultimately bad for nearly every player, if not all of them.
I love to see this extended
to all capitalist wages at well.
Go big.
It's a sport. sports contracts across the board are not the same. Why follow along an industry (music) that has shown to be horrible and t6ake advantage of people ledt and right. That's why there are so many independent artists right now.
Simon is worth more than another player.
Excellent viewpoints!
Comparing disc golf contracts to musician contracts does not make sense. comparison should be to other sport contracts. One difference is that Disc golfers do not design the discs that they sell with their name on them. Musicians create the music that is being sold by the record company. On the other hand tennis players put their name on products made by the sports companies and get a percentage. That is more similarto Disc Golf. Those are the contracts that should be used as a model.
Playing and hitting Mando's since 1995
You should never, ever be in debt to your 'employer'. NEVER.
These advances are horrible. They were horrible for a lot of musicians they'd be horrible for disc golfers.
Not only was this bad for musicians in the recent past it was bad for miners in the more distant past.
Bad take, really bad.
I don’t really like the comparison of musical artist contracts and disc golfer contracts. Artists make a creative product. Athletes play a sport. Too many artists made art for people that are starving now while what they created is owned by labels cashing in.
Yeah, record labels are notorious for completely screwing over their artists. Steve Albini wrote a great article on this 30 years ago called “The Problem with Music” where he outlines how a seemingly-great record deal can end up costing the band more than they make. It still holds true today.
What about when a manufacturer puts out an inferior product and the athletes' ability to sell discs suffers as a result. Shouldn’t the athlete have some sort of recourse or out to hold the manufacturer responsible?
The question should be, why did that athlete sign with a company who produces poor quality products in the first place?
Gannon? Is that you??
is that product truly inferior if its used to win multiple world titles??
A company with the means of sponsoring a player has proven they have made money with the products they have. Saying a product is inferior is more than likely in the eyes of the beholder. People complain about Prodigy all the time even with multiple world titles proving their discs will get to the basket.
No one forced them to sign with the company. This is a bad take.
Premise is admirable but entirely unrealistic.
Disc Golf Players Union coming 2025 😂
What are your thoughts on non professional disc golf players gaining contracts or sponsorships with disc companies?
A different comment mentioned how pro athletes are basically walking billboards of a sponsor. They’re really just influencers at heart. If a non-pro also has that level of sway, then it would be in the manufacturer’s interest to sponsor them. (Kristofer Hivju comes to mind.)
What’s with the clickbait?
I respect your freedom of opinion, but just because you’re a lawyer doesn’t endow you with common sense. Sometimes you say the most ridiculous crap.
PLAYERS SHOULD RARN THEIR PAY BY WINNING. Manufacturers should “support” their players and insure them with medical and a stipend. But! Manufacturers should invest their money in design and creation of exclusive disc golf courses. Above all, manufacturers should put their money into tournament payouts (.)
Players are “representatives” and can’t be responsible for product sales! People don’t just buy “one” disc! They buy “all” discs from that manufacturer.
Naturally, an “exclusive” disc, for example, The General, is a completely different thing: it’s not a “stamp” it’s a specific disc design.
Moreover, players shouldn’t be “sponsored” only by disc manufacturers, they should seek sponsorship with large companies like, alcoholic beverages, clothing manufacturers, automotive manufacturers, jewelry and other outside companies.
Again, with all due respect, your perspective is myopic and closed minded.
Disc golfers are athletes, not rock stars …
How is there a “should” with any of this? It sounds like you should represent these athletes when they negotiate their contracts and advocate for the things you argue for in this video.
This aint it, brother
So let’s use baseball as a example I hit 40 home runs with 100 RBI’s but my teammate hits 20 home runs and 70 RBI’s he should make more because he sells more merchandise or jerseys then me lol you let me know where in any sport that’s happening all give you a hint 0
Team sport is totally different than an individual sport. The athletes are representing a brand. They aren't contributing to a team.
@@michaelmaniloff9297 is it different with golf 👀is that a team sport 👀 you sound dumb and no Paul ulibarri will never be more valuable then Isaac Robinson
You will never convince me selling merchandise is more important then what you do on the disc golf course why play the game then 🤷♂️
@michaelmaniloff9297 it's very similar
This has to be by far the worst video you have made you said “players who sell the most discs should make more then somebody who actually wins” players contracts should always be determined with there play it’s like that in any sport you get paid with how well you perform at the end of the day in any sport nobody cares about how much merchandise you sell it’s how you play the game are you a winner or a loser nobody ever says that guy is the goat because he sells the most jerseys or he’s my favorite player because he sells so many jerseys 🤣🤣you get my point
Nope. Ulibarri is worth more to a company than Isaac Robinson. Disc golf needs to attract other sponsors on tour to increase the payouts.
kevin oleary? yuck. don't be like him
8:38 Insert Brodie Smith
It's funny when people say stuff like this like an insult, when Brodie would be the first to hold up his hand. He mocks himself for being close to the bottom, yet he still sells more discs than almost anyone out there.
@@clintsawyer7702 I wasn’t stating it as an insult. It’s just a fact, and like you said,he’s said this many times himself.
@@dalereinhold640 ok, hard to tell via text.
I disagree with the Advancements needing to be repaid bit.
I understand business, and accept that disc manufacturers take far more risk. However, once you're good enough that a company wants to sign you, they should own the costs of Advancements. Baking this into the contract means the yearly salary will be lower to compensate, but it eases the worries and concerns of a touring athlete who has to deal with incredible variability regarding weather/health.
Musicians don't deal with nearly as many variables, like injuries and "bad breaks" like insane wind ripping during their portion of a round compared to competitors. They make music and it either sells or it doesn't.
Players, like musicians, get screwed over FAR more than any record label or disc manufacturer ever has, or will.
These contracts seem insanely favorable to companies. Companies pay lawyers more than players...... see the connection?
I think this applies to team sports as well as music labels. Players like Parker Welck, Macie, and Sullivan Tipton can be solid to 50 players or elite series winners but they are overpaid because they likely don't recoup the investment for DGA. Players like Uli, Paul, Simon, Eagle, and Ricky are older players who have had time to show they are a mainstay and move discs long-term. If companies only sponsored players that made them money their would be no tour.
Musicians don't have variables? 😂 You're telling me they don't release bad albums that aren't well received or spend their careers fighting against being a one-hit-wonder?
Musicians don't deal with variables? 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Easy to tell you've never done it. Stick 5 people with different personalities in a van together for a month and then tell me there's no variables...
@@clintsawyer7702 "musicians don't deal with nearly as many variables"
I didn't say zero variables.
@cup_and_cone Just like the other guy who misread my comment, I said, "Musicians don't deal with nearly as many variables." I didn't say zero variables.
Also, most bands are unoriginal 4/4 piles of generic, mainstream, anti-intellectual noise that mocks real music. Most are lucky to even be a 1-hit wonders, and for good reason.
dang isaac caught a stray lmao 8:34