While some e s p o r t s happened during my Twitter absence, it all happened regardless of whether I was here. I'm also better off without Twitter so I'm signing off permanently.
Reach me at
fairchild. on Discord
ryan (dot) c (dot) fairchild (at) gmail for email
Cheers friends
For my birthday, I'm ditching my phone and computer for a week. I'm also gonna get off Twitter for thirty days to see if my account actually gets deactivated. Here's hoping.
Riot gave each team $3 million this year to operate in LCS + NACL, but only 3 could afford to spend 15-20% of that to promote the future of NACL? Shame on Riot for letting teams get away with it and shame on every team that pocketed the future of the league.
@HarrisPeskin@JacobWolf@esportslaw What I'm saying is that's not the only way. And if you only do that, then you're definitely going to have losers (9 of them in fact).
These LCS teams backed by multi-BILLION dollar companies claiming they can't afford an NACL roster is just so rich. The reality is that the owners of these teams don't actually care about League. And their apathy is going to bring about the LCS's demise unless reversed.
@HarrisPeskin@JacobWolf@esportslaw That's all good, but get Riot to pony up what amounts to esports-related revenue. How do you disentangle it? Also, when you don't have a league that can make financial decisions that will grow that pie (as opposed to growing the publishing side of pie), you have a real problem.
@HarrisPeskin@JacobWolf@esportslaw You don't need to win, you need something that draws eyeballs. Winning is one way. Building a brand is another. Winning is not a brand. I like what Liquid has done with Liquid+ as well with incentivizing engagement.
@JacobWolf@HarrisPeskin@esportslaw Unionizing doesn't happen without Riot at the table, though, and that's the hard part. I think Riot is fine to let the rest of us fight over what dollars exist out here.
@JacobWolf@HarrisPeskin@esportslaw Also, have you asked players whether they'd be willing to take paycuts to keep NACL going? You might be surprised that there aren't as many sharks as you think, if any.
@JacobWolf@HarrisPeskin@esportslaw with no justification other than to reduce costs). It's bad faith. Players haven't acted in bad faith, they've just taken what's been offered.
Teams have no one to blame but themselves (and Riot for not providing a $$ pool) for what they've paid or the situation they've created.
@esportslaw DIG and GG's announcements are what just triggered this, so I'll stick to them. DIG, afaik, is owned by Harris Blitzer, and GG is owned by GSW.
And even if they keep it separate (which I acknowledged), NACL is THE pipeline for NA talent. Cutting it off is going to hamstring LCS.
@esportslaw I'm also not talking about ones that are just VC backed but ones actually owned by billion dollar companies, in case that clarification helps.
@esportslaw Love you, too, so note I didn't say ALL teams, but the teams backed by billion dollar companies. And I know companies treat separate verticals separately, but the splash in the bucket that NACL is compared to overall spending, esp. relative to return, is really upsetting + myopic