PGA Tour Reveals Stunning $15 Million Pay Cut for Tour Championship Winner
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The FedEx Cup playoffs in general, and the Tour Championship in particular, have been the subject of much criticism from fans and players. In that regard, the PGA Tour has launched some changes for the current season that promise to be quite radical.
Recently, it was announced that the Tour Championship will abandon the given strokes rule and become a regular stroke-play format event. However, it remains the case that the winner will be crowned the FedEx Cup (or season) champion, something that doesn't quite convince everybody in the golf world.
The FedExCup Trophy is displayed on the 18th green after the final round of the TOUR Championship at East Lake Golf Club on September 01, 2024 in Atlanta, Georgia.
The FedExCup Trophy is displayed on the 18th green after the final round of the TOUR Championship at East Lake Golf Club on September 01, 2024 in Atlanta, Georgia.
Kevin C. Cox/Getty Images
Now, the tour has announced a new measure that could resolve the discrepancy between the regular-season leader and the FedEx Cup champion. An exclusive report from Front Office Sports revealed that a new prize distribution system will be implemented for the upcoming playoffs.
According to the report, the $100 million available for the playoffs will not be distributed at the end of the Tour Championship, but rather in three installments.
At the end of the regular season, meaning after the Wyndham Championship, the FedEx Cup ranking leader will receive a $10 million bonus. Two weeks later, after the BMW Championship, the ranking leader will receive $5 million, while the Tour Championship winner will receive $10 million.
Naturally, the other ranking members will receive decreasing prize money based on their placements at the same three tournaments. The FedEx St. Jude Championship and the BMW Championship will retain their respective purses of $20 million each as individual tournaments.
Under the previous system, the Tour Championship winner received a bonus of $25 million.
🚨💰⛳️ #NEW: The winner of the PGA TOUR's FedEx Cup will now receive $10M, down from $25M after the tour moved to compensate players with three seperate bonus payouts throughout the playoffs. (Via @FOS) pic.twitter.com/NnqWLIhxA4 — NUCLR GOLF (@NUCLRGOLF) July 2, 2025
Season-long leader vs. Tour Championship winner
One of the main criticisms of the Tour Championship has been that the winner may not have been the best player throughout the season and still be crowned the FedEx Cup champion. This new prize distribution undoubtedly seeks to resolve, at least in part, this issue.
The Tour is awarding the regular-season leader a bonus exactly the same as the Tour Championship winner. It is a clear message about the importance it places on being the best player of the year.
Until 2024, the regular-season leader was treated the same as any other player, unless he won the final tournament of the year. It's fair to say that things have changed for the best.
More Golf: Open Championship: LIV Golfer Left Dizzy, Quits Qualifying
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
4 minutes ago
- Newsweek
HelloFresh Users to Get $1-Million Slice of Major Settlement
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Californian HelloFresh users are set to receive a portion of a $1 million settlement after the meal kit company was hit with a lawsuit. HelloFresh will pay $6.38 million in civil penalties, $120,000 in investigative costs, and $1 million in restitution to eligible California consumers after a settlement to a complaint filed in the state was approved on Thursday. The company did not admit liability in the settlement. A Hello Fresh logo is seen at the company headquarters in Berlin in Germany on April 4, 2023. A Hello Fresh logo is seen at the company headquarters in Berlin in Germany on April 4, 2023. Copyright: Leon Kuegeler/ Photo by: Leon Kuegeler/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images Why It Matters HelloFresh, headquartered in Germany, is the largest meal kit delivery company in the U.S., with around 75 percent of the market share. Its market cap is around £1,549,000,000 so the settlement is unlikely to have a big impact on the company but it could—depending on how many people are eligible and how much they receive—have an impact on eligible Californian consumers. What To Know The district attorney's offices of Los Angeles and Santa Clara in California co-led the lawsuit, which was filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court. Prosecutors there said the meal kit company violated California's Automatic Renewal Law by auto-renewing customer's subscription plans without their proper knowledge or consent. Their lawsuit also claimed HelloFresh violated California's advertising laws by not disclosing the terms and conditions of freebies and offers, leading customers to being enrolled in plans that were hard to cancel. Consumers eligible for the payout are those who were enrolled in the company's automatic renewal product subscription between January 1, 2019 and August 18, 2025. They must have been charged for their first shipment without their knowlege, canceled their subscription after that shipment and failed to receive a refund from HelloFresh. What People Are Saying A HelloFresh spokesperson said in a statement to multiple outlets: "We take our commitment to customer transparency very seriously, and our subscription model and cancellation policies have been consistently clear to customers throughout the whole customer journey. While we deny any wrongdoing, we have cooperated fully with the coalition of California District Attorneys and have entered into a settlement agreement with them to resolve the matter amicably." Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan J. Hochman said in a statement: "No company, no matter how big or well-known, is exempt from California's consumer protection laws. We will aggressively pursue enforcement when businesses take advantage of consumers by failing to clearly disclose subscription terms, obtain proper consent, or provide a fair way to cancel. Consumers have a right to know what they're signing up for, and they deserve better. Digital deception is still deception under the law." District Attorney Jeff Rosen said in a statement: "Misleading automatic renewal subscriptions and false advertising practices don't sell products—they sell deception. Stop means stop." What Happens Next It is unclear how many Californian customers will receive pay outs and how much money they will receive.
Newsweek
4 minutes ago
- Newsweek
America's 10 Most Expensive ZIP Codes Revealed
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. From Miami to Malibu, the 10 most expensive ZIP codes in the country, according to a new report by can be found in three states: California, Florida and New York. In these areas, which are all located by the coast, the median sale price of a home is what you would normally pay for an ultra-luxury property. In Florida's Fisher Island-Miami Beach, which takes the No. 1 spot as the most expensive ZIP code in the country, the median listing price of a home in July was $11,925,000—about 27 times higher than the nation's median. By comparison, the median list price of the typical U.S. home was $439,990—a price tag that many Americans already struggle to afford, especially with mortgage rates still hovering around the 7 percent mark. Where Are the 10 Most Expensive ZIP Codes in the Country? According to data, these are the 10 most expensive ZIP codes in the country: 33109: Fisher Island–Miami Beach, Florida ($11,925,000) 92657: Newport Coast–Newport Beach, California ($9,099,000) 11932: Bridgehampton, New York ($8,495,000) 90077: Bel Air–Los Angeles, California ($8,234,750) 93108: Montecito–Santa Barbara, California ($6,995,000) 93110: Hope Ranch–Santa Barbara, California ($6,874,000) 90210: Beverly Hills, California ($6,869,000) 11976: Water Mill, New York ($6,845,000) 92067: Rancho Santa Fe, California ($6,075,000) 90265: Malibu, California ($5,971,250) These ZIP codes are not where the average American buyer shops around for their next home. What these places have in common is that they offer homebuyers—often celebrities and businesspeople—privacy and a luxurious lifestyle by the coast. "While these zip codes make up only a sliver of the U.S. housing market (just 0.1 percent of all for-sale properties), they show where the wealthiest buyers, and their dollars, are concentrated," Anthony Smith, a senior economist at said in a news release. Why Are Prices So High in These Areas? Fisher Island's housing market, according to what Ana Bozovic, a real estate agent and the founder of Analytics Miami, told "is riding the wave of Miami's ultra-luxury boom because it combines seclusion with inherent scarcity." The island is close to Miami but hard enough to access that it remains quite seclusive and exclusive. There are no public roads or bridges connecting Fisher Island to the rest of the state, making it accessible only by private ferry, yacht or helicopter. While Florida takes the top spot on this list, California dominates the ranking with seven ZIP codes in the top 10. These include markets such as Bel Air and Beverly Hills, which have historically been among the most expensive in the country—and not much has changed since then as they prove more resilient to the slowdown going on across the country. Not even the wildfires that devastated Los Angeles County this January have discouraged people from buying homes in these areas, and both buyers and developers seem to believe in their continuous popularity in the future. If anything, the wildfires have pushed prices up in these areas as the costs of insurance and rebuilding are likely to rise. Similarly, the two areas on the East Coast that made into the top 10, Bridgehampton and Water Mill, are historic examples of luxury living in the Hamptons. While prices remain prohibitive for most buyers—at $8.5 million and $6.8 million, respectively—these areas have seen a drop in interest in recent months, according to as a jump in inventory has given buyers more choice than they have had in years and less urgency to purchase. How Do These Prices Compare to the Average American's Experience? "In a country where a $1.3 million home marks the entry point to the top 10 percent, these neighborhoods operate on a completely different scale, where breathtaking views and unmatched exclusivity set the standard," Smith said. "They are the markets that capture the attention of the wealthiest buyers, concentrate extraordinary amounts of capital, and define what ultra-luxury living means in America today," he continued. In the rest of the country, median list prices are much, much lower—but still more expensive than many Americans can afford. In Florida, the median sale price of a home was $404,300 in July, according to Redfin, down 1.3 percent from a year earlier as the market struggles with high inventory and dwindling demand. In California, it was $831,300, down 0.74 percent from a year earlier as the state faces similar challenges, but with a much lower inventory to start from. In New York, that figure was $900,000, up 4.7 percent from a year earlier. In markets in the Northeast, where the housing shortage is most acute, prices are staying steady and even growing, while they are falling in those housing markets in the South that were the most overheated during the pandemic.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Elon Musk's xAI Published Hundreds Of Thousands Of Grok Chatbot Conversations
Musk and xAI recently attracted scrutiny when Grok began identifying itself as 'MechaHitler.' Getty Images Elon Musk's AI firm, xAI, has published the chat transcripts of hundreds of thousands of conversations between its chatbot Grok and the bot's users — in many cases, without those users' knowledge or permission. Anytime a Grok user clicks the 'share' button on one of their chats with the bot, a unique URL is created, allowing them to share the conversation via email, text message or other means. Unbeknownst to users, though, that unique URL is also made available to search engines, like Google, Bing and DuckDuckGo, making them searchable to anyone on the web. In other words, on Musk's Grok, hitting the share button means that a conversation will be published on Grok's website, without warning or a disclaimer to the user. Today, a Google search for Grok chats shows that the search engine has indexed more than 370,000 user conversations with the bot. The shared pages revealed conversations between Grok users and the LLM that range from simple business tasks like writing tweets to generating images of a fictional terrorist attack in Kashmir and attempting to hack into a crypto wallet. Forbes reviewed conversations where users asked intimate questions about medicine and psychology; some even revealed the name, personal details and at least one password shared with the bot by a Grok user. Image files, spreadsheets and some text documents uploaded by users could also be accessed via the Grok shared page. Among the indexed conversations were some initiated by British journalist Andrew Clifford, who used Grok to summarize the front pages of newspapers and compose tweets for his website Sentinel Current. Clifford told Forbes that he was unaware that clicking the share button would mean that his prompt would be discoverable on Google. 'I would be a bit peeved but there was nothing on there that shouldn't be there,' said Clifford, who has now switched to using Google's Gemini AI. Not all the conversations, though, were as benign as Clifford's. Some were explicit, bigoted and violated xAI's rules. The company prohibits use of its bot to 'promot[e] critically harming human life or to 'develop bioweapons, chemical weapons, or weapons of mass destruction,' but in published, shared conversations easily found via a Google search, Grok offered users instructions on how to make illicit drugs like fentanyl and methampine, code a self-executing piece of malware and construct a bomb and methods of suicide. Grok also offered a detailed plan for the assasination of Elon Musk. Via the 'share' function, the illicit instructions were then published on Grok's website and indexed by Google. xAI did not respond to a detailed request for comment. xAI is not the only AI startup to have published users' conversations with its chatbots. Earlier this month, users of OpenAI's ChatGPT were alarmed to find that their conversations were appearing in Google search results, though the users had opted to make those conversations 'discoverable' to others. But after outcry, the company quickly changed its policy. Calling the indexing 'a short-lived experiment,' OpenAI chief information security officer Dane Stuckey said in a post on X that it would be discontinued because it 'introduced too many opportunities for folks to accidentally share things they didn't intend to.' After OpenAI canned its share feature, Musk took a victory lap. Grok's X account claimed at the time that it had no such sharing feature, and Musk tweeted in response, 'Grok ftw' [for the win]. It's unclear when Grok added the share feature, but X users have been warning since January that Grok conversations were being indexed by Google. Some of the conversations asking Grok for instructions about how to manufacture drugs and bombs were likely initiated by security engineers, redteamers, or Trust & Safety professionals. But in at least a few cases, Grok's sharing setting misled even professional AI researchers. Nathan Lambert, a computational scientist at the Allen Institute for AI, used Grok to create a summary of his blog posts to share with his team. He was shocked to learn from Forbes that his Grok prompt and the AI's response was indexed on Google. 'I was surprised that Grok chats shared with my team were getting automatically indexed on Google, despite no warnings of it, especially after the recent flare-up with ChatGPT,' said the Seattle-based researcher. Google allows website owners to choose when and how their content is indexed for search. 'Publishers of these pages have full control over whether they are indexed,' said Google spokesperson Ned Adriance in a statement. Google itself previously allowed chats with its AI chatbot, Bard, to be indexed, but it removed them from search in 2023. Meta continues to allow its shared searches to be discoverable by search engines, Business Insider reported. Opportunists are beginning to notice, and take advantage of, Grok's published chats. On LinkedIn and the forum BlackHatWorld, marketers have discussed intentionally creating and sharing conversations with Grok to increase the prominence and name recognition of their businesses and products in Google search results. (It is unclear how effective these efforts would be.) Satish Kumar, CEO of SEO agency Pyrite Technologies, demonstrated to Forbes how one business had used Grok to manipulate results for a search of companies that will write your PhD dissertation for you. 'Every shared chat on Grok is fully indexable and searchable on Google,' he said. 'People are actively using tactics to push these pages into Google's index.' More From Forbes Forbes Elon Musk Wants To Raise The Birth Rate. He's Cutting Medical Care For Mothers And Babies. By Emily Baker-White Forbes How Jay Graber Is Making Sure Bluesky Never Turns Into Elon Musk's X By Emily Baker-White Forbes How Elon Musk Muzzled Government Employees From Talking About xAI's New Supercomputer By Sarah Emerson
