November 8, (THEWILL) – Yesterday’s announcement that LIV Golf would move towards liquidation was more than the end of a new golf league. For non-golfers, LIV is a Saudi-backed professional golf league launched in 2022 to challenge the established PGA Tour and D P World Tour. Its closure is a striking reminder that the resources to disrupt an industry do not automatically provide what is needed to sustain an institution.
When LIV first emerged, I was excited by what it might mean for golf. I argued that it could be good for the game because a serious new competitor might challenge established habits, bring fresh investment and push professional golf to think differently about its players and audiences. I still believe disruption can be valuable. But a powerful beginning does not, by itself, create a sustainable future.
LIV attracted leading players with extraordinary contracts, introduced team competition and gave its tournaments a festival atmosphere. Backed by more than US$5 billion from Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, it challenged the established tours and forced professional golf to confront questions about player compensation, audience engagement and the commercial future of the game. After a proposed US$300 million financing arrangement with BC Partners Credit fell apart, LIV told a United States bankruptcy court it would wind down its operations and liquidate its assets. The proposed relaunch, LIV 2.0, would not proceed. A league that had changed the conversation could not secure the agreements and financial backing needed to continue.
Rory McIlroy, a Northern Irish professional golfer and six-time major champion, recently captured one prevailing view when he described LIV as half of a good idea that was executed pretty poorly. He also said that the billions invested had, in many ways, been wasted and characterised the resulting financial environment in men’s professional golf as a false economy. His criticism was not simply that too much money had been spent, but that so much capital had been used without building a more sustainable future for the game. That distinction matters to every leader who has launched a bold initiative, entered a new market or tried to change an established industry. Disruption can attract attention.
Endurance requires a business that people continue to value, partners who see a reason to remain involved and a structure that can withstand changing circumstances. The challenge of endurance is visible in Nigeria, too. Estimates suggest that most businesses fail within their first five years, and that as many as 75 to 80 per cent do not survive ten years. These figures remind us that a promising start is only the beginning. An enterprise must adapt, earn the confidence of the people it serves and build the capacity to survive beyond its early momentum. LIV’s arrival was not without impact. It put pressure on existing institutions, drew attention to player compensation and forced professional golf to reconsider how it presents itself to audiences. Its team format and event atmosphere offered a different experience. Those effects do not disappear simply because the league may close. But disruption and endurance are different achievements.
Disruption can be bought, at least for a time. Endurance has to be built. As I have explored in previous articles, golf offers a useful way to understand this distinction. A powerful drive, the golfer’s first shot on a hole, can put a player in an excellent position, but it does not complete the hole. The player still has to judge the next shot, manage the course and avoid turning an early advantage into a difficult recovery. A spectacular beginning matters; what follows determines whether it becomes a good round.
The same is true of a business or sporting institution. Capital can fund a strong launch, recruit talent and create a compelling first impression. It can give a new enterprise time to find its audience and test its model. But money cannot, on its own, create recurring demand, align the interests of those involved or make the economics sustainable. When funding depends on one source, the organisation’s future remains closely tied to that source’s priorities.
READ ALSO:
Star power can bring people to the table, but it cannot do all the work that follows. A famous player may generate headlines and draw attention to a tournament. The harder task is converting that interest into a loyal audience, sustained sponsorship and a product people want to follow even when a particular star is absent. Fans and partners need a reason to remain invested in the competition itself. The episode also raises a question about governance. A founder, investor or owner can provide direction and make difficult decisions. Yet a durable organisation must be able to explain how decisions are made, how different interests are balanced and what happens when the original backer changes course. Governance cannot make an unsustainable model viable, but it can provide accountability and help people judge whether an organisation’s future is credible.
For leaders, the lesson is familiar. A new strategy may create excitement. A major investment may open doors. A bold promise may give customers and employees a reason to pay attention. But none of these can replace the work of building trust, understanding costs and delivering value repeatedly. The test is not simply whether people respond to the announcement; it is whether the organisation can keep its commitments after the announcement has passed.
There is a lesson for established institutions, too. Disruption should not be dismissed merely because the challenger struggles to endure. A competitor can expose neglected audiences, stale practices or assumptions that no longer serve the people a sport wants to reach. The PGA Tour responded to LIV’s challenge with changes of its own, including larger purses and a revised schedule built around elevated events. Pressure from a rival can prompt an institution to adapt, even when that rival does not survive. The same principle applies wherever ambition meets investment. Money can buy an impressive beginning. Only a sustainable strategy, credible governance and enduring stakeholder value can secure the long game.
In golf, the round is shaped by the choices that follow the first shot, especially when the original plan meets conditions no one can control. The institutions that endure keep adapting while building the trust and economic foundations that allow that adaptation to continue. LIV’s liquidation does not erase the changes it brought to professional golf. It does, however, show the limits of capital when it is not matched by sustainable economics, credible governance and enduring stakeholder value. The lesson is clear: leaders should embed sustainable practices from the outset rather than wait for external pressure or incentives to make them necessary. Disruption creates an opportunity, not a guarantee. The true measure of a bold idea is not how loudly it arrives, but whether it gives people enough reason to stay.
By Meka Olowola
-
Meka Niyi Olowola (FSPIN, FIMC) is the Founder and Managing Partner of Zenera Consulting, a business leader and entrepreneur with nearly three decades of experience, and an avid golfer.
