coverimage
2

FLASHPOINT Slams CSPPA With Multiple Allegations, Withholds $165,000 Payment

Aditya Singh Rawat
1/Jul/2020 09:29 pm
  • FLASHPOINT has raised multiple allegations against CSPPA on various counts.
  • FLASHPOINT has reportedly refused to pay CSPPA a previously set amount of $165,000 until these alleged concerns don't get rectified.
  • CSPPA has refuted these allegations by calling them false and will be providing a detailed statement tomorrow.

FLASHPOINT has come out all guns blazing against CSPPA (Counter-Strike Professional Players’ Association) as the tournament organizer has reportedly refused to pay a previously set amount of $165,000 to CSPPA unless specific requests are satisfied.

The amount being withheld by FLASHPOINT is for the player’s intellectual property rights for the opening season. This payment is being withheld due to multiple reasons against CSPPA which have been pointed out by FLASHPOINT in the letter obtained by DBLTAP.

[Also Read: CSPPA Discuses Player Safety with ESL and Flashpoint over Coronavirus Concerns]


FLASHPOINT’s Allegations Against CSPPA

According to the letter written by the tournament organizer to CSPPA, the latter has been accused of allegedly causing FLASHPOINT and its players loss of revenue, disrupting the tournament operations, failure to create an independent ranking system, a potential conflict of interest, and lack of transparency.

  • The first complaint shines a light on an incident where FLASHPOINT alleges that it lost sponsorship revenue for both the league and the players due to CSPPA not responding to several important requests made by FLASHPOINT.

  • In the second complaint, FLASHPOINT alleges that CSPPA refused to participate in any reasonable discussions regarding FLASHPOINT rules, especially those surrounding fining procedures. Due to this, no fining rules were in place for the first season of the league, hence FLASHPOINT was apparently not able to incentivize players to comply with the rest of rules.

    This apparently led to players repeatedly being late and delaying the broadcasts on multiple occasions, which in turn negatively affected production resulting in a degraded viewing experience for the consumers.

    “It further undermines our value in the marketplace as we seek sponsors and other streams of revenue which would otherwise benefit both B Site (FLASHPOINT) and players.”
  • The third complaint pointed towards CSPPA’s alleged failure to create an independent, transparent, third-party competitive ranking system. FLASHPOINT claims to have requested CSPPA to commit to a ranking system that was not based on an algorithm which would devalue player wellness, for which they even introduced them to HLTV’s leadership in February to discuss the possibility of adapting their current rankings in a more player-approved manner.

    But despite their efforts, the outcome was disappointing as FLASHPOINT claims that they still haven’t seen CSPPA take any action towards creating this ranking system.

  • The fourth complaint claims that members of CSPPA were involved in a conflict of interest as members of CSPPA’s core leadership were called out for acting as player agents in the FunPlus-Heroic deal.

    FLASHPOINT claims that as CSPPA leadership were advising the Heroic lineup with the deal, they allegedly used confidential information outside of the transaction to strategically advice the players to demand higher salaries. Due to which the FunPlus-Heroic deal had a fallout and when CSPPA were contacted at the time, nothing was done to provide transparency on the matter.
  • The fifth and final complaint sees FLASHPOINT talk about CSPPA’s alleged transparency shortcomings in regards to ‘B Site-funded insurance policy’. FLASHPOINT goes on to claim that it has been difficult discussing the policy with CSPPA and that they believe no work is being done by them to assure the players and Valve that they are being represented ethically and in a transparent manner.

FLASHPOINT says that these alleged concerns have to be rectified before they can continue working together again. This time under a new agreement and with CSPPA self-funding themselves moving forward.


CSPPA was quick to respond to these allegations, as they Tweeted out a reply calling the allegations baseless and in no way related to relieving FLASHPOINT from its obligations to make the agreed payment of $165,000 when due.

They went on to state that a “Full statement addressing all the false allegations against the CSPPA will be released tomorrow.”

[Also Read: CSPPA Voices Concern Over Inadequate Team Break Between Matches]

The two organizations were on the verge of signing a three-year partnership contract as reported earlier, but with FLASHPOINT hitting CSPPA with such heavy allegations it seems unlikely that the two will be joining hands for a long term deal anytime soon.



Loading...
profilepic

Aditya Singh Rawattwitter_link

FOLLOW

Aditya Singh Rawat is the in-house CS:GO editor at AFK Gaming. While his understanding of the esports space is not restricted by geographical borders, his current focus lies in the Asian region. Understands and follows almost all major esport titles.