No Laying Up - Golf Podcast - NLU Podcast, Episode 498: Andy Gardiner from the PGL

Episode Date: November 17, 2021

Andy Gardiner from the Premier Golf League (PGL) joins the podcast to discuss the format for the league, how the league's proposal has evolved in recent years, inconsistencies in the reports around the league, the issues that golf faces, and why the golf world could look a lot different with a bit of imagination. We discuss their desire to work directly with the PGA Tour, the confusion around their involvement with the Saudis, what PGA Tour players stand to gain from their proposal, and so much more. Thanks a ton to Andy for the time and transparency.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I'm going to be the right club today. Yes! That is better than most. I'm not in. That is better than most. Better than most! DJ five. Greetings. Hello. T.C. is here. Hello, T.C. I decided to talk about the league, baby. We, uh, this is a, this is a big podcast episode. If I, if we may say so, and we, uh, we want it, we want to put you in the best possible situation to listen to it. I know there's going to be a lot of listeners to this episode, probably that maybe don't listen to our podcasts,

uh, very often this has been a hot topic in the world of golf. These so-called breakout leagues, if you will, but is this a breakout league? We're going to cover all of that. The answer to that, of course, being no. But before we do that, no laying up is, of course, brought to you by our friends at Precision Pro Golf. Everyone here at No Lying Up Trust, Precision Pro Golf rangefinders to help us know the distance to our target and to pick the right club, whether out here

playing at Jack's Beach or somewhere in Michigan, filming Taurus sauce, Precision Pro helps us swing with confidence. This holiday season Precision Pro will help you buy with confidence right now. The best selling NX9 slope is on sale for $30. You might say, what's the big deal? Everything's on sale. Everything's on sale.

$30 off. Did I say that? Yeah, I was like, oh, shit. What a deal. You might say, you need to buy that. I can't even read these things, right? Everything is on sale for the holiday sale. You might say that. Well, precision you might I can't even read these things right everything is on sale for the holiday Sala you might say that well precision pro range fighters come with the industries best protection plan and customer service in

90-day money back guarantee two-year warranty 30% trade in discount on future products That's a new and I didn't know about that one in house customer support their customer support team are actually golfers Name Eric and Jack who are actually best friends just Just learn that too. All kinds of new info. Free lifetime battery replacements and access to the precision pro golf game tracking app to help you measure improvement. So you're not just buying a rangefinder with precision pro. You're joining a team with lifetime services and supports a joint team pro. This holiday season at the next nine slope to your golf bag for $30 off.

Ask for precision pro at your local Dixporting goods or golf galaxy. Of course, go to precision pro golf. local Dix sporting goods or golf galaxy or, of course, go to precisionprogolf.com. You'll never second guess your distance. You'll never second guess adding precision pro to your golf bag. Swing with confidence, hit more greens with precision pro golf. A breakout range finder company if I may say, may say you may say so. Sure. Just ruptures in this faith. You may say so. All right. So in this episode, you're going to hear the full two and a half hours, I believe that's to be the longest interview

in no-lang up podcast history with Andy Gardner. Who is Andy Gardner? So why don't you tell us, you talked to him for two and a half hours. I don't, yeah, we talked about pretty much everything, except for I didn't really intro him in there. Again, we're gonna get to the interview, but just a heads up for listeners. We go pretty much straight into it.

We start talking format. We start talking about the specifics of this league. So like we said, we're gonna talk just a little bit about what this league is, what it is not. And of course, we didn't really ask Andy for much on his background, but he is, of course, you will quite see quite early on. He's British, he is a lawyer, and he is...

A lawyer and a businessman. And a business man. And a enormous golf fan. First and foremost, essentially, I would say the, not necessarily in that order. If the PGL is his brainchild, is he the brainfather of it? Is that what you would say? Let's do that. He's the brainfather of the premier golf league.

Again, something that a lot of things that the model for the premier golf league has changed over the course of the last couple of years. We talking great detail about that. But what do we need to clarify about these breakout leagues or separate leagues or whatever they all are? It's not the Saudis. Yeah, I think it's probably interesting to just go through the state of play at least have extremely crashed one-on-one course.

I mean, we did a very, very long podcast about this a couple weeks ago. I'd like to think, hopefully, we got most of those facts, right? But yeah, it's just an insanely complicated conversation at this point. And I think a lot of that is because there's been a lot of things leaked at some of the wrong times, which I think Andy goes into in the interview. There's been a lot of things just misreported or gotten wrong, but as far as like kind of who's behind this, who's in bed with who. A lot of still, if you read stories on this, there's a lot of people conflating and explaining

that the PGL and the Saudis are the same thing or have consolidated. That's not true. Andy will go into that. I think the big things to kind of go through are probably what has been reported in the recent kind of, I don't know, weeks, months. I think the big ones are one. Honestly, if we go all the way back, he talks about this in the podcast. But if we go all the way

back, the PGL was first floated. It was kind of the first one of these breakaway things that came out that was, it's been in the works for about six, seven years, something like that. It was reported what, 18 months ago now? Yeah, beginning of 2020. As the first one of these, at that time, there was Saudi investment in a small amount of Saudi investment in the PGL.

There was, you know, the format. Yeah, the rain group was involved. The format was pretty close to the same as far as like what happens inside the ropes was pretty close to the same as what Andy will lay out here. But this was essentially a full breakaway league. We're going to pay the players a bunch of money to come over to basically kind of leave the PJ tour and we're going to start our own essentially F one of golf is what a lot of people called it teams, individual play, all kinds of different

things. That being all said, you know, basically things, nothing totally materialized. It didn't seem like for the next six months, if I remember in that timeline, right? COVID hit. COVID hit, which basically, yeah, kind of put a handbrake on everything. And then what I think the next development was we saw was the Super Golf League, the Saadi Golf League, the SLG, the SGL, was essentially, it looked like a imitation. Yeah, taking the model, a very, very, very close approximation of the model and kind of making it much more middle-east-based, Saudi based. That was sounded like it was pretty much entirely funded by the sovereign wealth fund.

Totally different than the PGL. Those are different things. That kind of didn't really materialize as far as we know. And then the next big announcement, I think, is what came out a couple weeks ago, which was live golf investments, live under par golf, which was, I mean, help me out with how to describe this. So this is a big investment in the Asian tour. And there's still strong heavy rumors that there will be a breakout tour under live golf,

live under par golf. Again, that's all Saudi. That's all separate than what we are talking about here with Andy. And so we thought it'd be a big... So a lot of that stuff too, just to clarify is we're still pretty scant on details, right? I mean, it could be a tour. It could be a series of events on the Asian tour, much like the Rolex series on the European tour.

It's... They could just give all the money to Co-Craft. It's possible. He could just go take the money the way he's playing. But yeah, to your point, so whilst all of that was going on, the PGL has kind of been laying in wait, I guess, from the sounds of it. And they've tweaked their business model. And he's going to go into it in much greater detail. But I think what he's presenting and what they've been trying to, I don't know, foster enthusiasm for over the last couple of months is basically a completely different model wherein they would

partner with the PGL tour and almost kind of sit next to on top of I don't know how the all the designations would work, but as a separate entity from the PJ tour that also offers equity to all current PJ tour members. Is that fair? Sounds right. That's that's the part that we'll get in great detail on it. We just wanted, like we said, we get hot and heavy hair pretty quickly. And the message I want listeners to get is stick with this, take it all in, listen closely. It's not going to be, it's not huge reveals. It's not groundbreaking.

It is just, we were on a fact finding mission about this thing, asking his thoughts. We kind of talk about some of the issues there are in ProGolf and how that would potentially be addressed by team formats or a different approach to it, why the 501C6 for the PGA tour holds them back in a lot of ways, what precedent there is in the past regarding PGA tour, we're kind of breaking out from the PGA of America.

It's all encompassing. I truly didn't know where to start the interview with because there's just, there's no way to really do it in sequence. Honestly, the way to start it might have been, let's go back to 1968 and then, and then 83. Then 83 and just see how many four.

And how things have evolved and 2009. So yeah, you kind of get in and it really ramps up. I don't know what, at what minute mark or I would consider it really ramping up. The picture starts to become more and more clear, the further you get into it. And I gotta, yeah, I gotta give Andy a lot of credit for just the willingness to,

you know, there were no questions that were off limits. There was, he answered everything as fully as he possibly could. We of course, you know, he is displaying his data, his information, his model. We're not auditing the numbers in it. We don't have, the information we have is what you're gonna hear in it. And we have known Andy for a couple of years now

and I've talked to him frequently. And, you know, so we've familiarized ourselves with him and this is not the first kind of conversation we've had with Andy over the course of the last several years. And yeah, I'm excited for people to listen to it. Is there anything else we need to get out to the listeners before they? What was your biggest takeaway?

Biggest takeaway was a, it's not a breakout league. And that was how we got to know it. It, he makes no secret. There's no secret about that. He explains in great detail the exact timeline of how the league evolved from, you know, being a breakout, having the chicken and egg problem. Again, I feel like we're just teasing the whole damn thing now at this point. But into becoming a proposal to work with the PGA tour.

And that's a, that's a huge takeaway, right? Because I feel like I knew that, but at the same time, I feel like a lot of the golf world does not understand, not only not being a breakout league, wanting it to work with the PGA tour, and how amazingly separate that is from the Saudi Gulf League. That's my biggest takeaway. I think also just the fact that there's so much bullshit tacked onto the PGA tour to try to monetize it, but if they just focused more on their product, that the product would be that much

more valuable. I think that was one of my biggest things that I gleaned from it. Like, hey, like, there's a massive opportunity here to just focus on growing the number of people that watch golf and how they consume it. And the money's kind of going to take care of itself. Yeah, I think there's a very existential question that kind of rings throughout this whole thing, which is, what's the best way to, I'm not going to say, grow the game,

what's the best way to get the most possible eyeballs on professional golf? Is it to isolate kind of the top players and basically use the best to get even bigger? Or is it to try to grow the entire pie at the same time? Right? And I think there's a multitude of other questions. Some of which are answered, some probably left unanswered that, you know, is the PJ tour able to do that on their own? Do they need a partnership like this to do that? What are all of the different ways that that can work? But I think it's, I don't know, I said this to you guys before we started talking about it, but it's

easily hands down like the most interesting. I hope people aren't sick of hearing about it because it's by far the most interesting thing in the world of golf. Especially in the fall, especially as no offense to anyone, ever, of course. Don't offense, Strab here. I know. We're at the Strab invitation of this week of it's the island. But when you really start going into some of these and you start looking at what the picture could look like,

either with the PGL, without the PGL, any kind of restructuring that can go on, it just makes what we're doing now feel like we're living in like 1986, to me, is how when I first heard it all laid out, you know, kind of all in front of me, it's like that, it just fundamentally changes your view on ProGolf, at least for me.

And just, I would just say at this point, you know, if you're going to listen to this interview, like suspend your understanding and your belief in the status quo for just a minute, right? Even if, even if you think this thing is totally unrealistic and won't ever happen, just suspend that for the next two and a half hours and imagine it. Like imagine what this world would look like. That's what I've, you know, that's what helped me get excited about the potential of it. And you will do kind of more recap, you know, in reaction to it on this Sunday night's recap pod as well.

But one last thing too, I think is just even if you don't think this is going to happen, it's already had a profound impact on the PGA tour at large and also like what events you're specifically going to be seeing totally in fall incoming years, where they're gonna do these guaranteed persons. Like the tour, the incumbent is already forced to evolve the status quo based upon having a challenger in the room. And it's not just that, it's the PIP, it's adding a phantomsca bonus money,

it's the players championship going up. But my pushback to that is like, these are all things to make players happy. And Andy talks a lot about making fans happy. And that there's a huge difference, right? And a lot of the tours reaction to this is not addressing the fan in the room. And we remain to be fans in the room. So yeah, I think without any further delay, let's roll right into Andy and we'll see you guys in two and a half hours. Cheers. All right, Andy. We're going to start this as basic as possible. Give us some good footing to go off of.

And I think you're answerable, probably even legitimately help me, someone who has followed this stuff as closely as possible. But what is the premier golf league? Okay, dual championships, team and individual, 12 teams of four players. So you've got a fixed guaranteed field of 48 week in week out, with an addition that we made probably started this year, which was to add a 13th team. That will be owned by our foundation, although the foundation will be under the control of third parties, but the foundation will own that franchise and the fans will get to pick three wild cards each week.

So over the full season, which is 18 events, you've got team and individual championships running in parallel with each other. You've got 48 fixed and the prospect of another 51 wild cards getting picked by the fans. So the season begins in January each year and runs through to August. It's 18 events in total and the regular season for the individual championship is the first 17 events. And so after the 17th event,

the champion is named as an individual. We then roll into playoffs. And we K-teen is effective with the team playoffs. So where you stand in the league is a team after 17 events will determine your seeding, which gives you an advantage that you take into the playoffs. And the playoffs is

$20 million when it takes all. All the previous 17 events are for $20 million bucks with 4 million to the winner and $150,000 to last place. And the other bits that are different from what you might see week and week out on other tours is that because we're 51 players, we have the ability to do away with the cut. So we are 54 holes with three days instead of four, which is based really on the early days of us talking to sponsors and broadcasters and agents and ultimately players to determine what we believe to be probably the best format, but it's a format that I think, you know, from our previous discussions, you know that we said about this just because we wanted to make golf as watchable as possible to get us to watch every week. And that was where we came from.

Zooming further out from the actual logistics of the format and the specifics of it, conceptually, what is this golf league? Is it top players? Is it a breakaway league? Is that still something you're trying to figure out and something that is still evolving? Conceptually, why would this league exist and what is it conceptually? So conceptually it has it's taken on different forms

so not all the reports that have been written have been accurate over the last probably two years. We began with the notion of how best to secure the services of the best 48 players in the world. And that's not necessarily just going through the top 48 by world ranking. There's the opportunity for others outside the top 48 to play because we want to watch Week in Week out, the best head to heads amongst between the biggest stars. So it's not a case of just going down the list. I guess the original notion was always to work with a P.J. tour, believe it or not. Some might still call that incredibly naive,

work with the PJ tour, believe it or not. Some might still call that incredibly naive, but it remains our strong desire. Now, we started off talking to, as I said, sponsors and broadcasters of the PJ tour. And so we knew that we had a format that appealed to those who funded the sport. We then began to talk to, well, fun enough, one of the first conversations I ever had was with Rory, if you would believe that. And I was explaining the concept, and at the time he was, he was at the view that actually this is probably what golf needs. And that was some time ago, his entitled to Change's opinion, but had Rory said to me, Andy, that's rubbish, I'd have probably stopped. So, oh, we went. We wouldn't be doing

this show right here if Roy didn't endorse this podcast. He's responsible for both of us. He certainly could have stopped me in my track. So we then went about trying to work out how to really solve the chicken and egg issue being, okay, how do you get the players to sign before you've got the sponsorship and the broadcast deals signed, and how do you get the sponsorship and the broadcast deals signed without the players being committed. And that's something we've wrestled with over the years. We went down a path of what we called simultaneous completion, which was the notion of having all parties come together at once,

but incredibly difficult to do. In our earliest documentation, set out the desire to work with the PJ tour, and the view that once the format was understood, we couldn't see any reason why collaboration couldn't be achievable. Nevertheless, we ended up down a path of looking to pay commitment fees to 12 guys. And we got to the commitment fees because in conversation with agents and some of the players, there was deemed to be a risk.

And the risk was this is a breakaway. And so we have reputational risk, we have peers to think about, we might get banned. Now that started to come up as a notion probably about two and a half years ago, which I guess was a sign that we were being taken seriously, because for the first two or three years, various people had tried to introduce me to Jay, Jay Monhan, and had failed to arrange a meeting. That was some very notable people in the game. And so we thought, well, OK, that's not looking feasible. We're going to have to compensate the guys for the risk they're taking.

And when the notion of being banned came up, it was alongside this notion that anyone playing in the league wouldn't be able to earn, well, ranking points. And so that led to the suggestion that commitment fees should be paid and led us down a path of securing at least the prospect of a billion dollars. And this has been reported in the press,

again, not always accurately, but we had a number of parties who were willing to stand behind that amount and began to become involved with discussions involving the players. That was the path that we were on. I would say probably for about six or eight months. Can you back up to just what the... When you are referring to prior years or the beginning, when was this culminating, right? What does this timeline look like?

Technically speaking, well golf group was formed in March 2013. So that was the start. I guess the pulling together of something that had been more of a passion and more of an idea, but probably when guys described it as a thousand to one shot, there were probably being kind. And we went through a process, we were talking to some high net worth about becoming team owners. The reaction was we'd love to be a team owner, but we're not going to get involved in so you get this off first base. Then we went sponsor, then we went broadcaster. Ultimately the agents, well, then the agents and ultimately the players. And that period, that process was probably the best part of three years, which some might say is an awfully

long time, but it's a case, it was always a case for us of earning credibility and building relationships. So basically earning trust, which I hope we did, I'm pretty sure we did, and always doing it in the right way. Now, we were completely off radar, probably until was it sort of January of last year, well, so it's almost two years ago. And we came on to radar because some of our documentation was given to Jeff Shackofford. I will say by a very well known agent who thought he was helping to move things along. And I can't say that we were ready to discuss anything publicly at that stage,

so that our response was quite muted. We were involved in conversations that we weren't prepared to disclose. Still wouldn't disclose those conversations as it happens, but those conversations led through to the players, I think, your World R was over at the players' championship of last year. It had been apparent for a little while that although we were talking about a very large amount of money, as far as I'm concerned anyway, we were talking about $580 million worth of commitment fees, there was still an issue which I could sense. Now there was an issue which was, you know, we might get banned.

Can you help us to get to the bottom of this? Because some of the players had taken legal advice and had been told that a ban would be unenforceable, but that it might happen anyway. And if it happens anyway, then you've got to deal with it. And if you've got to deal with it, then it's a lot of time. It's quite a bit of money. It's the ban from the PGA tour. Is that what you're saying? But so it's really in reality, the players getting banned, not the league getting banned. Is that what you're getting at? Yeah. So, yeah, the PGA tour is never to my knowledge made a public statement on this subject. I've sat with players who have said, look, we've been told

we're going to get banned. And the first proposed ban was anyone who had an interest in the league. So anyone who'd signed up or had any equity or any of that sort would be prohibited from being a member of the PJ tour. So you can't be, you can't be both. The second which was slightly more atlandish was, and if you have played on the league, you can't be both. The second which was slightly more at landish was, and if you have played on the league, you'll never play on the PJ tour again, which of course is, would be an issue because, you know, guys might play in the league and then be released, be relegated. There was a automatic promotion built into the league system. So they could be replaced and then whether they go and play. This was related to another issue,

which was the notion that the league would not be recognized as an eligible tour by official wall golf ranking. Therefore, they wouldn't get ranking points and ranking points. So in some contracts, some sponsorship deals are equivalent to cash, and they of course do provide a route to each of the majors. And so there were two issues that the players had, which they discussed together.

They effectively came to us and said, we'd like your help in getting around these issues, or at least seeking to address them. The other issue was at the time, we were proposing per se of $10 million a week. Now, our financial model had been reviewed by some of the agencies, and that had led some of the players to conclude that actually we could afford

under the league model to go to per se of $20 million. Now, we could. What it meant, of course, was over the 17 events prior to the team playoff, it meant a difference of 170 million a year in our profitability, which I explained to the players. And I said, as prospective team owners, with the teams getting a share of profit, this will obviously have an impact on of profit. This will obviously have an impact on value of those teams, although only to a degree because sports franchises don't tend to trade on multiples that ordinary companies do, because they're highly sought after assets and relatively scarce. So once we agreed to go to 20

million bucks, the reason we were asked to do that is because the guys wanted to make sure that the money that was being allocated to the top players. And this is all about what is fair reward. It was pointed out, you know, you said this is meant to reward the best players fairly. Therefore, if you put the purse up, even though we'll reduce the profitability of the league, we would rather play for the money than be paid it up front. We'd rather compete against our peers. And this was aligned with the sentiment that there was clearly a, in some cases, there

was a moral issue, perhaps that's too strong a word, but what is fair issue? And the line that stuck with me was one individual saying, okay, we sign what happens next. What happens next is there's a period of time between us signing and the league beginning. If we're not banned, we'll be playing PJ Tour in the meantime. So I could be stood on the first tee

at the next PJ Tour event alongside a guy who's 169th on the tour. And he could turn around to me and say, thanks very much, you XYZ. Now, that was a big issue. And it was how the players would be perceived. And that's obviously linked to the notion of a breakaway. Now, say all that, the guys back in 68 went through this process. You know, they were part of a structure, which was P.J.

of America. It got to the point where they didn't believe that they as a group, when I'm talking about 205 players, they didn't believe that their interests were being well-served by the P.J. of America, which had run all professional golf from 1916 onwards. And so 52 years later, I'm sure after quite a bit of soul searching and debate, 205 guys broke away from the PGA of America. And if you read books written about the subject, that wasn't a straightforward process. In fact, when I've read, and of course, the creation of the PGA tour is a precedent

for the creation of the leak. So when I read about it's a money grab, it's, you know, they don't need to do it, they're paid enough, it's remarkable. When you look at the quotes from 68, because the same, pretty much the same quotes have been used in relation to us. We've had a sort of realization of it was dawning on us that it mattered as much how the best players in the world would be perceived by their peers and fairness mattered. And I'd been talking to agencies, some of whom have 20, 30, 40, PJTOR members on their books. And guys there were saying, we can understand

how this is good for the top guys. You know, this is great for three, four, five of our clients. It's not great for the other 2025. What's going to happen to the PJ tour? And so it was this realization, it was listening and it was learning. Because as I said, we'd found ourselves going down a particular path which involved paying an awful lot of money to effectively, I guess, compensate for the risk that was being taken by the lead guys because they were breaking away. And COVID struck, we had time to reflect, I wasn't traveling so much. We were able to sit back

because, you know, quite frankly, as the realities of COVID were dawning, it wasn't really a time to be focused on anything other than staying safe and thinking of others. It certainly wasn't really a time to be pressing ahead, so we're talking really sort of April May last year. We then went through a process of having conversations with the European Tour, which I think some people have written about, although not in detail. The deal with the European tour would have, as far as I'm concerned, would have addressed the ban and the OWDR threats, because OWDR would have been resolved by sanctioned from the European tour, and anyone banned in the meantime could have played European tour events.

So that was part of it, but it was also to be part of the ecosystem of golf. There wasn't attempts again to talk to the PGA tour and that request was politely declined. What's the timeline of the communication with the PGA tour? What's that look like? So there's a call made probably June July last year. This is after, as I say, some of the biggest names in the game had tried, because I'd been explaining for a number of years that this was our intent.

It was always to work with the PGA tour. In the early days, the response was we're not talking because we don't consider them to be a real threat. And if we talk to them, we're gonna give them credibility which we're not talking because we don't consider them to be a real threat. And if we talk to them, we're going to give them credibility, which we're not going to do. Towards the back end of probably 2019, it was, no, we're not talking to them because they're competitors. So we'd gone from being no threat to being competitors, but either way, they weren't going to have a conversation with us.

We then rebased because the conversation with the PGA, sorry, with the European tour ended pretty much simultaneously with the formation of the strategic alliance. We then thought, right, what is the best way to do this, given that everything that we've learnt, because we've been doing this for a while, and we've probably spoken to Bar, Senior Executives, theJTOL. We've spoken to just about everybody, and they've all given us a viewpoint. And then it dawned on us that actually the best way to do this was to share the value that's been created. Now, the value that the league will create

is probably conservatively around about the $10 billion mark by 2030. Within seven years, you go two renewal cycles and then you're into your stride, so you're at a sort of $10 billion valuation. That is conservative. It could be $8.9, it could be $13.13 is closer to the number we anticipate. What you have is the ability to create a very significant amount of money that is currently locked out of the game. Why is it locked out? It's locked out because primarily the PJ Toro back in 74 was converted into a nonprofit, a 5166. And I'm not going to get into the technicalities, but that means it doesn't have any shareholders.

There are limitations on how a nonprofit can operate. What it can't do is crystallize $10 billion worth of value and share it with the relevant folk. Now, the relevant folk for us were, of course, the members of the PGA tour. And so our next communication with or attempt to communicate with the tour was June this year, early June. There had been confusion in the marketplace about what PGL was and what SGL was. I know you've covered that extraordinarily well, but the confusion still rained at that time, and so we thought it, well, the best way to deal with that is to

put a website up, which actually explains our motivation, explains what it is we're proposing to do, tries to identify how it could benefit the game as a whole, and that's always always only ever been about, can golf be better? And I dare say you have a view, and unless it's changed in the last... Yeah, yeah. But I know what it is.

Golf's golf's perfect to get be fixed. I've changed my views since the last part. From two. Okay, so we are... We came from a similar place, and the league is really just clean piece of paper, write down what would get you excited every week, what would make you tune back in every year, that's it. So we tried to convey that via the website in the politest possible terms and we set out our intention to give 50% of the business and we said said to Gols community, and we didn't limit it,

but we always had a desire to be able to accommodate, because if you're creating that value, you can, you know, the intent was to share it in a way that's good for the game, but also good for the key stakeholders. I then did a bit of press, I explained and people asked me incredulously, in many cases, so do you think the tour will engage?

And quite frankly, I did. I thought, this is the blueprint. We've spoken to so many parts of the game, players, agent sponsors, broadcasters, that group has come to the view that change is inevitable. This is the best change that can be affected and this is the blueprint. Now, when we put the person's up to 20 million bucks

and we decided, we decided actually, you know, that should cause probably 100 to 150 PGA tall members to be quite excited. This is what the player said to us. If you put the purses up, you will get 150 guys thinking they can get onto the league at some point in the future. And I've spoken to guys who were, when I first met them in the sort of 200s in terms of their position in the tour. And got to say that I was quite not nervous,

but I was slightly wary because we're in some cases we're in the same house. And eventually, they say, so what do you do? And I have to say, well, PGL, thinking, I'm just about to get punched in the face. And what the reaction I got was, wow, that's fantastic. That is impressive. And it's what the game needs. And I actually said to the guys who I then got to know, I thought you were going to react differently to this. And they said, no, we back ourselves to get in it. And if we don't get in it, then that's our lookout.

But by the time you launch, we'll be top 48. We're going to take a quick break here, and I'm going to promise you a great finish to this podcast. And speaking of great finishes, you should discover the greatness within Elijah Craig's small batch bourbon. Elijah Craig, bourbon never settles for less than the best. Every bottle of their award-winning small batch carries a signature warm spice and subtle smoke favor. It's exceptionally smooth and well balanced. I like to drink it on the rocks.

I'm still amazed at how affordable Elijah Craig's Craig small batch whiskey is for that amazing taste. You get the complex aromas of vanilla bean sweet fruit and fresh mint. The palate is pleasantly woody with accents of spice, smoke and nutmeg. It just feels like fall. Just saying these sentences out loud makes it feel a little bit more like fall. Elijah Craig was named the best small batch bourbon at the San Francisco World Spirit competition a couple years ago.

It just goes to show that hard work and dedication lead to great things. Whether you're watching golf at home, whether you're watching football at home or at the clubhouse or at the bar, wherever you may be, enjoy the action with a glass of Elijah Craig. So you can pick up a bottle today or order online and discover the greatness within. No, laying up as brought to you by Elijah Craig, Kentucky, straight bourbon whiskey, Bardstown, Kentucky, 47% alcohol by volume. Elijah Craig reminds you to think wisely and drink wisely. Let's get back to Andy Gardner.

Just kind of bridging the gap between these two things. You're, you're originally talking about the potential for a breakaway league and I believe that's kind of how you define the original concept. Verse now, if I may say so, you're not giving 50% of this, you're not giving 5 billion to PGA tour members out of the kindness of your heart, right? You are giving them a very clear, you know, instead of this being a jump ship or the chicken and egg problem that you did have, now there is very clear incentive for the, both the tour, basically the members of the tour to want to have to, to, to want to engage in this process or even

learn about it or have it presented to them in a way to say, wait a second here, this, there's a possibility that you could have $5 billion added to your, you know, to this pool in this way. And that is your gap bridging to the PGA tour and the incentive versus the breakaway model. Am I defining that well? You did it very well. There are two aspects to it. It solves the chicken and egg because there's no breakaway, it can be transitional. And it deals with immediately any concerns that any players might have lingering concerns about ban threats and OWGR and pension, because pension is another one. So some concern that they would lose their pension entitlements that that accrued under the PJTOR banner. Now a deal with the PJTOR would address all of those issues. But the other part of this was

if you're creating this value, who should own it? And when we were looking at raising a billion dollars, that meant that 90% of the league would be owned by the funders, as in the guys who provided the billion. It was never a billion, it was only of a 750 million that was required. By shifting to the 20 million dollar per se and by shifting to this model, you can't raise 750 and still give half the business away because that doesn't generate the return. So this meant that our working cap requirement reduced back down to about 150 million, which means that we became free to then share. And the

current proposed allocation is 50% to the voting members of the PJ tour. And there are roughly speaking 250 of those. It changes because it's based upon those who met the criteria in terms of number of events played and that was reduced during COVID to 10 but it's back up to 15. So the average number of voting members of the PJ tour is roughly speaking around about 210 but we call it 250 for current purposes. Now we have suggested that the the league is formed as a joint venture and that those 250 guys would be owners of the league half of it. It also outlined in our correspondence and the most recent was early September, where we tried again 10% to the staff and all commercial partners and all members of Cornferry and a further 10% so estimated value

by 2030 of a billion dollars would be placed into the foundation as an endowment for the amateur game. And as I said, the foundation which will also in the 13th franchise, we would hand over to third parties to control. And ideally those third parties would involve some or all of the owners of the major championships. That is the current proposal. The yes, it addressed chicken and egg as far as we're concerned, but it also avoided the cliff edge. And it also addressed the fairness, the concern over what is equitable, as far as the leading players were concerned. And I got a genuine sense that they weren't entirely comfortable with being separated from their peers

to the extent that commitment fees and team ownership would have separated them. So it took us a long time, long and winding road to get there, but as soon as we set about this path, which was probably back in January this year, was the decision to make the move to this model. And we've been talking to the players about owning the teams. The players have been talking about the high net worth individuals that they would bring into their teams. And so it also dawned on us, well, actually, if we bring in the high net worth individuals and they then sign the players, the players can still get paid.

They can still get paid assigning on fee, but that would be down to market forces because if there are five teams owned by five separate ultra-high net worths, then if they all want the same guy, they're likely to bid for him. So the notion of getting paid up front hasn't gone away. The notion of the best player's owning parts of a franchise hasn't gone away because it would be the best way to incentivize them. So all of all of those features of the previous model which were compelling for the players concerned, they remain. It's just that we've switched the emphasis around and really given, we're offering to give the

value of what is being created. I dare say to those who should have it. And that was, it was almost, almost like a Eureka moment and possibly because I'm a bit slow. But you can say, what were you doing for the previous three years? The answer was, I was just following the path because from year two onwards, this was just a bizarre ride that we were on. And it was taking us wherever, but it was the ability to step back, the ability to really begin to investigate, you know, working with the, they call it, they tend to call it the ecosystem, golf's ecosystem. And so this is very much within the ecosystem.

And rather than the guys getting banned, if there is a prospect of somebody signing up for the equity and then not being allowed to be a member of the PJ Tour anymore, why don't you make all members of the PJ Tour equity holders? Because ultimately, it's their organization. PGA tour Inc is effectively a trade association, which has some responsibility in terms of representing the interest of its members.

It has a lot of other tours to think about, which obviously creates a difficulty. But that is the timeline. So we put the website up in June, wrote our initial letter suggesting the league be formed as a joint venture, for the good of golf and for the good of all key stakeholders. We then increased it from 50 to 70% in correspondence in early September. And I've got as part of the reason I'm now talking to you, of course, is that I'm keen

to make sure that the opportunity doesn't go past the individuals concerned. You want people to hear it, right? In case it's not being presented to them, right? And by the tour, not engaging in conversation with them, that's a very real risk from your guys perspective. Yeah, I guess. They might be telling them everything. I just... Yeah.

Something tells me they're not. Well, so there's a lot of different, we could talk for a long time about the tour structure as a 501c6, what limitations it puts on the tour. Help me understand, that's something that, legally, I can't really wrap my head around of how you can, how the 501c6, the members of that can get equity in the PGL, yet still exist under the nonprofit,

you know, mode that the tour operates under. When, you know, that's one thing and to say like, why can't the tour just take this model and exclude you guys from it and do it themselves? Like, why haven't they gone away from anything related to their current structure with something like this that could be super fruitful for them? If they wanted to copy our model and do it, I think we'd all be happy because we'd end up with, I think I was one of the first people

to start describing golf as a product, I don't know which I hadn't, because it's golf, you know, and it's just about watching the best golf that makes you tune in and doesn't let you switch off. I'll come back to The reasons why I don't think they've done it and why I don't think they can which was also part of Part of the realization because I'd never really looked into the structure of PJ Touring properly probably until This time last year and PJ Tour Inc is all of its, you know, PGA Tour champions, its corn fairy, PGA Tour Latino America, China, four or PGA Tour, you, McKenzie, everything.

All those coming to the fall into the bucket of PGA Tour Inc, just for the list of mistakes. Yes. Now, this part might help your listeners get to sleep more easily, But it's important. So you go back to 68 and you go back to the breakaway, which according to the reports that time was led by Jack and Arnie. And they brought 203 guys with them. I'm going to push back on you on this put in people to sleep because I found this to be some of the most interesting stuff. Okay. So then you had APG, Association of professional golfers, then you had TPD, then you had ATC, then you had, there were different corporations set up. Now, when I think it was Jack who wrote to the P.J. of American and said, we've set up APG. Was it an American Professional Golfers Association?

Now, he said we've done this not as a threat to, but not as a threat to the P.J. of America, but to create a better vehicle for golf going forward. And said now, you know, the next move is for you guys, but they went to the point of saying, we wanna do this with you, but you haven't taken as seriously, you haven't moved towards us. We've created this entity. Now that's the first

physical sign that we're serious about this. Now why couldn't the PJ River America back in 68 just say, okay, we get it. We're going to create another division under our umbrella. And we're going to make sure that you guys, you 205 are fairly compensated for your skill. And the reason for that, I suspect, is because they had 5,500 members. And this is well documented. So how can you prioritize the interests of 205 guys over the interests of

the other 5,000? Plus of course, PGA of America had been in existence for 52 years and had never really faced any competition. So, you know, they weren't a dare say in the mindset of being told that this could be done better and differently. And that forced the guys to break away. Now, there were different corporations set up. The PJ tour ink was a change in name in 75. In 74, Dean Beaman had taken the decision to convert a full profit into a non profit, which is your five or one C six. That means your tax exempt. And that created really the structure for the PJ talking forwards. But what Jack and Arnie said, and this was in 83 when there was talk of an attempted coup. The coup in 1983 nearly occurred because they felt that PJTOR Inc, which is the 501C6 organization, had been delegated the authority to manage

the events that make up what we know as the PJT And so to most people, there will not be any distinction. The PJ tour is the PJ tour. Now actually the PJ tour is for the art events a year because what it is is a golf format. The operation, the management of that schedule of tournaments is what's delegated and remains delegated to PJ Turing. Now that is that is the crucial difference because when we're talking about doing a deal with the PJ TOR, we always knew that if we gave 50% of our equity to PJ TOR ink, it could not transfer that value to its members, because the rules that applied to nonprofits say no benefit can in your to the membership.

So you can't just hand out cash to the members. And that was true, remains true today of, for example, the PGA of America, because we had conversations with PGA of America years ago, and we were looking at bringing in those members as well. And the answer was, well, we can't take this equity because we're a 501c6. But if you could put it into a trust for our members, then you know, that's that would be a very good solution. So The members themselves could not receive the benefit of what we're creating if we gave it to the organization, which is PJ Taurink, but We have sought to engage with PJ Taur Inc.

In order to convey the opportunity to its members because our reading of the situation is that PGA TOR Inc is a trade association, otherwise called a business leak. It exists to benefit an industry. You can't limit access to that industry, which in itself would raise an interesting question relating to how does the 501C6 ban people? But as a trade association, we thought that that was probably the most effective, the most efficient,

and equally the most courteous route to take. But also could be a significant benefit to staff of PJToring. Now, you're right. PJToring back in 68 was set up just to operate the PJToring, to operate that schedule of events. In 83, in the letter that was written to the policy board, the soil guys who were looking at the time to possibly break away again were mined as to do so because as far as they were concerned,

the organisation had become distracted with the ownership of golf courses. It was starting to compete with their interests as players, so it was limiting their ability to generate cash on their own behalf. And it described it in the letter as I think that PJ Torres become a monster that we never intended to create. That issue went away because if you read the books, something that was written in the letter wasn't entirely true and would have been problematic for the guys who wrote the letter. That's how it's reported anyway. But at the time, PJ Torinck only ran one tour. It was since 83 that the others that you've listed and they're listed by PJ Torinkin, it's annual Form 990. Now they've got, I think roughly speaking,

about 1,400 golfers who play on those tours. So you've got a situation which, as far as we're concerned, is analogous to the situation that existed back in 68, where this goes, comes around to probably the answer to the question, why can't the PJ tour just do this themselves? Is probably also the answer to why won't the PJ tour engage with you? Well, it's interesting. You mentioned, I mean, the number of 5,000 PGA members, 205 are the best breaking off to

do their own thing, starting with 205. Now that number over the years has now grown to 1,400 as you mentioned, and now it's a bit of history repeating itself in terms of top players potentially throwing their hands up to say like, hey, wait a second here. Are our needs being met? How can you deliver the top value for us when you have this many interested parties? Yes, I'd say so. And, you know, also, then you look at the scale of the organization, the last form that was filed, I think is still 2018, I haven't looked in the

last month. But PGA Touring had that time, 939 employees. Now, when we built our business plan, we built it on the basis of working out exactly how many people we would employ, albeit to operate 18 events in 12 in the US and six internationally. And we will deploy or use the services rather of expert third parties. And exactly the same way as PGA taught us. So the sanctioned model means that third parties are used to promote and operate the events.

Most have a charitable component, but of course you then have experts in the actual operation of events, both inside and outside the ropes. That model makes it hard to get to a 939 number because if we were fully staffed and doing everything ourselves internally, we only ever got to 430. It might be 939 sort of ballparkish, but then you look at the subsidiaries below PGA Touring. And last time I looked, I think the number was in excess of 40. It might have changed because these again, at 2018 numbers that were last produced. But it is a vast organization. And some estimate, if you go on Facebook and look at the number of employees,

I think it says 2,200, which isn't a PGA Toring number, it must be a group number and some estimate higher. So you've got a huge organization that actually only has 250 members who have the ability to vote. And so going back to your question of how could they remain as members of a nonprofit, their members, the nonprofit organization is entirely separate from them. They have to an extent the ability to determine the regulations of that organization. I say to an extent because there are other bodies in golf that are structured as 501c6s,

where the members have the ability to appoint a majority of their governing body. And the governing body of P.J. Tor Enke is the policy board. It just happens that the members of the P.J. Tor do not have that right. They have the right to a point a minority, which I'm not sure any of them are particularly aware of, or would focus on. And they also, other organizations allow their members to amend their constitution, almost that will, as in, you know, 51% decide that the rules are going to change the rules change. Now, I believe the policy board has the ability to amend the rules, both of the handbook and also the constitution. I believe it, I'm not entirely sure, on the constitution.

But what is, what would stop, therefore, the members of P.J. Torrent from coming together and saying, actually, this is something we'd like to do. This is a once in a lifetime, windfall bonus. And when you think about it, one of the first things that was said to me to us when we began down this path is, you're creating a two-tier system. And we said, yes, but golf needs it.

As in, there are economic casualties because that is what results from a two-tier system. What you've seen as a, I dare say a reaction to us, because I've been thanked by numerous agents and players for the changes that have occurred in the last three years. I wish I'd been on commission actually. But the you saw the change in the FedEx bonus pool and you saw a reallocation towards the world's best. So really quite a lot of focus on the top 10 and you had wind him, you had other things, you're talking two, three years ago, you then had player

impact program. Now, that was a notion that was first explained to us, probably about two years ago. We were told by an agent and he seemed to have a pretty good idea as to who was on the list. Pretty much predetermined from what I've gathered. Well, I'm sure it's changed, but we won't know until December. Actually, we won't know. There was another sort of allocation, reallocation of funds towards the top 10, which in itself is great for those guys. But it was only ever an output of what we were doing because we were looking to create a better product, which happened to pay the best players more. If you don't make the product better, but you just play the best players more, you're sort of missing the point. But equally, if you're going to change, if you're going to create

a two-tier system, which again about a year ago I was told that there would be a move to more limited field events. And Golf Week said it a couple of months ago and they said it more recently, based on a source. Now, Golf Week were the first guys to disclose the Player Impact program, so maybe their sources reliable. But I'd heard talk of six events in the full, limited field, and golf weeks suggested it was going to be 50 or 60 max, with a team component possibly. And that, you know, you've got a range of fields already, invitations were the first to be limited, but there have been an increase in limited field, of course, the heroes 20. If you're going to reallocate money towards the top players, that's good.

If you're going to create a two-tier system by creating far more limited field events, okay, that's good as well. Obviously, if you're going to put them in the fall season, you've got a number of other issues, you've got to think about. Felix points and others, but if you're going to do that, why not do it in a way that compensates the entire membership? So if you're creating two tiers, at least created under a structure where all 250 members of the tour get to really benefit from the change that's occurring. That's the bit that I think is missing from all of the responses or the reactions to us. It's just taking piecemeal, stuff that's existed in our documents for the last five or six years, isn't the answer?

You know, the notion of introducing the limited field team events, it just sounds like 94 all over again. You know, it's, it's World Golf Tour. Didn't happen. It was meant to be eight, we'll do four. And, you know, sacrificing or giving up on two of the existing WGC's is testament to the fact that that doesn't work. And also, if you fiddle around the edges, you're not addressing the issue that we set out for growth, which is we want as many people as possible in the world to love watching golf for the next 10, 20, 30 years, saying that we're not going to touch our existing product. We're just going to make tweaks around the edges of it and put more money into the towards the top guys, the top 10. That's, as I say, it doesn't as far as we are concerned, address the fundamentals, which should be addressed. And that's where I would like to get an idea of from you what you think the issues in golf

are. To us, they're pretty apparent. We've referenced just watching it on television in general. I think I've come to the conclusion, maybe it's taken me several years that just increasing the amount of money guys play for doesn't make it more interesting to me. The idea, and I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong, I don't think I've heard you mentioned the phrase Formula One, since we started chatting, I don't know if that's something you're trying to ease away from or just hadn't gotten to it yet, but

and we've made a note secret that we've gotten into the world of Formula One in recent years and have really Appreciated so many things about it one being I know a lot about all 20 racers that I watch every weekend It's not every weekend. I should correct myself there. It's 23 events or something this year I know exactly who's gonna be there. I can follow this team concept It is really interesting to understand how guys are switching spots between during season, they're switching spots for next year, how the team orders get past the drivers, how it relates to the constructors, like there's just so much going on. And if they set out to, you know, have a hundred guys race over the course of the week, just

a hundred being the most realistic. Of course golf is even more than that. I don't know if I could follow it or get into it or anything. And it seems like there is a way to take a people show up to watch the stars and no disrespect to insert name that was on the leaderboard this past week. They probably just don't show up to watch a guy like, as I know a lot of people are gonna listen to this, for their sake, I won't name a name, but usually there's a couple of go-to guys that we like

to just make fun of. So you've touted this enormous value that you're going to be able to create within this league. Where does that value come from? What is it? And how does it address the issues that there are in golf? Okay, so yeah, Formula One is there are a handful of precedents for the league in sport. I'll repeat it because I think it bears repeating. The best precedent for what we're doing is actually the PJ talk. It's kind of crazy. As far as it sounds, it is deja vu all over again. Now that's given that golf is regarded by most as a very traditionally based enterprise.

The last major change being going from 22 events to eight, that's 22 holds to 18. That was a precedent for the Premier League over here, the EPL, because 22 clubs broke away from the Football League. It was slightly different with F1, but F1 was effectively, now you've got into it, you might recognise the names, but Berneckelstam was a team owner. And if I remember my history correctly, he gathered another four or five team owners around. And F1 prior to 1981 was controlled by the FIA and was run almost exactly as golf has run today, which was the sanctioned model.

So if you wanted to put on a Formula One championship race, you would approach the FIA and say, we've got a track or we're gonna build one. We would like that circus to come to town. And the FIA would possibly say eventually, yes, there's a slot in the schedule we can give you this. We can give you this weekend.

But it's up to you. As in, the purse is up to you. The field you're responsible for securing. You actually will probably have to do your own production in terms of the broadcast content. And that ended up with the situation which is again analogous to go off today. So you didn't know who's going to turn up. Now I was listening, I was brought out watching Formula One. And I've got to say it started

to leave me a little cold, probably five or six years ago. I am massively into it again this year. And I think we all probably can guess. I mean, I was listening to it on the radio yesterday and I had, you know, hairs standing up on my arms with the attempts and then the suggestion that, you know, for staff enforcing Hamilton off the track had been something that would result in a penalty. And then they were not even looking at it, et cetera. And then the overt... I mean, that was just brilliant. Now, you can't generate that type of engagement within golf,

but you can. That wasn't just the move. It was the fact that it was between those two guys. And it was everything that that it was between those two guys and it was everything that had gone on this season, the previous penalties, the creation of the personality of those drivers. The job they've done is exceptional. The move when Liberty took it over to we're creating 18 Super Bowls. Just brilliant because yes, they should be an event.

Now this goes all the way back to what Bernie Eccleston and his fellow team owner said to the FIA. And they said, if we want the world to watch this, we have to guarantee the best possible product we can, we can, we can't. Can I just ask you real quick, we've said product a lot. What is product to you? I don't know if that's a short or long answer. As I said earlier, I wish I'd never started using it. The product is you have a responsibility to produce. That's it. Produce entertainment. Is that it? Entertainment? Entertainment by all means? Yes, definitely. Yeah, you've got you've got to this is only ever a It was it didn't even occur to me when I started doing this that the top guys would get paid more

It didn't even occur to me So I didn't start with I started with right if just I started with, right, if just wild flight of fancy, if I've got the ability to create something that I think as many people in the world will watch as possible and it is golf, then what is the format? And that format has barely changed. There was a conversation with a well-known broadcaster in the US that resulted in one change because when we first walked through the door years ago, it was 12 teams of six. And they said, why have you done 12 teams of six? And I said, well, that's the cut,

roughly speaking, 72. And they said, great. Can you get it down to four players per team? And I said, I remember vividly sort of breastling at the idea of, hang on. Why, why are you telling me to change my fight? And they explain quite quickly. They said, shotgun stop, because you can get, you can get the entire field playing at the same time. That'll give us a five hour broadcast window. And by the way, we can make stars of 48 guys. At the moment, as as broadcasters and every single sponsor we talked to and we've talked to the biggest sponsors of the game, they they said They said, problem is with golf,

we only really focus on or care about six or eight guys. Six or eight. And yeah, you had a push you could have gotten to 10. And that's because it's the cult of personality, which is something that Formula One have recognized and achieved brilliantly. So the Formula One model was it took seven years for Bernie Eccleston and his fellow team owners to wrestle the control away from the FIA. And seven years is pretty much where we're at, so we're bang on track.

The Concord of Green into 81 ended what had been the case before. So it's an obvious point, but imagine as a F1 fan turning up to a race or switching on a race and finding out the Red Bull just hadn't bothered turning up that week. I mean, good grief. Now that's golf. You know, you could have a brilliant storyline where they've crashed or, you know, and there are storylines all the way through the field. Because even when the top two are fighting it out at the front, there are other battles going on. They follow them and pay attention to them and present them and make you care about them. And the announcers are invested in the storyline. And they tell your eyeballs to go right here to watch this race between sixth and seventh. And I've

watched golf every weekend of my life for the past five years. I have no idea how many points the seventh place guy gets like in a week. And they don't, they're always talking about, well, he needs to hold this here on 18 for a chance to get into a playoff. It's like, no, like, he needs to bird it for so low second. That means a lot and they don't tell that story at all. And as I'm thinking of it, it's like, I don't think I would care or emphasize this as much if golf didn't talk. And I say golf, meaning could be the tour, could be PJ American, could be US, G A, could

be anyone. They didn't talk so much about trying to grow the game, slash also just means make more money off of you, but means reach more people, have more people watch. If they didn't talk so much about that, I don't think I would like, you know, kind of take them to task a little bit to say like, hey, these are things that would make more people watch, right?

How can you keep doing the same thing on repeat, actually getting worse over time and still expect more people to watch? Well, the other thing about F1 is they manage to keep your attention even after the action stopped. So you get to the end of the race, ordinarily, what's gonna happen next? You've got two weeks before the next race

or whatever it happens to be. No, we're the F1, you've got team orders. You remember team orders? Well, you know, they're not meant to have team orders, but they had, I'm sure they had team orders this week. I'm sure that drive was designed to stop. Here's a opponent from getting away near it. Team owners between two guys who actually, you know, were competing for the same championship. So then you had the, so you had team politics internally and you had team politics externally.

And you've got team principles, which add to personality because you're giving people a reason to tune in because they can be interested in just the human side, the human nature of the sport. Now that rarely exists in golf, but it does exist when the rider cup comes around. And it exists in who they're going to pair, a, who they're going to pick, which will be an annual event for us, because there will be teams selecting players from pools and transfers,

et cetera, as well as automatic promotion and relegation. But then you've got the day to day, every day of every tournament. So our events, the first three days, as I said, the team championship is dependent on two scores out of the four players. So all four players play as individuals in the individual league. But the team principal, the team has to pick two scores, first thing in the morning, the two scores that were count towards the team that day. Now, that's as close as you get to right who you're picking and why you're picking them. Then you've got, remember, you know,

when they used to bring in the management consultants and the accountants and to advise the rider cup captains, well, you need him because this course has this many right handed bends of this many degrees. And that's that's the shot he plays. And if you pair him with him, then that's your most powerful combination. It's that to an extent. The pressure is on. So in the morning, you're going to get, who have you picked? Oh, that's interesting. Why did you pick those two? Well, I picked these two. What's there something wrong with it? What's a gone tellers? Tellers, what's, you know, something wrong with his back? What he seemed to have, you know, he looked a little, looked a little sore as he came.

This is spot in Japan on the team. Like, you know, you haven't picked him three straight rounds now. What's his role on the team? Yeah. Have you fallen out? Then, of course, you get't picked three straight rounds now. What's his role in the team? Yeah. Have you fallen out? Then, of course, you get to say when they come back in. Oh, that's interesting. So that's interesting. Yeah, because you picked a guy who showed a 74. And one of the guys you didn't pick, shot a 66,

which is detrimental to the team because your seeding after the end of 17 events is crucial, really, to how you get on in the playoffs. So you get that every day, and that also then generates team content. Now, that's been tried off the course. But when you bring in a team component, you're bringing in another dimension, another level of rivalry. You're bringing in probably something that's easier because Formula 1 could just be an individual sport. You could say, why is Formula 1 a team sport? Because they're individual drivers. Well, imagine Formula 1 without the team element. That would, you would, you would actually be extraordinarily disappointed

if, if they scrapped. And there's a group of people that look at golf and say, well, golf's an individual sport. And to that, I'm saying that only because it has been, you know, for such a long period of time, but one, what's everyone's like favorite event of every two years, it's the rider cup, and there's team elements to it. What's super, also super interesting to watch is when you flip on college golf, and you watch like what those kids feel towards their teams and that extra motivation instead of playing on their own,

and it doesn't have to be an individual sport. And... No, yeah. I think it's richer. I think that I'm talking about myself probably seven or eight years ago when I started to put this together, but everyone I've spoken to,

it's easier for a fan to feel allegiance towards a group and to, I mean, I think I went out to the Tava stock cup. I don't know if you remember the Tava stock cup. Like, no, no, no, no, worth. Yeah, they went through different iterations. I went out there the year that an English club was invited into the fold, which was Queenwood. So it went from two to four, and it was Queenwood and Albany,

but the other two. And I arrived at the course mid-morning and just had a walk around. People were wearing colours and I walked around for probably two hours because I was then going to meet someone for lunch and felt a strange compulsion to go into the shop and buy a teen colour because I was one of the, now, not a vast number of people there, because it's a private event, but it compelled me to pick a side and I wanted to pick the British club. I'm sorry, but I did. Also because I felt left out. Now, that's something that's eyes of fan would enjoy.

You also get the brand build of the team. It takes on a personality of its own. You can then have academies which can bring through juniors. And one of the things that I experienced as a parent is the different sports over here in the UK. They have different pathways and some are better than others. Some are better funded, some are better run. But the pathway in golf was never apparent to me.

Whereas as a kid, you, of seven years old, you can aspire, you can dream of playing for Chelsea or Manchester United or whatever sport it happens to be. You can pick the team that you want to play for that drags you into the sport I want to play for that team because this is how my affinity was built up and it might be through ownership it might be through perceived location, you know picking a territory that's a team particularly favors and You might have teams that are based out of Asia, you might have teams based out of Europe, you might have teams based out of the US. There will be a flavour to them and the flavour will be enhancing of what we're watching.

So that's where this started. I guess these are the bits that came out of Formula One. It was just apparent to me, and I thought it was bleedingly obvious to everybody, that if you were gonna do something of this nature, this is how you would do it. So I did, we did initially, was to set out and start to begin the conversation. It never occurred to me until we started

to actually get into the detail of building the financial model. And I then, different guys joined from head of ad sales at Fox, head of ad sales at NBC, head of ad sales at golf channel. So that, you know, production guys out of the US all started to come together, really experienced people from different facets of sport. experience people from different facets of sport, then we started to put together the financial model, then we started to work out actually what these rights were worth, which is, you know, if you're going to do sponsorship, how do you do sponsorship? Now, when I went to the biggest sponsors of the game, almost uniformly, when I said, how do you feel about your, the return on your investment from golf? It was, well, it's sort of, look, it works for us because of the demographic and we are brands that really want to get to that demographic. Okay, you don't look delighted, well we're not delighted obviously, well why aren't you happy? Well, we don't know who's going to turn up. Okay, now that's

really irritating because, yeah, what are the sport? Does that exist in? Okay, there aren't any. Okay, so we don't know who's going to turn up. We don't like the cut, even if somebody has turned up, then you don't know if they're gonna be there for the weekend, you might have all the hospitality partners out there for the weekend. I mean, there was an early event this year, new season of PJ Tour, which had six out of the top 50, including the world number one.

Low and behold, who missed the cups. I mean, imagine if you were the sponsor, you'd be pulling your hair out and I met a number who have pulled all their hair out over similar events. Then you go, okay, you're spending 8, 10, 12 on a title sponsorship. Yeah. And one of our competitors could actually be the next week. So we get one week in the summer, we don't know who's going to turn up. And we can be eclipsed quite quickly thereafter. But actually, people forget that we were the sponsor anyway because it moves on.

We also, if we're a truly global business with operations in different parts of the world, we've got different marketing and sponsorship divisions across the globe, and we like to activate on a typically a global basis. You can't do that when a majority, if not, you know, a good number of the events are actually in the US. It doesn't give us that global activation. We can't build the story around the world

and we can't fly everybody to the States, just not workable. So, you know, that was when we started to get into those details, we realized that there was also a better model for sponsors where you can give category exclusivity. So they know there's not going to be a competitor in alongside them. Where you can say, well, you can activate globally because they're going to be six parts of the world. We're going to be in outside of the US. Now that really appeals. And of course, you're going to know who's turning up. And then you can start to make small enhancements to, for example, the, the problems. When you've got teams involved, you can, you can start to create the, the team

base. Now I've been extraordinarily lucky and I've, I've been invited to the pits, pit lane in F1. I don't know if you've done it yet. Have not. Oh, this is just a treat. So you get invited down to the garage, and you get to be stood next to the car, and the engine is, and you go, wow, because you're right in amongst it.

And then you go out front and you get to look at all the screens, which give them all the telemetry they require during the race. And then if you're really lucky, you get to go back into one of the trucks and sit down and talk to the engineers after the race. And that is a tremendous experience. And they've also got the hot laps where you can go hop in a Porsche or McLaren or something like that and do a lap around the track for 15,000 bucks or something like that and they do those in between a bunch of the races. That's their version of the Pro Am what not, but yeah.

Exactly. Exactly. So, you know, team Bay is on the driving range. The ability for teams to bring in their own sponsors who get to have that experience. And then once the teams are vacated to bring in the fans who want to, you know, tour setup for the equipment, I dare say most people wouldn't be aware of the difference between even the shafts that mere mortals play and others play. But imagine being able to either whilst they're there or even afterwards go and say, right, well, these are the guys who set up the clubs for this player.

This is his setup. Now, by all means, have a go. And there is a price that you can pay to own that setup. We're not going to give you a guarantee it can pay to own that setup. We're not gonna give you a guarantee it's gonna improve you again. But you get to go to do the experience. And that's where, so, sorry to, I wanna interject a personal anecdote in this in terms of like,

I want to know that one of the biggest things I wanna know is like, when I go to watch the premiere golf league, like, is it gonna be the commercial load that I'm used to seeing out of a PGA tour event because it's the biggest preventor for me watching tour golf, as I can't sit through that many commercials. It's well documented on this podcast. That being one one question. And then with it is like, is there not, we were told so often from people involved, these are from the networks or with the tour, that the only way to pay for these rights fees that get funneled to the players is through more commercials.

I'm told that so constantly. And I want to just like scream from the top of my lungs like there has to be more creative ways to generate income that don't involve what I would call a middle finger to your fans. Like your time is not worth it. Like we are going to take 18 minutes of your hour and selling something that is gonna be on repeat. Something you've already seen. Even if we don't sell the spot,

we're gonna run one of our own commercials on it. And that just seems like to have, there's absolutely none of that when I sit and watch a Formula One race. And they have what their revenues are off the charts through a different way of creating it. And that's where I think like, does that where you guys see where you can provide the most value and upsetting the Apple cart in terms

of something that the digital probably is not capable of flipping around in a year or in five years or even 10 years? Yeah, so there's two parts to that, which is the existing broadcasters. When we started to speak to those guys, we had to start to understand the ad sales model. And they call it the secret source, which is the obligation imposed the sponsors to buy ads by media during coverage, based on they used to say we're still buying off a tiger rating, but it's no longer a tiger rating. And your CPMs then start to look a little pricey. And that led to fights between the sponsorship guys and the media buying guys

within the same organizations. So we we went to the top three media buyers in the US market, who between them are responsible for seven out of every $10 spent during live US support. And when we we did a lot of work then on the ad sales models, When we did a lot of work then on the ad sales models, because we wanted to provide something that was more equitable for, and more rewarding for the sponsors as engaged in decent value for money.

We built the ad sales model, and when we walked into the broadcasters in the US market, we walked in with the ad sales model and said, given that your biggest buyer is sat here alongside us, the guy who spends $2 billion every year on behalf of his clients, buying, in this case, most of the stuff that goes on our half-time at Super Bowl. Yeah, there is clients he buys. He buys those rights for them.

This is the model that we think. Part of that was how do you maximize the ratings? Because if you go too far with the ads, you're actually, it starts to have diminishing returns. Now, so there is a model that we devised and we took to the broadcasters and said, this is what you're going to pay and this is the margin you're going to make. But that's a good margin. They'll be part of this, which is underwritten by us, but these are fair CPMs. So this is, this is a good model.

We were very conscious of what was saturation, what was over saturation and what was, what was doable, as I say, were those we were talking to, because if you start turning off your audience, then you're in, that's the biggest trouble you can be in. There are, of course, now other models. I can listen to Adverts on Spotify if I want. Do I want to? No, I don't. So what do I do instead? I pay for it. I pay for it. I pay not to be interrupted by adverse. And that model, of course, didn't exist 10 years ago. It does today, and it's evolving all the time. And entrance to the new entrance to the media market coming with different models, and then they tend to tweak. And ultimately, I believe they're all going to find themselves in roughly the same place because you've got the optionality. So, you know, nothing to say, well, you know, on this feed, and by the way, they'll be a betting feed. So if you're particularly

interested in that type of data, that will be your choice to watch. You're gonna get to control some of your own production. Now, you, you know, at the moment, I don't know whether you still get it, but when I'm keen to watch something and I haven't paid attention before the tournament begins and I wanna, and I look down the list and I think, oh, just missed it.

As in he went out, what they put him out of 710 for, but they did. So I can't see him now. And likely it is because there's 150 odd guys involved for the first two days. I'm not going to see the guy really want to see. And even after the cut, if he's not in contention, I'm not going to see him. So, you know, we will give you, me, others, the opportunity to say, well, this is how I want to watch it. This is the type of feed I would prefer to listen to. Now, possibly going too far, but when I've spoken to people, let's say 15 to 20 years old on this subject matter, what's, how do you, what do you watch? I mean, constantly watching NBA NFL, but doing it all across Instagram and just taking just constant action, but constant

bite side. And I, you know, no teenagers who could be persuaded to sit down and watch something for a period of time if they had the right type of engagement coming through the tube, or sorry, through the air now. So if you want to appeal to the greatest sized audience, one size does not fiddle, and obviously you can create the distribution and the economic models that would enable you, for quite possibly an amount that you would consider to be very reasonable, so that you never had to watch very reasonable, so that you never

had to watch another advert during live golf. And it's just working, obviously, then it's down to our partners who are helping to provide that. What else are they getting from it? So that goes into the price that is that will be charged because in this still evolving new media landscape, the acquisition of your eyeballs is of value, very considerable value in itself. So the answer is, yeah, there is of course, the flexibility and I'm not criticizing anyone else for their models because their models are based on long-term relationships where there are some parties who are particularly wedded to

linear. And there's nothing wrong with network, by the way, particularly if that's where a sizeable chunk of your audience is going to reside for the next 10, 15 years. But beyond probably the next five or 10, it's not going to reside there. And that's, that's, you know, there's a million questions I would ask the tour on their, you know, presentation of their product as it is. But signing deals for nine years or however long these are, you just leave yourself. Here we are at the end of a deal and there's so many things they point to contracts. Well, I can't, we can't because of the contract. Well, because the contract, this has to go online because the

contract's, well, one, you sign the contracts, right? That was, that was your idea. And two, you locked yourself into and equate an an equated model for an extended period of time. And what'd you do when it came time for, you know, contracts, those contracts being up, you went ahead and signed up and did it again. So it's hard to say like, man, I'm super encouraged by where things are trending because I'm a part of the Netflix generation and that people younger than me

are the Netflix generation where I don't watch, you know, sign-failed on cable television because it's gonna get interrupted a bunch of times. I watch a show that's not going to interrupt me. And listen, that might be delivering a short term, a deliverable that you promise some sponsor, but you know, it long term, there's no telling the damage being done by the hurdles that are provided, you know, in front of people to get into this sport and follow it, you know, with great, great interest. But if I'm, if I'm coming

on the other side, if I'm saying, all right, why should the tour do it? Now, you know, your answer to that is, is probably pretty obvious. And the value that you're creating, you know, for the players, et cetera. But if I'm, if I'm Jay Monhand, if I'm the commission of the tour, why am I going to an outside organization to basically say, Hey, we need help over here I'm going to go ahead and be the commissioner that disrupts our whole operation our whole thing we have gone with sponsors events I need you to come in and pretty much you know run the show for the best players in the world Do you see that as big of a hurdle as I see it as coming from that perspective? Yes, of course I do.

I, if the tour didn't have so many interests to look after, I think the conversation would be quite straightforward. If it weren't a nonprofit 501 C6, if it were a corporation competing with other corporations, I'd dare say it would have the product would have changed over the last 50 years. Far more considerably than it has. It also, you're probably not old enough to remember pre-tiger, are you? A little bit. I was an impressionable golf fan.

I was 12 when Tiger came out. I guess I was 10 when he came out on tour, but a little bit, not much, but a little bit. Yeah. So, European tour and PJ tour, neck and neck, in terms of their commercial appeal. I think back in early 90s and possibly 94, if I remember my numbers right, Column Montgomeray won European Tour de Merit. And Nick Price was the equivalent champion in the US.

And a pretty sure Column won more money. That was early 90s. So two competing tours, both extraordinarily healthy. Then Tiger emerged, burst onto the scene 96, 97, and did a lot to transform the economics of the PJ tour, as I think everybody who's a fan of the game knows. That actually weakened the European tour, because there was more money in the US and therefore where did the best players want to go as quickly as they could get there. So that's sort of 96, 97 by 2004,

there was a noticeable difference in the purses and starting to grow. Then you had 2008 financial collapse, which had a far greater effect on the European soil and the PJTL. And that widened the divide. And once you in that, almost like a vicious circle, because then of course, OWGR points,

which are very important to the players, all of a sudden, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. The best players are turning up. There are more points that more points mean the best players turn up. So you then have a situation where your competition has faded away and the European tour as a competitor to the PJ tour faded away. And when you then go through a period of 20 years of not really having any competition, you get yourself into a mindset where you're dominant, you manage to increase your dominance. Ultimately, and bizarrely, you end up in a strategic alliance saving the organization that you fought against for 30 years. But it

creates a mindset with an organization which is as vast as the PJ tour, which isn't attuned or adept to modification and change. This is, you might have seen the reference, but there was an MIT professor called Donald Sull who wrote a paper in the 90s about something called Active Inertia, which is when a dominant corporation finds, experiences of change in its environment, how does it adapt to that change? And he listed, and it was written in the Harvard Business Review, but he listed why dominant companies often fail to react in a way that they need to in order to retain their position in the marketplace.

And it boils down to the mentality of if it ain't broke, don't fix it. But then you start to react in a way that actually, you're in a hole, but you just keep digging. Now, I think it would be very difficult for you talk about how you turn around an oil tanker. The PGA tour has been sailing the ocean for the last 20 years without a ripple on the and the war successfully from their view. right? And that's that's kind of what I'm getting at here. The money has gone way up. The sponsors are relatively happy. I think we can say the players are been relatively happy. They're getting paid. There's there's things that are cruising along quite smoothly from their viewpoint, I would say.

Yeah, yes. And I, you know, then you look at the ratings. And we started to study the ratings back in 2014. And they fell off a cliff. No, Tiger was absent from the game. And you think to yourself, right, how long is he going to be around? Because how much of the growth of the popularity of the sport was down to the genius of those running the PJ tour

and how much of it was down to the existence of Tiger Woods. And I think it was, probably get this wrong, but, and it might, it's attributed, I think, to Buffett, but, you know, only when the Tiger goes out, do you see where the wrecks are? That's, there was gonna come a point in time where golf was gonna have to live without Tiger.

And if you understood the difference that he had made to the sport and where the sport had been prior to his emergence. The question was how is the sport going to adjust the loss of that Tiger star? The gravity that that star has pulls in the fans. If that gravity doesn't exist within the sport, what else is going to pull them in? And that was as far as we were concerned, what needed to be addressed. You've got to start thinking now, 2013, about where the sport is going to be in 2030. sport is going to be in 2030. Again, back to your point, is it possible for them to engage on this basis, not voluntarily?

Not voluntarily now, I don't think. Would they engage, should a sufficient number of their members encourage them to do so? Now, it is possible to launch the league in a way that brings a lot of the existing partners of the PJTour with and in a way that brings a lot of events across because as we're proposing it the league would fall under the umbrella of PJTour Inc. The members of PJTour Inc could well say, we would like to be owners of the league. No, we're not going to be prohibited from being members of P.J. Touring at the same time, because we are the members, and we have the ability to modify the regulations to ensure that that's not

the case. And then the league can be launched on a transitional basis where you could say to existing broadcasters, for example, we want you to carry on supporting the PJTOL. Of course we do. And you actually want to carry on showing the PJTOL because that's the way you've operated, that's your relationship with golf over the years. And actually, we're creating something of considerable value, which is also capable of being shared with you. So you're going to, ideally, you will continue to support the PGA tool.

We've put in our documentation and explanation as to why there have been no loss of earnings for those who aren't participating in the league. So you've got the 48 who were contracted, although still remain as independent contractors, they do not become employees. Then you've got the three wild cards per week. So there's a considerable number of existing PGA toll members would, in any case, have the

ability to compete to win $4 million every week. But when you do the analysis, when you strip out the majors from the purse, because of course the majored purse is not technically paid or generated by the PJ. When you go down to regular season, and then you look at the fact that the top 48 guys tend to win about 55, 60% of the purse anyway. Then that means the rest, the majority, and there might be 300 guys who compete in at least one PJ tour event in a year.

So the majority are then competing for roughly speaking about $140 million. That's what they take home. And if you went to, for example, a 32 event season and you were able to achieve a purse of just over four million per week, that's your 140 million. I think it works out about 4.4. Now, there is a value to the rest of the field. There is a value to the majority. European tour proves that. Cornfairy proves that. European tour

has just announced a deal that I was delighted to see because it it underpins the finances of the European tour for the next 10 years. But I was also delighted to see it because it proved the value of a format that doesn't have the best 48 players in the world playing on it on a certainly a very regular basis. So there is a value. And also, if there were any loss of earning opportunity for the rest, the majority who continue to play on the PJ tour, then we've suggested that we would top up the purse equally. and to my knowledge as nobody's

and why that couldn't be allocated to make sure that there was no loss of earning for the rest over a very lengthy period of time. So, you know, I might be wrong about some parts of this because the existing world of golf is not terribly transparent. You know, when you when you try to understand the numbers, you're not talking about a set of numbers that are of international accounting standards. So there are certain things you just can't understand. But as far as we can ascertain, this is doable on a non-breakaway basis, on a transitional basis, which delivers for fans and therefore delivers for sponsors and broadcasters what we all want, what we as fans want, because I would tune

in 18 times a year to watch golf. If it was this golf I could watch. I would stay engaged if you fed me some quite juicy politics between the players and the teams. First thing on the Monday morning, and you kept feeding me through the Tuesday and Wednesday. Just keep me engaged, give me something, and then get me to start looking forward to the next. And the next one might be in a fortnight, and it might be in a different part of the world, but drag me into it. And then, once you've given me the team playoff, which ensures there's no foregone conclusion, because the team playoffs are guaranteed to go down to the wire, with teams who are better seated than others getting to pick their opponents in the order in which they go out. I mean, that's just great stuff. And then give me a break.

You know, allow me to miss it. And while I'm missing it, and I get to the end of a soccer season here in the UK, and I support a team that has disappointed me for the last 20 years. And the excitement I get from supporting this team is very often us staying in the league. And it's not the Premier League. It's the championship. Now I get to the end of the season and I'm jaded and I think I never want to watch football soccer again. I'm sick of it. I mean, we survived, okay, but I'm not falling in love with it again in three and a half months time.

I'm probably not going love with it again in three and a half months time. I'm probably not going to watch it until Christmas. Then August comes around and the pre-season starts and I'm watching my phone every minute of the day to see who we're going to sign. And all of a sudden I'm back and I'm just as devoted to it as before. Now that's what we're trying to bring to golf to the best extent possible. Give us the ability to take a break and to miss it. In the early days of talking to existing players and former players, when we were saying this is going to be the schedule,

this is going to be, you know, we're proposing basically four months off. God has tell you that in itself was one of the most attractive elements of what we were proposing. Yeah, we want time off. One guy said, yeah, but I only, you know, he sat next to another player and he said, yeah, but I've got a problem. I said, what's your gone? And he said, I'm not planning on playing more than 16 events. Really?

But the majors that, you know, 20 events is top whack for me. So you're asking me to play 18. And then the guy next to him said, dude, it's 54 old. So, and he did the maths or math. And he said, it's actually less golf than you were just saying you wanted to play anyway. And you caddy's going to be happy because he's going to get paid every week, as will you. Okay, okay. So, you know, but but having having that element and, you know, being able to say to the guys who turn up every week, you are truly now global superstars. The tours, I understand they've got to deal with Netflix. I think it's been confirmed by both sides. I had a conversation with Netflix months ago

and said, now the time for you to get involved is actually once the teams are starting to form, the stuff that's gonna go on in the meantime, someone's gonna wanna film it and it's never going to get shown. I'm not even sure I'll end up in the book. But when the team started to get formed, that's when it becomes interesting. And everybody who appreciates both the sports, but Formula One in particular knows the impact. There's a great Vine I'd saw on Twitter, which had the six things that F1 had done,

and they were trying to decide, I think you guys actually might have retweeted it. I think I might have seen it on yours. And it was, how much of this is down to Netflix? It's a component of a overall presentation that, and I might take on that, it's just like the tour, you can't just flip the Netflix switch and get rid of all these other problems

because I remember specifically thinking, I watched Drive to Survive, man, I'm into F1 now, this is cool, but you know what, I like the really well-packaged, the extra sound effects, the dramatization story, I like the version for the casual fan, right? When I flip it for me one race on, I'm gonna hate this. And I was stunned when I watched it

and just like how engaging it was and how much the announcer's brought you in, no commercials, no breaks, it's two hours. I know exactly who's gonna be right. Like all these things they had going for them that you can't skip pass. Like the tour, I think the series can be excellent. I think I will watch an inside look at golf

if they give up editorial control on that. I'll watch an inside look on all these guys. And interested parties will watch it and probably really take it in. But when they go to go watch a golf tournament, it's gonna be the same thing as what they're seeing now. So you're not gonna keep people hooked on that. There's not gonna be a, you know, you're still have,

I mean, sorry, Martin Trainor's still gonna creep up the leaderboard and, and you know, Matt Wolfe is gonna fall down the leaderboard at times and that's not a helpful thing to your product. So there isn't, yeah. But it's, it's personality. You know, I used, one of the things we dropped quite quickly was me suggesting to guys that don't wear caps.

No, no, no. That's a lot of ones. And I'm just a caster. Sorry, this was some time ago, and it was, I never said it again. And the answer was, do you know how much this is worth? But how much this is worth pointing front and side? And in those days, I didn't, actually. But I was driven by the fact that if

the guy's got a cap on in a pair of sunglasses, it's difficult to clean any part of his personality. And then, you know, number of events that I've been to where my eyesight is still 2020, but I can stare 150 yards down a fairway and not know who the hell I'm looking at. So that's an easy fix. You put them in team colors and you put the name on the back. That little things like that,

that are just enhanced. And then we put an hourly documentation, Cady Cam and CadyWire, which is effective just the interaction between player and Cady, because it is brilliant. Now, I wrote that, I think watching the 17th, final day, Augusta. I think it was Jason Day. I think I've probably told you this a year or two ago, but there was one more recently. But now this was, I think it was in the two tier 17th at Arnold Gaster, starting to drizzle, getting a bit dark. As far as I recall, I might have started to fabricate this, but it was, you've got to be,

you've got to get to the pin. You cannot leave it short. A bit of a bit of breeze. I think it was, is it a six or is it a seven? And it might just happen to be close enough to hear the conversation. And good grief. You didn't want to be the caddy getting that decision wrong. And somebody had to make the decision. There's a difference of opinion. The shot was hit as I recall, and it was almost immediately not the right club or the club hadn't been hit properly. But the impression I got was it was the wrong club. And then the audio cut as soon as you're about to hear the bit you wanted to hear, which was the consequence of the decision. And then I think I was watching Victor Harvland,

a comment for which event it was in the summer, but he was in a bunker. He had a terrible lie. And if he went left of the green, he was dead. And I don't know if you might have been watching the same thing, but it was, no, it's this club, no, it's this club, no, it's this club. And he must have got out of that bunker two or three times and swap clubs, but that was a fascinating conversation.

Now, you've had issues over the hot mics, et cetera, and not every player wants to be mic'd up. I've had players say to me, yeah, well, what have I say this? Well, what if I say this? The answer to that is don't say it. The deeper issue there, if we're worried that much about that. Don't say that, but this is their job. The more they contribute, the more they get out. And that includes of their own personality. Now, they, we've all had documented the issues

that different players have. And different personalities have different issues with engagement with the press. But the interaction between them and their caddy is something which occurs anyway, and can be incredibly insightful for a fan. But certainly, I mean, you know, from the point of view of learning how to, learning how to best play the game it's educational, but from the point of view of can I become truly engaged with and want to continue to tune in and watch this guy? Yeah, because he's he's my sort of guy. I like him. I like

his personality. I also like the team he's playing for. Because they've got a funky Lego. I like the name. And the owner's from my part of the world. Well, and to that point, there's precedent in other sports. Formula one being, of course, one of them. They will live. It's a little bit on delay, but it's 30 seconds on delay, but they will give you an update of the driver

might be yelling about another driver or might be yelling at his pit crew. Like we got this one wrong. Lewis Hamilton's caught on there all the time, you know, doing back and forth with their crew. How long has NFL films has long created weekly wrap ups of players mic'd up that that I know I'm not well versed in the full history of it. But one of the moments that I remember very clearly is when the Philadelphia Eagles won the Super Bowl, the play call that came in, Philly Special, the whole, the back and forth between Nick Foles and Doug Peterson was about the play call and they have

all that and it culminated in this great, peace of content that will live forever, that the idea for that play, if I might remember it right, but I think Nick Foles came up with the idea for the play, right? And like that kind of stuff as the, the, the, the, if we're fighting the hurdle on that, gosh, we are so far away from this mindset of let's give entertainment value to fans. Like that is a no brainer. That's an easy one. We can get past some of these fear issues that we fear. Not everything has to be super live. Some of the conversations are pretty boring, but there might be something to go look back on in a highlight clip that says, you know, here's some more information about this

that we didn't know we had. And it's just from mindset. Yeah, get the team principal onto the course. You know, you pick these guys this morning. Now, that could be a well-known player in his later years. It could be some other type of personality, but it's a personality that currently doesn't exist in the sport, but get them on the course and say,

tell us your reaction to that shot, be it brilliant or brilliantly awful, because that's just had an impact on your team score today. That, as I say, small things that, when you completely open your mind and you're entirely fan-focused, everything else flows. And as I said, the fact that the best players in the world

end up making more money is just a corollary of the enhanced production of the game as far as the fans are concerned. So, I promise myself I wasn't gonna cheerlead for this as much as I have, but you got me all swept up, and my magic is running wild, dream wise, but I still see hurdles,

and you know, if I, two-part question, what do you think this will happen with the PGA tour? Do you think you are gonna get buy by in with the PGA tour? And what happens if you don't get that by in? What is the next step? If it becomes crystal clear, you're not going to be able to engage them in any way with this, what happens next?

OK, so we've put out publicly, keep using the phrase, door is always open, and it will always be. Can PGA tour ink volunteer to have this conversation publicly, you keep using the phrase, door is always open, and it will always be. Can PJ Torinc volunteer to have this conversation given its existing structure given the number of formats it operates, et cetera, et cetera? No, it's extraordinarily hard. Would PJ Torinc be obliged to engage, should a sufficient number of its members ask it to.

I think yes. So this only really boils down to say there's 250 voting members. 25% of them can call a meeting. They can notify, I think it's the commissioner, and say there's 25% of it. So that's roughly speaking 65 guys. We'd like this matter to be tabled and discussed in an open forum for members. Okay. And then 51% of them can decide to effect the change required for them to become owners of the league. So then you're talking roughly speaking, 130 guys. So 65 required to say we'd like this to be tabled and discussed 130 odd, 133 who say actually we want to get this done. Now, that is, it was that realization,

which I've got, I think I said before, the Eureka moment. It was the realization that that is where the authority lies. It doesn't lie with the executive, it currently does reside with the policy board, but ultimately it's the members who get to make this decision. So will we get a deal done with, it's with PJ Tor Inc and or its membership is the answer. But I think if the membership is inclined to do the deal, I find it very difficult to understand how PJ Tor Inc would resist being a part of that conversation. And therefore, that doesn't mean it's straightforward because it requires communication.

It requires communication of the opportunity. Now, that is first of all that the opportunity exists. And we started to try to begin to convey the opportunity two, three weeks ago when we spoke again, because we hadn't said much beyond the end of June, because we were hoping that the blueprint would be sufficient and compelling enough for the tour to engage. It didn't turn out to be the case. So the phase that we're now in is, guys, there is an opportunity we would love to discuss it. We can discuss it with the organisation that represents you, and it can then distill and convey that message to you. If that's not the case, then how do we best get that message to you as members?

Now, it was written in one of the UK publications just before the weekend, but I wrote to Rory last week. And I wrote to him solely in his capacity as chairman of the PAC. Now, back in June at the same time as we were making our initial invitation to the tour, we wrote a similar letter to Rory as chairman of the pack, and he responded, and said that he believed that there might be possible to get a deal done if we could establish trust and it was apparent to the tours, tours, stroke tours that we were not a competitive threat, which I'm hoping is the message that's coming across. We are not a competitive threat, we would like to benefit the entire membership and we'd like to do this in a non-breakaway form, hence we're not a competitive threat.

Now, I've been encouraged by various players and told over the last three months that Bounta talked to you eventually, but a bounty. That might well be the case, and we have an order that patience, as we've demonstrated over the years, I absolutely fundamentally believe that the solution that we have devised in the last eight months is the ideal solution. It addresses all of the issues that were raised in the best possible way. And I genuinely think it is in the best interest of the sport and of the existing members of the tour. It will ultimately be their choice and we won't deviate from our path until we're convinced that the opportunity has been understood, considered. And if it is then rejected by the members of the PJ tour,

rejected by the members of the P.J. tour, then fair play. We did our best. Everybody can continue to watch what they've been watching or not watch it as the case may be. But if we are nothing more than the catalyst, because this is now becoming, it's not a case of we want to buy the sport or we want to own it. This is a case of where the mechanism that enables the sports to evolve. And once we've built it and it's owned by the right people, we'll then list it. That will give you the transparency. That will give you the corporate governance. That will give fans the opportunity to become owners of the sport of this league in perpetuity. And ultimately, here are the best custodians of a sport.

It's the fans. To me, it makes an awful lot of sense. And it is equitable and it's fair. And the PGA toll members could actually decide who they wanted to run the league. Now, if there are existing individuals that they're familiar with, they're one of the other issues that came up in fall of last year was, yeah, but you've, you know, you're going from a standing start. How do we know that the quality will be the same inside the ropes? Highly important to a player.

The answer is, well, under this set of proposals, the individuals are the same. They're wearing a different color shirt and carrying a different badge, but they're the same guys. The same guys who run the events in the background who are responsible for how everything operates. They're going to still be the same guys. It's just that we're going to be spending $13 million on average on every event. That doesn't include the purse. That is just putting on the show, which goes back to the 18 Super Bowls.

So it will only get better. Your experience as a player will only get better. Your experience as a fan will get better, because back to the Formula One principle, if you centrally control everything, which is effectively what the Concord Agreement gave bone echoston the ability to do, he could guarantee the quality of the event,

he could guarantee the field, he could guarantee the quality of the event. He could guarantee the field. He could guarantee the quality of the world feed, which was vitally important to the sport. Now, all of these things 30, 40 years later, you go, well, yeah, of course. But it hasn't happened in golf. And I understand that there might be changes in the broadcaster range, I've heard

the PJ tour is taking greater responsibility for the production of content. So, you know, possibly addressing that issue. So yes, we are, you know, to the question, and if there isn't a deal, so long as, so long as our proposals are not wanted. By the membership, and so long as that decision is, is an informed decision, then fine. Now also you then got a situation where you've still got the best players in the world saying, we could play for $20 million every week. Okay. Now we had a problem with leaving the rest behind. If the rest have been offered that deal and they don't want to come, what's our more obligation now to the rest? You know, going back to the guy who said, I'm bothered about standing on the tee next to the 169th on the tour who calls me a SOB.

Under this set of proposals, he stood on the tee next to the guy as 169th in the world. And he doesn't go, thanks very much. You go, thanks. Thanks. Can I kiss you? Because the guy is 169th, even if he thinks he's going to be top 48 in two years' time, because his career is going that way, he doesn't know he's going to get there, because injury could strike loss of form, whatever. Even if he doesn't make the top 48, he gets to benefit from what we're creating.

The guy is 169th and looking at the end of his career and thinking I've probably only got another two, three years in me is also thinking, well, hang on a second, I'm right place, right time for an evolution, a reformation of basically the structure, and I get to benefit. And you know, you could say, well, why those guys, what about those who come after or have, you know, have blazed the trail before. We thought about that, but the answer to that is, if the league does not happen, no one owns anything, because it's a nonprofit. So being in the right place at the right time

actually just works in this instance. Does that answer the old question? I don't know. Yeah, no, that it does. I think it basically I was getting at, you know, if the tour does not buy into this, it's not your answer is not, okay, we'll go back to the breakaway model.

That was, that I think answers that question, you know, and we've got, I don't know how long I've got you for, we've gone a long time, but this is fascinating to me, but there's a couple more questions I have that I'd like to get through. I know the listeners will appreciate. What is your affiliation with the Saudis? That is something that has been reported on and I knew I'd get a smirk on your face as I said it. What could you tell us about that, both the history and the current state? We have no affiliation. And that's And that's, there was confusion early part of this year. Then we brought, we brought the website up and we tried to make it clear that there was no connection.

There were some stories written in the press where it actually said sgl formerly known as past. I saw that on golf channel recently. I couldn't believe it. Good grief. Oh, and I thank you guys for making the point as clearly as you could, what we called two ago. I'm hoping that particularly with what I've been reading about SGL and the appointment of Greg and Sean and various others. That's, I'm hoping it's even for those

who are still confused, it will ultimately become apparent that both are entirely different. There was an affiliation, as I'm sure you know, because if you were following me, you'd have seen me play a program with Phil and Saudi. Then we changed our model. For all the reasons I've explained over the last four hours.

It's just been two. Two of the best never have ever been so. When you put your purse up to 20 million bucks and you do that because the players are saying, it will bring the crowd. It'll juice up 150 guys. Go, right. So if we're juicing up 150 guys in your convince, that's going to happen. We don't need to pay you up front, do we? Because we're paying you up front effectively danger money for breaking away. If this is true as in the rest will follow, then we don't need to pay you. And if you want to give half of a business away to a membership. As I said before, you can't raise 600 million to pay 12 guys. And generator, it's on that 600 million and give that equity away. So it was one or the other.

And we chose based upon our learnings that we were going to give half of this business away. I don't want to go back over the old ground, but of course there were other advantages dealing with the Bannon-O-Doubidure. That was a conclusion that we reached about this time last year when conversations with the European Tour terminated. And from that moment on, our working capital requirement dropped by 600 million to a very manageable one, 150, which I've got to say a number of our existing shelters could cover themselves multiple times over. So they just, they just wasn't a need to bring in third party cash.

And then when you switch the model of team ownership to bringing in the ultra-high net worths, you say, right, you guys, you 12, we're going to sell you 50% of a franchise for what is a relatively small amount of money. Probably, I'd go as far as to say insignificant to the people we're talking about. Now, why the hell would we do that? Well, we're going to do that because you've then got a capped budget of 50 million bucks, which you can use as signing on bonuses to the players. Okay, so that's how the top, so we shifted, as opposed to giving away 90% of our business to funders,

who were paying the six, who were providing the 600 million, we're saying, no, no, no, no, we're going to effectively not give away but sell for very little 50% of each franchise to owners who will then come in and to whom even 50 million dollars isn't a lot of money. And if you want to use all of that on one player, use it. Now that is when we have used the term, we took the engine apart, we stripped it down and we rebuilt it. And as I said, it could have happened a lot sooner, but it didn't. But from the, the moment it was the first time I sat down for two days and wrote the original document on this plan, didn't sleep,

I don't think I slept for two or three days. It was a sort of, oh, it's, and I was sat watching golf late at night and just carried on. I just got a pattern paper and said, this is it. And the, the realization that there was, that there was a much better model, was almost the same. It was invigorating as in, okay, was almost the same. It was invigorating as in, okay. Now, whilst we've been in the room

and we've been listening to what's being said, have we actually been listening? It's only after a period of time, as I say, you lock down. You've got nothing else to do, you go, actually, we were hearing, but we weren't listening. Now, we've listened, and these, this is what you do to change it. So, you know, they're, they've never been a deal done. There were various parties who were looking to fund the billion, and I'd dare say would have

been very happy to do so, but it wasn't the correct solution. And we hadn't signed a contract, so we weren't bound. And I've been I've been no more aware of what others have been doing in the last 12 months than you. Obviously I'm, I speak to a lot of people on a regular basis, but everybody I've spoken to hasn't really known anything more that's been concrete, rumours, dates, you know. And I think what, you know, when Greg was announced, I sort of, there's a bit of a sort of good, good, because, you know, we're now going to start to see what there are three alternatives as far as I can tell. There's our model, there's the existing PGA tool model, and there's another model. We just don't yet know what the other model is,

but I'm I'm as intrigued to find out as anybody else. Well, as I was going to say, it almost helps you a still outside competition to the PGA tour, providing an option to the PGA tour now to boost their product, rather than being a third competitor to it is interesting. I don't think I fully had gotten to that level until you're discussing that, that's interesting. So did the Saudis really just take your idea?

Like that was the original quote with the lead came out was that they did a hundred percent stole our ideas. Is that right? I don't know where that quote came from. It was not official. I. I did try and find the source, but didn't get to that.

And I'm sort of glad I didn't. Because it's not. Yeah, it's not the sort of thing I would't. Um, because it's not, yeah, it's not the sort of thing I would say. The answer is I don't know what they actually propose. So I don't, yeah, there were rumors around Asian tour, there were rumors of 10 events. I was being asked even by agents. I was being asked what I knew. Um, and as. And as you piece together all the different parts of the rumor, you still couldn't get to an answer. So, you know, other than what has been announced,

which of course is 10 years, 10 events, agents or, I know nothing more than that. By the sounds of it, a genuine alternative to, at least the PJ tour, if not a genuine alternative to our model will will materialize at some point. So you know, there's been a couple iterations of this and getting into the back into the nuts and bolts of I'm not quite sure I fully understand how one how players qualify for

the league or become a part of the teams, is that purely free market, if you're taking the owners of the team that are willing to use as their signing bonuses, that's the current plan to, you know, one, how will promotion work? Will there be in-season promotions of the teams? What happens when you get relegated? Just, I wonder if you can just kind of explain that

for the listeners. Yeah, it's simple. If we are around 50% by members of PJTorrent, because they get to decide. Now, you've got a fixed field of 48. How many of those 48 do you think should be relegated at the end of each season? And therefore, replace by, for example,

the top six on PJTOR. That's what you're talking about. Is it three? Is it six? Is it eight? And it's how much you want to refresh the field. Now, this isn't a big enough format to go into a full-blown draft. But you can have the equivalent of one because the culmination of the PGA Tour season, of course, is what determines the guys who get to play in the league the following year. And in its simplest form, you've got three teams with the three worst players and they might be 7th, 8th and 12th. But those three players were by league rankings, bottom three. Now you can then have mitigating factors, injury, etc.

Within the rules of existing tours, the commissioners powers are quite extensive when exemptions are to be granted. So you could grant an exemption. If you don't want that guy disappearing from the lead, but the list goes down. So you've got automatic relegation. Obviously, the league being operated under the auspices of PJ Torinco, under the umbrella. And we've also said we would like to appoint a PJ Tor ink, where it is very good at doing certain operations, we'll work together. That will be a fee on on Zendra commercial terms. So you got, you could then go into a playoff, you could you could do it based upon rankings at the end of the season, PGA tour, or you create another or you create another gem of an event where, for example, number one is automatically up. Number two might be, but the third and fourth spots might be down to a playoff. Religation is then those players return to the PJ tour because this is being done on a fully

collaborative basis. Then you can have, because we've got a four-month close season, you can then have a month in which teams can transfer. Now, they can go into the pool. As long as it's a pool that we approve and it's approved by our shareholders, they can dip into the pool. If they want to go and get a guy as any year out of college because they want him and they're going to put him on a contract because they're taking a bet that he's the guy who's going to be the next guy, that's entirely feasible, which is great.

Equally, you can get people who've fallen out with each other, or owners who are particularly keen on a particular player, who do say, right, we've got to transfer a window over a month, and that's when you can generate the content that brings the audience back. So obviously, you're much more familiar than I am with how brilliantly certain US sports do that. The trade deadline. It's content. It's all it's content content content. Yeah and yeah you guys have even said you can do a combine in golf. It's not how high they

jump. Or how fast they're over 10 yards or they're what I would like to see that in some cases. But, you know, it's hitting 10 wedges and making sure that the data that's fed off, you can create an equivalent. It's 100 drives, it's 100 sand wedges. Now that's not something that we've actually modeled. We haven't cost to it, we haven't, but it was a suggestion that was made to me a month ago. And yeah, I've had a couple of points, but actually it struck me as a good idea. I think you're still in no bad ideas. I think you're still the no bad ideas. Yeah, I think it, yeah, dreamin' big in this scenario. Obviously it's gotten you far enough as it is. Explain the wild cards to me.

I don't think I fully understand that yet. Either you have 48 guys playing event in three wild cards. So those are just individuals playing on their own for the cash. Right. So effectively, yes, but under the auspices of the 13th team. Now, when you do the math on Shotgun, we always had the ability to have a 13th franchise, but not with four players in it, because you can't, if you're getting the guys out in in threes, you've only got a certain number of holes.

But you can go to a 13th franchise of three players. We had toyed with that notion. We've been asked the question, could we do it? Would we go to a 13th franchise in due course? And the answer was always possibly, but not right now. I've got to say that I've got to say that early part of this year I was sat watching guys who I grew up watching who I've got a real, I'm a real fanboy and the old guys were taking on the young guys and they were going toe to toe and it was utterly brilliant and I know the individual I'm talking about and I was thinking

We can't miss this this has to have the this hat. We've got to have the ability to have this as part of the format now That's where It then tend it then also becomes a philanthropic benefit. Our model is based off 12 franchises. We didn't need to own the 13th. So immediately thought, well, if we're creating a 13th, we'll give it to the foundation.

There will then be sponsors who are drawn to the foundation team. The shirt might be a pink shirt, but if you're wearing that shirt on a weekend, you're playing for actually a good cause. You're playing to win four million bucks. If you win the event, that's what you're going to win. But you're playing for something which is also going to benefit others who need support. But it was a combination of factors. It was creating that value for third party beneficiaries, but it was also making sure that we didn't miss those stories. They don't happen very often, but when they do, you'd see a guy play well and you'd think to yourself

as a fan, right, he's not in the league, but I wanna see him next week. And if you're in a part of the world and PGL is coming to town and you've got a local favorite, by all means, as a fan base, vote, get involved. Let us see the guy that you want to see playing in your backyard. And you know, that's where it came from. It was really a sort of, gotta become this.

We've gotta see it. Do you have players that are in influential positions that you feel like are ready to run through a wall for you guys are extremely enthusiastic about this or the biggest cheerleaders in that influential position? If you'd asked me probably 18 months ago, I would have been more inclined to say, yes, there are very strong supporters.

The funny thing now is that the guy who's 250th on the tour is as important to us as the guy who's first, because he's got exactly the same voting power. So our focus is, and we had all the conversations we needed to have with some of the best players in the world who I've got to say were enthusiastic for the change. But it was the recognition that we had to shift our model to provide them with really the cover.

Because it's not necessarily all about the money. Or if it is about the money, it's about the money you can win. Not necessarily about the money that you're offered because you're a particular position in the game right now. So we haven't, our strategy has not been to ask an individual to be a cheerleader. Certainly, as I said, the lesser to the chairman of the PAC was based around our desire to ensure that those PAC members understood, at the very least that they understood, because when you look at the regulations of the PJ tour, the role of the PAC is to consult and advise the policy board on matters that relate to the membership. So the next part of this is guys face-to-face,

zoom, whatever it happens to be. We'd just like to have a conversation with you about what it is we're proposing. You can ask all the questions or you can just listen to them laying up. listen to no laying up. But you know, if we will then start to share with anyone you want us to share with all of our financial information, when you want to know that this business is going to be worth $10 billion, the answer isn't just while UFC is worth nine and has a very different demographic and reach. The answer is, this is why it's worth $10 billion because these are the financial assumptions. Now, one of those is, for example, the biggest number in our model is $450 million for broadcast. Global.

Now, you should look at that number and go, why is that so low? The answer is it's so low because we don't need to over claim in order to generate the EBITDA which when the multiple applied in 70 years time gives you a figure of 1010 billion. But by all means get your financial advisors to explain that to you. And the agencies that will be reviewing these numbers, if any of them said, well, your broadcast numbers wrong or your sponsorship numbers wrong, we'd say, well, please explain to us why because we're very good at this. What they should be saying is, okay, we can get you that number. Actually, we can get you 600 globally, because 450 for digital and linear on a global basis is just wrong.

That's the response we want because of course we're going to utilize in the same way as the PGA taught us, we're going to utilize the services of the best. Right now, the best players in the world are in a very intriguing position because some of them will have been offered money from the third party. Some of them will be waiting to see how the player impact program is allocated. So there's two parts of money that are in play for the top guys right now, which only creates probably more of a headache for the agents who've, you know, over the years managed to manage their conflicts, working for the PJ tour, working for the players, selling rights. Now they've just got it more complicated

because having listened to them, we said, okay, well, none of your clients are going to suffer under this model. I feel like we are, you know, maybe this feels more like a Joe Rogan episode than it does in no way up. It's maybe the longest interview in the history of this podcast. But so I asked this as a way to finally help you get out of here. If you're interested doing so, is there anything we haven't discussed or anything you think that is important that I haven't

asked about or anything that you know, you see as an important piece of this puzzle. Do you know what? This is not just me trying to get away. No, it's the answer. I think you've asked everything. The one thing I'm not going to ask you to change it, but you asked me the first question you asked me was to tell you what the premier goal fleek was. And no one's asked me that in months.

Really? Yes. Well, that's what it's involved. I think that's why I had to give it the best opportunity to explain it. My worst answer was the first time I got that. But so long as you, so long as that's acknowledged. Now, it's been a joy actually. Well, we greatly, greatly appreciate you taking the time.

We may, I'm sure listeners will have some questions. We may have to have you back to do a freak only ask questions or something like that in the future. But it's great to finally have you on to deliver the message out to golf fans and hopefully help answer a lot of questions that are flowing around out there. I know I can see things a little bit more clearly. Now, even if they are in flux and there aren't necessarily

answers to everything right now, it's good to get. I don't think you'd kept anything too close to the chest, so we greatly appreciate you sharing everything, Eddie. It's been a delight. But I thank you for your time. Cheers. Give it a nice blow up. Be the right club today.

Yes. Yeah. Yeah. That's better than most. How about in? That is better than most. Better than most. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say, I'm gonna say