Reports of T1’s corporate turmoil reveals exceptional 102-day sponsor schedule

Korean esports organization T1 has made headlines over the past week as reports surface of an internal corporate schism, players spending over a quarter of the year on sponsor activities, and suspicions about sponsorship arrangements implemented by outgoing CEO Jack Marsh.

The reports paint a damning picture of the efforts made to record T1’s first profitable year in 2025, with the most controversial claim that T1 League of Legends players spent an unprecedented 102 days fulfilling sponsor obligations.

T1’s 100+ day sponsorship schedule revealed

In April, T1, the esports organization best known for its hyper-successful League of Legends division, and superstar Lee "Faker" Sang-hyeok, announced it had posted its first ever profitable year. The end-of-financial-year declaration was greeted with a warm response by an esports industry that pointed to it as an example of just what could be achieved if organization just buckled down and made the best of the tumultuous esports landscape (with the implication that winning dozens of championships wouldn’t hurt either).

Three months later, and reports have emerged, primarily from South Korea-based Seoul Sports, that this profitable year may have come at the expense of the T1 players themselves. Published on July 23, the article entitled “From funeral wreaths to trucks… T1 shaken, why? Sponsor schedules for 102 days a year” disclosed that T1’s “official schedules” listed 102 days on sponsor commitments.

This would represent over 27 percent of the entire year, and a third of the working schedule of T1 players. It would also be the largest amount of sponsorship time disclosed by any organization. T1, who by most reckonings have around 16 sponsors (more than any other team in the LCK), could potentially have spent even more time on these commitments.

The article closed with a commitment to verify and confirm the contract details and revenue structure of these sponsors. And less than three days later, a second report began to shine light on these elements. The report revealed that many of the partnerships and sponsorships were managed by a company they refer to as “Agency A,” or “Company A” which the report claims has links to T1 CEO Joe Marsh.

The report alleges that “Company A” offered below market-rate deals to sponsors and that “T1 signed a contract with a global company for less than half the amount of a famous European team.” It also claims that almost all sponsorships, even those brought in by internal T1 employees, or offered directly to T1, were handled through “Company A,” ultimately giving a fee to the company.

The issues surrounding these partnerships and sponsorships reportedly led to a huge churn rate for T1’s internal partnership team, 75% allegedly leaving the company. All this took place amid a backdrop of Joe Marsh’s departure from the CEO position.

Originally slated to leave T1 in June, Marsh now allegedly works on a “rolling contract,” reportedly extended due to negotiations between T1 parent company SK Square and “Company A” client Comcast. A subsequent report also indicated that T1’s board of directors were made up of one member of SK Square and two from US-based Comcast. The report further suggested that T1’s inability to appoint a new CEO came down to disagreements between these two parties.

While these reports paint a dire picture of T1, they come amidst the backdrop of a CEO transition, and an alleged board conflict. Commenters have already suggested that Seoul Sport’s reporting carries some level of bias, although much of its reporting can be verified by publicly available sources.

Still, the issues are clear: A team at the calibre of T1 has found itself with a dramatic (and potentially untenable) sponsorship schedule amidst its first and only profitable year.