The European Tour CEO is an ‘ideas man’. Here, he discusses a wide range of topics including the distance debate, the inevitability of a World Tour, appearance money and his wish to add the Australian Open to the European schedule.
The world needs to know this, I feel. How many pairs of glasses do you own? And how many colours are involved?
The challenge is that my prescription changed last year. I am now replenishing. But I am looking forward to understanding and seeing what our new corporate partner, “Maui Jim” has to offer. All I can say is that I like to have more than 10 pairs on the go at any one time (laughs).
Do you get appearance money?
(laughs) Unfortunately, I don’t. But I am prepared to be an ambassador for Maui Jim. Not a paid ambassador though.
Good answer.
Good? That’s a great answer (laughs).
I spoke with swing coach Denis Pugh recently. He says you are the fastest golfer on the planet. Fair comment?
Me? The most outrageous change that would have the biggest effect on the amateur game is if we limited everyone to two practice swings. Think about it. We talk about slow play a lot. I was asked the other day when I had last watched a college tournament.
I hear they are brutal.
They say it is a painful watch. But in order to make a dramatic change to pace of play we have to change the dialogue. For us at the European Tour, there is now slow play and slow players. I do believe that, in the professional game, as technology advances, the size of our “read” is the biggest challenge.
I had this conversation with The Golf Channel people. Consumers now want to watch what they want, when they want and how they want. They expect to see everything. And right now they can’t. But eventually people will want to have the option of watching every single shot hit by every single player.
And choose the player they want to watch?
Correct. As our real-time data and gaming becomes more sophisticated – next year we are going to unleash 75 different data points that will allow you to follow and game on any player – that is going to be necessary. So it will happen. And at that point measuring slow play will become more scientific and sophisticated.
However, having said that, something drastic and dramatic needs to happen at the amateur level. It does. And the best notion I’ve had is to limit practice swings. Timing people exactly is too difficult. It’s just a thought. But to make massive change, you need a drastic idea. You can monitor practice swings more exactly than you do pre-shot routines etc.
You’ve been in your job a wee while now. How are you doing? How would you rate your performance? And what you have achieved?
We’ve made some tremendous strides. We have certainly tried to look at the golf industry from a different perspective. Our commitment to innovation. Our commitment to inclusivity. I’m proud of those. I’m energised by the golfers with disabilities we had playing at the recent DP World Tour Championship. They are inspiring.
We still have a lot of work to do. The challenge for golf is still that the infrastructure is somewhat fractured. There are so many governing bodies. So it is difficult for them all to align ourselves to one specific objective, say, how we grow the game. And how we celebrate our game. Our game has so much to offer. It is so unique in so many ways. But collectively I don’t think we’ve done a great job of emphasising that enough.
Why is that? Too many voices?
We are starting to work more closely together with the PGA Tour and the four majors. We all have the same goal. But we all have day jobs as well. So it becomes very time-consuming to have another level of business, especially when we are all living in different parts of the world. That’s the challenge for our sport.
Is that why we haven’t seen a World Tour yet?
I believe we will see a World Tour. Eventually. Again, it is complex because you are dealing with member’s organisations. If all we were doing is sitting around developing a strategy for a World Tour, it would happen relatively quickly, which is not to say it would be easy to create in a world full of already established global businesses.
I’m not sure it is impossible to keep everyone happy, But in order to create a World Tour everyone would have to be pulling on the same rope. And you have to have a lot of time to execute it. There are, for example, so many contracts already in place. Perhaps if we dedicated 10-15 people full-time to it, we could get it done. It isn’t imminent though. But long-term I feel sure it will happen.
How is your current relationship with the PGA Tour?
I have so much respect for Jay Monahan. I think he is a wonderful, quality guy. And a super leader. Smart.
But that’s Monahan. What about your relationship with the Tour?
Well, he is the commissioner. And our relationship is strong. It is very transparent. They are growing like we are. They have the luxury of being at the heart of the biggest golf industry in the world. They have great support from corporate America. If you look back at what Deane Beman did, then Tim Finchem and now Jay, our relationship with them has only gotten closer. And it will get closer.
That doesn’t mean that a World Tour is imminent though. That means we are working closer together to figure out things like slow play. Our biggest competitors are not the other Tours but the other sports. They are the ones taking viewing time away from us.
Every so often we journalists hear rumours of mergers between the European Tour and the PGA Tour. Anything to report on that front?
You never say never.
Have there been discussions?
There have been discussions going back 15-20 years. But that is all they have been. We don’t necessarily talk “merger.” We talk about strategic alliances and how we can work more closely together. We talk about broadcast deals. A merger would be an enormous undertaking.
Switching gears, is there anything you can do to get Rory McIlroy playing more in Europe?
You have to understand that, at Rory’s level, they are all world-class global players. And so they have multiple choices about where to play. If I was to spend time simply trying to get all the top players to tee-up in all the tournaments, all I would be doing is spending a lot of time with a lot of chest pain. I’d also have a lot of anxiety.
It is an unrealistic expectation to believe you are ever going to have everybody in an event. Based on the golfing infrastructure as it is right now. There are less than 10 “must play” tournaments annually. In the world.
So there is nothing you can do? Appeal to his good nature? Pay him more money?
There are 35 tournaments in the world where the purse is $7million or more. There are multiple choices. There are a number of high-level events in the US starting with the three majors. I honestly believe this. Any time Rory plays, the golf tournament is changed. And any time he plays in Europe, we celebrate.
The Rolex events all offer at least $7m. Why then do you still have to pay appearance fees to get guys to come and play in them?
We don’t pay appearance fees in Rolex Series events. Look at, say, the BMW PGA Championship, the Scottish Open and the Irish Open. There are no appearance fees.
No one gets paid? So Justin Rose wasn’t paid to play in the Turkish Airlines Open?
I said Ireland, Scotland and the BMW. Turkey was a promoter event through International Sports Management. We don’t get involved in how they get the top players there. Again, the top players have so many choices about where to play, which is why appearance fees are paid in many of those 35 events boasting at least $7million in prizemoney.
Would it have been a pointless gesture for you to say to Rolex, let’s make your purses $5m and take the excess money to Rory and see if we can get him to play in, say, six of the Rolex Series events?
As a member’s organisation, our focus is the entire membership. We believe that the Rolex Series has been a game-changer for us. No question. There is not an interview that goes by where I am not asked about it. Players who win events now talk about how they will now get into Rolex events. It has become part of the global vernacular.
It has been monumentally successful and defines what our Tour is. You have more of an obsession with top player participation than I do. I celebrate who plays in our events. And I recognise that any event is enhanced by top player participation. But it is not the only thing that defines a great tournament. It is the crowd. It is the quality of the golf course. It is the entertainment factor. There are a lot of variables.
Look at the Irish Open this year. Padraig Harrington played and he attracted huge crowds at a time when he wasn’t ranked inside the World’s Top-100. Then there is the Spanish Open. One of the highlights of the year for me was seeing a 150-yard long line of kids and adults waiting for Jon Rahm’s autograph. It was a captivating moment. The field that week contained Jon, Sergio Garcia and Rafa Cabrera-Bello. So the people came.
Would we like to have every top player in every single tournament? That’s unrealistic. There are over 100 events going on around the world every year. So it can’t happen, the way golf is currently set up.
So every tournament has a different wish-list?
One of the massive advantages that we have is the national Opens. But the key to those are the national heroes. We saw that with Padraig in Ireland. We saw it in Spain. And we saw it in Italy when Francesco Molinari played for the first time since the Open. It was staggering at all three.
I was chatting to Victor Perez’s agent yesterday. They were overwhelmed at the French Open. And he is just at the start of his career. And I can say the same about Robert MacIntyre, who is a superstar in the making for Scotland. He has it all. He’s left-handed. He hits it far. And he is one of the nicest, most humble, most down-to-earth individuals you could ever find.
One of the greatest strengths we have is our diversity. And a big part of that is our national Opens.
Which is the perfect lead into my next question: Why is the Australian Open not a part of the European Tour?
We would love to be involved. And we have tried to be involved. But right now the tournament is run by the management company, Lagardere. They do not see the value of the European Tour being involved. If they did, we would be more than happy to have such a great and historic event on our calendar. We have tried.
“The Australian Open is run by the management company, Lagardere. They do not see the value of the European Tour being involved.” – Keith Pelley
What is Lagardere’s argument or problem?
You would have to ask them. But we would love to be part of it. Love to. We really would. We think it would be a great addition to our Tour, just as the Australian PGA Championship is.
If and when that happens, would you like to see a run of Australian events in, say, February, a month that is somewhat up for grabs?
Australia is a great golfing country. And the fans are just as great. But what would be important for us going there would be to have multiple events in a row. It is challenging geographically. And it has been challenging finding global partners that want to invest in those events. That’s why the Open and the PGA would be wonderful back-to-back. Again, we would love to be part of that.
What happened to the Perth World Super-6s?
Government support dried up. Tourism WA pulled out, which was a shame and a disappointment. It was a good event. We need strong partners and strong government support to make things happen though.
What do you learn from an experience like that?
It’s just common business. We had several conversations and they made the decisions they made. There is nothing specific to be learned from that. They did what they felt was right for them.
Rory has back-tracked a bit from what he said at the Dunhill Links Championship. But the question remains: are European Tour course set-ups generally too easy? Are you happy with the level of winning scores?
It is something we talk about with the tournament committee. We’re comfortable with the quality of our courses. We are always looking to improve though. It can be tough when you play in so many different countries and on so many different grasses. But I can say – and I know the players concur – the courses are getting better every year. That’s important for us.
Define ‘better’ in terms of the winning scores? Is there any temptation to make things more difficult?
We can set-up a course to be very difficult. Then have no wind and perfect weather. You can also set-up a course to be ‘easy’, and the weather is awful. So winning scores is not something we spend a lot of time on. There are so many variables. What we do spend time on is the quality of the courses.
Where does the Tour stand on the contentious issue of how far the ball goes at professional level? If the R&A and the USGA do eventually act on that, will you be okay with whatever they do?
We will continue to have discussions with the R&A and the USGA. We don’t have all the information at this particular time. But we will certainly give our thoughts and opinions. And whatever we collectively agree upon, we will pull on that rope.
What is your own feeling on this subject?
I’ll let you know when I have all the information.
Isn’t one consequence of how far your members can hit the ball the loss of some iconic venues? Sunningdale and the Kings course at Gleneagles come to mind. They have both provided enormous entertainment over the years but are now deemed to be obsolete. Hasn’t the quality of your product been hit by distance gains?
They are both excellent courses. But there are so many out there. So I wouldn’t concur that the quality of our courses has suffered. However, I do believe that 8,000-yard courses are not things I would like to see. But as to what the final solution is, I will defer to the R&A and the USGA.
So you’ll be okay with whatever they do?
I hope we come up with a collective decision. One we can all buy into.
Let’s talk about the Vic Open that now includes both men and women playing alongside each other. Is this something you would look to do more of going forward?
The Vic Open was just another of the different formats we have brought to our Tour. They have all brought a lot of interest. It was a good event, a good test event. The biggest challenge for us in Australia is having two strong, sustainable, viable tournaments for a long period of time so that we can grow them and build them.
The country is so vast you can still have a four-hour flight between events. But that’s ok, because we have to travel so far to get there. And that is why, in a perfect world, we’d love to have the Australian Open and the PGA – and maybe one other – back-to-back-back there. What we can’t do is have just one event at the end of such a long journey.
We have funded a commercial director in Australia along with the Australasian Tour, but it comes down to government and regional funding.
The Premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews, is a complete golf tragic. You should be all over him.
What they are really interested in is a mega-superstar event. They would love to have a Dunhill Links-style event. But in order to make that work, they would need every top Australian player to come back and embrace it. That’s a massive commitment. Think about how long it takes to fly from, say, Orlando to Melbourne. Not many people are going to do that for just one week.
We found that when we put on a plane to take players from the British Masters to the US PGA this year. It was in New York, which was fine. But it would have been very different if the PGA had been in Los Angeles. That almost doubles the flying time and makes a significant difference to a player’s decision.
So yes, Australia is a magnificent country. It has great courses and great support. But it is a long way to go.
Still, you are not dismissing the concept of playing with the women, given that you are going to have a similar event in Sweden next summer. Albeit there are only 75 men and 75 women taking part.
That’s true. The interesting thing about that is that, when we took the idea to the tournament committee, I was wondering how they would react to us, in effect, taking away 75 playing opportunities for our members. But Sweden is the perfect place for this particular tournament. We want to showcase inclusivity. We believe it is very good from a commercial perspective, having women play with men. But it remained an interesting decision for us.
How many “different” events can you have in any season? How many is too many? How many is not enough?
That’s a great question. And how many different formats are there? I believe we should try most things even if, in the end, some don’t really work out. For example, I strongly believe in “Golf Sixes.” But we haven’t rolled it out with the proper investment. I still believe it has a significant role in creating a carnival-like atmosphere, which is our key growth initiative for the game.
There are 100 72-hole tournaments ever year. But there is a great challenge for our global industry. You can accuse of having the wrong “double-C.” Which means we have consumer confusion as opposed to consumer clarity as an industry.
What I mean is, what tournaments are really, really important. We made the Rolex Series important. They are important events. They are important from a Ryder Cup points perspective. That’s why we made the qualifying period start and finish at the BMW PGA Championship. Consumers are looking for events that are important. Saturation of choice right now is at an all-time high. There is so much content out there, on so many different platforms.
So what is critical going forward – for any industry, but especially in sports – is complete consumer clarity.
As far as how many is too many and how many is not enough is concerned, I think we need to select a couple of key formats that we see as having the best chance of being successful. Then build on them.
What sort of feedback have you had from the players? What have they liked and not liked?
It will be fascinating to see the reaction to the Scandinavian Mixed. Because it is so different. It will be interesting to see how the leaderboard works and if there is a good mix up there.
I’m smiling here. Because you are very good at not actually answering the question.
(laughs) Okay. Everyone who has played Golf Sixes liked it, despite being very hesitant going in. But they all loved it. Because it is fun. Sport is supposed to be fun and entertaining.
There was a mixed reaction to the Super Sixes. The format was fine. But players did not like the play-off being a shoot-out on a pitch hole.
Look, we all love the game. We all love the traditional game. I love playing 18-holes. However, if you take what we all love, you also have to understand that it has to change. There have to be variations. If you keep the words that Keith Waters – our Chief Operating Officer – you will be okay. Every event has to be credible, yet entertaining.
That’s why we don’t have a five-club event on Tour.
You should have. That would be great. Every club in the country has one of those ever year.
I know. But it is credible for the pros? It’s an interesting question.
Absolutely. Go for it. We’d see some shot-making.
Fine. When we announce the five-club challenge, I expect a glowing review from you.
You’ll get one. You have my word. Anyway, let’s move on. You once said your aim was to make the European Tour a “viable alternative” to the PGA Tour. How close are you to that?
That was what I said early in my tenure. But I would now change the word “alternative” to “difference.” We’re definitely viable. But we are a different Tour with a different offering. We want our players to be global players and we embrace the fact that they play on both Tours. We recognise the fact that, with three majors in the US surrounded by big events, it is fair that players want to be over there at that time of year. If we had three majors in Europe, it would be different.
If I am totally candid, every golfer aspires to play in the majors. There is no debate about that. But the fundamental question – which I never hear – is, if we started golf right now, what would a new Tour look like?
The four majors would be different.
True. If the game was to be truly global. And if our piece of paper was really blank, every round would be only, say, 12 holes. So the game would be quicker.
Is appearance money good or bad for the European Tour?
I don’t understand the question.
Well, do the advantages of paying appearance money outweigh the implication that your events are somehow inferior and so have to pay stars to appear?
The reality is that, outside of the four majors and a few other events like this week at the DP World, or the BMW PGA Championship, or the Scottish and Irish Opens, appearance money is a way of life on every Tour. That is reality.
So it’s not a battle worth fighting?
No. I don’t fight that battle in any way. We as a Tour don’t pay appearance fees. The promoters do.
Is there any pressure put on your television commentators to cheerlead more than they should? I know guys who commentate – experts on the game – who feel restricted in what they can and cannot say.
Our guys?
Yes. And that is typical everywhere.
I don’t put any pressure on them in that way. What I believe is that journalistic integrity, because of my background in media, must always play a role. However, what we want the broadcast to be is informative and entertaining. That’s what we talk about. We want it to be a celebration of our game. I’m not sure I’d ever use the word “cheerlead,” but I do believe there needs to be more cheerleading in our sport in general. So I’m not sure it is such a bad thing.
Not always.
But if someone has pulled a five-foot putt and missed, the commentator needs to say that was a bad stroke. That, to me, is fine. I’d be shocked and disappointed if we ever told people what not to say. What we preach is more and more story-telling and more graphics. We want the pace to be quicker. We want more highlights of the beautiful places and diversity we have on our Tour. We want in-round interviews, which, while they are not cheerleading, they are not hard questions.
Nor should they be, mid-round. There’s a difference between broadcasting and journalism.
Correct. I think our world feed (which is what is heard in Australia) has improved dramatically. Its pace is better. It’s more entertaining. It’s more informative. There is more story-telling. But I personally would be surprised if anyone is told not to say “bad stroke” when one is made. Regardless of who it is.
Last question: I’m going to give you three wishes. What are they?
For the Tour?
Yes.
A year where all four majors are won by European Tour members.
A year when I am never asked, “what about the strength of your fields?” Is that too much to ask (laughs)?
And I’m having trouble with the third one … (long pause)
I’ve got it. I’d like to see a time when we, collectively and globally, come up with a message that emphases the strengths of our game, its unique components and a strategy how to best communicate that.
Are you talking about the game’s image? Golf is a fantastic game but its image is not always what it might be.
Here’s the reality. Golf is one of the most inclusive games of all-time. An 80-year old can play with an eight-year old. Women can play with men and compete. People with disabilities can play. I can play golf with anyone but I couldn’t play tennis with Rafa Nadal … even if I had the doubles court to hit into and he played left-handed.
He does play left-handed.
(laughs) Don’t put that in the interview!
Golf has great health benefits, too. It teaches life skills to the young. It teaches integrity and respect and emotional control. 73 percent of the wealth in the UK is owned by those over-50. People live longer. So golf has huge benefits for them. Golf can be something that can mitigate dementia. It helps with agility and balance. It helps fitness.
Is the golf club system fit for purpose in creating the environment you just described? So many of them have so many rules, so many “don’ts.” They exclude, not include.
It’s problematic. But things are changing. You can keep the tradition and respect in the game and still embrace millennials and ‘Gen-Zs.’ The former have attention spans of 12-seconds, the latter eight seconds. They are completely different. Their definition of “cool” is different from when the game was created.
“Things are changing. You can keep the tradition and respect in the game and still embrace millennials and ‘Gen-Zs.'” – Keith Pelley
Anyway, that’s my third wish. We should be anything but an elitist sport.
Ah … one last question. The 2022 Ryder Cup is heading to Italy. How are things looking?
We visited the Marco Simone course during the Italian Open this year. The course build was behind where we wanted it to be, but now we are ahead of schedule. It will open in time for the 2021 Italian Open, which will be played there.
The back-nine is done. It is a fantastic risk-and-reward course, perfect for match play. And it is an enormous facility, from where you can see the Basilica in Rome. The designers are now working on the front-nine. There is one great location for spectators. You see the drivable par-4. You overlook a par-3. A lot of thought went into that aspect. We want viewing to be as good as possible without people having to sit in a grandstand.
Post-Ryder Cup the course will be very playable for members too. Yes, it is easy to make it penal with rough. But with little or no rough it will be so much fun for all.
Related Articles
Huggan: Confident tours wouldn't be bothered by LIV Golf
Feature Story: Moving the Needle
