Witz78 wrote:Before i start i will say that i totally commend what On Q Promotions have done with building and establishing their impressive Snooker Academy, as well as managing a wave of players, and having met the likes of Janie and Sarah i have no doubt that there 100% snooker people with their hearts in the right place, and from what ive heard of Paul Mount, he seems to be living a dream at the moment.
However i did stumble across a comment somewhere last week, on another site i think raising concerns that there may be a danger that OnQ could end up with political aspirations within the sport.
With the latest addition of Mark Allen, taking the stable of pros up to around 25 with numerous other amateurs also represented, is there a danger of On Q getting a monopoly of players interests and ultimately a lot of power within the game.
We did see this happen with 110sport in the past, and whilst i wouldnt compare On Q to them cowboys, its still a question that has to be raised IMO.
Id expect to get shot down to flames by some for even raising this subject, and i certainly dont expect, or wish for Sarah, Janie or anyone else to feel the need to defend or argue the case against.
Personally i dont really envisage any problems in the future, but it has crossed my mind that one party having a growing monopoly on players cant surely be healthy in the long run.
I do know that the Grove has a good few players on its books too, and it may just be that they are a smaller, London based version of On Q.
Firstly, I am more than happy to reply and hopefully ease some of your concerns and any concerns others may have. We have nothing to hide and have always operated transparently and will continue to do so. The only time I will not make a comment is on anything confidential for one of our clients or in a situation that does not involve us. Otherwise, try and shut me up
I assume the other comment you are referring to is the one on Pro Snooker Blog's post on Jamie Jones, Michael White and Liam Highfield joining On Q. If so, I have read and replied to that comment today as it was the first chance I have had to read the snooker sites since before the Pink Ribbon.
The addition of Mark Allen today has taken us to 23 clients. 6 of those are amateurs currently and the other 17 are professionals. I understand your concerns about On Q possibly having too much power with so many players on the books but when you consider the varying positions of those players you will see that each player has their own needs. They can be broken down into ranking categories to show this better. Currently we manage 1 top 16 player, 4 top 32 players (one of whom started last season in the top 48), 3 top 48 players (one of whom started last season in the top 64), 4 top 64 players (one of whom started last season outside the top 64), 5 players ranked 65-100. What I am trying to explain is that what may be best for Mr X in the top 32 may not be best for Mr Z outside the top 64 so we have to take each player as an individual and provide them with support tailored to their needs at any given time in their career. I think the issue of power is only a problem if your clients are all in a similar position and would therefore all benefit from certain decisions, or lose out from others.
We have a long term vision in place that will see our clients working as part of a cycle within the company. We envisage the amateurs replacing our 65-100 players, who have replaced our top 64 players, who have replaced our top 48 players and so on. This is obviously a long term plan which will work over many years. As our experienced players get older, we will have a new batch of experienced players to follow on from them when they retire. As you can see I am talking about long into the future here.
As I said on the post on Pro Snooker Blog, we are dedicated to working with World Snooker and the WPBSA to ensure that snooker goes from strength to strength. If everyone works together then in theory a greater product will be created and everyone will benefit from that, ourselves and our clients included. Therefore, both World Snooker and the WPBSA have our full support.
As you mention, the Grove are another management company within snooker who also have a number of clients. It would be nice to see more management companies within the game though as it can only help to improve the professionalism within snooker and go towards creating a sport that is even more marketable and sustainable. It is just important that any rivalries and competitiveness is kept on the table between the players.
I hope that helps to answer the questions and concerns you expressed. Please do feel free to ask any further questions as I am more than happy to answer them