Grant Horvat not playing in the Barracuda

[Titleist99]

8 hours ago, Lord Viking said:

Entertainment with some is excellent. 

You'll see a side of the pros that play with them that you'd never see anywhere else.  Phil, JT, Rahm are entertaining as hell out there.

Tiger, DJ & Nelly are actually pretty boring when they're not hitting great golf shots.

You either love golf or you dont. 

Watch whatever you want

 

Watching Touring Pros act goofy. Entertaining? Only in golf does anyone care bout an athlete's personality. That's hilarious!

 

For some, enjoy.

 

 

[Titleist99]

Internet content.

 

Next, people will be watching a touring Pro hit balls over his house and call that entertainment. 🤣

[GG43]

I don't watch much youtube golf but from what I've seen of Horvat, he seems like a good guy.  He should have put aside his business ventures and played simply from an experience and reputational standpoint.  Not many people get an opportunity like this and I think he whiffed on this decision.  

[Mr.Cleeks]

14 hours ago, knock it close said:

Phil's in Grant's ear, Phil told him not to play without his crew/monetization, LIV will let him do it at some mickey mouse event and Phill will claim it as some massive W over the oppressive PGA tour.

 

Yawn

The statement he put out sounds exactly like the media rights stuff Phil was complaining about before he went to liv. 

[Frank Newport]

Is he a “scratch”? I have an idea.

[TheOverratedPhotog]

I think people are vastly underestimating the situation. The guy isn't a narcissist as some have claimed. He is a golfer and a businessman. Not just a businessman, a very successful one at that, I'm guessing the guy is earning in excess of $5 million a year. The guy is a big enough name to be snagging videos with Tiger and Rory doing the kinds of things he is doing now. People will argue that the PGA is doing him a favour but let's be realistic here, Grant isn't winning a PGA event any time in the near future so what is in it for him? He’s probably going to go out and miss a cut, so what is the PGA offering him other than an opportunity to experience something most people dream about. At this point he’s playing the duels with Rahm, Bryson and Phil so I'm guessing playing with some of the best isn't as big a deal as it once was.

 

So, I think he's right to ask for exclusions. He isn't going to post a video live which is when the prime viewership is being experienced for the PGA. It’s going to get cut and edited for days before it gets posted, but what it will do is change the landscape of media rights the next time they get negotiated, so allowances are made for YouTube golfers. He may not get what he wants now, but he will get it in future.

 

A lot of people will say the PGA doesn't need youtubers, but the next generation of golfers don't watch PGA events. At my course, there is a generation of golfers who haven't watched a televised PGA event ever, but they watch heaps of youtube golf. It’s sad, but the younger generation are different to us. Television rights only mean something if people are watching and the numbers are reducing.

 

Specific Examples:

 

• The final round of the PGA Houston Open was down significantly from previous years, including a 34% drop from 2015. 
• The 2025 PGA Championship first round average viewership dropped under 1 million, after years of being above that mark. 
• Round 3 of the 2025 PGA Championship was down 12% from 2024, and the first two rounds also saw decreases. 

Grant Horvat is currently get 15-16 million views a month. Let that sink in. The problem with the way we look at golf is that we look at who is best, and we think that's entertainment. The next generation want their golf to be entertaining, friendly banter between golfers, and the likes of Wyndham Clark isn't making the PGA any easier to watch.

 

[solidcontact]

who? 

[MountainKing]

While I'm certain Grant doesn't have the game to compete on tour, that's a bit beside the point. His Youtube channel has almost as many subscribers as the PGA Tour channel.   Grant, and people like him are how young people are consuming golf.  The PGA tour not adopting to this might not be a blunder today, there's still enough guys like me who still tune in on some form of Dinosaur TV to watch, but at some point not getting in on that train might catch up to them.  IMO for futureproof, they should be looking to go all in on these Youtube guys and figuring out how they can support them.   Giving Grant what he wanted could have been a good trial run for the tour and give them some insight on how they can control it, vs fighting it. 

[UncleJohn’sBand]

36 minutes ago, Frank Newport said:

Is he a “scratch”? I have an idea.

Https://youtube.com/watch?v=HnW1ZqsRr8c

 

 

👍

Edited July 16 by UncleJohn’sBand

[dcmidnight]

Honestly I dont know if the PGAT could have allowed him to film even if they wanted to. Billion dollar contracts come with a lot of red tape so even if they wanted to team up with him, maybe there was legitimately nothing they could do.

 

And on that note....its honestly hard for me to believe someone who knows as much as Grant does about how the business works had *absolutely no idea* the PGAT wouldn't want him to have his own film crew out there during an event. Seems like now its a convenient excuse for him to back out.

 

As mentioned, he films a lot with Rahm, Bryson and Phil...gotta say its at least 50-50 he's in a LIV field before long.

[UncleJohn’sBand]

In all seriousness, George has “vlogged” a few of Wesley’s rounds at the RBC a few years back that was pretty cool. Just an outside the ropes view, so it definitely could have been done. 
 

I kinda agree on whiffing on the opportunity though. Like it’s a PGA tour event. You HAVE to tee it up, just to say you did it! 

[Titleist99]

30 minutes ago, TheOverratedPhotog said:

I think people are vastly underestimating the situation. The guy isn't a narcissist as some have claimed. He is a golfer and a businessman. Not just a businessman, a very successful one at that, I'm guessing the guy is earning in excess of $5 million a year. The guy is a big enough name to be snagging videos with Tiger and Rory doing the kinds of things he is doing now. People will argue that the PGA is doing him a favour but let's be realistic here, Grant isn't winning a PGA event any time in the near future so what is in it for him? He’s probably going to go out and miss a cut, so what is the PGA offering him other than an opportunity to experience something most people dream about. At this point he’s playing the duels with Rahm, Bryson and Phil so I'm guessing playing with some of the best isn't as big a deal as it once was.

 

So, I think he's right to ask for exclusions. He isn't going to post a video live which is when the prime viewership is being experienced for the PGA. It’s going to get cut and edited for days before it gets posted, but what it will do is change the landscape of media rights the next time they get negotiated, so allowances are made for YouTube golfers. He may not get what he wants now, but he will get it in future.

 

A lot of people will say the PGA doesn't need youtubers, but the next generation of golfers don't watch PGA events. At my course, there is a generation of golfers who haven't watched a televised PGA event ever, but they watch heaps of youtube golf. It’s sad, but the younger generation are different to us. Television rights only mean something if people are watching and the numbers are reducing.

 

Specific Examples:

 

• The final round of the PGA Houston Open was down significantly from previous years, including a 34% drop from 2015. 
• The 2025 PGA Championship first round average viewership dropped under 1 million, after years of being above that mark. 
• Round 3 of the 2025 PGA Championship was down 12% from 2024, and the first two rounds also saw decreases. 

Grant Horvat is currently get 15-16 million views a month. Let that sink in. The problem with the way we look at golf is that we look at who is best, and we think that's entertainment. The next generation want their golf to be entertaining, friendly banter between golfers, and the likes of Wyndham Clark isn't making the PGA any easier to watch.

 

 

Total nonsense.

 

The most recent PGAT event, the Travelers Championship, averaged 3.5 million viewers on CBS. UP 35%. Second most in 22 years.

 

*AS an aside. "Baby Shark Dance" had over 15 Billion views.  So, what.

 

 

[Frank Newport]

35 minutes ago, TheOverratedPhotog said:

I think people are vastly underestimating the situation. The guy isn't a narcissist as some have claimed. He is a golfer and a businessman. Not just a businessman, a very successful one at that, I'm guessing the guy is earning in excess of $5 million a year. The guy is a big enough name to be snagging videos with Tiger and Rory doing the kinds of things he is doing now. People will argue that the PGA is doing him a favour but let's be realistic here, Grant isn't winning a PGA event any time in the near future so what is in it for him? He’s probably going to go out and miss a cut, so what is the PGA offering him other than an opportunity to experience something most people dream about. At this point he’s playing the duels with Rahm, Bryson and Phil so I'm guessing playing with some of the best isn't as big a deal as it once was.

 

So, I think he's right to ask for exclusions. He isn't going to post a video live which is when the prime viewership is being experienced for the PGA. It’s going to get cut and edited for days before it gets posted, but what it will do is change the landscape of media rights the next time they get negotiated, so allowances are made for YouTube golfers. He may not get what he wants now, but he will get it in future.

 

A lot of people will say the PGA doesn't need youtubers, but the next generation of golfers don't watch PGA events. At my course, there is a generation of golfers who haven't watched a televised PGA event ever, but they watch heaps of youtube golf. It’s sad, but the younger generation are different to us. Television rights only mean something if people are watching and the numbers are reducing.

 

Specific Examples:

 

• The final round of the PGA Houston Open was down significantly from previous years, including a 34% drop from 2015. 
• The 2025 PGA Championship first round average viewership dropped under 1 million, after years of being above that mark. 
• Round 3 of the 2025 PGA Championship was down 12% from 2024, and the first two rounds also saw decreases. 

Grant Horvat is currently get 15-16 million views a month. Let that sink in. The problem with the way we look at golf is that we look at who is best, and we think that's entertainment. The next generation want their golf to be entertaining, friendly banter between golfers, and the likes of Wyndham Clark isn't making the PGA any easier to watch.

 

Check the trend of TV rights vs YouTube payouts. I assure you the people making the decisions on what to pay for each aren't using the metrics you mentioned.

 

[Frank Newport]

42 minutes ago, TheOverratedPhotog said:

I think people are vastly underestimating the situation. The guy isn't a narcissist as some have claimed. He is a golfer and a businessman. Not just a businessman, a very successful one at that, I'm guessing the guy is earning in excess of $5 million a year. The guy is a big enough name to be snagging videos with Tiger and Rory doing the kinds of things he is doing now. People will argue that the PGA is doing him a favour but let's be realistic here, Grant isn't winning a PGA event any time in the near future so what is in it for him? He’s probably going to go out and miss a cut, so what is the PGA offering him other than an opportunity to experience something most people dream about. At this point he’s playing the duels with Rahm, Bryson and Phil so I'm guessing playing with some of the best isn't as big a deal as it once was.

 

So, I think he's right to ask for exclusions. He isn't going to post a video live which is when the prime viewership is being experienced for the PGA. It’s going to get cut and edited for days before it gets posted, but what it will do is change the landscape of media rights the next time they get negotiated, so allowances are made for YouTube golfers. He may not get what he wants now, but he will get it in future.

 

A lot of people will say the PGA doesn't need youtubers, but the next generation of golfers don't watch PGA events. At my course, there is a generation of golfers who haven't watched a televised PGA event ever, but they watch heaps of youtube golf. It’s sad, but the younger generation are different to us. Television rights only mean something if people are watching and the numbers are reducing.

 

Specific Examples:

 

• The final round of the PGA Houston Open was down significantly from previous years, including a 34% drop from 2015. 
• The 2025 PGA Championship first round average viewership dropped under 1 million, after years of being above that mark. 
• Round 3 of the 2025 PGA Championship was down 12% from 2024, and the first two rounds also saw decreases. 

Grant Horvat is currently get 15-16 million views a month. Let that sink in. The problem with the way we look at golf is that we look at who is best, and we think that's entertainment. The next generation want their golf to be entertaining, friendly banter between golfers, and the likes of Wyndham Clark isn't making the PGA any easier to watch.

 

Anyone who films their "life" expecting others to be entertained by it is a narcissist. 

[5 O'Clock Charlie]

Yea I think a You Tube golfer should get a spot over someone cutting their teeth out there every week who actually needs the start to maybe help their season and career.  Call me old fashioned.

[dcmidnight]

21 minutes ago, MountainKing said:

IMO for futureproof, they should be looking to go all in on these Youtube guys and figuring out how they can support them.   Giving Grant what he wanted could have been a good trial run for the tour and give them some insight on how they can control it, vs fighting it. 

 

I think I mostly agree with this sentiment. But has it actually been proven (anywhere) yet that YouTube popularity in any way translates to good for business?  You hear this argument all the time.

 

LIV signed Rick Shiels at the beginning of the season and he has over *2x* the subs of Grant - yet their year has been as awful as ever in terms of ratings.

[MountainKing]

Just now, UncleJohn’sBand said:

In all seriousness, George has “vlogged” a few of Wesley’s rounds at the RBC a few years back that was pretty cool. Just an outside the ropes view, so it definitely could have been done. 
 

I kinda agree on whiffing on the opportunity though. Like it’s a PGA tour event. You HAVE to tee it up, just to say you did it! 

 

 

He probably doesn't need or want the stress that comes with competing, and then the ridicule he'll hear about how he's not good after he more than likely misses the cut. Based on his YT channel alone he probably pulls in the low millions, then add sponsor money into that.  He doesn't need to do anything and if he's smart with his money he'll be more than set for life with this.  He's in an awesome spot where he has complete control of what he does and what he wants to do.    With content creation being a much easier route to monetize than professional golf, I think you're going to see more and more really good players go that route vs trying to grind to make it on tour.   IMO when you have guys who are in a spot to say thanks but no thanks to what was once the golf dream, that's a sign the tour needs to start thinking about it's future and figuring out how they can get in on this.    

 

As a music guy, this is a very similar spot the music industry was in when MP3 technology came to be.  They had the opportunity to get in on it and control it, but they passed thinking it would just go away, and anybody into music knows how that all played out over the last 25 years. 

[WesternRacing]

10 hours ago, Chunked said:

Total BS. The pga tour has tons of YouTube content. They could have come up with something. They chose to not try. More of the same dumb crap they do where the pga tour struggles to get out of its own way to grow its audience. 

 

Yes, all on THEIR platform, under their content control, etc.  Entirely different than allowing a third party to film their event and monetize it themselves with no editorial control by the Tour.  Has the NBA ever allowed a summer league one and done to film a game and distribute the footage?

[UncleJohn’sBand]

10 minutes ago, MountainKing said:

 

 

He probably doesn't need or want the stress that comes with competing, and then the ridicule he'll hear about how he's not good after he more than likely misses the cut. Based on his YT channel alone he probably pulls in the low millions, then add sponsor money into that.  He doesn't need to do anything and if he's smart with his money he'll be more than set for life with this.  He's in an awesome spot where he has complete control of what he does and what he wants to do.    With content creation being a much easier route to monetize than professional golf, I think you're going to see more and more really good players go that route vs trying to grind to make it on tour.   IMO when you have guys who are in a spot to say thanks but no thanks to what was once the golf dream, that's a sign the tour needs to start thinking about it's future and figuring out how they can get in on this.    

 

As a music guy, this is a very similar spot the music industry was in when MP3 technology came to be.  They had the opportunity to get in on it and control it, but they passed thinking it would just go away, and anybody into music knows how that all played out over the last 25 years. 

And I guess that’s the double edge sword of this kinda stuff. The tour extends an invite to a guy who positions himself as and “elite” golfer, who monetized his skills in a different way…all for him to say no, and place the blame on the tour for not allowing him to monetize this particular version of golf.  
 

The MP3 example is great. I don’t think the tour ever thought this through past giving the exemption, and when he asked to film the event, it spooked them and they said absolutely not. Saying yes to filming could have been their Pandoras Box, and destroyed their stranglehold on the media rights. 

[Frank Newport]

31 minutes ago, dcmidnight said:

 

I think I mostly agree with this sentiment. But has it actually been proven (anywhere) yet that YouTube popularity in any way translates to good for business?  You hear this argument all the time.

 

LIV signed Rick Shiels at the beginning of the season and he has over *2x* the subs of Grant - yet their year has been as awful as ever in terms of ratings.

 

There is a ton of golfers who love playing golf and don't pay attention to anything else golf related.

There is also a ton of golf fans who don't play much but consume every piece of content of the golf entertainment universe (PGA Tour, Social Media, GolfWRX, etc.).

(And obviously there's a lot of golfers who fall in between)

 

To get one of these groups to start to adopt the practices of the other is extremely difficult and no one has really found a recipe to do so. For example, The Tiger Boom brought great TV ratings but it didn't exactly lead to the long-term growth of actual play by amateurs that many thought it would.

 

Overpaying for media personalities at the peak of their popularity isn't likely to pay big dividends for many of the stakeholders in the golf community (Tours, OEMs etc.).

 

Edited July 16 by Frank Newport

[WesternRacing]

1 hour ago, TheOverratedPhotog said:

I think people are vastly underestimating the situation. The guy isn't a narcissist as some have claimed. He is a golfer and a businessman. Not just a businessman, a very successful one at that, I'm guessing the guy is earning in excess of $5 million a year. The guy is a big enough name to be snagging videos with Tiger and Rory doing the kinds of things he is doing now. People will argue that the PGA is doing him a favour but let's be realistic here, Grant isn't winning a PGA event any time in the near future so what is in it for him? He’s probably going to go out and miss a cut, so what is the PGA offering him other than an opportunity to experience something most people dream about. At this point he’s playing the duels with Rahm, Bryson and Phil so I'm guessing playing with some of the best isn't as big a deal as it once was.

 

So, I think he's right to ask for exclusions. He isn't going to post a video live which is when the prime viewership is being experienced for the PGA. It’s going to get cut and edited for days before it gets posted, but what it will do is change the landscape of media rights the next time they get negotiated, so allowances are made for YouTube golfers. He may not get what he wants now, but he will get it in future.

 

A lot of people will say the PGA doesn't need youtubers, but the next generation of golfers don't watch PGA events. At my course, there is a generation of golfers who haven't watched a televised PGA event ever, but they watch heaps of youtube golf. It’s sad, but the younger generation are different to us. Television rights only mean something if people are watching and the numbers are reducing.

 

Specific Examples:

 

• The final round of the PGA Houston Open was down significantly from previous years, including a 34% drop from 2015. 
• The 2025 PGA Championship first round average viewership dropped under 1 million, after years of being above that mark. 
• Round 3 of the 2025 PGA Championship was down 12% from 2024, and the first two rounds also saw decreases. 

Grant Horvat is currently get 15-16 million views a month. Let that sink in. The problem with the way we look at golf is that we look at who is best, and we think that's entertainment. The next generation want their golf to be entertaining, friendly banter between golfers, and the likes of Wyndham Clark isn't making the PGA any easier to watch.

 

 

Again, the Tour didn’t give him a sponsor’s exemption.  The tournament director and sponsor determine the exemptions, not the PGA Tour.

 

Second, that bolded part.  15-16 million views a month is worth between $15k and $150k in YouTube revenues, depending upon his deal.  So high end, $1.8 million per annum.  Not exactly the gold mine of value people think it is, and that’s before deducting all the costs of producing videos and maintaining the channel.  The simple fact is that if any major sports league had to survive on the revenue from the YouTube audience, they’d go out of business right now.

 

Edited July 16 by WesternRacing

[TheOverratedPhotog]

2 minutes ago, WesternRacing said:

 

Again, the Tour didn’t give him a sponsor’s exemption.  The tournament director and sponsor determine the exemptions, not the PGA Tour.

 

Second, that bolded part.  15-16 million views a month is worth between $15k and $150k in YouTube revenues, depending upon his deal.  So high end, $1.8 million per annum.  Not exactly the gold mine of value people think it is, and that’s before deducting all the costs of producing videos and maintaining the channel.  The simple fact is that if any major sports league had to survive on the revenue from the YouTube audience, they’d go out of business right now.

 

 

That's revenue based purely on viewership. They make 5 times that in endorsements. He has shares in tokomo and other companies.

[straightshot7]

4 minutes ago, WesternRacing said:

 

Again, the Tour didn’t give him a sponsor’s exemption.  The tournament director and sponsor determine the exemptions, not the PGA Tour.

 

Second, that bolded part.  15-16 million views a month is worth between $15k and $150k in YouTube revenues, depending upon his deal.  So high end, $1.8 million per annum.  Not exactly the gold mine of value people think it is, and that’s before deducting all the costs of producing videos and maintaining the channel.  The simple fact is that if any major sports league had to survive on the revenue from the YouTube audience, they’d go out of business right now.

 

you’re not factoring in sponsorship money/product and apparel deals at all?

[Frank Newport]

22 minutes ago, MountainKing said:

 

 

He probably doesn't need or want the stress that comes with competing, and then the ridicule he'll hear about how he's not good after he more than likely misses the cut. Based on his YT channel alone he probably pulls in the low millions, then add sponsor money into that.  He doesn't need to do anything and if he's smart with his money he'll be more than set for life with this.  He's in an awesome spot where he has complete control of what he does and what he wants to do.    With content creation being a much easier route to monetize than professional golf, I think you're going to see more and more really good players go that route vs trying to grind to make it on tour.   IMO when you have guys who are in a spot to say thanks but no thanks to what was once the golf dream, that's a sign the tour needs to start thinking about it's future and figuring out how they can get in on this.    

 

As a music guy, this is a very similar spot the music industry was in when MP3 technology came to be.  They had the opportunity to get in on it and control it, but they passed thinking it would just go away, and anybody into music knows how that all played out over the last 25 years. 

 

This trend isn't going to last and a lot of PGA golfers who have been successful creating content were famous and successful before launching their content social media platforms. A lot of golfers just don't have the talent or personalities to launch a successful content channel.

[straightshot7]

Social media, YouTube, the internet in general — are all related. The way people consume content has changed.

 

its not just on TV now, it’s on the phone. It’s on the computer. 
 

this is only going to increase.

 

the argument that YouTube/Internet golf is not important gets dumber every day. 

[Frank Newport]

1 minute ago, TheOverratedPhotog said:

 

That's revenue based purely on viewership. They make 5 times that in endorsements. He has shares in tokomo and other companies.

i need actual numbers. A lot of golf brands are way smaller and less successful than many people realize. 

 

Callaway Golf has a market cap of ~$1.62 billion. They're not handing out multi-million dollar contracts to anyone not on the PGA Tour.

[TheOverratedPhotog]

48 minutes ago, Frank Newport said:

Check the trend of TV rights vs YouTube payouts. I assure you the people making the decisions on what to pay for each aren't using the metrics you mentioned.

 

 

I think you need to check the net worth on some of these youtube stars. Mr beast was offered a billion for his channel and does nearly half a billion in revenue every year. He may not be a golfer, but youtube is big money. 

[Frank Newport]

4 minutes ago, straightshot7 said:

Social media, YouTube, the internet in general — are all related. The way people consume content has changed.

 

its not just on TV now, it’s on the phone. It’s on the computer. 
 

this is only going to increase.

 

the argument that YouTube/Internet golf is not important gets dumber every day. 

The mistake people make is trying to equate the clicks a YouTube influencer gets to the way people consume PGA Tour Tournament content. 

 

A YouTuber might be getting 10 million+ plus views but the average length of view might be less than 1 minute with very few people sitting through the ads. Those views are almost worthless to advertisers.

 

A network might only get 1 million viewer for the final round of a tournament but the average length of view might be 1 hour plus with many of the viewers sitting through 15 minutes+ worth of commercials. PGA Tour Tournaments are also being consumed through many different outlets as well so that 1 million reported viewership for the network is underestimating how many people are actually watching tournaments. I follow tournaments through PGA TourCast and sometimes watch for 6+ hours at a time.

 

Don't equate these. I assure you advertisers don't and it's why you see TV rights exploding and $/click shrinking.

[MountainKing]

11 minutes ago, Frank Newport said:

 

This trend isn't going to last and a lot of PGA golfers who have been successful creating content were famous and successful before launching their content social media platforms. A lot of golfers just don't have the talent or personalities to launch a successful content channel.

 

It's like anything in life - not everybody is going to be successful at it, much like somebody trying to make it on tour, but even low level success in content creation is more likely and easier to make money doing than it is being a nobody on tour grinding week after week.    

 

Also—thinking this is just a trend is a mistake that a lot of older folks, likely including some PGAT leadership, are making. YouTubers have been around for 20 years (even longer if you count the pre-YouTube internet), and in the last 5 or so, they've really taken off in the golf world. The audience is only growing year over year.  You don't necessarily need talent, there's plenty of succesful youtube hacks that are heavily monetized. 

 

In 10 years, it might evolve or take a different form, but it's not a passing trend, and it's not going anywhere. Dismissing it as such is a huge misstep. The kids who are obsessed with this YouTube golf content aren't going to suddenly shift in five years and start consuming golf the way most of us over 40 do.  

[Frank Newport]

11 minutes ago, TheOverratedPhotog said:

 

I think you need to check the net worth on some of these youtube stars. Mr beast was offered a billion for his channel and does nearly half a billion in revenue every year. He may not be a golfer, but youtube is big money. 

That's $2.50 per subscriber for him. That would make GH's channel worth about $3.5 million and that's assuming GH's viewers sit through videos for as long as Mr. Beast's viewers.