by Tdarcos » Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:37 pm
Finsternis wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 9:11 pm
You have no concept of how hard these games can be. If you think it's so easy, go get yourself well-ranked on one of the leading Esports games and then I'll reconsider.
This is absolutely amazing. It is the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority" with himself as the authority! And the deflection of saying that "if you disgree with what I say, I don't have to provide any evidence, instead you have to learn how and then prove my (unsupported) opinion wrong." I think that is called "reversing (or inverting) the burden of proof."
Finsternis wrote: Sat Jun 06, 2020 11:10 pm
I caution you in the future to not make absurd statements about something you don't know the first thing about, especially when you're talking to someone how knows
a lot about the subject. I don't feel like going through all the reasons you're wrong (history, financial, etc) - if you're curious, do some research yourself.
Again, amazing use of both a logical fallacy and "inverting the burden of proof," which can be summarized as, "I'm right, you're wrong (because I say so), and if you don't agree, do the research to prove it." For a man who claimed not to believe in God, he sure took a number of tricks from Christian apologetics.
Positive claims require positive evidence. Claims made without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.
At least here he does present evidence. I don't care one way or the other, but on one point he's definitely wrong. The Washington Redskins have been using their name since 1947. Is he claiming eSports has been around since before 1947? I think the Green Bay Packers go back to the 1920s. Has eSports been around that long?
When Jack Kent Cooke died, his estate sold the Washington Redskins to Dan Snyder, a typical rich prick, for $750 million. I'm sure that's a huge increase over what it cost Cooke, and the franchise is probably worth a lot more now.
I'll look at these reports, now that I mention it, but I doubt eSports teams are worth tens or hundreds of millions, or able to pay players millions a year.
I looked at one of the reports. Estrimated prize pool for 2022 is $100 million, with net revenues of $3 billion. Okay, in that respect I am wrong. But the fact that eSports is very profitable relates to the (extremely) low cost to get into it. This means new teams, new leagues or groups could get involved, and if you bet on (err, I mean invest in) the wrong team and interest iades, you could be left with a worthless investment.
I'll presume for the sake of argument the numbers Goldman provides are true. I'm not sure how much every player on every NFL team is paid, but add them up and I'm sure it's more than $100 million, with the league and terms combined earning more trhan $3 billion, but if he had read the report he referred to, and then quoted figures,
that would have been more credible.
I take this with a grain of salt, were the quoted figures audited by a reliable accounting firm - doesn't have to be one of the Big Four, but it should be someone with credibility - to verify the numbers? After all, these reports are created to convince people to invest, with Goldman taking a cut through sales commissions. Or more, if they're selling investments in a fund that invests in eSports.
As I see it, it's still speculative and things could change. Or something else could come up to interest the public and the supposed "exponential growth" could drop. Or it might be sustainable. Right now I see it as "just another Bitcoin." A high risk speculative investment; for those interested in gambling.
Finsternis wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 9:11 pm
As for "it's still terrible to watch" - well, pro football, basketball, and baseball are all even worse to watch.
That is an opinion, and is not provable. I have never been interested in sports programs, this does not mean it's not interesting to others.
[quote=Finsternis post_id=109965 time=1591157470 user_id=149]
You have no concept of how hard these games can be. If you think it's so easy, go get yourself well-ranked on one of the leading Esports games and then I'll reconsider.[/quote]
This is absolutely amazing. It is the logical fallacy of "appeal to authority" with himself as the authority! And the deflection of saying that "if you disgree with what I say, I don't have to provide any evidence, instead you have to learn how and then prove my (unsupported) opinion wrong." I think that is called "reversing (or inverting) the burden of proof."
[quote=Finsternis post_id=110094 time=1591510240 user_id=149]
I caution you in the future to not make absurd statements about something you don't know the first thing about, especially when you're talking to someone how knows [u][i]a lot[/i][/u] about the subject. I don't feel like going through all the reasons you're wrong (history, financial, etc) - if you're curious, do some research yourself. [/quote]
Again, amazing use of both a logical fallacy and "inverting the burden of proof," which can be summarized as, "I'm right, you're wrong (because I say so), and if you don't agree, do the research to prove it." For a man who claimed not to believe in God, he sure took a number of tricks from Christian apologetics.
Positive claims require positive evidence. Claims made without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.
[quote=Finsternis post_id=109965 time=1591157470 user_id=149]
Esports is growing exponentially, worldwide, has been doing so since long before any Pro Sportsball players were doing it, and will continue to do so. If those people had never appeared on ESPN it would not even make the tiniest drop in the bucket of Esports in terms of popularity and profitability. If you don't believe me, maybe you will believe Goldman Sachs, one of the biggest financial companies in the world, and what they have to say about it.
https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/pages/infographics/e-sports/
https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/pages/the-rise-of-digital-gaming.html
https://strivesponsorship.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Goldman-Sachs-Esports-Report.pdf
[/quote]
At least here he does present evidence. I don't care one way or the other, but on one point he's definitely wrong. The Washington Redskins have been using their name since 1947. Is he claiming eSports has been around since before 1947? I think the Green Bay Packers go back to the 1920s. Has eSports been around that long?
When Jack Kent Cooke died, his estate sold the Washington Redskins to Dan Snyder, a typical rich prick, for $750 million. I'm sure that's a huge increase over what it cost Cooke, and the franchise is probably worth a lot more now.
I'll look at these reports, now that I mention it, but I doubt eSports teams are worth tens or hundreds of millions, or able to pay players millions a year.
I looked at one of the reports. Estrimated prize pool for 2022 is $100 million, with net revenues of $3 billion. Okay, in that respect I am wrong. But the fact that eSports is very profitable relates to the (extremely) low cost to get into it. This means new teams, new leagues or groups could get involved, and if you bet on (err, I mean invest in) the wrong team and interest iades, you could be left with a worthless investment.
I'll presume for the sake of argument the numbers Goldman provides are true. I'm not sure how much every player on every NFL team is paid, but add them up and I'm sure it's more than $100 million, with the league and terms combined earning more trhan $3 billion, but if he had read the report he referred to, and then quoted figures, [i]that[/i] would have been more credible.
I take this with a grain of salt, were the quoted figures audited by a reliable accounting firm - doesn't have to be one of the Big Four, but it should be someone with credibility - to verify the numbers? After all, these reports are created to convince people to invest, with Goldman taking a cut through sales commissions. Or more, if they're selling investments in a fund that invests in eSports.
As I see it, it's still speculative and things could change. Or something else could come up to interest the public and the supposed "exponential growth" could drop. Or it might be sustainable. Right now I see it as "just another Bitcoin." A high risk speculative investment; for those interested in gambling.
[quote=Finsternis post_id=109965 time=1591157470 user_id=149]
As for "it's still terrible to watch" - well, pro football, basketball, and baseball are all even worse to watch.
[/quote]
That is an opinion, and is not provable. I have never been interested in sports programs, this does not mean it's not interesting to others.