Board Candidate Announcement

[denny ritner]

Shawn's a quality guy who'd make an excellent board member. I just might need to pony up and renew my membership so I can vote for him. (well, that and so I can play the Outlaws this fall

 

[dashiellx]

What about enforcing the equipment specs more? One of the biggest complaints I read is manufacture consistantcy, etc...

 

[shawnsinclair]

What about enforcing the equipment specs more? One of the biggest complaints I read is manufacture consistantcy, etc...

You are exactly right! We have tech standards that are not enforceable. The only enforceable tech standard is the weight. However, do we require all TD's to carry a scale? Then do we expect them to weigh every disc in play? A TD barely has enough time to get scorecards filled out let alone time to weigh all discs.

Now what about the nose radius of a disc, the diameter, and the flexibility? With the nose radius and the flexibility you need very specific tools. As far as the diameter it's easy to measure, but over time it's very possible for a disc to lose a couple millimeters.

I think a better solution than putting the responsibility on the TD's would be for the PDGA to do spot checks. Kind of like random drug testing. I don't know how the logistics would work but the idea would be to just randomly pull discs from each manufacture and retest them. There would then need to be some type of system in place if a disc doesn't meet the standards. Maybe x number of months to fix the problem then retest. The harder problem comes when a 2nd or 3rd problem arises. Do you make it so all discs by ______ manufacture are not legal for tournaments for 6 months? That's a hard question to deal with.

 

[onemilemore]

You are exactly right! We have tech standards that are not enforceable. The only enforceable tech standard is the weight. However, do we require all TD's to carry a scale? Then do we expect them to weigh every disc in play? A TD barely has enough time to get scorecards filled out let alone time to weigh all discs.

Now what about the nose radius of a disc, the diameter, and the flexibility? With the nose radius and the flexibility you need very specific tools. As far as the diameter it's easy to measure, but over time it's very possible for a disc to lose a couple millimeters.

I think a better solution than putting the responsibility on the TD's would be for the PDGA to do spot checks. Kind of like random drug testing. I don't know how the logistics would work but the idea would be to just randomly pull discs from each manufacture and retest them. There would then need to be some type of system in place if a disc doesn't meet the standards. Maybe x number of months to fix the problem then retest. The harder problem comes when a 2nd or 3rd problem arises. Do you make it so all discs by ______ manufacture are not legal for tournaments for 6 months? That's a hard question to deal with.

If the PDGA were to actually enforce this, they would need to sanction the manufacturers with fines, or withhold any new model approvals until the problems were fixed. Otherwise, the enforcement rings hollow.

 

[mashnut]

You are exactly right! We have tech standards that are not enforceable. The only enforceable tech standard is the weight. However, do we require all TD's to carry a scale? Then do we expect them to weigh every disc in play? A TD barely has enough time to get scorecards filled out let alone time to weigh all discs.

Now what about the nose radius of a disc, the diameter, and the flexibility? With the nose radius and the flexibility you need very specific tools. As far as the diameter it's easy to measure, but over time it's very possible for a disc to lose a couple millimeters.

I think a better solution than putting the responsibility on the TD's would be for the PDGA to do spot checks. Kind of like random drug testing. I don't know how the logistics would work but the idea would be to just randomly pull discs from each manufacture and retest them. There would then need to be some type of system in place if a disc doesn't meet the standards. Maybe x number of months to fix the problem then retest. The harder problem comes when a 2nd or 3rd problem arises. Do you make it so all discs by ______ manufacture are not legal for tournaments for 6 months? That's a hard question to deal with.

If you believe that disc spec enforcement is a priority, what program(s) would you take the money from to pay for that kind of testing and enforcement? Also, if a disc already in production doesn't pass, how would you differentiate that run of discs from other runs of the same disc already in circulation?

 

[Disc Fiend]

Mike Solt FTW!

 

[Ripper]

Does the magazine generate advertising revenue?

 

[bikinjack]

Here is my first big question.

If you have not joined the PDGA or decided not to renew your membership, how come?

I want to start compiling a list and see what the major reasons are for not joining or renewing. I will get the list started.

• To expensive
• I don't play any tournaments
• I only play 3-4 events a year so I just pay the $10
• I don't know what I get for my membership fee
• I don't care about the magazine or a rating

I really want to hear from players on DGCR that are not members. Members feel free to chime and tell me what might get you to renew.

I have never joined, and don't currently have any plans to do so. My interest in disc golf is much more on the recreational side of things, and also in course work/construction. I don't see any benefit that's worth the $50 or whatever. I might possibly join if there was a much lower cost "Supporting Member" option. I've only ever played one sanctioned tourney, and didn't particularly enjoy it. I've actually spent way more time volunteering at tournaments than playing in them. (Admittedly, I'm probably an oddity there.)

I don't see that the PDGA does very much on the advocacy side of things. If there was an organization that worked mainly to get new courses installed, I would support it financially and otherwise.

For comparison, I've been involved in the cycling community for many years. There are many advocacy groups such as IMBA, Bikes Belong, and the League of American Bicyclists. These groups have no official ties to the competitive side of cycling (USA Cycling or the UCI). I think disc golf needs something along these lines, and I'm not too sure that role can be properly filled by the PDGA. Show me that it can, and I'll join in a heartbeat.

Long story short, there's not enough in it for me.

All that said, I wish you luck Shawn.

 

[grodney]

Hi Shawn, what's up?

I think a lot of people see the PDGA as a tournament player's org. The sense I get is that a lot of people want it to be MORE than that (and/or LESS of that).

As for your retention question, the standard reply has always been: "Retention rate for PDGA is similar to other orgs.". Period. End of discussion.

But really, isn't there more to it? Doesn't the PDGA have the data to look at who is renewing and who isn't, and therefore hypothesize WHY people are renewing or non-renewing? Here's something I posted a couple-few weeks ago:

"
In whatever year I studied it (probably 2003), I found 2222 new members from the prior year, 1395 of which renewed, for a NEW MEMBER retention rate of 63%.

It broke down by rating as:
Unrated (30% of the new members) - 41% renewal rate
Rated <900 (49% of the new members) - 68% renewal rate
Rated 900+ (21% of the new members) - 82% renewal rate

So,
30% of new members were unrated after 1 year, and 4/10 renewed.
21% of new members were rated 900+, and 8/10 renewed.
"

Here is another interesting membership issue, retention. Where are they going and how do we keep them?

PDGA # 2012 2013 % change
19001 - 20000 161 160 0.6%
20001 - 21000 151 167 -9.6%
21001 - 22000 172 173 -0.6%
22001 - 23000 183 188 -2.7%
23001 - 24000 159 184 -13.6%
24001 - 25000 177 201 -11.9%
25001 - 26000 209 239 -12.6%
26001 - 27000 216 248 -12.9%
27001 - 28000 221 248 -10.9%
28001 - 29000 236 284 -16.9%
29001 - 30000 237 291 -18.6%
30001 - 31000 214 238 -10.1%
31001- 32000 235 284 -17.3%
32001 - 33000 256 301 -15.0%
33001 - 34000 287 335 -14.3%
34001 - 35000 340 414 -17.9%
35001 - 36000 321 380 -15.5%
36001 - 37000 293 350 -16.3%
37001 - 38000 315 380 -17.1%
38001 - 39000 351 429 -18.2%
39001 - 40000 299 382 -21.7%
40001 - 41000 314 406 -22.7%
41001 - 42000 384 496 -22.6%
42001 - 43000 426 544 -21.7%
43001 - 44000 419 524 -20.0%
44001 - 45000 403 521 -22.6%
45001 - 46000 463 735 -37.0%
46001 - 47000 557 990 -43.7%
47001 - 48000 545 988 -44.8%
48001 - 49000 513 965 -46.8%
49001 - 50000 535 941 -43.1%
50001 - 51000 862 1037 -16.9%

 

[jenb]

Hi Shawn, what's up?

Here's something I posted a couple-few weeks ago:

"
In whatever year I studied it (probably 2003), I found 2222 new members from the prior year, 1395 of which renewed, for a NEW MEMBER retention rate of 63%.

It broke down by rating as:
Unrated (30% of the new members) - 41% renewal rate
Rated <900 (49% of the new members) - 68% renewal rate
Rated 900+ (21% of the new members) - 82% renewal rate

So,
30% of new members were unrated after 1 year, and 4/10 renewed.
21% of new members were rated 900+, and 8/10 renewed.
"

My impression is that tournaments cater to those rated over 900. For example, men's intermediate gets a 35 point spread in that division of 900-935, for a much more closely competitive experience. And if there are new, unrated layers capable of throwing advanced rated rounds, they usually start out in rec and bag that division, instead of ruining the experience for the int men. Meanwhile, men's rec is usually being dominated either by unrated players throwing one or more advanced rated rounds, or players rated near 900 throwing int rated rounds. So the average player rated below 875 is usually out of luck, and those rated under 850 rarely cash at all. These observations are based on the divisions that are typically offered around here, and that does not include novice. So I think TDs have to share some of the credit for lower rated players feeling left out in the cold as far as PDGA tournaments are concerned.

 

[grodney]

My impression is that tournaments cater to those rated over 900.

When I was on the Ratings Committee, I advocated for the PDGA to provide incentives, structure, and support to TDs for running events that didn't include Adv and Pro divisions. I don't know if that was a good idea, but I thought it was at the time.

p.s. This included providing X number of memberships for the tournament to give as prizes to the highest-finishing non-members (or whoever they wanted to give them to).

 

[bhadella]

Does the magazine generate advertising revenue?

I was thinking the same thing. Shouldn't ads offset a good portion of the cost of producing a magazine? If not, it should be cut in half. I personally think that the previews of upcoming tournaments (many of which have already occured before I receive my magazine) and reviews of tournament results (six months old by time of publication) are wasted space. Stories celebrating the history of the PDGA are very interesting as are the player stories. I'd love more stories on the up-and-coming players (like the kids that tore up the USADGC) about future stars. Celebrating and focusing on growth in the 6-16 age group is how we grow the sport.

 

[Dave242]

Here is my first big question.

If you have not joined the PDGA or decided not to renew your membership, how come?

I want to start compiling a list and see what the major reasons are for not joining or renewing. I will get the list started.

• To expensive
• I don't play any tournaments
• I only play 3-4 events a year so I just pay the $10
• I don't know what I get for my membership fee
• I don't care about the magazine or a rating

I really want to hear from players on DGCR that are not members. Members feel free to chime and tell me what might get you to renew.

I played my first PDGA event 3 months before my 3rd/last child was born and my oldest was 3 (that was 2003). I played 3-6 PDGA events per year for the next 4 years. Then I stopped renewing as I did not have enough time to devote to competitive golf (not just the tournaments....but practicing as I cannot stand to see my game decline - makes tournaments no fun. So why play then?)

• Life changes. Specifically, a growing family.

 

[_MTL_]

So what is the trade off if we introduce a supporting only membership $20, then reduce the membership fees down to say...$35 for everyone? That's a $350,000 + hit! We would need +/- 13,000 additional members.

This is why I think we need to take a chance on tiered membership.

You still offer the Pro and Am memberships the same way and they get the same benefits, but you add in a supporting member. That person gets, say, a number, online benefits (message board), the magazine. Let's say this is $25.

Then you have another tier which gets all of this but can also run PDGA events and can also vote in PDGA elections. Let's say this is $35.

Both of these memberships allow players to play in events and get round ratings and points, however they have to pay the $10 fee. Or make it $5 instead. Yeah, I like that better.

This accomplishes a few things, I believe.

1. It allows the guy who says "$50 for a year? I only play 1 event a year, the mat doesn't make sense." Now he is more likely to get the $25 membership and pay the $5. This is increased revenue (from $10 to $30). Also, this player now has the added bonus of a player rating from that one event a year.

2. It rewards the John Biscoes of the world - guys that don't compete anymore but are great tournament directors and want to and continue to run events.

In theory, this could reduce reveune - in the John Biscoe example, you are taking a guy who pays either $50 or $75 a year and decreasing it to $35 or what not. However, I think the overall gain of the number of $25 memberships you get plus I think the number of $10 non-member fees would actually increase (you still will have the same number of non-members playing, but I think you will get more of the once a year guys to play a 2nd event b/c now they will get a rating, now they have a PDGA number, now they will get points, etc). I also think this greatly increases the chances that player pays the $50 next year now that he has experienced a few different events, points, ratings, etc.

And you have an added bonus of membership with the $5 compared to the $10.

"Join the PDGA for just $25 and you can play in any PDGA event for just $5 extra! Plus get the Disc Golfer Magazine, round ratings, your own number, etc etc"

That sounds MUCH more appealing to the once a year guy than pay $50 to save $10.

 

[krupicka]

I think the $25+$5/event idea has merit.

 

[NOStheBOSS]

I agree, but I think the PDGA can shoot themselves in the foot with too many memberships/more comnplicated structure. But I like the lower tier membership idea. Although the 25+5 would convince some players, it will also create a new "$30 for one event?!" crowd, unfortunately

 

[_MTL_]

I agree, but I think the PDGA can shoot themselves in the foot with too many memberships/more comnplicated structure. But I like the lower tier membership idea. Although the 25+5 would convince some players, it will also create a new "$30 for one event?!" crowd, unfortunately

Right, but obviously people are more likely to spend $30 than $50 especially when $30 includes round ratings, the magazine and other benefits when $10 does not.

 

[shawnsinclair]

The magazine costs +/- 200k a year.
*

The budget covers the following related expenses:

·******* Magazine staff

·******* Contributor content (articles, photographers)

·******* Art

·******* Layout

·******* Printing & shipping

·******* Postage

·******* Advertising sales

·******* Travel

·******* Misc. Expenses

·******* Tour program (Spring issue)

The rest of the expenses are covered by advertising.

So bottom line the magazine is expensive to produce. I also agree that it needs to move in the direction of more personal interest stories that are not time sensitive.

 

[BgWvDave]

The magazine costs +/- 200k a year.
*

i find that number way excessive. I am a proponent for a magazine but i don't think the Org. should be paying for it. especialy to the tune of the number above. Print media is dying a miserable death. which i feel is a bad thing. But plain and simple from a business standpoint if the magazine can not pay for itself through advertising dollars then it should be discontinued or gutted to get the cost down.

 

[shawnsinclair]

If you believe that disc spec enforcement is a priority, what program(s) would you take the money from to pay for that kind of testing and enforcement? Also, if a disc already in production doesn't pass, how would you differentiate that run of discs from other runs of the same disc already in circulation?

Very good questions, which is why I started my reply with we have tech standards that can't be enforced. It would be easy to spot check most of the manufacturers at NT's and majors but more difficult to include all. I think just the notion that the pdga would be doing random spot checks would go a long way to help the problems.

As far as discs already in players hands this would be a little bit more difficult. However in other sports equipment changes and players have to change their equipment. Golf changed the grooves in the clubs, table tennis outlawed speed glue, and changed the size of the ball, I believe tennis changed the size of their ball too. If it turns out that disc xyz is to wide, then we make an announcement on the website and to the td's. My guess is the players will regulate this issue.

Something that would go a long way is the model of disc needs to be molded in the disc. I know a few do this. This would help with enforcement issues.