When did the negotiations regarding the Louvre agreement and this new formula including certain teams start?

Discussions started back in october 2018. We've always had an open line of dialogue with the teams and the players. For example, it was within the WESA framework, where several teams were working with ESL, that the first ESL Pro League was born, 5 years ago. Why did you feel the need for a change right now, after 10 seasons and 5 years of Pro League, and 8 years after CS:GO got out? We already updated the Pro League format once in 2018. It's important for us to be innovators and to keep offering new formats. But, as everybody is aware, the chaotic schedule of our scene makes it hard for the teams, the players and the partners to have a more durable commitment together and to secure their financial stability. That's what convinced the best teams in the world and ourselves at ESL to join forces and create a new framework in CS:GO, allowing long-term vision, revenue and profits sharing, and a global circuit in CS:GO with the ESL Pro Tour. After stints at EA, Activision and the Syndicat des éditeurs des logiciels de loisir (SELL),

David Neigchel is now co-CEO at ESL. What were the requirements to be part of the agreement? Do the teams have to pay a fee, or to compete in a certain amount of ESL events?

Contrary to closed francises, there is no entry fee. Among the 24 teams, you have to distinguish the 13 teams who chose to be part of the agreement from the 11 others. The 13 teams are majority partners in the Louvre agreement. They will have a key-role in the evolution of the format, they will earn a share of the earnings and, naturally, have commited to a certain amount of tournaments. But it remains an open system because the other 11 teams will be able to qualify, whether it's on the basis of their world rank or through the Mountain Dew League, which is the de facto amateur entrance gate in Pro League. For those 11 teams, there are no obligations to compete in any amount of ESL tournaments. What are the guarantees that you gave to the teams in exchange for their participation to the agreement?

Mainly, we offered them a share of the revenues and profits. For more details, and in an effort to be transparent, we published part of the agreement online. What would happen if a partner team keeps getting bad results and ends up several seasons at the bottom of the table? Could it be replaced in that case?

Partnered teams have committed to a renewable 3 years contract. I think they are going to do everyting in their power to remain competitive and keep their partner status, with the advantages that come with it. However, if a team ends up thrice at the last place over four season, there is a procedure to exclude it from the agreement.

Pro League is at the heart of the new system

Your system looks a lot like franchising, do you think it is the safest way to go for TOs and teams in terms of finances? Is this format destined to become central in esport?

ESL Pro League is an open system and teams are not asked to pay for a slot. We believe in a collaborative approach that brings everyone's interests together: producing the best possible competition for fans, and working closely together between players, teams, organizers, partners and publishers. Approaches aimed at privatizing a competition for purely financial purposes or around a single actor in the chain are not the format of the future in my opinion. At ESL, we believe in developping the whole ecosystem, from the amateur level to the top tier, from the local scene to the international circuit. Our goal is to make esport the biggest sport on the planet. Have you had any contact with Valve, which last year objected to the leagues' exclusive contracts, for this project? Valve has given its approval for the competition format provided for in the Louvre agreement. We regularly work closely with Valve and this exchange is essential for the development of the esport scene on CS:GO.