Husker_Du

@Dark Energy i love the idea and i'm going to talk about it on the show on monday. one of the reasons i love message boards. very intelligent community (this side of NJ Dan) that has great ideas and fosters great discussion (and perhaps sometimes change)

the option to go with one of three weight categories is a trainwreck. you're going to have states with those three and a few states with their own version. then, what does USAW do? Then what does, say S32 do. Then you have international / UWW weights. it creates a ton of issues the most important of which is a universal product and the least of which is a pain in the ass for rankings.

an example of what? that you don't need a weight in the middle b/c they can figure it out and still be uber successful? your thesis was that kids leave the sport b/c their isn't a weight class for them. i'm asking for examples. as a very small high school kid, i wouldn't mind 118 for the kurt mchenry's of the world. but pragmatically, that's an outlier. ask any college coach in the country what's the most difficult weight to recruit and he'll tell you 125. because they just never stay small enough.

when did this happen? ever? when was there a viable DI prospect between 197 and 285 that said 'ef it'. please tell me you have more than your john wise anecdote.

...Top 25 in the next year or so if Gaitan stayed committed there. pretty impressive job by their staff. I hope they can pick up another stud or two.

i don't get a salary. and im not beholden to rokfin. i could choose another platform (or a site of my own) any time i want.

i was happy w/ the numbers/revenue prior to the PPV thing. and i was also one that endorsed it despite not using it (and not ever intending on using it). and now i'm even happier. if you know the details, and experienced the compensation structure both before and after, you'd know why. but alas, you guys don't and didn't but are sure of your assessment.

I think he's a HWT. i get conflicting things from him on what he thinks he is.

i can see it. call Hammerlock whatever you want (i have lol) but the man is knowledgable and engaged and would never A) ask what content I produce or B) confuse Rokfin w/ Rudis

you could be correct: perhaps rokfin will prove to be only 'better' for certain types of creators. idk. i'd be silly to be sure of anything as the platform is in its infancy. i know this much though - if you took the views one gets on YT and the compensation they get and compare it to rokfin for the same numbers....it's night and day. i know what numbers i'm driving and i know what revenue comes with that. and i'm more than happy with it. and that's all that really matters.

nailed it geesh. i've never seen anyone make in entrance in which they're so clearly oblivious in so many consecutive posts. and you do it with so much surety. impressive.

i know. i just like to give you a hard time.

just because they (high audience creators) aren't on there yet doesn't mean the model isn't the best. a more equitable platform was the entire impetus behind the project. the compensation (the share the creator gets) is night and day. the first big creator that gets on there will do massive numbers. that's why i'm saying that you guys are forming an argument without knowing the full situation. i'm not trying to be arrogant about it. rokfin is new, the details unknown to most, and i happen to be in the middle of it. (by the way, crypto isn't 'imploding;' it's going through what it should go through, which is weeding out the junk projects and those with very little real world application. the one's worth it will survive. and imo, thrive.

omg i can't believe you guys fell for that.

if you guys scratch Vak's avatar you can actually smell his nervousness. if you don't believe me, try it.

i said in my first reply that i wouldn't try to convince you guys. i'll stop now. think what you want. it's your money after all.

that's a horribly inaccurate metaphor. that cup isn't empty.

Rokfin = $100 yr. and one off PPV fees for certain events whose promoter decides to utilize that function glad to clear that up for you.

that may or may not be the case, Mike. however 1) rokfin is agnostic in this (it's the event organizer that decides it) and 2) it's much better for me (who doesn't use ppv but who has more daily viewers than most) it's a really great happy medium (and currently the best situation for the creators) the only down side is that some consumers a skittish b/c they can't wrap their brain around $10+$15=$25 vs. $25 of course, the choice is yours in deciding whether to watch or not.

are you using any data at all? seems to me you're making assumptions based out of thin air.

at the end of the day the current system is better for the creators in a world where every other platform is terrible for creators. if you guys think this is terrible for consumers, and that it limits viewership, then the market will bear that out and the creators will have to reconsider ppv. otherwise, you're just scoffing at semantics and/or a unique funnel.

wrestling people always say this and it's always not accurate. there's a reason flo makes it painful/impossible to do monthly. it's called data. and your assumption that a different model would result in more customers is just that...an assumption.

it works better for both daily content creators (like me) and individual event promoters (like Frank Pop) that both are in play. i wouldn't say the single/initial plan didn't work. i think it worked quite will. but that this (from a creator's pov) was more equitable. of course, it's up to the event promoter to use the ppv or not. that's not determined by the platform.

OKST + Over parlay NEB + Over parlay Both overs parlay Bolen-Romero under 9.5