ADVERTISEMENT

Flo’s lawsuit against Willie and Rokfin

My credit card renewed so they couldn’t auto bill me.
I’m letting them go, not overly impressed by some of the things they choose to do.
plus I’m saving money to put towards a tree stand harness for a buddy of mine.
he can’t stay in trees or fly apparently.
 
... How many total Flo subscribers even know about the lawsuit?

I would think covid would have a much bigger impact.
Flo is fake counting. Those lost subscribers were all old and had a pre-existing condition of wanting to cancel, and so they shouldn’t count at all. Also, the people counting (i.e., Flo) can get paid more for each WILLIE count and less for each CORONAVIRUS count. People are cancelling due to motorcycle accidents, and they still get counted as WILLIE cancellations. :)
 
Last edited:
Flo is fake counting. Those lost subscribers were all old and had a pre-existing condition of wanting to cancel, and so they shouldn’t count at all. Also, the people counting (i.e., Flo) can get paid more for each WILLIE count and less for each CORONAVIRUS count. People are cancelling due to motorcycle accidents, and they still get counted as WILLIE cancellations.
If you die of coronavirus can your Willie still be counted toward FLO damages?
 
My credit card renewed so they couldn’t auto bill me.
I’m letting them go, not overly impressed by some of the things they choose to do.
plus I’m saving money to put towards a tree stand harness for a buddy of mine.
he can’t stay in trees or fly apparently.
The new climber I bought last week came with a harness. Now I have two. Buy me a beer and subscribe to NLWC Rokfin, instead.
 
I suspect that most of Flo's lost subscribers were the direct result of their lawsuit against Willie. I think I'll start a poll here to determine the breakdown of why Flo lost subscribers.

Edit: I've never made a poll. Could someone please tell me how to create a poll?
I left because of the lawsuit. I wasn’t really a fan of flo when Martin, Joe Flo, Velliquette weren’t around anymore. They used to put some good, funny content. Was never a fan of CP, Bratke, Askren, etc.
 
COVID and Flo dropping the agreement with BTN.

I’m not sure that many people are aware of the BTN thing. In fact I don’t believe either Flo or BTN have officially confirmed it.

I would guess:
1. The season was going to end in March anyway (and one of their witnesses even admitted it was common for people to cancel after the season)

2. Covid - lack of events and people cutting spending

3. The lawsuit

4. Other - stream issues, issues with women’s wrestlers, people that knew about the BTN loss

I am curious if they showed any detail about loss of subscribers from when Willie left in November through the conference tournaments. In theory if people cancelled during that timeframe maybe Willie had something to do with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennstate1985
BTW, so they said nothin happening this week right so I guess we won’t know anything about the damages or whatever until at least next week?
 
The only damages caused by Willie that I can see Judge Livingston possibly awarding to Flo are associated with the time and resources taken to find and restore the one set of rankings Willie admitted he had pulled down. However not seeing the closed damages session, I don't know whether Flo even specifically asked for that.

I think Soltero may've recognized this, and that's why he spent some of his time during the trial (but none in the closing) on Willie's quick restitution of this action. I think that was Soltero's strategy to minimize the only undisputable damage.

I doubt Judge Livingston is going to say she reformed any agreement such that the injunction itself was the sole Flo remedy, such that Flo could not seek damages. If that were the case, it seems the trial wasted even more time than I thought possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikk10
Flo is fake counting. Those lost subscribers were all old and had a pre-existing condition of wanting to cancel, and so they shouldn’t count at all. Also, the people counting (i.e., Flo) can get paid more for each WILLIE count and less for each CORONAVIRUS count. People are cancelling due to motorcycle accidents, and they still get counted as WILLIE cancellations. :)
Flo just wanted to put Willie on lockdown before the next wave of subscriptions. "For his own good."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogwelder
I’m not sure that many people are aware of the BTN thing. In fact I don’t believe either Flo or BTN have officially confirmed it.

I would guess:
1. The season was going to end in March anyway (and one of their witnesses even admitted it was common for people to cancel after the season)

2. Covid - lack of events and people cutting spending

3. The lawsuit

4. Other - stream issues, issues with women’s wrestlers, people that knew about the BTN loss

I am curious if they showed any detail about loss of subscribers from when Willie left in November through the conference tournaments. In theory if people cancelled during that timeframe maybe Willie had something to do with it.
It was mentioned on a FRL that they lost the Big 10 contract.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1032004
In closing FloKaren said there was a "shift in value" from Flo to Rokfin by NLWC using Rokfin over Flo. I say, "Flo, welcome to capitalism. Evolve or die."

Content creators maintaining full licensing rights has been a long time coming. Flo's business model is going to dry up as the cost of digital video equipment drops and available streaming infrastures grow. If he had a choice and was truly an expert, I'd bet Wolk would've still taken $500 cash per hour over Flo stock options.

Flo never had the NLWC event so it wasn't theirs to lose was the obvious point Soltero made. I didn't see any Rocket Mortgage Ads during either NLWC event, so Flo didn't lose that revenue.

I don't see how Flo could claim the NLWC spike correlated to lost Flo subscriptions. The NLWC donor and PSU season ticket lists can easily account for the spike. Although a single PPV rather than subscription, the HWC went with TrackWresting in the same timeframe. Lots of wrestling fans are budgeting their entertainment dollars. I believe that's why FloKaren didn't say a shift in subscribers.

Bottom line, Flo wants to maintain a monopoly of niche sports. The use of Willie's non-compete was a ruse.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1032004 and tikk10
The only damages caused by Willie that I can see Judge Livingston possibly awarding to Flo are associated with the time and resources taken to find and restore the one set of rankings Willie admitted he had pulled down. However not seeing the closed damages session, I don't know whether Flo even specifically asked for that.

I think Soltero may've recognized this, and that's why he spent some of his time during the trial (but none in the closing) on Willie's quick restitution of this action. I think that was Soltero's strategy to minimize the only undisputable damage.

I doubt Judge Livingston is going to say she reformed any agreement such that the injunction itself was the sole Flo remedy, such that Flo could not seek damages. If that were the case, it seems the trial wasted even more time than I thought possible.
I think that's a smart take on damages, i.e., the only reliably cognizable damages occurred in the immediate aftermath after Willie left and dissipated shortly thereafter. And by drawing out the concrete details of just the immediate aftermath, the defense, by implication, rendered in relief the evidence of damages everywhere else as wholly speculative. @El-Jefe above joked about the $1 awarded to the USFL in its suit against the NFL, but I wouldn't be surprised to see the judge do something along those lines: I'm recognizing the validity of your non-compete, but I'm also telling you precisely how much it's worth.
 
In closing FloKaren said there was a "shift in value" from Flo to Rokfin by NLWC using Rokfin over Flo. I say, "Flo, welcome to capitalism. Evolve or die."

Content creators maintaining full licensing rights has been a long time coming. Flo's business model is going to dry up as the cost of digital video equipment drops and available streaming infrastures grow. If he had a choice and was truly an expert, I'd bet Wolk would've still taken $500 cash per hour over Flo stock options.

Flo never had the NLWC event so it wasn't theirs to lose was the obvious point Soltero made. I didn't see any Rocket Mortgage Ads during either NLWC event, so Flo didn't lose that revenue.

I don't see how Flo could claim the NLWC spike correlated to lost Flo subscriptions. The NLWC donor and PSU season ticket lists can easily account for the spike. Although a single PPV rather than subscription, the HWC went with TrackWresting in the same timeframe. Lots of wrestling fans are budgeting their entertainment dollars. I believe that's why FloKaren didn't say a shift in subscribers.

Bottom line, Flo wants to maintain a monopoly of niche sports. The use of Willie's non-compete was a ruse.

Yup, although I think if they actually had any evidence Willie helped convince Cael to go to Rokfin, then they would’ve had an argument for damages caused by Willie. But they didn’t. However I think the NLWC event is certainly evidence that the 2 companies do in fact compete.
 
I think the NLWC event is certainly evidence that the 2 companies do in fact compete.

I terms of my read of Willie's PIIA and testimony, I tend to favor the position that "Flo is competing with the content creators as license retainers" over "Flo is competing with Rokfin in the sports video industry." I also see Rokfin as a "digital media delivery platform" rather than a "licensed live sports content producer and rights holder." I see Flo as the latter.

I don't think the case depends solely on whether Flo and Rokfin simply compete in any way. The degree that Rokfin competes with (vs complements) Flo for audience time or subscription dollars is largely speculation. The competition or complement will always be secondary to and depend upon the content would be subscribers seek. Flo doesn't have a venue by which most providers on Rokfin could monetize their content.

Overly focusing NLWC event is cherry picking, and it wasn't demonstrated that Willie had anything to do with convincing the NLWC to go with Rokfin.

Willie and NLWC are but two content providers of the 50+ in the wrestling genre/vertical. Askren is among them, preceded Willie on Rokfin, and has a featured testimonial on Rokfin website aimed at recruiting content providers. Willie testified Askren is one of two from whom he first learned of Rokfin. And Askren has plenty of content on Rokfin while he also works for Flo.

I could argue it was Askren that spun up the alleged flywheel. Without overcoming its initial inertia, the alleged flywheel would be just a dead weight at Flo.

I am confident Judge Livingston has seen through the charade. I give credit to Willie for his fortitude and am hopeful he will be made whole after the damages phase concludes. I hope Willie comes to see his being cutoff from his Flo accounts as one of the best things that ever happened to him in his professional career.
 
I terms of my read of Willie's PIIA and testimony, I tend to favor the position that "Flo is competing with the content creators as license retainers" over "Flo is competing with Rokfin in the sports video industry." I also see Rokfin as a "digital media delivery platform" rather than a "licensed live sports content producer and rights holder." I see Flo as the latter.

I don't think the case depends solely on whether Flo and Rokfin simply compete in any way. The degree that Rokfin competes with (vs complements) Flo for audience time or subscription dollars is largely speculation. The competition or complement will always be secondary to and depend upon the content would be subscribers seek. Flo doesn't have a venue by which most providers on Rokfin could monetize their content.

Overly focusing NLWC event is cherry picking, and it wasn't demonstrated that Willie had anything to do with convincing the NLWC to go with Rokfin.

Willie and NLWC are but two content providers of the 50+ in the wrestling genre/vertical. Askren is among them, preceded Willie on Rokfin, and has a featured testimonial on Rokfin website aimed at recruiting content providers. Willie testified Askren is one of two from whom he first learned of Rokfin. And Askren has plenty of content on Rokfin while he also works for Flo.

I could argue it was Askren that spun up the alleged flywheel. Without overcoming its initial inertia, the alleged flywheel would be just a dead weight at Flo.

I am confident Judge Livingston has seen through the charade. I give credit to Willie for his fortitude and am hopeful he will be made whole after the damages phase concludes. I hope Willie comes to see his being cutoff from his Flo accounts as one of the best things that ever happened to him in his professional career.

I get the technicalities of Rokfin being “content neutral” and the content creators posting their own content, but Martin himself testified that when he was at Flo, he considered Facebook a competitor. If Facebook is a competitor, then Rokfin definitely is.

But I agree the case didn’t really depend on whether they compete, and yes as I said they didn’t have any evidence that Willie had any role in getting NLWC to Rokfin, which I think would have changed things if they did.
 
I terms of my read of Willie's PIIA and testimony, I tend to favor the position that "Flo is competing with the content creators as license retainers" over "Flo is competing with Rokfin in the sports video industry." I also see Rokfin as a "digital media delivery platform" rather than a "licensed live sports content producer and rights holder." I see Flo as the latter.

I don't think the case depends solely on whether Flo and Rokfin simply compete in any way. The degree that Rokfin competes with (vs complements) Flo for audience time or subscription dollars is largely speculation. The competition or complement will always be secondary to and depend upon the content would be subscribers seek. Flo doesn't have a venue by which most providers on Rokfin could monetize their content.

Overly focusing NLWC event is cherry picking, and it wasn't demonstrated that Willie had anything to do with convincing the NLWC to go with Rokfin.

Willie and NLWC are but two content providers of the 50+ in the wrestling genre/vertical. Askren is among them, preceded Willie on Rokfin, and has a featured testimonial on Rokfin website aimed at recruiting content providers. Willie testified Askren is one of two from whom he first learned of Rokfin. And Askren has plenty of content on Rokfin while he also works for Flo.

I could argue it was Askren that spun up the alleged flywheel. Without overcoming its initial inertia, the alleged flywheel would be just a dead weight at Flo.

I am confident Judge Livingston has seen through the charade. I give credit to Willie for his fortitude and am hopeful he will be made whole after the damages phase concludes. I hope Willie comes to see his being cutoff from his Flo accounts as one of the best things that ever happened to him in his professional career.
Agreed with your the competition analysis. I don't think it's lost on the court that Flo is asking it to adopt a rigid interpretation of its non-compete and an amorphous definition of competition to enforce it.

Re Willie, Flo not only shot itself in the foot by bringing the trial, they elevated Willie's profile to a degree they're probably already regretting. It's as if they transferred whatever good will they had in the wrestling community to Willie, who was already pretty good on that front.
 
Thanks, wasn’t aware of that

A quick reminder on Flo's Big Ten Contract: it was for simulcast streaming.

Meaning, the Big Ten continued streaming the content themselves (via BTN+ and/or BTN2GO) at the same time Flo was allowed to also stream the exact same content to their own paying subscribers.

Meaning, meaning, Consumers had two choices about which Org to pay to be able to watch:
1. If we paid Flo, we could avoid paying BTN+, and would also get access to Flo's other non-B1G content
2. If we paid BTN+, we could avoid paying Flo

So after running with that arrangement for (2yrs? 3yrs? I can't remember), the Big Ten decided any or all of the following:
  • NO to accepting Flo's cash payment for simulstreaming any longer
  • NO to allowing Flo's existing paying customers to continue watching B1G content WITHOUT directly paying the B1G
  • YES to continue to do what the conference had already been doing: streaming their content themselves
  • YES to making their own stream of content being the ONLY way consumers can watch
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dogwelder
Re Willie, Flo not only shot itself in the foot by bringing the trial, they elevated Willie's profile to a degree they're probably already regretting. It's as if they transferred whatever good will they had in the wrestling community to Willie, who was already pretty good on that front.
Streisand Effect strikes again.
 
I get the technicalities of Rokfin being “content neutral” and the content creators posting their own content, but Martin himself testified that when he was at Flo, he considered Facebook a competitor. If Facebook is a competitor, then Rokfin definitely is.

But I agree the case didn’t really depend on whether they compete, and yes as I said they didn’t have any evidence that Willie had any role in getting NLWC to Rokfin, which I think would have changed things if they did.
They showed texts between Cael and Willie where Cael was asking about the Rofkin model and the two agreed to discuss Rokfin and the NLWC over the phone. Willie clearly had a role.

To your earlier question about subscribers, there was a graphic that showed Rokfin’s number of subscribers jumped by (roughly) 2,000 when Willie joined and then more than doubled again to (roughly) 6,000-7,000 when the NLWC signed on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tikk10
They showed texts between Cael and Willie where Cael was asking about the Rofkin model and the two agreed to discuss Rokfin and the NLWC over the phone. Willie clearly had a role.

To your earlier question about subscribers, there was a graphic that showed Rokfin’s number of subscribers jumped by (roughly) 2,000 when Willie joined and then more than doubled again to (roughly) 6,000-7,000 when the NLWC signed on.

All they could prove was that Willie helped explain to Cael how Rokfin worked.

I wasn’t asking about Rokfin subscribers, I was asking about Flo subscribers. Just because Rokfin gained subscribers when Willie first joined, doesn’t mean that they cancelled Flo to join Rokfin.
 
Given that Flo compensated Willie for each new sub attributed to him, I’d be curious to how many subs/month he was attributed as being responsible for. Flo’s damages are $139,500, equivalent to 930 annual subs, or ~78 subs/month. If Willie’s content was driving more than that, then it’s hard to see how Willie took subs from them versus that they just couldn’t replace him effectively.

Given that he was under a TRO that essentially become permanent, it is hard to see how Flo was effected beyond whatever he did last Nov through Dec. I think Flo got what they asked for in the TRO and won’t get anything else from Willie individually. Flo essentially spent more money litigating Willie than what losses they claimed. Put differently, their non compete with Willie was of negative value as it was more costly to enforce then they actual damages incurred in that year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennstate1985
Re Willie, Flo not only shot itself in the foot by bringing the trial, they elevated Willie's profile to a degree they're probably already regretting. It's as if they transferred whatever good will they had in the wrestling community to Willie, who was already pretty good on that front.
Agree. I used to think Willie was pretty good and an important spoke in the wheel at FLO. Now after the trial, they've made me believe Willie was the hub in the wheel at FLO. FLO makes me wonder if they lack confidence in the remainder of their troops being able to defeat a lone Willie Saylor on a level playing field.
 
Agree. I used to think Willie was pretty good and an important spoke in the wheel at FLO. Now after the trial, they've made me believe Willie was the hub in the wheel at FLO. FLO makes me wonder if they lack confidence in the remainder of their troops being able to defeat a lone Willie Saylor on a level playing field.

It also should be noted that the guy Flo tapped to replace Willie’s on air role in FRL has had a Rokfin channel for 6 months longer that Willie’s Matscouts channel.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PAHURDLER
If Flo doesn't recover substantial damages and instead pays more than it might recover, as I expect Judge Livingston will rule, then then depending on the Judge's reasons, there are two current Flo employees neither of whom I would wish to be:

1) Ray Machuca may be on the first and hottest seat for the initial affidavit (assuming Soltero's points carry the day) and for his repeated guidance to Pyles on how to deal with Willie absent any real contingency for Willie's departure (even if he simply grew tired of Pyles whining about Willie).

2) Christian Pyles could be on the hot seat for following Ray Machuca's advice without a contingency plan. Depending on the Judge's conclusions about the texts and whether Flo legal was involved from the get go, that could spell trouble for Pyles.

I wonder how much personnel management training (e.g. conflict resolution) Flo invested in either of them. I didn't see evidence of any, let alone as much as Flo "invested in Willie" flying him all over (which I thought was just travel and part of the job requirements).

Flo is going to need a scapegoat (or two) to sacrifice to their investors should they lose big. Too bad the results from the future consultant's lesson-learned study of this affair is likely to become a Flo trade secret. I'd sure love to read it.
 
If Flo doesn't recover substantial damages and instead pays more than it might recover, as I expect Judge Livingston will rule, then then depending on the Judge's reasons, there are two current Flo employees neither of whom I would wish to be:

1) Ray Machuca may be on the first and hottest seat for the initial affidavit (assuming Soltero's points carry the day) and for his repeated guidance to Pyles on how to deal with Willie absent any real contingency for Willie's departure (even if he simply grew tired of Pyles whining about Willie).

2) Christian Pyles could be on the hot seat for following Ray Machuca's advice without a contingency plan. Depending on the Judge's conclusions about the texts and whether Flo legal was involved from the get go, that could spell trouble for Pyles.

I wonder how much personnel management training (e.g. conflict resolution) Flo invested in either of them. I didn't see evidence of any, let alone as much as Flo "invested in Willie" flying him all over (which I thought was just travel and part of the job requirements).

Flo is going to need a scapegoat (or two) to sacrifice to their investors should they lose big. Too bad the results from the future consultant's lesson-learned study of this affair is likely to become a Flo trade secret. I'd sure love to read it.
My guess is that it is the investors who pushed for the lawsuit from the beginning. I admittedly did not really keep up with the actual trial, but I guess it would surprise me if flo starts looking for heads after all of this. At least in the case of Pyles, I’m not sure they can afford to lose another of their “talent“ at this point.

I am happy for Willie, as this whole affair definitely seemed petty, but I’m also hopeful that flo doesn’t go away altogether— at least not yet. Flo and rokfin (or their content creators) are giving something to our sport that I’m not sure we’ve had before: actual competition. Nothing like market dynamics to improve the product!
 
guess is that it is the investors who pushed for the lawsuit from the beginning

Martin Flo's sister, an investor, questioned FloSports board's judgement. Martin Tweeted her letter. I thought according to testimony Martin remains one of, if not, the single largest investor with an 11% stake in Flosports. Therefore, I tend to doubt the investors pushed for the lawsuit.

Instead, I believe the Board is much more likely to say they acted based on information from subordinates. To wit, the general rule, $h!+ flows down hill, may prove true in this case.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: nerfstate
In closing FloKaren said there was a "shift in value" from Flo to Rokfin by NLWC using Rokfin over Flo. I say, "Flo, welcome to capitalism. Evolve or die."

Content creators maintaining full licensing rights has been a long time coming. Flo's business model is going to dry up as the cost of digital video equipment drops and available streaming infrastures grow. If he had a choice and was truly an expert, I'd bet Wolk would've still taken $500 cash per hour over Flo stock options.

Flo never had the NLWC event so it wasn't theirs to lose was the obvious point Soltero made. I didn't see any Rocket Mortgage Ads during either NLWC event, so Flo didn't lose that revenue.

I don't see how Flo could claim the NLWC spike correlated to lost Flo subscriptions. The NLWC donor and PSU season ticket lists can easily account for the spike. Although a single PPV rather than subscription, the HWC went with TrackWresting in the same timeframe. Lots of wrestling fans are budgeting their entertainment dollars. I believe that's why FloKaren didn't say a shift in subscribers.

Bottom line, Flo wants to maintain a monopoly of niche sports. The use of Willie's non-compete was a ruse.


CP running that NLWC financials scandal/nonscandal may go down as the first worst move by flo.

Parting ways with willie might be the next.
 
I’m also hopeful that flo doesn’t go away altogether

Flo will have a place until digital video cameras and live streaming becomes ubiquitous to the point that each sport content contributor can do it on their own. We may already be there.

It really wouldn't be that difficult to upgrade a high school's A/V club (the term used in the late 70s to date myself) to a more complete video production Vo Tech program. Some high school's probably already have them (I may be out of touch) . We know colleges have had similar programs for some time. Extending backward into HS would provide a great practical learning experience.

The only things I see potentially holding it back is fear of change, administrative school bureaucracy, and, dare I say, cronyism and kickbacks.
 
Martin Flo's sister, an investor, questioned FloSports board's judgement. Martin Tweeted her letter. I thought according to testimony Martin remains one of, if not, the single largest investor with an 11% stake in Flosports. Therefore, I tend to doubt the investors pushed for the lawsuit.

Instead, I believe the Board is much more likely to say they acted based on information from subordinates. To wit, the general rule, $h!+ flows down hill, may prove true in this case.
By "investors" he probably meant the venture capital investors. Who very likely did push for this.

Put another way: no suit like this happens without Board approval. And Martin didn't vote to sue himself out of business.

In any case, agreed that staff scapegoating would be a non-shock. I would have already met with outside counsel.
 
By "investors" he probably meant the venture capital investors. Who very likely did push for this.

Put another way: no suit like this happens without Board approval. And Martin didn't vote to sue himself out of business.

In any case, agreed that staff scapegoating would be a non-shock. I would have already met with outside counsel.
Yeah, I meant the VC.
 
If Flo doesn't recover substantial damages and instead pays more than it might recover, as I expect Judge Livingston will rule, then then depending on the Judge's reasons, there are two current Flo employees neither of whom I would wish to be:

1) Ray Machuca may be on the first and hottest seat for the initial affidavit (assuming Soltero's points carry the day) and for his repeated guidance to Pyles on how to deal with Willie absent any real contingency for Willie's departure (even if he simply grew tired of Pyles whining about Willie).

2) Christian Pyles could be on the hot seat for following Ray Machuca's advice without a contingency plan. Depending on the Judge's conclusions about the texts and whether Flo legal was involved from the get go, that could spell trouble for Pyles.

I wonder how much personnel management training (e.g. conflict resolution) Flo invested in either of them. I didn't see evidence of any, let alone as much as Flo "invested in Willie" flying him all over (which I thought was just travel and part of the job requirements).

Flo is going to need a scapegoat (or two) to sacrifice to their investors should they lose big. Too bad the results from the future consultant's lesson-learned study of this affair is likely to become a Flo trade secret. I'd sure love to read it.

No inside knowledge of course, but I got the sense CP didn’t want to be involved in the lawsuit. Don’t know much about Machuca but I’d guess it was above him as well.

As I believe others have said previously, I think it’s about Mark vs. Martin.
 
If I could throw my novice, 2 cents of opinion into this conversation.....

I was convinced Flo was a flailing company that was ripe for failure ever since the National Dual meet debacle against OSU, when their feed crapped the bed figuratively. Afterwards, they needed to perform a thorough and robust evaluation / after action review of their infrastructure. Instead they talked about how they would improve, and then made zero noticeable improvements. IMO, this is not how successful companies operate. It’s how companies with a complete lack of leadership operate.

They’ve been able to survive because they haven’t had any real competition until recently. This lawsuit shows a mind numbing lack of leadership and a PR machine that seems determined to shoot themselves in the kneecap.
 
If I could throw my novice, 2 cents of opinion into this conversation.....

I was convinced Flo was a flailing company that was ripe for failure ever since the National Dual meet debacle against OSU, when their feed crapped the bed figuratively. Afterwards, they needed to perform a thorough and robust evaluation / after action review of their infrastructure. Instead they talked about how they would improve, and then made zero noticeable improvements. IMO, this is not how successful companies operate. It’s how companies with a complete lack of leadership operate.

They’ve been able to survive because they haven’t had any real competition until recently. This lawsuit shows a mind numbing lack of leadership and a PR machine that seems determined to shoot themselves in the kneecap.
Pretty good post for a novice. ;) Flo has made the worst of errors by believing the courts are there to protect them from their competition. Nothing can be further from the truth. The courts are simply there to ensure a level playing field. They do not pick winners and losers.

I never subscribed to Flo. I didn't feel they had the best interests of the sport at heart and said so many times on here. For awhile, the interests of Flo and the sport and their fans appeared to align, but about 12-18 months ago, Flo got extremely aggressive with takedowns and showed it was always about money and monopoly. I've also noted as you have that Flo has never fixed their streaming issues. Ever. There are likely a dozen reasons why it's never been fixed but they all center around management decisions that provided a lack of funds to streaming issues. Obviously, management didn't think subscriptions were a priority for them and that retaining video rights were and put their efforts there. That's where the money is and was. The real purpose of Flo is creating content to sell elsewhere. If they can make a little extra by selling live feed while creating the content, all the better, but it isn't their primary revenue stream or concern. So what we believe to be poor management is actually the true misalignment between Flo and the fans of the sport.
 
Last edited:
I think Flo could be really good if they simply acted the way the pretend to be - fans of the sport. Regardless if they have the rights, they should be covering the sport, providing updates, content, etc. They're driving their own stake...
 
No inside knowledge of course, but I got the sense CP didn’t want to be involved in the lawsuit. Don’t know much about Machuca but I’d guess it was above him as well.

As I believe others have said previously, I think it’s about Mark vs. Martin.

CP wasn’t responsible for the lawsuit, however, he definitely had no problem leaning into the company line during his testimony.
 
ADVERTISEMENT