Changes brewing at the ATP
- Thread starter Fee
- Start date
Leublu tennis
Legend
I hope he was drunk and not just being his real self. Some player rep.
taffymoon
Semi-Pro
Come on people, someone knows what he's really like - it's not good for female tennis player's if he is this hostile to women players. And we should know if he is.
rfprse
Professional
Yeah it's nice that they did.
Yeah, it is a very important issue. And Gimelstob is now a board member that decides ATP issues that are so important to tennis and us tennis fans as you mentioned.
So, maybe, you can see the relevance. If he had not been elected or if the episode happened like a year ago, I wouldn't care to post it or read it
in the first place. However, ironically the article popped up in the same week he got elected and it's he who projects himself in such a way as a public persona.
Whichever way one takes the episode like it, it's up to him or her to take it as a funny one or a concerning one.
Personally, I just hope he works well & faithfully as a real players rep despite the public persona that he himself projects because, like you, I also think the whole thing is quite important.
malakas
Banned
Exactly the fact that this popped up same week as these elections is what makes me suspicious!That's why I said about having agenda,trying to shed negative light.It's too much of a coincidence!
Anyway,all I want is not to change the subject and try to take the attention from the most important thing-the change in ATP's leadership/the Hamburg lawsuit/the new calendar..See,all the responses after that have been on whether Gimelstob is a ********* or not,whereas that's of secondary importance.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Having a player on the board who is sexist is NOT of secondary importance.Exactly the fact that this popped up same week as these elections is what makes me suspicious!That's why I said about having agenda,trying to shed negative light.It's too much of a coincidence!
Anyway,all I want is not to change the subject and try to take the attention from the most important thing-the change in ATP's leadership/the Hamburg lawsuit/the new calendar..See,all the responses after that have been on whether Gimelstob is a ********* or not,whereas that's of secondary importance.
malakas
Banned
you don't know if he's sexist or not!You don't know even IF he made this comments,in what context he made them,if he was joking or not.Don't make assumptions based solely on one article that accidentaly surfaces just about as Gimelstob get elected.
I don't support Gimelstob but it IS of secondary importance what some journalist reported based on the other more serious issues here.Like the whole financial future of the ATP!!!
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
To me, it would be of great importance to ascertain whether this article is truthful or not. What could be more serious than not discriminate against women? But of course there are a lot of other issues, I understand what you mean.
Fee
Legend
Justin was elected by the players, so obviously his presentation to them on the issues of the ATP was what they wanted to hear. They have some kind of faith in him, and if they lose their faith in him, they will remove him.
Is he a sexist? In my opinion, no. He has a long standing dislike of Anna, they have known each other for years. He was blunt, to say the least, he was a bit harsh, but if he had said those exact same words about a male player (body serve, make him cry, etc), I'm sure no one would care.
Does Justin revert to 'lockerroom talk' sometimes? Yes he does, especially when he is on particular Howard Stern type radio shows with a high male-jock type audience. I hate it when he does it, I've told him I won't listen to those shows anymore, I think it is completely beneath him, but hey, at least he would fit in quite well with some of the juvenile males on this forum who use similar 'locker room' type language to discuss the WTA players.
Is he a sexist? In my opinion, no. He has a long standing dislike of Anna, they have known each other for years. He was blunt, to say the least, he was a bit harsh, but if he had said those exact same words about a male player (body serve, make him cry, etc), I'm sure no one would care.
Does Justin revert to 'lockerroom talk' sometimes? Yes he does, especially when he is on particular Howard Stern type radio shows with a high male-jock type audience. I hate it when he does it, I've told him I won't listen to those shows anymore, I think it is completely beneath him, but hey, at least he would fit in quite well with some of the juvenile males on this forum who use similar 'locker room' type language to discuss the WTA players.
rfprse
Professional
malakas,
I wouldn't go too far with your idea that the article is somehow a product of conspiracy against Gimelstob. You're giving too much credit...
There's no one to blame but himself about the timing of the article: it was about what he talked in the radio show on that day, 6/18. It's not like the writer dug up some old story.
And washington post is not some kind of tabloid and since it's quoting what he said on radio, I doubt the writer made it up unless he's a real fool.
I wouldn't go too far with your idea that the article is somehow a product of conspiracy against Gimelstob. You're giving too much credit...
There's no one to blame but himself about the timing of the article: it was about what he talked in the radio show on that day, 6/18. It's not like the writer dug up some old story.
And washington post is not some kind of tabloid and since it's quoting what he said on radio, I doubt the writer made it up unless he's a real fool.
"Change is Vital", column by Etienne de Villiers that appears in this month's Tennis Week magazine :
http://www.tennisweek.com/features/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6612561
http://www.tennisweek.com/features/fullstory.sps?inewsid=6612561
Kaptain Karl
Hall Of Fame
<Mod Mode> Off-topic / trolling posts of the last three pages are deleted. Please stick to the subject. </Mod Mode>
- KK
- KK
Thud and blunder
Semi-Pro
A different take on the issue:
Helyar on changes at the ATP.
Column by John Helyar. Don't know what his tennis creds are, but he did write the rather excellent Barbarians at the Gate.
As an aside, the article contrasts the tennis setup rather unflatteringly with golf.
For an irreverent view as to why golf thrives as it does:
Michael Lewis on golf's big, bad lie
From the author of Liar's Poker, Moneyball etc.
Helyar on changes at the ATP.
Column by John Helyar. Don't know what his tennis creds are, but he did write the rather excellent Barbarians at the Gate.
As an aside, the article contrasts the tennis setup rather unflatteringly with golf.
For an irreverent view as to why golf thrives as it does:
Michael Lewis on golf's big, bad lie
From the author of Liar's Poker, Moneyball etc.
Last edited:
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
Terrific post! Very informative. If what he says it true about sponsors wanting strong leadership rather than coalition governments, a titanic change in the tour may be a very bad move for an already struggling organization.
This author seems to strongly disagree with Fee. Am I correct in thinking this?
Thud and Blunder and Fee, what do you make of this article?
Thud and blunder
Semi-Pro
I don't really have a view to peddle; I just thought it was a useful counterbalance to a lot of the stuff out there.
What I didn't like in the article was that he gave de Villiers a bit of a free pass, but his broader point about the possible downsides of player power seems quite valid to me. What do players care about the business of tennis, which is predicated on a long-term business strategy? Players want what workers everywhere want: less work, more pay.
If you want to put tennis on a sound business footing, you need business people making the big calls. Often, their calls will make the players unhappy. But that's the way it has to be. If the main aim of the tour is to make the players happy, thats fine by me, but then we'll just be tooling along as we are at the moment. Is there anything necessarily wrong with that? Maybe not. But then people shouldn't be expecting more sponsorship, more TV, more mony, more, more, more.
What I didn't like in the article was that he gave de Villiers a bit of a free pass, but his broader point about the possible downsides of player power seems quite valid to me. What do players care about the business of tennis, which is predicated on a long-term business strategy? Players want what workers everywhere want: less work, more pay.
If you want to put tennis on a sound business footing, you need business people making the big calls. Often, their calls will make the players unhappy. But that's the way it has to be. If the main aim of the tour is to make the players happy, thats fine by me, but then we'll just be tooling along as we are at the moment. Is there anything necessarily wrong with that? Maybe not. But then people shouldn't be expecting more sponsorship, more TV, more mony, more, more, more.
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
I tend to agree. Federer, Nadal, and Djokovic are very mature young men, but no company would appoint a 20 something as their CEO. Especially a 20 something whose time would be dominated by activities unrelated to running the company.
That is why such 20 somethings start their own company, like Microsoft, Google or Yahoo.
Klatu Verata Necktie
Hall of Fame
Good point, although those people started their companies from the ground up, no one appointed them CEO. The ATP is an established entity which helps govern the professional lives of hundreds of people.
If you had a large company to run, would you trust it to a 25 year old without a proven business track record, or a proven business veteran? I would surely choose the person who brought experience to the table.
Fee
Legend
Klatu...
I would not say that I strongly disagree with the author's viewpoint. He has one major point wrong - the OLD player council are the ones who made the changes to their reps on the Board. They got rid of Perry Rogers in May, then Jacco Eltingh last week, and the third one that I just went blank on decided to step down. It was the old board that elected Justin and David Edges from TTC as their last act. The new player council was elected and had their first meeting after the old council finished its business.
Anyway, I do believe that the ATP needs to find a strong leader, but that leader also has to walk the fine line of protecting the players, protecting the tournaments, and protecting the legitimacy of the game all at the same time. DeVilliers seemed to start out that way, and then he started making changes for the sake of changes and stopped listening to the players. That is my complaint with him, that he seemed to stop consulting with the players and they seemed so surprised when the changes were announced. I'm not saying the head of the ATP should only do what the players want, but surely they should be part of the decision making process and not come across as completely surprised when 2 masters events get changed.
I did not like round robin and knew it would be a complete disaster. I think the current Feel It ad campaign was a complete waste of money and is absolutely ineffective. I think the 'rebranding' of the ATP as the ATP WORLD TOUR with the WORLD TOUR FINALS (yes, the WTF) is utterly stupid. I think the 2009 schedule (which still has not been made public) is probably going to be a huge mess. I don't know if it's too late to fix some of this, I suppose everything is riding on the Hamburg lawsuit.
It just seems that the ATP would be better off without DeVilliers. Not sure who they would get to replace him, but I hope they find someone soon.
I would not say that I strongly disagree with the author's viewpoint. He has one major point wrong - the OLD player council are the ones who made the changes to their reps on the Board. They got rid of Perry Rogers in May, then Jacco Eltingh last week, and the third one that I just went blank on decided to step down. It was the old board that elected Justin and David Edges from TTC as their last act. The new player council was elected and had their first meeting after the old council finished its business.
Anyway, I do believe that the ATP needs to find a strong leader, but that leader also has to walk the fine line of protecting the players, protecting the tournaments, and protecting the legitimacy of the game all at the same time. DeVilliers seemed to start out that way, and then he started making changes for the sake of changes and stopped listening to the players. That is my complaint with him, that he seemed to stop consulting with the players and they seemed so surprised when the changes were announced. I'm not saying the head of the ATP should only do what the players want, but surely they should be part of the decision making process and not come across as completely surprised when 2 masters events get changed.
I did not like round robin and knew it would be a complete disaster. I think the current Feel It ad campaign was a complete waste of money and is absolutely ineffective. I think the 'rebranding' of the ATP as the ATP WORLD TOUR with the WORLD TOUR FINALS (yes, the WTF) is utterly stupid. I think the 2009 schedule (which still has not been made public) is probably going to be a huge mess. I don't know if it's too late to fix some of this, I suppose everything is riding on the Hamburg lawsuit.
It just seems that the ATP would be better off without DeVilliers. Not sure who they would get to replace him, but I hope they find someone soon.
tennisfan08
New User
A very biased article. And: Helyar is trying to sell opinions as facts, so watch out !
ET did not "make changes", he made a lot of mistakes, the biggest of them being the perfect mess he got ATP into by making new contracts with Madrid while Hamburg is sueing ATP for breach of contract. The figures given by Nina Rota in her blog show very drastically the desperate financial fix ATP is in because of that: ATP yearly budget is $ 11 million and lawyers/legal costs only already amount to $ 7 million. Hamburg sets damages at $ 76,6 million. Even if they make a last-minute settlement outside court, ATP will bleed heavily and is financial ruined. Thank you for that, ET, and please close the door when you leave.
Strong leadership has caused the very problems ATP is in: ET was only hired as chairman but also got himself the post as CEO
So the much praised strong leadership caused the very problems ATP is in with ET taking over both jobs and enforcing changes instead of implementing them with all partners involved, ignoring the input of a business partner, i.e. the players, that own 50 % of ATP, breaking contract with a business partner which has resulted in a fatal law suit. Great strong leadership indeed - into desaster. Just steamrolling everyone is no solution, it just causes more problems. There are other approaches to such situations, e.g. an approach of business excellence that is based on customer orientation and on participative business culture.
Thank you, John Helyar, for behaving so openly so badly and arrogant. And as often is the case, bad manners and stupidity go together: Helyar has bought the stupid stuff ET is trying to sell as a great five year plan. ET is incompetent and got ATP in a perfect mess. Helyar is too stupid to realise that. And is arrogant enough to talk down on ATP players for not having a proper education, "whacking a yellow ball and nursing aches and pains". This is very ugly bad behaviour.
BTW: where are the data that show that players often abandoned school ?
Where are the data to support this thesis that investors like strong leaders at their sports properties ? (Especially when strong leaders cause the very problemes themselves, as I have pointed out above)
And: Has Mercedes-Benz indeed declined to renew its major tour sponsorship because of "inmates running the asylum" ? I am inclined to doubt this. I will do some research and try to find out when and why they really left.
And Tom Tebbutt has an entirely different point of view on "inmates running the asylum" and player power in ATP:
And I do hope and pray that it is not too late for players getting active and that there is still a chance to get ATP out of this crises.
In May I opened a thread about this and an online petition that I started, see here http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=199155
Please feel free to come and visit that thread.
tennisfan08
New User
News in a German newspaper had it that players have already a candidate to compete against (?to replace ) ET.
The original German article see here:
Free translation just of the relevant sentences:
And here's the ATP profile for Zeljko Franulovic --
http://www.atptennis.com/en/aboutatp/organization.asp
PCXL-Fan
Hall of Fame
Very good point, but I don't think that it will matter in the presses or many womens eyes. This is a witch hunt and there is very little patience or willingness to try and understand the full picture before condemning him.
If the thing was reversed however unlikely that might be and it was Anna saying equally harsh things about Justin, there would be very little desire to persecute her.
malakas
Banned
So Zeljko Franulovic it seems to be.I suppose since his the Tournament Director of Monte Carlo is pretty clear what is his opinion about some of these new changes.
About that article above..I don't think that the lack of education is that important because we saw what happened when the educated specialists who said about tennis:"it's only a fuzzy ball over a net" dragged themselves into.IF you don't know tennis,if you don't love tennis if you don't have any clue about the needs of the players,and don't really care about finding out and communicating with them,then all the education in the world will lead to similar disasters.Deciding for changes only in the name of change,and without firstly considering the possible faults,like the fiasco in Las Vegas with the new Round Robin system they implemented, is THAT strong leadership???
I am just a casual fan,but from what I have seen from mister De Villiers,and the results he has brought on to the ATP,I strongly believe the tennis community should be done with him as soon as possible,and NEVER again in the future hire ppl without any idea of the tennis reality for managers-because it will lead to the shame results.ATP isn't Disney World.
B
BorgPulse
Guest
After attending Harvard, Stanford, etc...and please don't comment with, "Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard."
People with the imagination/intelligence to make major sea-changes in the world are of a different ilk. Arthur Ashe might fit into this category - I would argue that he was exceptional.
BTW: I don't know enough about the whole mess to be able to suggest a solution. But I do know that human nature tends to be rather self-serving, regardless of what side of the coin you're on. And as much as I respect a guy like Nadal for his athleticism, he's led a very sheltered, rarified existence IMHO. I might give more of the wisdom-nod to a guy like Federer.
And I think Michael Lewis rules.
ruerooo
Legend
Hamburg? ATP?? Anti-trust??? What the ...
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2008-07-17-ATP-lawsuit_N.htm?csp=34
Hamburg is claiming if the ATP wins, their tournament will go down in flames.
Attorneys involved say if the ATP loses, it will bankrupt their organization (Hamburg is asking for approximately $10 million more than the ATP is carrying in assets.)
After all the glory that was Wimbledon ...
Somebody want to comment on what the plu-perfect **** is going on?!?
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2008-07-17-ATP-lawsuit_N.htm?csp=34
Hamburg is claiming if the ATP wins, their tournament will go down in flames.
Attorneys involved say if the ATP loses, it will bankrupt their organization (Hamburg is asking for approximately $10 million more than the ATP is carrying in assets.)
After all the glory that was Wimbledon ...
Somebody want to comment on what the plu-perfect **** is going on?!?
alonsin
Rookie
Basically they're replacing Hamburg with Madrid that pays much more money. Actually I'm not happy with that, I'm tired of Spain being only about clay, and I like indoor HC like the ones we have at the current Madrid TMS, but I guess it's the way to assure spaniards are in the final rounds and that the big stars come in order to prepare for RG:
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Madrid masters series alreday exists and will stay the same, or will it change to clay?
Hamburg is getting downgraded and replaced by a new hardcourt masters series Shanghai.
Hamburg is getting downgraded and replaced by a new hardcourt masters series Shanghai.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 3771
Guest
Shanghai is the only new one.
Just found info on madrid. Its moved to may and is on clay.:
MADRID MASTERS SERIES
"
The event, which will be staged from May 7 to 17 2009 and will be allocated 6.5 million euros in prizes, will attract the best rackets from the ATP and WTA circuits (participation is obligatory). Matches will be played on clay and the event will be one of the five combined tournaments on the international calendar (apart from the four Grand Slams), alongside Miami, Indian Wells, Shanghai and Beijing. With the new configuration of the international calendar, these five events will be the second most important competitions after the Australia Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, the US Open and the Masters Cup (ahead of the level 1000 tournaments: Rome, Cincinnati, Canada, Paris and Monte Carlo). "
Just found info on madrid. Its moved to may and is on clay.:
MADRID MASTERS SERIES
"
The event, which will be staged from May 7 to 17 2009 and will be allocated 6.5 million euros in prizes, will attract the best rackets from the ATP and WTA circuits (participation is obligatory). Matches will be played on clay and the event will be one of the five combined tournaments on the international calendar (apart from the four Grand Slams), alongside Miami, Indian Wells, Shanghai and Beijing. With the new configuration of the international calendar, these five events will be the second most important competitions after the Australia Open, Roland Garros, Wimbledon, the US Open and the Masters Cup (ahead of the level 1000 tournaments: Rome, Cincinnati, Canada, Paris and Monte Carlo). "
alonsin
Rookie
So in short they're replacing Hamburg with Madrid. Same dates and same surface. What I don't know is if Madrid, Indian Wells and Beijing will award the same points as the 1000 tournaments, I guess so
L
laurie
Guest
Interesting eh? So it's more about money than reducing the schedule for the players (as we knew anyway. Therefore Hamburg are right to pursue this - if the ATP lose, they will have no one to blame but themselves. I think Ettiene Devilliers approached things from the wrong angle, messing with tournaments that have 100 years tradition.
L
laurie
Guest
If I'm not mistaken, Ion Tiriac is behind some of the big tournaments in Spain and he opens a lot more doors sponsorship wise etc.
alonsin
Rookie
Yeah, it's sad. If I remember correctly the ATP has the right to move the tournaments (that is, to change the dates) but not to degrade them, and that's what Hamburg is claiming. Anyway, the indemnity they're asking for is ridiculous, they'll settle and agreement but lose the tournament. I'm sorry for Hamburg and for myself as a regular spectator of Madrid TMS, I really enjoy indoor hardcourts.
alonsin
Rookie
That's true, and he's one of the wealthiest people in the world. In addition, Madrid is investing a lot of money in sports events in order to get the Olympics some day. I read somewhere how much they were paying the ATP for this, I don't remember the exact number but it was much more than Hamburg
L
laurie
Guest
That's interesting.
I went to the WTA championships last year and thought the venue was fantastic, the atmosphere for the final was amazing, plus the tickets were surprisingly modest, I paid only 33 euros (about £26) for the final ticket which was in a good spot as well.
Assuming the ATP Masters cup comes to London, I wonder what the ticket pricing will be? London can be quite expensive for everything.
Will they use the same venue for the clay tournament? Do they use Casa de Campo for other activities like concerts etc like Paris Bercy does?
johnny ballgame
Professional
You're thinking of the year-end Masters Cup, which will be moved to London starting in 2009.
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
Will it be on grass then? (I wish!)
veroniquem
Bionic Poster
I'm so glad they moved the m cup. I thought Shangai was a terrible location for it.
jmverdugo
Hall of Fame
alonsin
Rookie
No, they have built a bigger one, it's called the Magic Box. In the link The Natural provided you can get some information and a picture of the project. I hope they don't rise the prices too much...
The venue in Casa de Campo is used for other activities, a basketball team plays there, but not for concerts I think. In 2008 both tournaments will be held there, but it will be the last time
Last edited:
Fee
Legend
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article4368122.ece
ATP's power is under threat from lawsuit
Neil Harman; Tennis correspondent
Men’s professional tennis faces a trial from today that may not only break it financially but will also probably cost Etienne de Villiers, its leader since January 2006, his position as chairman and president of the ATP, whatever the outcome.
Moves are under way to replace the former Disney executive whether or not the governing body beats off the German federation’s suit for damages for what it terms an “illegal, anti- competitive arrangement” to demote the Hamburg clay-court tournament from Masters status from next year.
De Villiers, the 57-year-old South African whose contract expires at the end of this year, suffered a setback last month when Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic were elected to the ATP’s player council. It was the first time that the world’s top three have chosen to become so politically involved in the game, and came about because they have been critical of De Villiers’ “brave new world” for men’s tennis, in which Hamburg loses the status it has enjoyed since 1990.
Toni Nadal, the Wimbledon champion’s uncle and coach, stirred the pot in May, when he called for the chairman’s head. Then Ivan Ljubicic, the Croat who has been promoted to the ATP Board as an interim player representative until next month’s US Open, was asked about De Villiers’ position at Wimbledon. “The day the decision is announced, the phones are going to be hot,” he said. “That’s when we need to talk to each other and really see where we go from there.” Would the chairman’s position be discussed? “Definitely,” he replied.
De Villiers has flown to Wilmington, Delaware, for the two-week court case, which the ATP cannot afford to lose, in all senses. It is suggested that the lawsuit could become a landmark for professional sports in determining the authority of governing bodies and what rights an organisation such as the ATP has in shaping its calendar and protecting commercial interests. “In terms of how it impacts players and cities with tournaments, it has the potential to change the face of the game,” Richard Fields, a veteran New York attorney, said.
When initial plans for the tour’s restructuring were announced, it was to the effect that the Monte Carlo and Hamburg clay-court events would become second-tier tournaments. Both sued — Monte Carlo settling for a compromise in which it would offer the same number of ranking points (1,000) as the other eight Masters tournaments, but without the rule that forces the top eight players to appear or face financial penalties.
There have been at least half a dozen attempts at mediation, but Hamburg and its backers — which include the Qatar tennis federation, which bought the women’s Berlin Open in 2005 and is said to be offering “both moral and financial” support — have refused to budge. The ATP is alleged to have spent more than $7 million (about £3.5 million) in legal fees and the damages sought exceed its assets of $62 million as at the end of 2006.
It is understood that persuasive pressure has been applied to the ATP to settle, but the body remains steadfast in its belief that it is in the right. “We are ready to the last minute to settle this amicably,” an ATP spokesman said. “It is safe to say that there is a keen interest in the outcome from everyone in tennis, but at the heart of this is whether we, as a body, can decide on appropriate categories of tournament and set a calendar.”
The ATP insists that what it has done will “unlock more potential and deliver more value across the spectrum of the sport”. It says that more than $1 billion of investment is waiting to be pumped into men’s tennis and that Hamburg is earmarked as one of the ten 500-point tournaments (ie, the second division) and is promised a summer slot.
The litigation involves four claims against six named defendants — De Villiers, his fellow board members, Charlie Pasarell, Graham Pearce and Iggy Jovanovic, and two former members, Perry Rogers and Jacco Eltingh, who lost their positions two months ago.
“We remain very confident of our position,” the ATP spokesman said. Fields, on the other hand, has said that Hamburg has a very strong case. He added: “The Germans could end up owning the game of tennis before it’s all over. The ATP won’t exist in its present form if they lose this case.”
Etienne de Villiers
- Born in Pretoria, South Africa. Graduated from the University of Pretoria in 1970 with a degree in civil engineering. Received a Rhodes scholarship and read politics, philosophy and economics at Oxford University from 1971 until 1974.
- Served from 1986 to 2000 in a variety of senior executive capacities for The Walt Disney Company, including president and managing director of Walt Disney International Europe.
- De Villiers was appointed non-executive chairman of the ATP in 2005. Assumed broader, full-time responsibilities as executive chairman/president a year later, focusing on strategy and board governance.
- Non-executive chairman of BBC Worldwide and holds non-executive directorships, including Jetix Europe, Video Networks Ltd and Private Investor Capital Ltd. Underwent prostate cancer surgery in 2005.
ATP's power is under threat from lawsuit
Neil Harman; Tennis correspondent
Men’s professional tennis faces a trial from today that may not only break it financially but will also probably cost Etienne de Villiers, its leader since January 2006, his position as chairman and president of the ATP, whatever the outcome.
Moves are under way to replace the former Disney executive whether or not the governing body beats off the German federation’s suit for damages for what it terms an “illegal, anti- competitive arrangement” to demote the Hamburg clay-court tournament from Masters status from next year.
De Villiers, the 57-year-old South African whose contract expires at the end of this year, suffered a setback last month when Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic were elected to the ATP’s player council. It was the first time that the world’s top three have chosen to become so politically involved in the game, and came about because they have been critical of De Villiers’ “brave new world” for men’s tennis, in which Hamburg loses the status it has enjoyed since 1990.
Toni Nadal, the Wimbledon champion’s uncle and coach, stirred the pot in May, when he called for the chairman’s head. Then Ivan Ljubicic, the Croat who has been promoted to the ATP Board as an interim player representative until next month’s US Open, was asked about De Villiers’ position at Wimbledon. “The day the decision is announced, the phones are going to be hot,” he said. “That’s when we need to talk to each other and really see where we go from there.” Would the chairman’s position be discussed? “Definitely,” he replied.
De Villiers has flown to Wilmington, Delaware, for the two-week court case, which the ATP cannot afford to lose, in all senses. It is suggested that the lawsuit could become a landmark for professional sports in determining the authority of governing bodies and what rights an organisation such as the ATP has in shaping its calendar and protecting commercial interests. “In terms of how it impacts players and cities with tournaments, it has the potential to change the face of the game,” Richard Fields, a veteran New York attorney, said.
When initial plans for the tour’s restructuring were announced, it was to the effect that the Monte Carlo and Hamburg clay-court events would become second-tier tournaments. Both sued — Monte Carlo settling for a compromise in which it would offer the same number of ranking points (1,000) as the other eight Masters tournaments, but without the rule that forces the top eight players to appear or face financial penalties.
There have been at least half a dozen attempts at mediation, but Hamburg and its backers — which include the Qatar tennis federation, which bought the women’s Berlin Open in 2005 and is said to be offering “both moral and financial” support — have refused to budge. The ATP is alleged to have spent more than $7 million (about £3.5 million) in legal fees and the damages sought exceed its assets of $62 million as at the end of 2006.
It is understood that persuasive pressure has been applied to the ATP to settle, but the body remains steadfast in its belief that it is in the right. “We are ready to the last minute to settle this amicably,” an ATP spokesman said. “It is safe to say that there is a keen interest in the outcome from everyone in tennis, but at the heart of this is whether we, as a body, can decide on appropriate categories of tournament and set a calendar.”
The ATP insists that what it has done will “unlock more potential and deliver more value across the spectrum of the sport”. It says that more than $1 billion of investment is waiting to be pumped into men’s tennis and that Hamburg is earmarked as one of the ten 500-point tournaments (ie, the second division) and is promised a summer slot.
The litigation involves four claims against six named defendants — De Villiers, his fellow board members, Charlie Pasarell, Graham Pearce and Iggy Jovanovic, and two former members, Perry Rogers and Jacco Eltingh, who lost their positions two months ago.
“We remain very confident of our position,” the ATP spokesman said. Fields, on the other hand, has said that Hamburg has a very strong case. He added: “The Germans could end up owning the game of tennis before it’s all over. The ATP won’t exist in its present form if they lose this case.”
Etienne de Villiers
- Born in Pretoria, South Africa. Graduated from the University of Pretoria in 1970 with a degree in civil engineering. Received a Rhodes scholarship and read politics, philosophy and economics at Oxford University from 1971 until 1974.
- Served from 1986 to 2000 in a variety of senior executive capacities for The Walt Disney Company, including president and managing director of Walt Disney International Europe.
- De Villiers was appointed non-executive chairman of the ATP in 2005. Assumed broader, full-time responsibilities as executive chairman/president a year later, focusing on strategy and board governance.
- Non-executive chairman of BBC Worldwide and holds non-executive directorships, including Jetix Europe, Video Networks Ltd and Private Investor Capital Ltd. Underwent prostate cancer surgery in 2005.
Fee
Legend
http://tennis.com/features/general/features.aspx?id=140358
Court in Session: Hamburg, ATP go to trial
By Kamakshi Tandon
TORONTO—A summer of promise and peril begins in men's tennis this week. The top players return to the courts in Toronto, still riding a wave of public enthusiasm over the Wimbledon final that could lift he game to renewed heights.
Meanwhile, a battle in a very different kind of court will be taking place in Wilmington, Delaware -- a messy and complex lawsuit that has the poential to knock down the existing structure of the ATP tour.
Organizers of the Masters Series event in Hamburg filed suit against the ATP in March 2007 to try to prevent the tournament being downgraded under the ATP's planned calendar changes for next year. Under the plan, a new two-week combined Masters event in Madrid will be established during the spring clay season and the clay Masters events in Hamburg and Monte Carlo will be moved into a lower tier of tournaments.
Monte Carlo filed a similar suit against the ATP but the two reached a settlement just few months later in July 2007, with the tournament keeping all its current features but not gaining the 'mandatory' designation that all Masters events will receive next year.
Twelve months on, no such resolution has been reached with the German tennis federation (Deutscheur Tennis Bund), which runs the Hamburg event. The cash-rich Qatar tennis federation, which holds an interest in Hamburg, is also a plaintiff in the antitrust lawsuit. The suit alleges that the ATP is running an "illegal cartel" and challenges its right to control the schedule of the men's pro circuit. The tournament is also seeking a potential $76.6 million in damages, a figure which, if awarded, would certainly bankrupt the ATP.
The ATP argues that tour structure and scheduling is one of its foundational roles, and that Hamburg has implicitly acknowledged this authority in the past.
According to Sportsbusiness Journal, both sides have spent over $7 million in legal fees so far. Last-ditch talks on both sides of the Atlantic over the past few months have failed to result in a settlement, and the case goes to a jury trial on Monday. It's expected to last about two weeks.
"It's a very serious case for the men's pro circuit, and I think it's very troubling that a jury of 12 people is going to have a major impact on the direction of the ATP tour one way or the other," said Donald Dell, a lawyer and long-time tennis promoter who himself has twice sued the governing body of men's tennis in similar fashion.
"Because it's a jury trial, it's going to be decided a lot by who has the best lawyers."
No equivalent case in tennis has ever gone fully through the trial process and resulted in a final ruling.
In 2002, the ATP was sued by the Indianapolis and Washington tournaments when it changed their dates in the calendar. The parties settled out of court for an undisclosed amount, and the tournaments moved to their designated dates but reduced the amount of prize money they offered. Dell is the founder of the ATP event in Washington and its former tournament director.
In an interesting twist, the former tournament director of Indianapolis, lawyer Rob MacGill, is representing Hamburg in its current case.
A predecessor of the ATP tour, the Men's International Pro Tennis Council (MIPTC) was also sued in the late 1980s by Dell, IMG founder Mark McCormack and Volvo Corp. The case was reinstated on appeal after initially being thrown out of court, but partway through the MIPTC ceased to be operational (the men's circuit was unified under a player-tournament partnership called the ATP Tour) and negotiated a settlement.
"So both sides can argue, 'well, we didn't win the case,' or 'we didn't lose the case.' All I know is that the people we were suing no longer existed," said Dell.
But, he added, many of the issues in that dispute are the ones being cited by Hamburg organizers today -- the rights of tournament holders, the extent of the tour's control over when and where players play, and the fairness of pooling television rights.
Other antitrust cases in sports have had equally ambiguous outcomes. A lawsuit brought by the United States Football League (USFL) against the National Football League (NFL) at around the same time saw the jury rule in favor of the USFL but award it only $1 in damages (tripled to $3 under antitrust law).
"It was the most hollow victory in sports," said Dell.
While he doesn't expect a repeat of that infamous decision, he thinks it's very possible that neither that ATP nor Hamburg will be an outright winner or loser in this case.
"The real issue is going to come down to... is it reasonable, for the order of the sport, to have a governing body that can schedule? If they can't schedule the tournaments, the ATP tour board doesn't have much," said Dell.
"When jurors sit down and it's a complicated balancing of equities, they could very well come back and say, 'Well, the ATP does have the right to schedule -- that's the only way you have order and a good tour -- but Hamburg has been hurt and therefore the ATP has to do 'x' to alleviate the hurt.'"
The uncertainty of the outcome and the stakes involved mean a worrying waiting game for the sport. The ATP's restructuring efforts have also created friction among players and ATP officials, so the lawsuit is simply the largest conflict being waged, looming over past and upcoming skirmishes over the shape of the tour and the future of embattled ATP chief Etienne de Villiers.
In just over two months, player representatives Perry Rogers and Jacco Eltingh have been voted off the ATP board by the Player Council and replaced with Justin Gimelstob (now himself embattled), David Egdes and past Player Council president Ivan Ljubicic (serving as an interim representative). The Player Council itself has also been enormously strengthened by Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic all taking a spot on the council. It marks the first time the top three players in the world have been on the council together and is a clear signal of the players' determination to have more say over the governance of the tour.
"We'll have to wait and see what happens," said Federer about the lawsuit. "We [the players] are concerned that things [should] be good for the players and for the tournaments at the end, whatever the outcome [of the case] will be."
Said Djokovic, "The players' voices have to be heard, that's for sure. That's what we are trying to do.
"But first of all, we have to wait for the trial... Obviously, it is going to decide a future of this sport. And hopefully it is going to be in our favor, because we don't want any scandals."
Did he mean in favor of the ATP?
Djokovic paused after the question. "I mean the players," he said.
The outcome of the court battle is expected before the summer is over, but the internal war may just be beginning.
Court in Session: Hamburg, ATP go to trial
By Kamakshi Tandon
TORONTO—A summer of promise and peril begins in men's tennis this week. The top players return to the courts in Toronto, still riding a wave of public enthusiasm over the Wimbledon final that could lift he game to renewed heights.
Meanwhile, a battle in a very different kind of court will be taking place in Wilmington, Delaware -- a messy and complex lawsuit that has the poential to knock down the existing structure of the ATP tour.
Organizers of the Masters Series event in Hamburg filed suit against the ATP in March 2007 to try to prevent the tournament being downgraded under the ATP's planned calendar changes for next year. Under the plan, a new two-week combined Masters event in Madrid will be established during the spring clay season and the clay Masters events in Hamburg and Monte Carlo will be moved into a lower tier of tournaments.
Monte Carlo filed a similar suit against the ATP but the two reached a settlement just few months later in July 2007, with the tournament keeping all its current features but not gaining the 'mandatory' designation that all Masters events will receive next year.
Twelve months on, no such resolution has been reached with the German tennis federation (Deutscheur Tennis Bund), which runs the Hamburg event. The cash-rich Qatar tennis federation, which holds an interest in Hamburg, is also a plaintiff in the antitrust lawsuit. The suit alleges that the ATP is running an "illegal cartel" and challenges its right to control the schedule of the men's pro circuit. The tournament is also seeking a potential $76.6 million in damages, a figure which, if awarded, would certainly bankrupt the ATP.
The ATP argues that tour structure and scheduling is one of its foundational roles, and that Hamburg has implicitly acknowledged this authority in the past.
According to Sportsbusiness Journal, both sides have spent over $7 million in legal fees so far. Last-ditch talks on both sides of the Atlantic over the past few months have failed to result in a settlement, and the case goes to a jury trial on Monday. It's expected to last about two weeks.
"It's a very serious case for the men's pro circuit, and I think it's very troubling that a jury of 12 people is going to have a major impact on the direction of the ATP tour one way or the other," said Donald Dell, a lawyer and long-time tennis promoter who himself has twice sued the governing body of men's tennis in similar fashion.
"Because it's a jury trial, it's going to be decided a lot by who has the best lawyers."
No equivalent case in tennis has ever gone fully through the trial process and resulted in a final ruling.
In 2002, the ATP was sued by the Indianapolis and Washington tournaments when it changed their dates in the calendar. The parties settled out of court for an undisclosed amount, and the tournaments moved to their designated dates but reduced the amount of prize money they offered. Dell is the founder of the ATP event in Washington and its former tournament director.
In an interesting twist, the former tournament director of Indianapolis, lawyer Rob MacGill, is representing Hamburg in its current case.
A predecessor of the ATP tour, the Men's International Pro Tennis Council (MIPTC) was also sued in the late 1980s by Dell, IMG founder Mark McCormack and Volvo Corp. The case was reinstated on appeal after initially being thrown out of court, but partway through the MIPTC ceased to be operational (the men's circuit was unified under a player-tournament partnership called the ATP Tour) and negotiated a settlement.
"So both sides can argue, 'well, we didn't win the case,' or 'we didn't lose the case.' All I know is that the people we were suing no longer existed," said Dell.
But, he added, many of the issues in that dispute are the ones being cited by Hamburg organizers today -- the rights of tournament holders, the extent of the tour's control over when and where players play, and the fairness of pooling television rights.
Other antitrust cases in sports have had equally ambiguous outcomes. A lawsuit brought by the United States Football League (USFL) against the National Football League (NFL) at around the same time saw the jury rule in favor of the USFL but award it only $1 in damages (tripled to $3 under antitrust law).
"It was the most hollow victory in sports," said Dell.
While he doesn't expect a repeat of that infamous decision, he thinks it's very possible that neither that ATP nor Hamburg will be an outright winner or loser in this case.
"The real issue is going to come down to... is it reasonable, for the order of the sport, to have a governing body that can schedule? If they can't schedule the tournaments, the ATP tour board doesn't have much," said Dell.
"When jurors sit down and it's a complicated balancing of equities, they could very well come back and say, 'Well, the ATP does have the right to schedule -- that's the only way you have order and a good tour -- but Hamburg has been hurt and therefore the ATP has to do 'x' to alleviate the hurt.'"
The uncertainty of the outcome and the stakes involved mean a worrying waiting game for the sport. The ATP's restructuring efforts have also created friction among players and ATP officials, so the lawsuit is simply the largest conflict being waged, looming over past and upcoming skirmishes over the shape of the tour and the future of embattled ATP chief Etienne de Villiers.
In just over two months, player representatives Perry Rogers and Jacco Eltingh have been voted off the ATP board by the Player Council and replaced with Justin Gimelstob (now himself embattled), David Egdes and past Player Council president Ivan Ljubicic (serving as an interim representative). The Player Council itself has also been enormously strengthened by Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic all taking a spot on the council. It marks the first time the top three players in the world have been on the council together and is a clear signal of the players' determination to have more say over the governance of the tour.
"We'll have to wait and see what happens," said Federer about the lawsuit. "We [the players] are concerned that things [should] be good for the players and for the tournaments at the end, whatever the outcome [of the case] will be."
Said Djokovic, "The players' voices have to be heard, that's for sure. That's what we are trying to do.
"But first of all, we have to wait for the trial... Obviously, it is going to decide a future of this sport. And hopefully it is going to be in our favor, because we don't want any scandals."
Did he mean in favor of the ATP?
Djokovic paused after the question. "I mean the players," he said.
The outcome of the court battle is expected before the summer is over, but the internal war may just be beginning.
Similar threads
