Interesting Matt Kuchar Story

[oldman]

Let's suppose Kuchar hires the caddie, and doesn't make the cut -- no cash. He still has travel and hotel expenses he has to pay. Does he still owe the caddie per their original agreement? Absolutely.

In my line of work, you agree to a contract and that's it. If we make a lot of money, great. If we lose a lot of money, that sucks. But we don't get to change the agreement because of one or the other.

 

[MJN]

I do find it interesting when people tell other people what they should do with money that isn't theirs...."oh I'd do this if I had that much money".....

Its a bad look but he's getting dragged through the mud for giving Tucan what they both agreed to. Kuchar didn't owe anything more than outside the agreement. To compare Tucan to a regular tour caddy is not comparable. Regular tour caddy spends majority of their year traveling. Have much higher expenses. Time away from their family.

If Tucan didn't like the agreement then he should not have caddied. Tucan also got fired earlier in the week from a different guy. He also refused an additional 15K. Sure it was after the fact but if it's that important why would you turn down 15K?

 

[Cyclone.TV]

Let's suppose Kuchar hires the caddie, and doesn't make the cut -- no cash. He still has travel and hotel expenses he has to pay. Does he still owe the caddie per their original agreement? Absolutely.

In my line of work, you agree to a contract and that's it. If we make a lot of money, great. If we lose a lot of money, that sucks. But we don't get to change the agreement because of one or the other.

It’s almost as if your line of work isn’t being a PGA tour pro or caddie.

 

[erikbj]

I am sure if Kuchar knew what the bad publicity this would brought upon him, he would have gave him $25-50K. When you worth $50MM +, $25-50K pre-tax is not a big deal.

 

[coolerifyoudid]

Was the issue brought up after Kuchar had already paid the caddy and they were basically "all good"? If that is the case, I'm having a harder time siding with the caddy since he agreed to the terms up front. He didn't have to take the job, and it appears the terms were disclosed up front.

With that being said, Kuchar's comments make him seem like an *******, and he deserves the ridicule tied to his comments. Being a sports figure doesn't mean you need to be more generous with your money, but you'd better be willing to deal with the public perception when you choose to be cheap after winning a million bucks. Very few people are going to look favorably on the 'rich guy sticking it to the poor guy', even if that's what was agreed upon beforehand.

 

[Cyclone.TV]

Was the issue brought up after Kuchar had already paid the caddy and they were basically "all good"? If that is the case, I'm having a harder time siding with the caddy since he agreed to the terms up front. He didn't have to take the job, and it appears the terms were disclosed up front.

With that being said, Kuchar's comments make him seem like an *******, and he deserves the ridicule tied to his comments. Being a sports figure doesn't mean you need to be more generous with your money, but you'd better be willing to deal with the public perception when you choose to be cheap after winning a million bucks. Very few people are going to look favorably on the 'rich guy sticking it to the poor guy', even if that's what was agreed upon beforehand.

The “he didn’t have to take the job” stuff is ridiculous. If the going rate for a tour pro who wins a tournament to give the caddie $5k, great, but it’s not. If he had won $80-100k, $4k is a good deal for both and about the going rate for a caddie of his nature. But when he won, that % should stay the same. Instead, it didn’t change.

 

[CyForPresident]

It's indicative of the current climate in this country that so many people side with the millionaire.

"**** you! Got mine!"

 

[coolerifyoudid]

The “he didn’t have to take the job” stuff is ridiculous. If the going rate for a tour pro who wins a tournament to give the caddie $5k, great, but it’s not. If he had won $80-100k, $4k is a good deal for both and about the going rate for a caddie of his nature. But when he won, that % should stay the same. Instead, it didn’t change.

You focused on one phrase in my post and then argued something that I didn't say. In reality, he didn't have to take the job. It's not ridiculous at all. Would it have been stupid to not do it? Sure, since you wouldn't want to be know as the caddie that turned down that opportunity. However, it was still a choice.

I'm just saying that the caddie didn't agree to a percentage of the winnings, he agreed to a set amount. The terms were laid out ahead of time. I'm not debating whether or not the terms were fair, because they clearly weren't based on the result that occurred.

I'm agreeing with everyone saying that Kuchar should have paid him more. He's not legally obligated to do so, but common sense would dictate him doing it. He's in the entertainment industry and his image is part of what he's selling. As it is, is screams of a rich guy exploiting the situation to his advantage.

 

[CyForPresident]

I don’t think Kuchar liked getting heckled today

 

[Nader_uggghhh]

There were provisions made for nearly every other scenario. Both of them should have addressed the possibility of a win.

The choice could have also been made to address the situation personally after the fact. That's not what happened. That's where the problem lies with me.

 

[SpokaneCY]

I can't fathom why caddies get 10% anyway.

A lob wedge doesn't clean itself?

 

[SpokaneCY]

Of course hes under no obligation. No one is saying that. He made 1.4M and won for the first time in 4 years. 3-5% would have been enough.

I understand the “agreement” they had - but what is a local caddie going to say in that situation? No, you have to give me way more!! It wouldn’t be that easy. It’s on Matt after he won. He obviously thought some sort of bonus was necessary as he gave him an extra $1k - and that’s an absurd amount.

If you make $200,000 a year, do you tip your waitress more than if you make $100,000?

 

[SpokaneCY]

No, don't do this. If not for just being a decent human then think about it as just bad business. If someone helps you make a **** load of money then help them out.

$20,000 is a crap ton of money for carrying a bag for part of a week in Mexico - hell ANYWHERE.

 

[SpokaneCY]

If the roofing company all of a sudden makes a huge jump in profit, they should absolutely kick some of that back to their employees, otherwise they're jumping ship. Most of these examples have nothing to do with this scenario though, pinching pennies when shopping isn't the same thing.

Not everyone does this.

The roofing company doesn't need highly paid unskilled labor. They just need labor which can be provided by about anyone.

 

[SpokaneCY]

I am sure if Kuchar knew what the bad publicity this would brought upon him, he would have gave him $25-50K. When you worth $50MM +, $25-50K pre-tax is not a big deal.

The cost of something doesn't go up just because you have more money. Should he pay more for bread? Hotel rooms? IS he obligated to pay twice what something is worth just because he's rich?

His comments were stupid and he's paying a PR price, but his issue has nothing to do with paying that caddy.

 

[Cyclone.TV]

If you make $200,000 a year, do you tip your waitress more than if you make $100,000?

It’s like that’s not even close to the same thing.

 

[Cyclone.TV]

$20,000 is a crap ton of money for carrying a bag for part of a week in Mexico - hell ANYWHERE.

Helped someone make 1.4M. That’s a crap ton of money too.

 

[RoseClone]

This little tidbit on Matt Kuchar has sparked some debate on social media:

https://www.golf.com/news/2019/02/14/matt-kuchar-caddie-pay-controversy/

Basically, Kuchar doesn't take his regular caddie to a tournament in Mexico and picks up a local caddie. He agrees to pay him between $2,000 - $4,000, depending on how he does in the tournament. Kuchar winds up winning and pocketing 1.3 million dollars. He pays the caddie $5,000, which was their agreement plus a $1,000 bonus, but on the tour it is customary to pay your caddie up to 10% for a win, which in this case would have been $130,000.00. Apparently the caddie is not too thrilled about the pay now.

I see it both ways. On one hand, a deal is a deal. On the other hand, if you regularly pay your caddie a significant sum more for a win, that would seem to suggest you are acknowledging the caddie's role in you playing well. You'd think you could probably float the guy a little more cash, especially when you just raked in 1.3 million dollars.

Also, for Kuchar's public persona being that of the "nice guy" he sure does kind of come off as a **** in this article...

Sounds like a caddie isn't that important.

 

[Shawker]

$5,000 out of a $1.3 million pay day is 0.0038%

Anyway you slice it that just looks like someone being super cheap. Then he made it waaay worse with his comments. It's also telling that no other tour pros came out in his defense.

 

[cy4life94]

So, this must be what the cave is like.