National Online League - Added Value Clarification

[AceOnTheRiver]

I lol"ed  

Actually, I think you L"edOL

[AMRN]

I lol"ed  

Actually, I think you L"edOL

I L"edOL at that!!

[BOINGBLITZ]

You are all too clever for me.... if taking something off whoever wins  AFTER they have won it is correct, then you carry on.
After all, nobody can stop it anyway, whatever is decided.

[duke3016]

I have not entered this debate for various reasons, not least that I sometimes think people need to give others the benefit of the doubt in a particularly difficult time. But come on Bri, you know I like and respect you totally, however, I for one am not too clever at all, I am pragmatic, it's tough enough to negotiate this added value stuff at the best of times.

Circumstances change it's a fact that affects us all in all walks of life.

[BOINGBLITZ]

Agreed Ger...so what is wrong with saying to the winners  "There is a £560 event at DTD in January and we will put the £500 (£550 ??) towards that but you make up the shortfall yourself"
 In my mind that is much better than "We advertised it as a £500 (£550 ??) seat all season, but now you have won, we are taking £70 off you"
 Sorry, but if I did that to last seasons BCPC winner, would he be happy???
Can"t see it myself.

[BOINGBLITZ]

Having said that, I seem to be in a minority of one !!

[Swinebag]

Thing is Bri, when you use your BCPC example you are treating the terms "prizepool" and "added value" as the same, when they are clearly not.

If you pay people into events at the BCPC out of your own pocket and not from an accumulative pool of money that members pay over the course of a season, then I of course apologise for my mistake and congratulate you on your generosity

[AMRN]

Thing is Bri, when you use your BCPC example you are treating the terms "prizepool" and "added value" as the same, when they are clearly not.

If you pay people into events at the BCPC out of your own pocket and not from an accumulative pool of money that members pay over the course of a season, then I of course apologise for my mistake and congratulate you on your generosity

this is the difference (and quite a big difference too).  BCPC "prizes" are made up from money that we each pay every month..... the APAT league prize is just that, a prize. As the seats are awarded in addition to the overall prize pool of the competition, I think we should be grateful for whatever APAT are able to negotiate with sponsors..... and in this day, age, and climate, I think any added value from a sponsor should be well received, even if the value of the seat changes due to the UKIPT changing their buy in.

[BOINGBLITZ]

So this is the sponsors decision to take the money off the winners then??

[duke3016]

So this is the sponsors decision to take the money off the winners then??

LOL Bri - excuse if I sigh

[TightEnd]

So this is the sponsors decision to take the money off the winners then??

No

Brian I am sure when push comes to shove we (APAT) aren"t going to quibble over a £430 entry or a £500 one.

when we suggested the new Genting Tour as an alternative (prompted by Steve) it looked to be a good alternative that"s all. There was no ulterior motive to reduce added value. Naively, I didn"t think it would be an issue for anyone.


That said, what sticks in my throat a bit, and really I wanted to avoid saying these sort of things but it seems you need it spelling out, is that its been an odd year for APAT, tricky sponsorship market and that has been personally felt by all those involved in running APAT which has been run on a complete shoestring with cost reductions wherever possible

In that environment, and not wishing to exaggerate but merely stating the facts, I would have hoped the bigger picture would be seen as the priority.

As I say though, I am sure we can search behind the sofa and come up with something that makes you feel happy.

[Fatcatstu]

So this is the sponsors decision to take the money off the winners then??

LOL Bri - excuse if I sigh

+ 1

[Chipaccrual]

So this is the sponsors decision to take the money off the winners then??

No

Brian I am sure when push comes to shove we (APAT) aren"t going to quibble over a £430 entry or a £500 one.

when we suggested the new Genting Tour as an alternative (prompted by Steve) it looked to be a good alternative that"s all. There was no ulterior motive to reduce added value. Naively, I didn"t think it would be an issue for anyone.


That said, what sticks in my throat a bit, and really I wanted to avoid saying these sort of things but it seems you need it spelling out, is that its been an odd year for APAT, tricky sponsorship market and that has been personally felt by all those involved in running APAT which has been run on a complete shoestring with cost reductions wherever possible

In that environment, and not wishing to exaggerate but merely stating the facts, I would have hoped the bigger picture would be seen as the priority.

As I say though, I am sure we can search behind the sofa and come up with something that makes you feel happy.

Nicely put.    

[scouse3465]

Well played Tighty !

And Bri on your point about taking something off someone who has already won , That is exactly how and individual would feel if they finished 2nd or 3rd to west midlands players in individual standing s and another west mids player gets the seat who finishes 20th in individual standings .

You do like your double standings as longs as it suits your team !

[Des]

I"ve stayed clear of this discussion for a while now, but it looks like it"ll trundle along unless I give my two penneth.

Brian - you"re missing the point with regards the added value that APAT secures for our members. 

We do not offer cash on top, or allow the seats to be transferred or sold.  The seats themselves have a net value of ZERO; unless a member makes the top 10% of the added value event and cashes.  The added GPT event we"re talking about has a superb structure - 60 min clock, 25k starting stack, and a guaranteed prize pool of ONE HUNDRED GRAND.

And still you"re worried about a £70 difference in the "advertised" prize - despite the fact that the UKIPT buy in has clearly increased to £770. 

The impression you"re leaving here is that APAT will pocket the £70 difference, despite the fact that for approaching six years now, we have ran registration free events; worth thousands of pounds for our members, have added value in seats to every online and live event, not to mention trophies and medals and given you the opportunity to play and improve your game in high quality tournaments for a throw-a-way low buy in.  I won"t even mention the community aspect, which no other poker tour offers.

APAT does not turn a profit of any sort and will aim to exit this season with a bank balance of zero, because that is absolutely in line with our strategy of returning as much value to members as we can secure on your behalf. 

And we"re not Marks & Spencer with regards the comment on "advertised" prizes. 

We change things if they are not right; just as we did the schedule for the last two events of this season because members thought we could improve, just like we"ve done with our structures, our rules and other aspects of APAT that members said could be improved. 

If you don"t get that then you"re not an APAT-er. 

Don"t you remember how you felt when you were  appointed as an England player in Season 3, or England captain in Season 4, or how you felt when I interviewed you as Irish Amateur Champion in Dublin, or when you won the National Online League for the first time with Walsall?  If you do, then take the advice of your friends on this thread and step back and think of what you"re saying for a minute. 

If when you"ve done that you still want the difference in prize money made up, I will pay you from my own pocket.