Taylor Caby

Had a fun time talking to these guys about my poker career!

@jesswelman I think the more interesting question is why exactly is the other company doing that deal

I'm a bit baffled why an MLB team would sign a sports betting partnership with a group that is not licensed to operate in its state nor any state surrounding it, but OK, sure.

@EzraMoGee Fair point, not really sure there

@taylorcaby the best pitchers won’t want to play for the team?

I've always wondered why MLB teams don't move their fences in. The offensive explosion of the steroid era was widely considered a huge boost to the excitement of the game. Why not move fences in across the league, increasing scoring, while also creating room to sell more seats?

@marinadgal @EzraMoGee Thank you both, and right back at you!

@EzraMoGee @taylorcaby Total legend!

helping to build cardrunners alongside @taylorcaby was THE formative experience of my career more importantly, my deep friendship with taylor has proved more valuable in my life than almost any other relationship. he is a true legend.

@nw3 @conorsen Yes, almost noted that as well

@taylorcaby @conorsen They’re marketing to Gen Z men.

I don’t get this media strategy, and makes me more skeptical about what they’re trying to build.

We disagree on the way it's been managed. I think the NFL has largely been great at making sure the game evolves in a way that's both safer and still interesting to watch. So many rules are dramatically different compared to how it was when I was a kid. I'm not saying there haven't been mistakes...I just think it's hard for me to look at the evolution of the game compared to the other big leagues and think they've done worse. And if it's simply just a more interesting game to watch, why wasn't football always "king?" The league has been steadily gaining on the other leagues for like 40 or 50 years now. With that said, I do think there are structural advantages that play really well in today's society. The nature of the game makes it so it's pretty hard to be truly oversaturated beacuse the players need to rest after playing. FWIW - the thoughts about working on the space were not at all directed at you or anyone specifically. Just a general observation I have noticed (and felt) from working in the space for a long time. I consider myself very lucky to be able to do it, but there's a something of a hidden "cost" to it. Which I try to always keep in mind how happy I am to pay that cost vs the alternatives, but it's still there. I think many working in sports share and sometimes express feelings about the costs and it leads to a perception gap on here vs typical fans. Ultimately, the net result of these policy changes I think will be more money for the league, which trickles down to many in the ecosystem, including us.

I'm probably referring to things that don't actually impact the bottom line and are less about the business, which would be a mischaracterization on my part, but I do believe there are a lot of things you're crediting the league for that basically a group of monkeys could do right with a sport that is just more interesting than other sports in its blend of physicality and strategy, plus the weekly nature of games, etc. In my opinion, it's captivating not because the NFL is well-run, but because football is king. That said, your point is taken. A big part of my point is about the way they run the sport, from the way they've handled refereeing (from a couple angles), to rules changes, to stuff like reviews, to player misconduct stuff, all of which tends to be reactionary/PR-focused, rather than proactive. My long-held opinion has been that they needed to make more unpopular decisions for the betterment of the game a long time before they actually addressed some of those things, because they should be the informed experts. They've been better about some of this. The hip drop rule would be Exhibit A for me where not just casual fans but supposedly well-informed media made a massive mistake in covering that and it's been a total nonissue that also improved player health since the rule was instituted. Unpopular rule, better for the game. But to your points, most of those things aren't negatively impactful to franchise valuations, which I didn't articulate well in that post but did hint at in the one reply I threaded beneath it (linked below). Also, while I totally agree with your points about working in the space, my personal thoughts were not informed by them (not that I took your comments as a direct response to me in that regard). x.com/YardsPerGretch…

The NFL has always fundamentally misunderstood why it is such a cash cow, but if their lust for more games leads to random deactivations of fantasy stars on Sunday mornings, they will seriously damage that hobby for casuals, which would be the biggest misstep yet.

I disagree that the NFL misunderstands why they are successful. I think they are by far the best run American sports league and that is a major part of why the league has performed so well over the last few decades -- highest revenue, highest franchise values, biggest audience, biggest cultural impact, etc. There are competing interests for every move the NFL makes. Fantasy football is one of them. I'd note that fantasy football is more popular than ever, with ESPN announcing last fall that 14 million players played in leagues on their platform, their fourth straight year of all-time highs. To speak to the specific issue below - "surprise deactivations" and its potential impact on fantasy football popularity: 1. The NFL is by far the best sport with injury info. There are very few surprises by the time inactives hit each week due to reporting that is made publicly available well ahead of Sunday at 1ET. I would expect there to be significant reporting - and fan interest, around what fantasy players are likely to sit and when. Similar to how there is much discussion late in the season about which players might rest ahead of the playoffs. Very rarely are there surprises near kickoff. 2. Fantasy football platforms now access all relevant injury information and provide push notifications when you are starting a player that is not expected to play. 3. If the above doesn't prevent this from being an issue, platforms will move towards auto-substitutions of injured or resting players. This is already an option on some platforms. ----- What I think is actually misunderstood is that fantasy football is fundamentally a game for the most engaged football fans. It's just not a big ask for this group of fans to engage more with the game and league over time -- at the expense of other leagues and activities. I know for me personally, I used to follow all of the professional leagues seriously, and now I follow the NFL 365 days a year and the other leagues in a more casual way. When I talk to people who are more casual fans of the NFL, I don't hear strong opinions about having more games on TV or a longer season. It's not something that really has any positive or negative impact on them. What I think is really driving the sentiment against NFL expansion online is that for people who work in sports (especially online) it feels, accurately, as if the commitment required to do the job well continues to increase. This is true - both because of these changes in the NFL, but also the nature of competition on the internet. Everyday there are more sources of content and products targeted at this massive audience. It's brutally difficult to keep up, and you feel it when you work in that type of environment. I remember predictions starting two decades ago that the NFL was taking expansion "too far" as they expanded into Thursday night football, Saturday games, internationally, and more. Someday we will hit a saturation point, and hopefully the NFL will be wise enough to pull back at that point. I just don't think there's any reason to think we're there yet.

@DougPolkVids Congrats!!

Welcome to the world, Georgia Ann Polk! Proud to officially be on Team Girl Dad

🚨 New episode alert! @jesselearmonth sits down with @taylorcaby from @EstablishTheRun to share the story behind building the evolution of betting content, the business of premium sports analysis, and why high-quality information products continue to thrive in an increasingly crowded sports betting ecosystem. Full episode here Youtube: youtu.be/9JcX2LkcSFU Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-… Spotify: open.spotify.com/episode/1YGM7N…

Incredible read: 60 New Yorkers on how much they made last year. Midtown coffee cart guy made as much as a NYT Bestselling Author with 800k IG followers. Both made 1/3 as much as a server at a midtown power lunch spot & less than a traveling lice lady. archive.is/ezKAu

@lulumeservey It's been really surprising to me the extent that so many people simply don't seem to care about this. Other forms of media are very likely to be called out as "AI," but text rarely is.

Next can there be a “Written by AI” label on generated posts? Even if a human is hitting cmd+v and posting, it’s bot content It’s fake and lazy, clogs the feed with slop, and contributes to cognitive decay The digital town square has a zombie infestation

I would guess they believe at least one of these are true, but can’t say this directly as it’s unpopular with both employees and customers: 1. They over-hired in the past on the fraud team (and probably across teams) - very common/normal in hyper growth companies 2. They believe or know that AI will allow the remaining employees to be more efficient and match the output of the previous group of employees.

@TheNickRudman @HaydenWinks Aren’t fraud concerns directly related to drafts for most players? Laying off people players trusted isn’t great “showing”

Seen a lot of convo of how the recent layoffs impacts Drafts. Drafts will continue to improve, we're going to keep building them, any layoffs related to Fraud are not related to Drafts. We're going to Show more than Tell here re Drafts and product updates but we wanted to provide some clarity given the discourse.

Yeah I'm definitely not feeling bad for him, just trying to understand what the inputs are. People do get bad advice all the time, for what it's worth. And the guys making the mega contracts are probably much more equipped to handle these situations for a few reasons. The whole situation remains absurd as standard operating procedure, IMO.

He wouldn’t have had to move. He could have still kept AZ as his offseason home if he’s fine with the state taxes there. And a signing bonus is the opposite of a deferral, but you know that. My point is, he’s either being disingenuous or got bad advice, and I’m not going to feel bad for someone crying poverty who’s made $36million the past 6 years not counting the additional $40 he signed for over the next two.

LMAOOOOO!!!! This is so dumb.

I see what you're saying. One issue is that for a 3 year deal, he basically then "has" to leave to not pay the tax on the bulk of his income, assuming he deferred his comp. Right? Regardless, I get why someone would just say they don't want to deal with it if it's a close call. And all of this is setting aside the absurdity that this is just how contracts have to get structured...and it's "ok." Kind of a slap in the face to the people that can't afford to defer income and move to avoid tax. Totally separate conversation, though.

@taylorcaby @MoDakhil_NBA Ohtani, Tucker, Snell. All of them.

@AlZeidenfeld @MoDakhil_NBA Do you mean like Ohtani's deal, deferring most of the comp until he (presumably) leaves CA? Or something else?

@MoDakhil_NBA Also, any athletes not coming to CA because of taxes has bad agents and financial planners that don’t understand the landscape.

@abarber1 @lakelikeglass19 @MicheleSteele None of that really matters. IL politicians understand how deeply unpopular losing the Bears is, and they have a great offer to leave. None of this is a judgement about what is right or wrong. I just think this can't only be analyzed from a dollars & cents standpoint.

@lakelikeglass19 @taylorcaby @MicheleSteele There's *lots* of evidence that publicly-funded stadiums are a raw deal for local governments and basically a fiscal transfer to owners. Eventually cities have to say "no". If enough do, the private money will be there.

Amazing. Why bring in another investor if the public is willing to make you liquid without any dilution of your control of the team. You get to rake in (even more) cash without selling any part of the underlying asset