El Tucan Speaks..... (NO POLITICS)

[jacobEDGE]

 

LOL

 

When you go to a store and find something on sale, do you go up to the register and offer to pay full price for it?

 

Its quite clear you have never even participated in any kind of business transaction in your life. If the caddie thought $5K was unacceptable, he should turn down the job. The fact that he all of a sudden has dollar signs in his eyes because the golfer he looped for won the tournament isnt Kuchar's problem. Its not Matt's fault that he got a great deal on a locat caddie. That's great business on his part.

 

You're a real piece of work, aren't you?

 

You also have no idea what you're talking about. You cannot compare a service that requires a tip to a set price on a good. Goods (or a physical product) is not the same as a service. That's something most middle school children can comprehend.

 

Remember all those spectators in Phoenix a couple weeks ago heckling Kuchar at every turn and instead of "Koooooch" yelling you're a "Cheap so and so and owe some guy more money, booooo"?

Ya, me neither.

No one was exploited here. No one was abused. Some pro golfer paid a local caddie, way more money than that local caddie got paid the previous year by another pro golfer.

 

This is the most "whataboutism" I've ever seen.

 

First off, I'm sure a vast majority of spectators in Phoenix had no idea about any of this. I had never heard of anything until reading a post on Reddit this morning. Had I been at the WM Open, I wouldn't have boo'd him, because I had never heard of this story and scandal.

 

Second, you can't honestly believe the WM Open is a solid event to hold spectators at such standards? That's the Coachella of Golf. More people are there from the local college than actual golf fans. More people are there to drink and party instead of watching golf.

 

You think you made some profound point with your comment, when you actually just strung some words together to form a bunch of nonsense.

[deadsolid...shank]

Kuchar 100% took advantage of the situation. It was his first win in 4 years with a fill in caddie and he probably thought he could offer way less than usual and keep most of his earnings. Even with the extra $15,000 being offered, it's a very bad look on Kuchars part. He could have been a hero in this situation. Get the win, help a local and his family out and set them up nicely for the future. As a touring pro, he should know better than anyone else that caddying at local courses isn't the most glamorous or most well paid jobs out there. No matter what was "agreed" upon beforehand, Kuchar should have ponied up.

 

And bravo for the caddy for turning down the extra $15,000. The guy is sticking to his principles and you have to admire him for that. Anyone who has ever thought they should deserve something should never settle for less.

 

What exactly does he “deserve”? Don’t you “deserve” what you agreed to work for when you’ve satisfactorily completed the job?

 

So many people saying he “deserves” 10%. Well hell, why stop there, why not 20%, or 50%... ?

 

I never said what he deserves. But he obviously thinks he deserves more than what he got, so why settle for what he thinks isn't enough? You even said earlier that you would have paid more in this situation, meaning you think he deserves more as well. Whatever figure that is isn't for anyone of us to decide except for Kuchar and the caddy. My opinion is that Kuchar took advantage of him.

 

I don’t necessarily feel he deserves more, because I don’t know exactly what he did. I would have given more because I typically tip more than average. That’s just different people.

 

I’ve never said anything about whether I feel what Kuchar did was right or wrong, because it’s his business. I’me very pragmatic though, if you sign on to do a job for a certain wage, that wage is what you’ve earned, or deserve. Any thing on top of that is gravy, and it’s gravy that is up to the discretion of the person offering it. If you’re worried about getting “shorted, you’d better get the details ironed out beforehand. Basic business.

 

It is his business, but we also have a right to call out his business for being cheap.

 

As for getting the details iron out beforehand, how would you feel if you were one of Kuchar's sponsors? Here we pay good money to associate our brand with this guy and this is the kind of image he is projecting? I would want that detail sorted out beforehand, and if it wasn't it for certain would be now. I would think twice about continuing our relationship if this is what our money gets us: stiffing Mexican caddies.

 

Did you hear the fans at Phoenix? The sponsors heard that a lot more than they’re hearing this thread. I’ll bet you Skechers doesn’t suddenly drop him.

[Jagpilotohio]

 

 

And I’ll tell you how this whole pathetic thing got started.....

 

How much cash did Kuchar actually have on him or have access to in Mexico?? I’d be willing to bet that he gave Tucan everything he had at the moment. I’m also betting Tucan didn’t want a personal check.

 

No one is cruising around Mexico with a giant wad of cash other than the Drug lords.....and maybe Phil....LOL!!

 

There’s a reason he got paid in a lot of small bills in a thick envelope. Kuch certainly cleaned out the ATM machine at the resort and the front desk.

 

The resorts deliberately keep very limited cash on hand to avoid getting jacked. Most things are on credit card. What do you think the odds are that Tucan was SUPPOSED to get more money later via a wire transfer and things somehow went terribly sideways?

 

 

[jacobEDGE]

 

Jacob, similar to my reply to Jay. If you’re basing anything off a tip or gratuity, that amount is at the discretion of the person leaving it. If you want to make sure it’s going to be certain amount you have to iron out the details up front. I really don’t think comparing percentages on a $100 tab as opposed to a $1.3 million one is apples to apples.

 

And when that information is public knowledge, or shared with the public, we (as the public) have every right to comment about it. If my friend left less than 1% tip on our dinner bill, I'd absolutely call them out on it.

 

Was Kuchar cheap or not, no my place to say. Again, my contention all along has been it’s noone else’s business. If what’s his name had never gotten involved, any bets the caddie would still be happy with what he received? Too many people these days stick8mg their nose in where it doesn’t belong.

 

I mean, I feel like anyone on Earth would agree that a 0.15% tip is cheap. Regardless of the numbers involved. Regardless of the job involved. Regardless of the services rendered. If you tip less than a single percent, that's objectively cheap.

[deadsolid...shank]

A reminder that political discussions are prohibited.

 

Keep responses civil and free of politics. Move on to another topic or away from the keyboard if you are unable to do so.

 

I’m going to heed that advice and move away from the keyboard for a while.

 

That lasted all of 7 minutes Sir.

 

I’m trying, I really am.

[sevenputts]

At this point Kuchar should take $50k and burn it on the dirt road in front of El Tucan’s house.

wtf ?

[McGee72]

Not sure why he wouldn’t accept the extra money even if its not the $50k... His common law wife obviously has expensive taste spending that $5k on paint, blinds, and a mirror.

[deadsolid...shank]

 

Jacob, similar to my reply to Jay. If you’re basing anything off a tip or gratuity, that amount is at the discretion of the person leaving it. If you want to make sure it’s going to be certain amount you have to iron out the details up front. I really don’t think comparing percentages on a $100 tab as opposed to a $1.3 million one is apples to apples.

 

And when that information is public knowledge, or shared with the public, we (as the public) have every right to comment about it. If my friend left less than 1% tip on our dinner bill, I'd absolutely call them out on it.

 

 

You just hit the nail on the head. This isn’t, or rather shouldn’t have been, public knowledge. If Gillis doesn’t stick his nose in there, everyone is happy. Because you can bet the caddie was tickled to death with his $5,000 until someone told him he “deserved” more.

 

Heres a thought, if Gillis is so concerned with the caddies welfare, why doesn’t he pony up the money?

[jholz]

Ah, you just gotta love the lingering impact of Milton Friedman on ethics and economic matters. As those of us in this thread are currently experiencing, it is tough to reconcile a theory that predicts good outcomes from bad behavior.

[jacobEDGE]

I personally place the blame on Steinberg.

 

This is pure speculation on my end, but considering the emails were went to Steinberg, I have a feeling the $45,000 request never even met Kuchar's ears. Steinberg is doing his job, being an agent and thinking about his client's money first and foremost. Probably declined the $45,000 request and countered with $15,000 all without Kuchar's knowledge.

 

Had Toucan had Kuchar's personal email or phone number, and sent the $45,000 request personally to Kuchar? I could see him saying "Yeah, no problem buddy. You did great and I can't wait to see you again next year!"

[Man_O_War]

I personally place the blame on Steinberg.

 

This is pure speculation on my end, but considering the emails were went to Steinberg, I have a feeling the $45,000 request never even met Kuchar's ears. Steinberg is doing his job, being an agent and thinking about his client's money first and foremost. Probably declined the $45,000 request and countered with $15,000 all without Kuchar's knowledge.

 

Had Toucan had Kuchar's personal email or phone number, and sent the $45,000 request personally to Kuchar? I could see him saying "Yeah, no problem buddy. You did great and I can't wait to see you again next year!"

 

 

can't be,... he said non issue... he paid more than 3K...it was 5K.

[shoot4par]

So he felt he was worth a 3.85% cut instead of the 0.385% he initially got.

 

When you succeed and you were assisted you take care of the right people, its that simple.

 

Neither now looks good and it was an embarrassingly cheap move at the outset.

 

Surely a decent manager/agent would have seen that coming.

 

It should come down to the simple fact - his name and brand should have taken precedence over the almighty dollar. Even if you don't agree upon the standard 10%, fifty grand changes someones life and casts you in a somewhat positive light. Simply put- be ethical when you achieve success. Still, nothing Steiny does will ever make him less of sleezball. He's not in it for a better business bureau rating (kidding).

[Obee]

Some of you on this thread on Team Kuchar need to read up on the a fallacy known (among other names) as the "continuum fallacy," or "fallacy of the beard."

 

Being cheap is a thing. Being generous is a thing. Just because some of you can't put an exact number on what is cheap doesn't mean that there isn't a thing called "being cheap."

 

So just stop with this "I don't know how much he should have given him, so therefore it can't have been cheap." None of you are actually saying those words, but that is, nevertheless, your argument. That's flat-out fallacious reasoning.

 

No tip on top of the $3,000 would have been cheap. $1.00 would have been cheap. (Virtually) everyone would agree with that. And so on, up to a certain point that varies from individual to individual. At some point we all have a point at which the tip becomes "reasonable," and then flows over into "generous." That is a given.

 

This is really the only argument here from those of us on Team Toucan. That's it. We're literally arguing about the definition of cheap in this instance, which is why I posted my question earlier in the thread. I really wish some of you guys on Team Kuchar would answer it, because I think it would help minimize the snark.

[SwooshLT]

Kuchar 100% took advantage of the situation. It was his first win in 4 years with a fill in caddie and he probably thought he could offer way less than usual and keep most of his earnings. Even with the extra $15,000 being offered, it's a very bad look on Kuchars part. He could have been a hero in this situation. Get the win, help a local and his family out and set them up nicely for the future. As a touring pro, he should know better than anyone else that caddying at local courses isn't the most glamorous or most well paid jobs out there. No matter what was "agreed" upon beforehand, Kuchar should have ponied up.

 

And bravo for the caddy for turning down the extra $15,000. The guy is sticking to his principles and you have to admire him for that. Anyone who has ever thought they should deserve something should never settle for less.

 

What exactly does he “deserve”? Don’t you “deserve” what you agreed to work for when you’ve satisfactorily completed the job?

 

So many people saying he “deserves” 10%. Well hell, why stop there, why not 20%, or 50%... ?

 

Earned?

[ebrasmus21]

Some of you on this thread on Team Kuchar need to read up on the a fallacy known (among other names) as the "continuum fallacy," or "fallacy of the beard."

 

Being cheap is a thing. Being generous is a thing. Just because some of you can't put an exact number on what is cheap doesn't mean that there isn't a thing called "being cheap."

 

So just stop with this "I don't know how much he should have given him, so therefore it can't have been cheap." None of you are actually saying those words, but that is, nevertheless, your argument. That's flat-out fallacious reasoning.

 

No tip on top of the $3,000 would have been cheap. $1.00 would have been cheap. (Virtually) everyone would agree with that. And so on, up to a certain point that varies from individual to individual. At some point we all have a point at which the tip becomes "reasonable," and then flows over into "generous." That is a given.

 

This is really the only argument here from those of us on Team Toucan. That's it. We're literally arguing about the definition of cheap in this instance, which is why I posted my question earlier in the thread. I really wish some of you guys on Team Kuchar would answer it, because I think it would help minimize the snark.

 

I could see myself paying an agreed rate for services whether that’s 3k or 5k or whatever. Winning with a resort caddie I could realistically see myself paying maybe another 35k. Not sure how cheap that would make me in this situation.

 

In the other thread I never defended Kuchar and his cheapness. I was only pointing out that at that point in time we didn’t have the facts and there was a whole lot of speculation going on.

 

As I said before, I am not and have never been a fan of Kuchar.

[Smooth spin scott]

Maybe a good time for the PGA tour to institute rules and percentages for any sanctioned PGA event where a Tour Pro and "parking lot" caddie know exactly what the percentage and caddie fee are to be paid at the end of a tournament...including caddie fee for tournament and % of winnings etc. Tips are up to the individual pro.

 

Easy peasy this never happens again.

[MidwestGolfBum]

Jacob, similar to my reply to Jay. If you're basing anything off a tip or gratuity, that amount is at the discretion of the person leaving it. If you want to make sure it's going to be certain amount you have to iron out the details up front. I really don't think comparing percentages on a $100 tab as opposed to a $1.3 million one is apples to apples.

 

And when that information is public knowledge, or shared with the public, we (as the public) have every right to comment about it. If my friend left less than 1% tip on our dinner bill, I'd absolutely call them out on it.

 

 

You just hit the nail on the head. This isn't, or rather shouldn't have been, public knowledge. If Gillis doesn't stick his nose in there, everyone is happy. Because you can bet the caddie was tickled to death with his $5,000 until someone told him he "deserved" more.

 

Heres a thought, if Gillis is so concerned with the caddies welfare, why doesn't he pony up the money?

 

I think we all know the answer to that last question... he likes the limelight this brought to him, he could actually care less about what the caddie gets.

[TheCityGame]

I just can't imaging winning $1.3 million and somehow feeling that $5K makes for an acceptable payment to someone with whom I spent four days of what should have been a memorable and special weekend in my career. Was Kuchar within his rights to only pay his caddie $5K? Yes, absolutely he was within his rights and does not "owe" him a cent more. Is he a complete a****!@ for doing so? Yes, absolutely.

This is because you have a characteristic called empathy and you're able to distinguish between "what is right" and "what you have the right to do".

 

When I click "post", it's the last time I enter this thread; I generally try to remain oblivious (when I can) to the worst part of golf. . .the people it attracts.

[Man_O_War]

after all is said and done.. he has time to make this right. ..that would be a decent person saying... i ffffed up... let's do this the proper way once and for all. heck do it in public. it's ok. that flunky smile will be come real to me

[ProphetLogic]

What if you were to order a solid gold pizza with diamonds instead of pepperonis. Do you tip the delivery driver for delivering a pizza or do you tip based on the price of gold? Questions without answers. Riddles of the universe my friends.

[Dpavs]

This is just becoming a rehash of what has already been said and argued.

 

So I guess my final thought is simply that Kuch might have just as well offered this advice to El Tucan at the end of the Tourney...

 

..

[Obee]

Some of you on this thread on Team Kuchar need to read up on the a fallacy known (among other names) as the "continuum fallacy," or "fallacy of the beard."

 

Being cheap is a thing. Being generous is a thing. Just because some of you can't put an exact number on what is cheap doesn't mean that there isn't a thing called "being cheap."

 

So just stop with this "I don't know how much he should have given him, so therefore it can't have been cheap." None of you are actually saying those words, but that is, nevertheless, your argument. That's flat-out fallacious reasoning.

 

No tip on top of the $3,000 would have been cheap. $1.00 would have been cheap. (Virtually) everyone would agree with that. And so on, up to a certain point that varies from individual to individual. At some point we all have a point at which the tip becomes "reasonable," and then flows over into "generous." That is a given.

 

This is really the only argument here from those of us on Team Toucan. That's it. We're literally arguing about the definition of cheap in this instance, which is why I posted my question earlier in the thread. I really wish some of you guys on Team Kuchar would answer it, because I think it would help minimize the snark.

 

I could see myself paying an agreed rate for services whether that’s 3k or 5k or whatever. Winning with a resort caddie I could realistically see myself paying maybe another 35k. Not sure how cheap that would make me in this situation.

 

In the other thread I never defended Kuchar and his cheapness. I was only pointing out that at that point in time we didn’t have the facts and there was a whole lot of speculation going on.

 

As I said before, I am not and have never been a fan of Kuchar.

 

Thanks. Now we're getting somewhere. :-)

 

And I use "Team Kuchar" loosely. ;-)

 

Yeah, my advice to Kuchar would have been: "Golly, Kuch, depending on the deal worked out with the player, Tour caddies get ~10% of a win, right? He's a resort caddie, so maybe half that? $40k to $60k?"

 

edited to add: I definitely don't think $25k additional would have fit my (or most people's definition of) cheap. This isn't even a "thing" if he had given him $25k additional.

[bscinstnct]

Few years back, my nephew looped 18 holes for kooch and his buddy at TPC Ponte Vedra before the tournament. Typical north Florida day, 90 degrees and 90% humidity. Mister kooch drops him a $20 for the effort. Dude is cheap and that's all there is to it.

 

Thats kooch for ya.

 

 

[Z1ggy16]

From this article

Ortiz said that Kuchar said at the start of the tournament that he would be paid $3,000 for the week, plus an unspecified percentage of his winnings.

 

So from Caddie POV, he was paid his firm $3k plus much less than the typical 10% "tip" one might get from a win. Math says he got .1% of Kuch's pay day which... if they didn't actually hand shake on a number, still does seem pretty (actually quite) low, I'll give him that. However, with translation being a major factor here, who knows if there was a misunderstanding between the two. I'd like to think Kuch wouldn't short change a guy that bad, because he seems like a good dude. Seems like he tried to make good by offering $15k more but the proud Mexican already started digging his hole and is in deep.

 

Hopefully the friendly 'every day guy' personality Kuch has isn't a facade. Does sound like maybe Kuch has a rep for being stingy. Sad if true.

[Obee]

This is just becoming a rehash of what has already been said and argued.

 

So I guess my final thought is simply that Kuch might have just as well said to El Tucan at the end of the Tourney...

 

..

 

I beg your pardon, sir, but no one brought up the continuum fallacy in the previous thread if I'm not mistaken! ;-)

[ebrasmus21]

Some of you on this thread on Team Kuchar need to read up on the a fallacy known (among other names) as the "continuum fallacy," or "fallacy of the beard."

 

Being cheap is a thing. Being generous is a thing. Just because some of you can't put an exact number on what is cheap doesn't mean that there isn't a thing called "being cheap."

 

So just stop with this "I don't know how much he should have given him, so therefore it can't have been cheap." None of you are actually saying those words, but that is, nevertheless, your argument. That's flat-out fallacious reasoning.

 

No tip on top of the $3,000 would have been cheap. $1.00 would have been cheap. (Virtually) everyone would agree with that. And so on, up to a certain point that varies from individual to individual. At some point we all have a point at which the tip becomes "reasonable," and then flows over into "generous." That is a given.

 

This is really the only argument here from those of us on Team Toucan. That's it. We're literally arguing about the definition of cheap in this instance, which is why I posted my question earlier in the thread. I really wish some of you guys on Team Kuchar would answer it, because I think it would help minimize the snark.

 

I could see myself paying an agreed rate for services whether that’s 3k or 5k or whatever. Winning with a resort caddie I could realistically see myself paying maybe another 35k. Not sure how cheap that would make me in this situation.

 

In the other thread I never defended Kuchar and his cheapness. I was only pointing out that at that point in time we didn’t have the facts and there was a whole lot of speculation going on.

 

As I said before, I am not and have never been a fan of Kuchar.

 

Thanks. Now we're getting somewhere. :-)

 

And I use "Team Kuchar" loosely. ;-)

 

Yeah, my advice to Kuchar would have been: "Golly, Kuch, depending on the deal worked out with the player, Tour caddies get ~10% of a win, right? He's a resort caddie, so maybe half that? $40k to $60k?"

 

If I was a tour player and my colleagues and or agent said “dude a 35k bonus is way too cheap” then I could see myself bumping it up. Personally I have a hard time thinking that I’d give a “traditional” bonus.

[duffer987]

Some of you on this thread on Team Kuchar need to read up on the a fallacy known (among other names) as the "continuum fallacy," or "fallacy of the beard."

 

Being cheap is a thing. Being generous is a thing. Just because some of you can't put an exact number on what is cheap doesn't mean that there isn't a thing called "being cheap."

 

So just stop with this "I don't know how much he should have given him, so therefore it can't have been cheap." None of you are actually saying those words, but that is, nevertheless, your argument. That's flat-out fallacious reasoning.

 

No tip on top of the $3,000 would have been cheap. $1.00 would have been cheap. (Virtually) everyone would agree with that. And so on, up to a certain point that varies from individual to individual. At some point we all have a point at which the tip becomes "reasonable," and then flows over into "generous." That is a given.

 

This is really the only argument here from those of us on Team Toucan. That's it. We're literally arguing about the definition of cheap in this instance, which is why I posted my question earlier in the thread. I really wish some of you guys on Team Kuchar would answer it, because I think it would help minimize the snark.

I could care less whether people think he is cheap or not cheap - he obviously could have given the local caddie much much more. As could Cjeka the year before, but neither of them did.

You are missing (willfully or otherwise) a bunch of posts where people are making larger character and career missives about Kuchar based on this episode and inserting themselves into the episode and how they'd be so fantastic, not simply whether he was cheap and should have given more.

 

That is what a fair few people are countering here, not a definition of cheap.

[SMcGavin1]

 

What exactly does he “deserve”? Don’t you “deserve” what you agreed to work for when you’ve satisfactorily completed the job?

 

So many people saying he “deserves” 10%. Well hell, why stop there, why not 20%, or 50%... ?

 

I never said what he deserves. But he obviously thinks he deserves more than what he got, so why settle for what he thinks isn't enough? You even said earlier that you would have paid more in this situation, meaning you think he deserves more as well. Whatever figure that is isn't for anyone of us to decide except for Kuchar and the caddy. My opinion is that Kuchar took advantage of him.

 

I don’t necessarily feel he deserves more, because I don’t know exactly what he did. I would have given more because I typically tip more than average. That’s just different people.

 

I’ve never said anything about whether I feel what Kuchar did was right or wrong, because it’s his business. I’me very pragmatic though, if you sign on to do a job for a certain wage, that wage is what you’ve earned, or deserve. Any thing on top of that is gravy, and it’s gravy that is up to the discretion of the person offering it. If you’re worried about getting “shorted, you’d better get the details ironed out beforehand. Basic business.

 

It is his business, but we also have a right to call out his business for being cheap.

 

As for getting the details iron out beforehand, how would you feel if you were one of Kuchar's sponsors? Here we pay good money to associate our brand with this guy and this is the kind of image he is projecting? I would want that detail sorted out beforehand, and if it wasn't it for certain would be now. I would think twice about continuing our relationship if this is what our money gets us: stiffing Mexican caddies.

 

Did you hear the fans at Phoenix? The sponsors heard that a lot more than they’re hearing this thread. I’ll bet you Skechers doesn’t suddenly drop him.

 

Where's the story about the fans at Phoenix? I don't see it anywhere, but this El Toucan thing is the biggest story right now in golf, front page on Golf.com.

 

And the thing about no one knowing about this if it wasn't for Tom Gillis is total BS. This would have gotten out. The caddy was not thrilled with the 5k he got, he was shocked, just like we all have been when we are stiffed on a tip. I'm sure he shared that with other caddies or friends and the story leaked from there. This being a story is all on Kuchar. He should have nipped this in the bud when it first popped up, but just like many in the public eye, he mis-represented the truth and hoped it would go away.

[Dpavs]

This is just becoming a rehash of what has already been said and argued.

 

So I guess my final thought is simply that Kuch might have just as well said to El Tucan at the end of the Tourney...

 

..

 

I beg your pardon, sir, but no one brought up the continuum fallacy in the previous thread if I'm not mistaken! ;-)

 

lol, I stand corrected :)

[Matt J]

100% agree Obee. It would have not been a story had he gave him $40k to $60k.

 

I think $15k on top of the $5k and there's no story had it been delivered immediately not in response to being called out.

 

Everybody has an opinion, fair, not fair, but I lost respect for Kuch. Where I'm from those alligator arms are stereotypical of alums from his alma mater... I wouldn't have guessed he would fit that stereotype.