Posting player entry fee breakdown: PDGA requirements?

[biscoe]

I would use MSRP, personally. I can see rationales for otherwise, and I do see a TD's right to decide exactly which number to use - but I would identify what number I am using.

You call me not giving out a number "immoral" but you would use MSRP as yours? :|

That may be just a wee bit hypocritical.

 

[runningDoc]

one factor of cost is the time given to running event.

even at $15/hr min wage will probably never work out to profit for most TD and staff. those guys work wicked hard just to get complaints galore.

i've said it before but i factor in my own time and money in dollar value as a player in tournaments. unless it's some outstanding experience + players pack + tons of friend playing… pdga events aren't really worth a whole day/days worth of my time (and ultimately money) anymore.

i'll still volunteer to do course maintenance and buy fund raiser discs/tags/etc because i love certain local courses. but i'm no longer motivated to do pdga tourneys recently.

 

[ChrisWoj]

You call me not giving out a number "immoral" but you would use MSRP as yours? :|

That may be just a wee bit hypocritical.

A valid point. I agree. I amend that, definitely a better call to not make players go online and check the costs, if I'm going to be consistent you're right. I appreciate that feedback.

 

[ChrisWoj]

Last I checked, charities have to deliver 5% of funds raised to the beneficiary. Some charities disclose details to advertise they deliver much more than 5%. For the rest, I tend to assume the worst.

This is exactly my point. And our various economic sectors should be run the same way - maximize transparency. Remove all doubt - on compensation, on costs, on markup, everything.

The sort of thing to work for over a period of generations. Pipe dream, obviously not stuff I'm asking society to do tomorrow or saying that's my expectation of society.

 

[Cgkdisc]

If performance, smarts and cleverness aren't rewarded, the economy grinds to a halt. In the case of disc golf, most are not aware of the significant differences in how tournament finances are handled and prizes determined outside the U.S. BTW, much of that info is published if you look for it or available if you talk with international players. I just played with guys from Japan and Norway at the U.S. Masters and got more info on their tournament scene.

 

[biscoe]

If performance, smarts and cleverness aren't rewarded, the economy grinds to a halt. In the case of disc golf, most are not aware of the significant differences in how tournament finances are handled and prizes determined outside the U.S. BTW, much of that info is published if you look for it or available if you talk with international players. I just played with guys from Japan and Norway at the U.S. Masters and got more info on their tournament scene.

The International Tour Standards make a thousand times more sense than the American (North American?) ones. Events outside the US actually operate much more like every other sport in the world.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The International Tour Standards make a thousand times more sense than the American (North American?) ones. Events outside the US actually operate much more like every other sport in the world.

Perhaps more sense in terms of the increasingly outdated pro/am model. But the merch model for amateur competitive play was a major contributor for building the sport in the U.S. and boosting the payouts for pros and eventually touring players even though it was on the backs of the thousands of course builders, TDs and other undercompensated volunteers.

 

[biscoe]

Perhaps more sense in terms of the increasingly outdated pro/am model. But the merch model for amateur competitive play was a major contributor for building the sport in the U.S. and boosting the payouts for pros and eventually touring players even though it was on the backs of the thousands of course builders, TDs and other undercompensated volunteers.

Debatable whether the game grew because of the merch model or in spite of it but most likely somewhere in between.. The merch model makes the assumption that players need that to be drawn to competitive play which is not what the success of every other sport in the world would indicate. Had the sport grown as a normal one with a base of amateur players rather than the idiotic "everyone's a pro" we may very well have seen more growth rather than less. We have no real means to tell.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Debatable whether the game grew because of the merch model or in spite of it but most likely somewhere in between.. The merch model makes the assumption that players need that to be drawn to competitive play which is not what the success of every other sport in the world would indicate. Had the sport grown as a normal one with a base of amateur players rather than the idiotic "everyone's a pro" we may very well have seen more growth rather than less. We have no real means to tell.

The big difference between other sports that grew with the traditional amateur model is they were played in organized school competitions. Disc golf has been trying to figure out ways to work backwards as a breakout pro "sport" from Overalls and Wham-O support back to amateur participation/donation to prop up pro payouts via the merch model and eventually attempts to get back into schools via EDGE, Collegiates, UPlay and the High School initiatives. In the meantime, the traditional school model for sports development is becoming more professionalized with NIL payouts in the colleges and we have school aged teens cashing with not so insignificant amounts in disc golf (Gannon Buhr plus others). Interesting to see how the traditional model evolves to converge with the back fill approaches from disc golf.

 

[ChrisWoj]

If performance, smarts and cleverness aren't rewarded, the economy grinds to a halt.

It's just one way to skin a cat. The profit motive being drummed out would take generations, as I noted. The first step is a small one. But ultimately - humans create.

 

[Golden Tuna]

I'm not saying you're trying to maximize profits, but I simply don't see the point in obfuscation for what I see as no reason. I believe that if there's not a relevant reason to be something other than as transparent as possible, then you should seek to be as transparent as possible. I think that the default should be toward maximizing transparency.

I would use MSRP, personally. I can see rationales for otherwise, and I do see a TD's right to decide exactly which number to use - but I would identify what number I am using.

To be completely clear Chuck - ****. CAPITALISM.

Obfuscating in the ways you describe, to me, and like capitalism, is immoral. And I think it is unfortunate that our current society ever existed. So, in running an event, I'd rather not guide anything I do using principles of capitalism.

Transparency on the back end is important because it is a rational good for us to seek to provide the fullest possible accounting of how we do things to each other, especially where it is of minimal effort to do so. It should be that a case should be made for why we should obfuscate, not the other way around. We should seek to establish as much as we can, to maximize clarity and build opportunities for trust from the start.

I'd forgotten what a joy you are to talk to :wall:

Your own comments kind of reveal the difficulty in "being transparent"...

Not that I have any issue with transparency, it's just not always that clear.

Here are just a few items that are difficult to dollarize and others that are a little easier.

- Player's packs: Assigning "retail" value to an item you paid wholesale for could raise eyebrows among conspiracy theorists.
>> What if those discs were less popular molds, strange colors, or odd (light) weights?
>> Can you, should you assign value to items that are donated?

- Volunteer compensation: Our club feeds the volunteers and provides a player's pack or club voucher for big events.
>> Should we get the cheapest hotdogs and buns we can find, or spring for delivery? There is a cost delta associated with that decision...
>> Should volunteers get first choice of player's packs?
>> Should a volunteer get a tank of gas if they drive 100 miles over a weekend around various tournament locations? Should that be dollarized and reported to the community?

- What about discs that are donated or purchased from an on-site vendor for CTPs/volunteer staff.

- We sometimes have to rent utilities like porta-johns, sinks, and use coolers, ice. These are the "cost of doing business" for a big event.
>> What about a PA system? What about hiring a band or serving alcohol at a player's party?

- How do you value facilities that are donated or closed for an event? Our Club is a 501c3, so we have partnerships that preclude us from "paying" for shelter rentals because we put the money we would have spent on the shelter back into the courses.

I don't know what your community is like, but (the people like you) who live around here only seem to want these details so they can pass judgement on one parameter or the other.
> All the items above are real world scenarios that I've experienced running events within the past few years. Ironically, our club is a 501c3 (Not For Profit) yet (some of) our Club members complain about paying a membership fee or pulling a "profit" from our events when 100% of our profit is reinvested back into our courses.

I'm with biscoe in that we strive to put on an event that offers a great player experience overall. This includes, but is not limited to, adherence to all PDGA standards relative to player payouts. Transparency is good, but without context tents to lead to assumptions.

 

[ChrisWoj]

I'd forgotten what a joy you are to talk to :wall:

Then feel free to **** straight off.

Your own comments kind of reveal the difficulty in "being transparent"...

Not that I have any issue with transparency, it's just not always that clear.

Here are just a few items that are difficult to dollarize and others that are a little easier.

- Player's packs: Assigning "retail" value to an item you paid wholesale for could raise eyebrows among conspiracy theorists.
>> What if those discs were less popular molds, strange colors, or odd (light) weights?
>> Can you, should you assign value to items that are donated?

Biscoe already called me out on that, and I agreed - MSRP is the wrong decision. I'm happy to hear reasonable feedback and take it into my decision making processes. Stupid **** like "tHiS iS hOW wE cApItALIsm" is broken philosophically and in practice.

- Volunteer compensation: Our club feeds the volunteers and provides a player's pack or club voucher for big events.
>> Should we get the cheapest hotdogs and buns we can find, or spring for delivery? There is a cost delta associated with that decision...
>> Should volunteers get first choice of player's packs?
>> Should a volunteer get a tank of gas if they drive 100 miles over a weekend around various tournament locations? Should that be dollarized and reported to the community?

Whether you do it or not is not as important as that you report it and make it clear, allowing players to decide what they think of it.

- What about discs that are donated or purchased from an on-site vendor for CTPs/volunteer staff.

- We sometimes have to rent utilities like porta-johns, sinks, and use coolers, ice. These are the "cost of doing business" for a big event.
>> What about a PA system? What about hiring a band or serving alcohol at a player's party?
- How do you value facilities that are donated or closed for an event? Our Club is a 501c3, so we have partnerships that preclude us from "paying" for shelter rentals because we put the money we would have spent on the shelter back into the courses.

Easy as pie to report something as having been donated. And in the case of the other items - it sounds like you've got a handle on what it costs, and you should be transparent about it.

I don't know what your community is like, but (the people like you) who live around here only seem to want these details so they can pass judgement on one parameter or the other.

Are you implying this is a problem? How about we make it clear providing as many players as possible the opportunity to pass that judgment, whether they had the intent or desire to do so without it in the first place.

> All the items above are real world scenarios that I've experienced running events within the past few years. Ironically, our club is a 501c3 (Not For Profit) yet (some of) our Club members complain about paying a membership fee or pulling a "profit" from our events when 100% of our profit is reinvested back into our courses.

I'm with biscoe in that we strive to put on an event that offers a great player experience overall. This includes, but is not limited to, adherence to all PDGA standards relative to player payouts. Transparency is good, but without context tents to lead to assumptions.

None of what you brought up sounds difficult to make transparent to players at all.

 

[ru4por]

As a club, we try to be transparent as possible. Posting costs of operation vs player fees is not a great solution, IMO. Many of the reasons have been addressed here.

We publicize our club meetings and they are open to members and the public. Anyone is welcome to attend and listen to the open discussions of cost, price and associated finances.

I had a chance to play a C Tier, in my area, last weekend. Not one of my club events, but I had plenty of players ready to offer feedback on our events and leagues. Most of it self serving and misinformed. Rarely were invitations to attend club meetings, received very well. I have a tendency to agree with Tuna....."only seem to want these details so they can pass judgement on one parameter or the other."

 

[biscoe]

Are you implying this is a problem? How about we make it clear providing as many players as possible the opportunity to pass that judgment, whether they had the intent or desire to do so without it in the first place.

I am not implying anything. I am stating directly that catering to the nitpickers out there simply validates their nitpicking which is a product of a system (merch for Ams) that was broken from the get go and encourages more people to pick nits. It is a ticket to organizer burnout.

In 1997 or so I bought into this crap a bit, having run roughly 120 PDGA events since then I have come to recognize it for what it is. Event value should be judged holistically and a lot of the things which provide the most value in that sense are impossible to accurately define in dollars and cents. This game has finally grown up to the point that amateur player expectations of events have grown more reasonable- what you are suggesting is a big step backwards imo.

 

[DavidSauls]

Like most TDs, I've been on both sides, playing more tournaments than I've run.

As a player, for the life of me, I can't imagine caring what the TD paid for the players pack. The PDGA amateur payout rules are already excessive, so if the prizes come anywhere near that -- on top of the experience of actually playing in a tournament -- I don't care how they financed it.

Nor can I imagine wanting such transparency in any other recreational event I pay to participate in. Someone organizes something, sets the price, announces the rewards (if any), and I either choose to pay and participate, or don't. Their finances are their problem.

 

[ru4por]

Like most TDs, I've been on both sides, playing more tournaments than I've run.

As a player, for the life of me, I can't imagine caring what the TD paid for the players pack. The PDGA amateur payout rules are already excessive, so if the prizes come anywhere near that -- on top of the experience of actually playing in a tournament -- I don't care how they financed it.

Nor can I imagine wanting such transparency in any other recreational event I pay to participate in. Someone organizes something, sets the price, announces the rewards (if any), and I either choose to pay and participate, or don't. Their finances are their problem.

As a player, I concur. I am interested in my "player experience" value. To be honest, that will have NOTHING to do with plastic. Perhaps other, unique player pack items, but not any discs....and player packs, in general, are a very small part of what I would value. I reward TD's that provide MY particular perception of value, by returning the following year or frequenting their tournaments.

 

[ChrisWoj]

I am not implying anything. I am stating directly that catering to the nitpickers out there simply validates their nitpicking which is a product of a system (merch for Ams) that was broken from the get go and encourages more people to pick nits. It is a ticket to organizer burnout.

In 1997 or so I bought into this crap a bit, having run roughly 120 PDGA events since then I have come to recognize it for what it is. Event value should be judged holistically and a lot of the things which provide the most value in that sense are impossible to accurately define in dollars and cents. This game has finally grown up to the point that amateur player expectations of events have grown more reasonable- what you are suggesting is a big step backwards imo.

I absolutely disagree that this serves to cater to nitpickers - this caters to everybody. You can choose to tell the nitpickers who quibble with your specific decisions to **** off. If others follow them - then you know to change your distribution of resources. If others don't - you keep running events as is and don't worry about them.

Like most TDs, I've been on both sides, playing more tournaments than I've run.

As a player, for the life of me, I can't imagine caring what the TD paid for the players pack. The PDGA amateur payout rules are already excessive, so if the prizes come anywhere near that -- on top of the experience of actually playing in a tournament -- I don't care how they financed it.

Nor can I imagine wanting such transparency in any other recreational event I pay to participate in. Someone organizes something, sets the price, announces the rewards (if any), and I either choose to pay and participate, or don't. Their finances are their problem.

And you don't have to care. I generally don't either. I rarely, if ever, check the financial sheet for the few TDs I know that do provide them, aside from looking at the line outlining payouts in my division to see if they make sense. My own personal lack of care as a player does not impede the fact that when I run an event I'd rather maximize transparency as a matter of transparent process.

 

[DavidSauls]

For events we run, we choose to maximize player experience. "Transparency" implies a degree of ownership that participants don't share with us.

 

[Countchunkula]

I think fact that this thread started out talking about a charitable event is relevant. I agree with everything that biscoe and others have been saying regarding normal events. A charity fundraiser is somewhat of a different animal though.

 

[txmxer]

Having been around a lot of other fringe sports, I've never seen any sort of transparency.

I've never concerned myself with where the money went. I consider the entry fee—is it worth it to me? If I participate and don't believe the event was run right, I may provide feedback or I may just pass on it next time.

Pretty much in line with DavidS—it's your event. I'm the consumer.