Pin Enhancer’s (https://pinenhancer.com/)
A newly forming group called Pin Enhancers is billing themselves as an eSport. In all actuality & beyond the self titling as an esport, it is a tournament created PinballMag. It’s billed as a combination of IFPA and virtual pinball tournaments. This opinion piece will only look at the funding model which we believe should change in favor of the players, who are the primary fundraisers.
Pin Enhancer’s Funding Model: A Costly Mistake for Competitive Pinball
Competitive pinball hasn’t even hit the ground running as an eSport, yet Pin Enhancer is already implementing a funding model that sets a dangerous precedent. Let’s be clear: taking 40% from donations meant for players’ basic needs is not standard, ethical, or even remotely supportive.
1. A Massive Cut from Player Funds? This Isn’t Support—it’s Exploitation.
Pin Enhancer claims a full 40% cut from players’ own fundraised support, with only 60% going to cover essentials like travel, accommodation, and tournament fees. In legitimate competitive models, organizational and promotional costs are covered by the team or through sponsorships—not taken out of funds that players need just to get to the competition. These donations are meant to support the players, not line the platform’s pockets.
2. Comparing Real eSports: This Model is Miles off Standard Practice
Look at how established eSports are run. Players aren’t saddled with fundraisers just to pay for travel or food; that’s covered by the organization through sponsorships and partnerships. Pinball should aim for the same standards. Instead, this model shifts the burden onto players and fans, practically taxing them for the chance to compete. Pin Enhancer’s approach is the wrong model for a new sport, especially if we want to encourage growth and new talent.
3. “Solidarity” Isn’t an Excuse for Taking Nearly Half of Player Donations
Pin Enhancer says the 40% cut helps fund “management, promotion, production of communication support, and clothing” and is supposed to create “solidarity” between famous and lesser-known players. But in reality, taking this big of a cut with little transparency on how funds are used feels like exploitation. If solidarity was the goal, Pin Enhancer would be finding sponsors, not pulling from the players themselves. But wait, they have sponsors so what gives? Can we see a cost breakdown! So many sponsors and yet this is needed?!? What do these tournaments cost, what are the profits? If the players are generating the money, why don’t they own the company? These are the off hand immediate questions that come to mind.
4. This Model Risks Undermining Pinball as a Viable eSport Before It Even Starts
Pinball has the potential to make a name for itself as an eSport, but this model is not the way forward. Requiring players to raise their own money and then taking 40% risks turning players away before pinball even gets established as a legitimate eSport. This approach will harm the sport’s growth, alienate players, and risk damaging the reputation of competitive pinball before it’s fully off the ground.
The Bottom Line: Competitive Pinball Deserves Better
Pinball deserves to grow and succeed on a foundation of fairness and transparency, not exploitative practices. This funding model by Pin Enhancer fails to meet the standard. If we want competitive pinball to thrive, it’s time to call out models like this and demand better. Pin Enhancer needs to adopt an ethical, player-first approach—one that truly supports players without adding to their burdens. Competitive pinball’s future depends on it.
Todd Russell