In a recent article on SK Gaming, Michael 'Carmac' Blicharz took a swing against TUT (The Unnamed Team) for being the main reason why WC3-salaries have come out of proportion. This is not an attack on that article, but a mere explanation of the facts and history that Carmac chose not to include in his piece.

The main argument behind the article, is that the excessive amount of money TUT is putting into their WC3-squad is twisting the salary expectations for all the WC3 players. It does hold some truth, as money given to Player A will give Player B a better understanding of what he is worth; as in if Player B is better than Player A he will want to recieve more money than him.

That is pretty logical. But the rest of the equation just falls apart when the author wants to blame TUT. Because there has to be an organization to pay Player B the amount he wants. If there isn't, then Player B will have to lower his expectations to his salary to get a contract. Now, where in that part does TUT hold any responsibility?

One could probably argue that TUT's competitors will have to keep up with their wages, to keep up with their pace, which is not true.

Unless TUT would employ the entire top of the WarCraft-scene, there will still be plenty of good - and great - players left over for the competitors to capture.

And in a WC3-landscape where the last 3 top-tier events has had 3 different winners (KODE5, ESWC Masters and ESWC GF), other teams would still get champions.

One of TUT's competitors could be called Sauer Krauts. They employed a business-strategy much like TUT's; trying to get as many trophies as possible in as little time as possible, knowing that champions create fans and fans create good business.

They actually even did that, before TUT hit the WC3-market in the Summer 2004. At that point Sauer Krauts was already one of the biggest teams, with one of the best rosters. They had been using money to get that roster; and used money to keep it intact - expanding the budget year by year.

In the mean time, another competitor to TUT - let's call them The Kings - had the absolute top roster of the entire WC3-community. With the exception of one player - who was captured by a Chinese organization in 2005 (who eventually overbid The Kings in terms of salary and bonuses) - The Kings managed to keep that roster together until late 2007. They had a 6-digit euro-sponsorship with one of the biggest players in the industry, and managed to use up all of their money before letting the team go.

While all this was happening, TUT had managed to put together a top-tier WC3-team and create a business-strategy that attracted sponsors and investors alike. The old saying of "if you want to make money, you have to spend money" seems to be true for TUT, as the organization is still investing lots of money into areas where others have to draw out.

And while the original article would like you all to think it's because of inflated wages, it is in fact because most other teams have failed to capitalize on what they have. What is the reasoning behind going into a wage-race if you don't have a strategy on how to earn money on it?

Take the Sauer Krauts for example. One year ago, they put a huge investment in to a new WC3-roster; one that could bring them to the top again.

But for what? Nobody thought that the team-events of WC3 would just go bezerk, bringing millions of dollars into the game - so why get a whole team? Well, the fact is that nobody knows but themselves.

Maybe out of necessity to keep up with TUT, maybe with the hope of making a mark on something - or closing a special deal. Instead, they will now have to ask themselves if it was worth it, as the team will probably be shut down before long.

Bonus question: Who killed WC3L? Was it investments from the teams participating or was it the founders of the tournament who can pay out 25,000€ two times a year for a national league of solo-players, while they only give 20,000€ to the very best teams and players in WC3? Who was it that actually downplayed the seriousness of the league?