I'm just curious what other TDs think about the increase in non-member fees from $5 to $8 in 2006.

or even 10 dollars :D

Is the intent to increase PDGA revenues, increase PDGA membership, or discourage non-member participation?

I'm just curious what other TDs think about the increase in non-member fees from $5 to $8 in 2006.


Has that been announced?

just off the top of my head, $8 is starting to get up there. its a significant percentage of most lower division fees. i feel it is at the upper upper end of what would fly. and i would bet that at least a few non-members would not do it twice.

If the local DGRZ didn't know, then I'm curious... proposed increase, or what?

why not take a bad idea and make it worse? the PDGA's greed is relentless.

Just another way to force you to buy a membership :eek:

Oh wait I mean just another reason to be a member......ummm well you know what I mean :eek:

It might be an incentive to join, for some. Are membership 'dues' set-to increase?

These are not member fees but NON-member fees. I believe in several sports only members can enter. So, relative to joining the org for $40 or not playing, I wouldn't think $8 is an unreasonable option, especially when you can also get a 3-month trial membership for $10 instead.

Youse aboves Two must think the organization will just waste the $$, despite being Pro-PDGA, methinks...[?] :confused:

how about a twenty dollar a year fee for posting on the thread for non member:Dand raise the non-member entry fee to 6 dollars :DGrunion would love that /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif :D

3 month trial membership for $10 ?

Isn't that $5 now ?

If the non-member rates are increased and membership dues for first-time joiners was cut in half, I think that might be the best of all worlds for increasing membership, covering operating costs, and growing event attendance.

IMO, $8 is only pocket change more than $5, but it "feels" like a much steeper price to pay just for the privilege of participating in a PDGA event. Not sure that the semi-casual golfer will feel the value proposition of $8 on top of the entry fee will be worth it. Many struggle with justifying the $5 adder today.

I will prolly be a member for the rest of my life. I like watching my stats and rating improve and I will continue to pay for that untill I see a great reason otherwise.

Just because I dont agree with the PDGA doesnt mean I dont think the membership is worth it.

Heck I would prolly pay 50 or 75 a year if I had to.

There is no $5 or $8 non-member fee, only a $5 or $8 member discount.

Why you guys always got to be player hatin'?

If it's a $5-$8 discount, our payout calculations are way off. :D

There is no $5 or $8 non-member fee, only a $5 or $8 member discount.

Why you guys always got to be player hatin'?



What are you talking about???

I think he is poking fun at the semantics game that TD's play with advertising late registration fees. Instead of the penalty for slackers (feels negative and punative), they word it as a savings for the people who take initiative and pre-register (sounds positive and rewarding).

Positive marketing spin versus negative. reward versus punishment. Same effect though.

There is no $5 or $8 non-member fee, only a $5 or $8 member discount.


It sure seems like a fee to a Director, if you have to pass that $$ collected, on to the PDGA. But it's considered a discount for which the non-member player is not eligible...right? :p

If it is going up I hope the $3 difference goes to the the local club.

There is no $5 or $8 non-member fee, only a $5 or $8 member discount.


Currently, it is neither. Only PDGA members are allowed to play in PDGA sanctioned events, and the $5 non-member fee is technically a temporary and restricted membership that lasts for the duration of that tourney.

If the non-member rates are increased and membership dues for first-time joiners was cut in half, I think that might be the best of all worlds for increasing membership, covering operating costs, and growing event attendance.


I'm for those last 3 goals as well, but will half-price cover the one-time gifts, and the Magazine subscription? That's one slick publication; it's a selling point, too.

If JoeDiscGolfer has to pay $16 for a temp membership for 'just' two tourneys, $20 for a six-month window sounds pretty inviting. Sent 'em two DGWNs to seal-the-deal and I see a renewal. ;)

...give 1st-Time Renewals the regular gifts. :)

I don't know if it has been "announced." It has been voted on and passed unanimously by our Board and published in their minutes. I guess I'm announcing it.

I'm still not sure what to think of this. For the non-member does it make joining more attractive, or does it make playing unsanctioned tournaments more attractive?

I don't know if it has been "announced." It has been voted on and passed unanimously by our Board and published in their minutes. I guess I'm announcing it.


Is this a nugget from the magazine that I don't have yet, or am I missing a link to web-published minutes. :)

For the non-member does it make joining more attractive, or does it make playing unsanctioned tournaments more attractive?

the reason for your confusion is that it does neither.

what it does for the non-member is make playing sanctioned events less attractive.

Thank you. That clarifies everything.

At our last tournament we filled to fivesomes on the Rec-Int day and half were non-members.

What happens next season, though; any guess? Will fewer play?

i'm not sure if you are agreeing or not.

question: did you charge the $8 fee?

this is a classic marginal rate of substitution case. the only thing certain from the data given (that the price of one component of a basket of goods, ie sanctioned event price is going up) is that the affordability of the sanctioned event will go down. assuming that players are already behaving rationally in economic terms, their only choice is to substitute non-sanctioned events for the newly more expensive sanctioned events.

they COULD mitigate the change by sacrificing events and subtituting with a PDGA membership... but to pull that off would require an outreach to the non-member that convinces them that their satisfaction level will be maintained or increased by playing less events until their membership is paid for.

i could draw out all the graphs i spose.

so much depends on what the pdga is trying to accomplish with this change. economics indicates that increased event participation is not the objective. increased membership COULD be the objective, but success would require a marketing campaign focused on non-members who turn up at sanctioned events. the absence of such a campaign would indicate that the decision is more of a spaghetti on the wall exercise and not a serious business decision.

other factors that COULD come into play include:
availability of events within a player's willing-to-travel range;
willingness of a player to accept less of some other non-disc related activity in order to maintain the same level of disc golf participation;
non-members as a group experience an increase in their income and allocate a portion of their increase to disc golf

Maybe we just haven't heard the campaign, but for sure I'd like to know 'what the pdga is trying to accomplish with this change?'

I really hope the PDGA does not do this. I was involved with 8 PDGA events in 2005 that accomodated 921 players. 257 of those were happy to pay their $5.00 PDGA fees. That's a $,1285 check to the PDGA. The PDGA is increasing in membership every year. Our area is gaining players and interest. Please do not charge $8.00.It will turn players away!

Paying the $5 fee keeps me from going to some events. I'm just a rec player who goes to tournaments for fun and friends. If it increases, then it's highly likely that I will go to the tournaments and help out, but not play at all. I know there are a bunch of people like me, I just nominated myself as spokesperson.

How many are you going to miss?

what it does for the non-member is make playing sanctioned events less attractive.

Bingo. I never got around to joining before I stopped playing a while ago, but I guarantee an $8 extra fee is not an incentive to get me to play now. I can't make it out to hardly any tournaments as it is, so a $40 membership fee for hardly any use isn't worthwhile either. I read an article in either Fortune or Forbes a few years ago about the universal bribe currency of $20. I believe this can be adapted to an $8 versus $5 fee. A 5 dollar bill is one piece of currency, easily spent, doesn't psychologically seem like that much. $8 requires either a $5 and three ones, or break a $10. People underestimate the psychological aspect of pricing, there's a reason why things cost $199.99 and not $200. If somebody believes mentally they're spending more than they want to, it turns them away.

By that logic, using a single $10 bill for a 3-month membership will be even more attractive than the $8 nonmember fee that requires 4 bills...

In a lot of situations, yes. However as the overall total price increases, so does perception of cost. Mentally $8 is associated as $5 + another fixed sum. $10 is seen as simply $10. Once you reach that point though, some may simply not be willing to pay $10 or $8. Perception of value for each person ultimately has a price cap, once that price cap is reached it doesn't matter if it's an appealing number or not. If you create a situation that is perceived as currency plus, it has a negative impact. If you create a situation that is perceived as currency minus, it has a positive impact.

By that logic, using a single $10 bill for a 3-month membership will be even more attractive than the $8 nonmember fee that requires 4 bills...

actually, no it doesnt, at least necessarily. it only makes it more attractive IF the player already had considered the $10 temp membership and valued X events with the $5 fee more highly than X-Y events plus the $10 temp card.

besides, most events take checks from those folks who still use 'em, so its only one piece of paper no matter what the value.

i recognize you're disputing the number-of-bills argument in the previous post, and in that limited sense your response would be correct. but overall it ignores that number of bills is not the most important factor in price psychology. if it was then by the writers own example, 199.99 would be a less, not more, attractive price than $200 because he's gotta use the same number of bills, plus d!ck around with a penny change. but i think it is overwhelming agreeable that $5 is a fair more attractive price point than $8... breaking a $10 or finding some ones to go with the fiver is just one of the hurdles for an $8 price point.

regardless, this simply CANNOT add non-members to the playing roster. it can only exclude players. IF there is a nice, attractive, well-written, and HIGHLY PERSUASIVE supporting material that goes along with a change to $8, then there is a potential to increase membership - BUT that potential existed even inthe days of the $5 fee. i see zero upside to this change.

Listen to sandalman, he knows what he's talking about.

Pricing cannot be treated as an obligation to buy, that's where the $10 for a temp membership example breaks down. If someone doesn't place $10 worth of value into the membership, they'll just walk away. If you go above the level that someone is willing to spend money, no amount of apeal can reverse that. Is it objectively more appealing, yes, but only to those who have an interest in the first place. You have two factors in a change from $5 to $8. Not only is it more money, it's an unappealing number. Those will both drive casual people away, not bring them in. Those who are truly interested in disc golf will either buy a membershp anyway or not mind the price increase. Of all the outcomes this change can result in, very few are positive, even if you do use your imagination for what the PDGA is trying to accomplish.

I finally joined the PDGA at my last tournament mainly because I find myself playing in more tournaments. Over the last year I played four sanctioned tournaments where I ponied up the $5. It seamed like a nominal added charge for not being a member. Moving it to $8 would definitely have changed the value proposition.
$13 trophy only + $5 PDGA ok.
$13 + $8 PDGA fee, now the $8 is over half the entry fee portion.
That is a major mental shift. It was easy for me to recommend people to play sanctioned tournaments when the fee was $5. At $8, it doesn't sound as good. Overall, I probably would have only played 2 of these tournaments instead of the four if the fee had been $8. i.e. 4*5=20 vs 2*8=$16. Theoretical loss for the PDGA $4.

On the other hand, the PDGA membership does sound more attractive. It will only take 5 tournaments to pay for the membership instead of 8. As a casual player, I will probably not make 8 tournaments in a year, but 5 is more likely. In that case, the $8 fee makes PDGA membership better financial sense.

PDGA membership is growing, but from the banter I've read on these boards, it's not so much getting new members that is the problem as it is keeping them.

I have not seen a $10 for a 3month trial membership deal. Is this something you are proposing or is it currently in effect?

In colder climates, a 6 month membership covers just as many tourneys as a year long membership does. (At least it would have covered all the tourneys I played in the past year).

it's not so much getting new members that is the problem as it is keeping them.



And therein lies the logic of increasing nonmember fees. Member fees are not increasing so it makes membership more attractive on a relative basis.

And therein lies the logic of increasing nonmember fees. Member fees are not increasing so it makes membership more attractive on a relative basis.

Except they realize they don't play enough to pay $40 a year, and now they have to pay $8 to play a single tournament. The result? You lose them, the exact opposite of the intent. It will drive away casual players in a huge way.

please explain that logic in more detail. i'm not getting it.

I think the forecast is that the total revenue from nonmember fees will increase. In economic terms, the price change at this level is presumed to have a more inelastic than elastic response. The number of nonmembers would have to drop 40% for the revenue to go down. With the alternative of a 3-month membership at $10 that includes the magazine and the ability to use this as a down payment toward the full fee (which wasn't the case this year), it seems like reasonable set of options.

Non members are usually recreation or intermediate amatures. they are also funding the pro cash pool, as any winnings they get are paid in plastic discs, not cash.

Their entry fee, even if they win, is money given away. They will not get any back, regardless of outcome.

increasing the cost of competition will only narrow the am1 and rec fields. The cost of membership can easily be viewed in the same way. Generally making these players restrict themselves to non-sanctioned and "mini" tournaments.

I know that this is a seperate can of worms, but it must be viewed from the point of view of these "rec" players, and their total cost to compete.

I'm not sure what the point of your post was, but reducing the number of competing rec and am players is putting a choke hold on the future of the sport. Who do you think becomes tomorrow's professionals?

if that is the logic, the pdga should consider obtaining the services of a qualified and brilliant economist to complement its qualified and brilliant statistician.

the scenario you outlined can be valid ONLY if backed up with some very persuasive point of sale propaganda. as mentioned previously, the option of having those materials existed before, at the lower price point.

and to borrow your own phrasing, "with that logic" why not just go to $10, since then participation could down 50% before a net loss of immediate revenue was felt.

perhaps more importantly, if we are thinking that a 40% loss of non-member participation represents NOTHING WORSE than a revenue-equal proposition, we are also saying we place ZERO value on new participants. that is not even logic - thats a failure to grasp the most basic concepts of marketing, customer creation AND customer retention - all at once.

better add a marketing person to the economist on the next draft wish list!

wow.

Without getting into the reasons why I do not renew, i will say that I do not think I will be playing any PDGA events next year because of this. I already did not care to pay the five, and I know of plenty of poeple who dont play because of the five that will definatly never have a change of heart on that now.

I'm not sure what the point of your post was, but reducing the number of competing rec and am players is putting a choke hold on the future of the sport. Who do you think becomes tomorrow's professionals?



you appear to have understood my point perfectly. we need to make sanctioned events more attractive, not more restrictive. we need to lower the cost, not raise the cost of competition for the lowest divisions.

and there you have it straight from a nonmember - the target of this change.


it would be better to REDUCE the fee to $3, or to issue a six-month moratorium, or to provide a FREE 6-MONTH membership at no cost to ANY nonmember who plays in a sanctioned event in the 2006 calendar year.

any of these options could easily turn out revenue-positive (especially relative to an $8 nonmember fee) in the short term... and membership-positive in the long term. which also mean hugely revenue-positive in the long term.

if that is the logic, the pdga should consider obtaining the services of a qualified and brilliant economist to complement its qualified and brilliant statistician.

the scenario you outlined can be valid ONLY if backed up with some very persuasive point of sale propaganda. as mentioned previously, the option of having those materials existed before, at the lower price point.

and to borrow your own phrasing, "with that logic" why not just go to $10, since then participation could down 50% before a net loss of immediate revenue was felt.

perhaps more importantly, if we are thinking that a 40% loss of non-member participation represents NOTHING WORSE than a revenue-equal proposition, we are also saying we place ZERO value on new participants. that is not even logic - thats a failure to grasp the most basic concepts of marketing, customer creation AND customer retention - all at once.

better add a marketing person to the economist on the next draft wish list!

wow.



Yes. This will also create more work for the TD, who will now not only have to sell his tourament, but also the PDGA.

I don't think that this decision presents a crisis or anything, but I do think it is economically naive and counter-productive.

The PDGA's own analysis a few years ago showed that collecting non-member fees was far more profitable than selling memberships. The income from memberships gets eaten up almost entirely by the cost of member services, whereas the income from non-members is 90% gravy.

I think the upshot of this is that some of those non-members will join, and the PDGA makes less money on them, and some will not play the tournament, and the PDGA makes no money on them. For a lot of those non-members it is not $3 more than last year; they did not play a tournament last year. It is just $8 for not being a member of the club.

If nothing else, I think this makes it a lot harder for the PDGA to break into regions where it is not established already.

I don't think the dollar value of the nonmember fee was or should be considered a marketing tool. I believe there are more nonmembers who have just taken advantage of the option to avoid paying the full membership and don't intend to join or renew like Scott. Those who are inclined to join don't continue to use the nonmember fee. Perhaps they use it once or twice, then join. They are more likely to use the 3-month membership which is much more of a marketing tool. It will now be even better with the option to use the $10 as a down payment toward full membership. With memberships AND retention rate both increasing, it makes more sense to try and boost revenues from nonmembers than tax members further.

I don't think the dollar value of the nonmember fee was or should be considered a marketing tool.



If it apears on a PDGA sactioned tournament flyer or regisration form, then it is a marketing tool.

The PDGA's own analysis a few years ago showed that collecting non-member fees was far more profitable than selling memberships. The income from memberships gets eaten up almost entirely by the cost of member services, whereas the income from non-members is 90% gravy.

then the pdga is might silly when it comes to maketing and economics.

perhaps we should make them really really happy and just not renew. they'd really get off on all the nonmember fees i bet :D

their own analysis is goofy. the incremental cost of membership services approaches zero as membership increases. (or at least it should in a well-run organization anyway). it also provide long term strength to the organiation.

i agree with you bruce - milking non members for a couple quick bux is incredibly naive and frighteningly short-sighted.

The very existence of a nonmember fee is a marketing tool by default, but its dollar value is not. The specific dollar cost will have little bearing on whether someone considers a membership worthwhile. The key decision is whether the value of PDGA benefits versus the dollar cost of a 3-month or full year membership are worthwhile.

so, lets hear the objective of this change!

because $0 is a dollar value also, and by your logic, could therefore be considered marketing tool.

the best way to increase membership is to give nomembers a taste of membership, then focus on retention.

but it would be great to hear the specifics of the objective. is it to generate new members or to generate ready cash?

the best way to increase membership is to give nomembers a taste of membership, then focus on retention.



I don't disagree. My thought would have been different from the choices made but I was not part of the discussion, just a bystander who listened to some of it. My thought would be to perhaps completely remove the nonmember fee and make a single fee of $8 that is a 3-month membership for those who have never been members or an $8 downpayment on renewal for those who have a PDGA number. These potential renewers would have 30 days from the event to pay the balance of the annual fee. If they don't, it results in a defacto $8 nonmember fee. The benefit of this proposal is that everyone submitted on the TD report is a member for the event even if temporary. You can argue whether the number should be $5 or 6 or 7 or 8, but I like the consolidated single fee concept that gets everyone as a member, even if just for 30 days for some.

ah, i see. so we are in basic agreement. a free/included membership with full member priviledges would be awesome! they'd get at least one issue of the mag, get rated, and all that other stuff. i hope the pdga will give this approach a shot next time around.

The problem w/ free is that I can see it easily being abused. At some tourneys, higher rated players use a pseudonym and compete as a Rec player and pony up the non-member fee. Making the non-member fee $0 makes this scam so much easier for the hustler. To prevent the wide spread abuse the TDs would have to check IDs at registration. Like they need more work. :p

The problem w/ free is that I can see it easily being abused. At some tourneys, higher rated players use a pseudonym and compete as a Rec player and pony up the non-member fee. Making the non-member fee $0 makes this scam so much easier for the hustler. To prevent the wide spread abuse the TDs would have to check IDs at registration. Like they need more work. :p

This is the second time you've made this allegation in an unsubstantiated sort of way. If you'd give us a name, he would not ever do that again.

I didn't make the original allegation (twas made by clonefan94 on the other board) and I don't know who he was referring to (heck I don't even know who clonefan94 is). Bruce, I know you make the extra effort to have some of the best tournaments and I wouldn't expect you to turn a blind eye to junk like that. It's just something I could see being abused.

Last year I TD a C-Tier where 30 of the 41 participants were not PDGA members. I cut a bigger check to the PDGA than I did to the top open player and I payed out 200%. I have no problem in doing that if the the percieved value in playing a sanctioned event is worth the extra money. It now does not make sense to sanction my small one day tournament as a C-tier event. There is no way that the percieved value of playing in a PDGA event is worth $8 to a non-member for that small of an event. Utah is an area where disc golf is in its infancy but has been growing rapidly. We only have three events a year that are sanctioned. Alot of the AM particpation we see at our sanctioned events is from non-members. So essentially this is going to discourage AM players from PDGA events. If AM players are the future of the sport, I don't see how this positive in encouraging AM participation at PDGA events. It is clear to me that the PDGA BOD is pushing their own agenda and greed down the throats of the players and TD's.

From the minutes of the same Board meeting under the ongoing challenges section it states, " The PDGA continues to struggle with an ongoing image problem, not least generated from the DISCussion Board". Do they honestly think that this helps the image of PDGA?

At the TD level, I want more Ams playing because they contribute to the bottom line of the tournament finance model. Most non-members are ams. The PDGA raising the non-member fee therefore affects my tournament bottom-line if it discourages non-members from playing.

Chuck, was this line of thought explored at all during the discussion of this rate hike? Or was discussion only focused on the PDGA organizational level dollar?

...I'm interested in the idea of 3/6 month trial "memberships"; is that just banter? :confused:

Sorry. My mistake. It was the second time I saw that in two days from a northern Illinois player. Thought it was the same person posting.

Maybe the PDGA will use the extra $3 per non-member and go and buy a friggin' clue. Every year it gets harder to write that check.

Let's bully (financially) people into joining. Sheer genius.

that what ya get for focusing on the fine print instead of the guys name :D

If the temp membership is $10 per quarter, I predict that many members will opt to not renew their full-year memberships and instead buy 2 or 3 temp memberships to cover the tourney-heavy months of the schedule.

This would represent a revenue net-loss scenario for the PDGA, and more work for the TDs to administer those 2 or 3 temp memberships instead of 1 real membership.

if it was me, i would give either a ONETIME temp membership for a low ($8-10) fee, or a ONETIME FREE temp membership. i would track it by name, address, drivers license number, retina scan, gps anklet, rectal exam, whatever. we have the means to do so.

If the temp membership is $10 per quarter, I predict that many members will opt to not renew their full-year memberships and instead buy 2 or 3 temp memberships to cover the tourney-heavy months of the schedule.



The $10 3-month (developmental) membership is only available to those who have never been members or who haven't been members since 2001. Those who are just non-current for the past few years can't do this and would pay either the nonmember fee or renew to play.

All I have to go by is what I read on this here message board. :)

If the temp membership is $10 per quarter, I predict that many members will opt to not renew their full-year memberships and instead buy 2 or 3 temp memberships to cover the tourney-heavy months of the schedule.



The $10 3-month (developmental) membership is only available to those who have never been members or who haven't been members since 2001. Those who are just non-current for the past few years can't do this and would pay either the nonmember fee or renew to play.



It is also only available to those players who are qualified as above AND play D and C tier tournaments---If we are talking about the same developmental membership requirements that were in place this year.

Like a non-member is even going to know that a developmental membership is an option. The more I look at these changes, the less I want to think about them.

What is the good that can possibly result from this?

Like a non-member is even going to know that a developmental membership is an option. The more I look at these changes, the less I want to think about them.

What is the good that can possibly result from this?



It will do a lot of good for anyone sitting on the fence about whether to sanction their event or not. Makes it a much easier decision.

I have to agree with you Jim. But it would be easier to justify if we knew where the money was going. Does anybody out there even know what the PDGA's employees get for salaries? And what the volunteers can and do claim as expenses? I don't. Its hard to support an organization that's turned its back on its own constitution.

Maybe this won't really affect me after all.

In 2004 my EIEIO tourney had 14 non-members in a field of 86 players.

In 2005, there were 5 non-members in a field of 90 and we turned people away. It is very likely that there were 5 PDGA members waiting to fill those spots even if all 5 of those non-members decided that $8 was way too much.

I still don't like it, though. My one-day C-tier/wannabe-B-tier is the perfect type of tourney to encourage "never played a tourney" people to try. Now there will be $13 added on top with a $8 PDGA fee and a $5 SoCal fee.

I have to agree with you Jim. But it would be easier to justify if we knew where the money was going. Does anybody out there even know what the PDGA's employees get for salaries? And what the volunteers can and do claim as expenses? I don't. Its hard to support an organization that's turned its back on its own constitution.



Constitutionally you have no right to ask any of those questions Jason. You must be a current member.

I have to agree with you Jim. But it would be easier to justify if we knew where the money was going...

i think the point was that sanctioning will occur less frequently.

btw, the whole salary thing is completely irrelevant.

Nick you're such a company man. I can ask the question, and like everyone, PDGA member or not, I don't get an answer.

so the question arises again and yet you will NEVER get the answer your looking for. We will find the information you are looking for though. No since in keeping it a secret when it will come out in the wash anyway. Well thats what I think of it anyway.

Laterz

It's the "small market" tournaments that are going to have a problem. I have gotten several blank stares from new tournament players at a couple of C tiers I've worked when you have to tell them that "yeah I know the flyer said $20 but it's an extra $5 if you're not a PDGA member." "Well what do I get for the $5?" "You get to play in the tournament." "Isn't that what the $20 is for?" ... Now $8 isn't all that much, but I have seen a couple people who didn't have cash left for lunch because they didn't know about the $5 and only brought a couple of extra bucks for food.

Don't even get me started on how much of a pain it's going to be to try and make change.

This is about commitment and the different levels of commitment to organized disc golf.

Here are a few original and never heard of before ideas for TDs who want to attract players scared off by an $8 fee for playing in a PDGA:
Run Twice a Week Tags Rounds
Run Monthlies
Run Weekly Doubles
Get them into a Local League Night
Involved in Course Clean Up Days

When, if ever they are ready for a higher (or just different) level of commitment to organized disc golf and think "I Want to Help Grow The Sport" or "I'm too lazy and selfish to actually help in any other way so I'll pay a measly $40 membership fee to help out", or "I don't fully comprehend all the things the PDGA does for me, few do, but I can see that they are the only game in town and they at least give us rules and the potential to someday stop crying like little spoiled brat babies and take ownership of the challenges that face organized disc golf and stop blaming others who do more for the sport than we could ever hope to do". At that point $8 or $40 will be of nearly no consequence to them.

There is no disc golf topic I find more ironic than the one of wanting to attract new players, when we have only one product to offer and one product only: Playing for each others entry fees in the form of cash or prizes.

We worry far too much about the wrapping and nearly not at all about the contents of the package.

Jim, you need to publicize the $5/$8 in your flyers and announcements.

From your comments so far I can see that you consider this a burden, but try to consider that you are the PDGA, that you represent them, that you very much want new members, that these new members be a part of your local and possibly local network that are all coordinated to help promote organized disc golf on a worldwide level. Because that is really exactly what it is. You just need discover how it can help you and your efforts to promote disc golf, prepare yourself to answer such stares and statements with valid and meaningful answers, and you will feel much more comfortable (not to mention including it in your flyers and mailers that their is an additional fee for non-members) doing your part to build our membership.

As a not-for-profit organization based primarily on volunteers we will likely never win good solid members by means of bribing them with expensive goodies, we have a ways to go, if ever, we are in a position to do that. Besides, what we already offer is not chopped liver, is it?


It's the "small market" tournaments that are going to have a problem. I have gotten several blank stares from new tournament players at a couple of C tiers I've worked when you have to tell them that "yeah I know the flyer said $20 but it's an extra $5 if you're not a PDGA member." "Well what do I get for the $5?" "You get to play in the tournament." "Isn't that what the $20 is for?" ... Now $8 isn't all that much, but I have seen a couple people who didn't have cash left for lunch because they didn't know about the $5 and only brought a couple of extra bucks for food.

Don't even get me started on how much of a pain it's going to be to try and make change.

No more a company man than your commitment to the Marshall Street For Profit Project Jason. You are the one that cited the PDGA Constitution as a means for you to access our financial details, I only clarified that you as a non-member have no such right.

In fact I have no more right to see your tax returns or the revenues generated by the MSDGC than you do to see the PDGA financial statement.

Is it fair for me to say you are dishonest and have something to hide because you won't share your tax returns?

You have a bone to pick with Brian, we all know about it, whoo pee! Don't throw out the baby with the beer Jason. The PDGA is not just Brian, it is all the other National Tour TDs and Volunteers, it is the PDGA Rules Committee, it is the EDGE Program, it is the Course Directory, it is the PDGA Website, it is the PDGA State Coordinators, it is the network of regional and local clubs, it is the entire PDGA Membership, heck it is even your co-TD.

Try to keep that in mind when you hurl insults at the PDGA or don't miss a chance to go pessimistic on us. What are you going to do, replace all of what I just mentioned? Do it all yourself!?! There is arrogance and then there is arrogance.

If you want an answer then stop being so lite in the pants and make a commitment to the PDGA. Not to me, not to Brian, but to all of the other folks that make up 99.9999% of it. You couldn't possibly hate all of them, do you?


Nick you're such a company man. I can ask the question, and like everyone, PDGA member or not, I don't get an answer.

Nick first of all I don't run them, I just help out when I can. Secondly, every flyer for a PDGA event I have ever seen has the $5 for non-PDGA member disclaimer on it but if you don't know what the PDGA is, you're not going to know whether you're a member. Thirdly, I do not consider it a burden, I consider it a misguided attempt to try and force people to join the PDGA by charging them extra if they don't. This is merely my opinion. Now the only question is how long will it take for Jeffy to post an attack on you. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Nick,

If you want to get Jeffy off your back, beat him in a D contest.

Oh yeah, that doesn't work either.

One thing to keep in mind is that even though Bruce posted some info from the Board minutes for discussion, nothing is final until the actual 2006 Tour Guidelines document has been approved. Our Competition Committee is meeting by teleconference Thursday evening to finalize the Tour Guidelines draft for Board approval. I and other members of the Committee who have read this thread appreciate the comments and suggestions from both members and nonmembers. It will be taken into account before the final plan is hammered out.

Nick,

If you want to get Jeffy off your back, beat him in a D contest.

Oh yeah, that doesn't work either.



From all accounts Jeff is the biggest D in all of disc golf, so I wouldn't want to go there...

Nick where did you get all that, and why are so so worked up? I've been pointing to that line in the PDGA's constitution for about a year now. So what if I'm critical of the PDGA? Isn't criticism one way to improve an organization?

As for Marshall Street's profit motives, yes we would love to be making lots and lots of money. But for now the goal of Marshall Street is to promote the sport, so later -- much much later after we've developed far beyond where we are now -- we can be rich and famous and none of us will ever have to chainsaw, tamp, lop, mow, tap (the keg) or try to talk Tommy into getting rubber for his tee pads anymore. We've got a ways to go before that, and in the meantime we fully intend to enjoy every bit of the ride.

I also strongly believe that our events run much more smoothly without the assistance of the PDGA. And I'm not a PDGA member anymore, so what? Does that somehow invalidate my opinions? I don't think it does.

You seem to take even normal, well-intentioned criticism of the PDGA as a personal affront. Me, I don't much trust an organization that keeps its finances secret, its disciplinary proceedings out of public view, and disregards its own constitution. To me these points are clear and obvious, but I'm just one person, and a very opinionated one at that.

Does that make me a biatch, a puszee, a jerk, lite in the pants, or somehow hateful and troublesome? Well, I don't think it does. It's just me expressing my thoughts in a rational manner on a frisbee discussion page.

The $5 non-member fee is already unpopular in some parts of the southeast and is one reason many people don't run PDGA events. There are more TDs looking at PDGA sanctioning, but I feel like an increase to $8 will only cause more grief for the PDGA in an area where there are many opportunities to play quality unsanctioned events. Russ3523 :cool:

Dear PDGA,

Please listen to Russ in his post right above mine.

Rhett Stroh
#14540

Geez ... I haven't had time to read the board recently and I come back to find this ridiculous idea :confused: :(
As far as I can see, the PDGA does nothing to help persuade me to renew my membership each year and now it makes a decision to basically turn its nose up to the newbies and casual players. I don't have a degree in Economics, but I do have common sense ... and this don't make sense.

As far as I can see, the PDGA does nothing to help persuade me to renew my membership each year



While the reality is that many may see the PDGA like McDonalds where you pay money and get benefits that at least equal the value, my optimistic side hopes that many will and do respond positively to a simple, "Danny (or Pat, Bruce, Jason or ?), please renew your membership because it's good for all of us to work together for the betterment of the sport."

I'd like to think that's enough. I've got so many disc golf related projects and ideas to carry on for many, many years. It will go so much easier and be done more effectively as a partner with the PDGA than going it alone. I have no trust fund or special powers to pull this off, just the ability to do a good chunk of the work, communicate and persuade those with elected power, appointed power and with financial resources. Many other disc golfers could do the same should they care to try.

From all accounts Jeff is the biggest D in all of disc golf, so I wouldn't want to go there...



I live in MADC land, and while Jeff is annoying, you are the biggest d!ckhead in all of disc golf, Nick. Confirmed.

i definitely support the pdga and do not think that the splinter organizations mentioned in other threads will help get us where we want to go, but i think it's a big mistake to let anyone walk away from the opportunity to compete as a rec or junior player due to a non-member fee. that person may come back to become a competitive player later, but they may not.

i think that td's should have the discretion to sanction some divisions, but not all. if we've got 2 open holes and 8 rec players with $10 each that want the chance to get a disc in their player's package and compete for a trophy, then we should let them in!

tons of posts on this board are about how this sport and sponsorship are not growing fast enough. we are not in a position to let potential lifetime members walk away over $5 or $8.

i would even suggest the following scenario:
at 8:30 am registration closes for hypothetical tournament
at 8:31 am td "a" tells td "b", there are 2 open holes on the course that you can use for your event. td "b" then registers 8 rec players for $10 each for an unsanctioned event.
at 9:00 am everyone tees off and is good.

One thing to keep in mind is that even though Bruce posted some info from the Board minutes for discussion, nothing is final until the actual 2006 Tour Guidelines document has been approved. Our Competition Committee is meeting by teleconference Thursday evening to finalize the Tour Guidelines draft for Board approval. I and other members of the Committee who have read this thread appreciate the comments and suggestions from both members and nonmembers. It will be taken into account before the final plan is hammered out.



Thank you, Chuck.

Jason, do you want to make a difference on a Worldwide Level in Organized Disc Golf?

Or do you just want the PDGA to move out of your way?

In either case the decision is an easy one, please make it and either join in or go away.

Rhett,

2 Questions:

1) How many non-PDGA Members play in your PDGA events?
2) If it is a significant number, like 25% to 50%, why are you running PDGA events in the first place?

You guys are overcomplicating this. That PDGA events target PDGA players and players ready to play in PDGA events is not some kind of mistake, it is purposeful.

Sounds like you guys need to run more grassroots events.

You guys are overcomplicating this. That PDGA events target PDGA players and players ready to play in PDGA events is not some kind of mistake, it is purposeful.

Sounds like you guys need to run more grassroots events.



Nick,
In Ohio, courses are popping up in areas where there has been no disc golf before. Inevitably, C-tiers find their way to these courses. For MANY people these are their first experiences with the PDGA.

Raising the nonmember fee may cause countless people to not be exposed to the PDGA. Many of these new tournaments may not be sanctioned & therefore keep people from seeing the PDGA in action.

Keep the nonmember fee down. Find other resources.

A. It is nice to see that the Board can be overruled by one of its sub-committees.

B. If I thought it was final, there would not be much point talking about it.

A. It is nice to see that the Board can be overruled by one of its sub-committees.



Says who? The Tour Guidelines will have to be signed off by the Board if there are any material proposed changes to what had been approved before.

I think raising the fee for non members in the pro divisions is fine. Players in those divisions probably know about the PDGA and know what it means to them.
Even advanced divisions probably know too.
Intermediate and Am or Rec divisions should be exempt from these fees. I've paid them myself for beginers out of the general event funds many times.
The PDGA is for ALL golfers, not just it's members.
and it is NOT a pyramid scheme(no offense Jason).

But as Chuck points out,
The increase is not law till it passes the board.
So maybe we need to form lobby groups to emphasize our views.(If we can agree on them:)

I agree we should have more transparency in the finances of our organization.
Who are our tustees and where is there voice?

and there you have it straight from a nonmember - the target of this change.


it would be better to REDUCE the fee to $3, or to issue a six-month moratorium, or to provide a FREE 6-MONTH membership at no cost to ANY nonmember who plays in a sanctioned event in the 2006 calendar year.

any of these options could easily turn out revenue-positive (especially relative to an $8 nonmember fee) in the short term... and membership-positive in the long term. which also mean hugely revenue-positive in the long term.



I recently played in my first PDGA tournament. I payed my $5 fee, since I'm not a member. Hell, I just picked up a disc for the first time in my 25 year lifetime this spring. It was a C-tier doubles event, the Kentucky States Doubles Championship, and I had the co-TD as a partner. He's been teaching me the game after he saw my raw abilities, and even though he won the event last year, he took on a rookie for a partner and finished DEAD LAST.

I never had so much fun playing disc golf. I've played in some ball golf tourneys before, and this was much more fun. I enjoyed myself throughly. I decided right then that I was going to make a commitment to the sport, and get better. Become active locally in the Cincinnati disc golf scene, and play in the local tournaments. Become a PDGA member in 2006, or maybe 2007.

My partner for the tourney, Rob Johnston, asked me when he was taking up my registration, if I wanted to sign up for the trial membership. I think it was like a bumper sticker, a copy of disc golf news, 3 months of a PDGA membership, and maybe something else, for the same amount as the non-member fee. I passed, because I didn't think I'd play anymore PDGA events in the next 90 days, and I should save it for next year's tourney season.

Now I want to play in a tourney in November, and I probably will. I'll do it as a rec player, and pay the non-member fee. I'm not going to take the development membership - still saving it. But if the $5 is raised to $8, it will absolutely kill the PDGA's next generation of players. They will just not want to pony up that extra cash to get involved in organized disc golf. I wouldn't, and I'm the guy you are trying to hook right now. I don't know when or if I'm playing another PDGA tourney. My local club puts on lot's of weekly, monthly, and quarterly events to keep me satisfied if the PDGA brass runs me away.

Hey board members who are secretly paying attention to this thread: How about you raise the price on higher divisions but not on lower? That might make more sense than chasing off the future tournament players of the sport.

Let me summarize all of Nick's posts:

"If they don't want to pay $8, screw them, they shouldn't be playing PDGA events anyway and should play non-sanctioned"

Yes Nick, wonderful strategy to increase PDGA membership. I can see perfectly clearly how running away the future of the sport is a productive course of action. If only every decision was this easy.

How can anyone in their right mind think that charging more than someone wants to pay will be an incentive? The line of reasoning presented earlier was that the more expensive single tournament fee will push them into buying a full membership. Yes...they don't want to pay $8, so now they're going to fork over $40 to the organization they already don't want to give $8 to? You're approaching this from the position of a established disc golfer, not your average Joe-casual who is the potential future member.

I like the idea of lower cost for Adv and Pro, lower prices for Int and Rec. Aren't Jrs already free ?

I've been reading this thread every day. I have not heard 1 good thing about this increase of $3.00. How would it benefit the players & TD's?

How about a poll on here?

Is this really going to benefit the PDGA with the increase? For every 4 non members that play a sanctioned event the PDGA makes $20.00 from the $5.00 fee. If 2 of them don't show because of this, they will be losing $4.00 & 2 players!

Jason, do you want to make a difference on a Worldwide Level in Organized Disc Golf?

Or do you just want the PDGA to move out of your way?

In either case the decision is an easy one, please make it and either join in or go away.



Nick I would love to exert a positive influence on disc golf worldwide, but, heck, that's a lot and I don't know how to do that. Maybe I can promote the sport in my little neck of the woods, and then maybe my efforts, combined with the efforts of many many other people, will slowly provide a positive model for others to emulate.

As for jumping on the PDGA bandwaggon, I just can't right now. Better to run alongside it. It makes it a little harder, but it's good exercise and for us it's more appealing not to have others dictate too many tournament details. Besides, we take full advantage of many aspects of the PDGA infrastructure, which helps us promote the sport, which in turn helps the PDGA in its overall goal of promoting the sport. In that, in running the MSDGC, we are working together with the PDGA, even if we forget that from time to time.

So I don't accept your choice of joining or going away. Instead I'll stay here pursuing Marshall Street's goals for promoting the sport (and getting filthy rich, rich enough to buy a new truck), and not join the PDGA for now.

This proposed $8 non-member thing, to me, expresses an attitude that NEFA went through five or six years back. We also instituted the five dollar rule at NEFA events for non-NEFA members. We did it for all the wrong reasons. In retrospect, we didn't care that much about increasing revenues or increasing membership. We were more focused on how much work we were doing and how little some people appreciated us. Our attitude at the time: We work our butts off for this organization, so screw the non-members.

We had our chins stuck out pretty far, and our lower lips were puffy with righteous belligerence. How did it go? you ask. It was a total disaster. Our membership didn't grow, fewer TDs ran NEFA tournaments, and there was no noticeable jump in attendance at our events. Did revenues go up? Well, not appreciably. When we regained our senses, we rescinded the very unpopular "NEFA Tax," and now whenever someone asks whether they have to be a NEFA member to come to an event, I'm proud to tell them no, you don't have to be a NEFA member, and you don't have to pay extra either. It's great being able to say that. It's inclusive and it feels right, like we have the right attitude.

I think a lot about attitude and disc golf, and when someone like you Nick says I should either join the PDGA or shut up, my internal bad attitude alarm goes off. When I hear about a proposed increase in the non-PDGA-member fee, I also wonder whether this proposal is designed to increase membership, increase revenues, or to get revenge on all those non PDGA member bums who contribute nothing and suck up the benefits of everything the PDGA does. In short, isn't this proposal just the result of a bad attitude on the part of PDGA Management?

or to get revenge on all those non PDGA member bums who contribute nothing and suck up the benefits of everything the PDGA does. In short, isn't this proposal just the result of a bad attitude on the part of PDGA Management?

i sincerely doubt that such is the case. they're not that kind of people.

its simply misguided economics, nothing more, nothing less. and since its not even "official" yet, things could still change.

Jason, while I appreciate your posts, why waste your time with these greedy PDGA snobs? You and Steve and Joe and the rest of your MS crew have already demonstrated the future of disc golf will be much brighter without the PDGA taxing us all for funds for their relentlessly wasteful projects.
Walk away from the PDGA and keep trucking, you are heading in the right direction.

Look at the people you lose at your tournaments when you don't sanction with the PDGA---would you want folks like Nick or Brian at your tournament anyway?

Nick,

So you should only run a PDGA event if you have more than 75% of the players that are PDGA members? Isn't one of the main purposes of D & C tier events to introduce new players to the PDGA and sanctioned events? I played a few C tier events before I joined the PDGA. I also took advantage of the $5 developmental membership. The more non-members at a PDGA event the better exposure the organization gets. I guess your lips are so far attached to the PDGA hiney that are missing valid points from members and non-members alike. Didn't you post earlier in this thread that you hoped the extra $3 went to the local club? If you don't have non-members at your tourney's then why in the hell would you care where the $3 went?

i like bruces' idea about rec players not paying as much, i like the idea the developmental-tiered events not paying the non member fee (or just the increase) i cant see how the negativity posted here by certain people will attract new members, or old members.......

To Nick, I always thought that people such as Jason Southwick, were considered non-current PDGA members. I think those non-current members have some rights that non-members do not have, but I'd have to read the constitution again to be sure.

To Jason Southwick, thank you for everything that you do to promote disc golf. I think you are doing a great job. I have no problem with non-current PDGA members helping to promote the sport with as much enthusiasm as you have.

To the PDGA BOD: What is the business case for considering this change? I don't think this will increase revenue. The number of people who don't play because of the added $$$ will probably equal out the increased revenue. It might nominally increase membership but maybe at a cost of losing potential new players and maybe some tournaments. I just don't see a business case for this at all, but maybe I'm missing something.

Hey board members who are secretly paying attention to this thread: How about you raise the price on higher divisions but not on lower? That might make more sense than chasing off the future tournament players of the sport.



I like this idea...but will it encourage more sand baggers??? I dont see how this increase will encourage any non-members or the up and coming future pro discgolfers to join . It seems to me that everyone here feels that it shouldnt go into effect, and I am sure most of us probably pay our membership fees every year. I think we(the PDGA memebers) have spoken our opinion here that is should not go into effect!!! We(the members) still have a say right??

Hey board members who are secretly paying attention to this thread: How about you raise the price on higher divisions but not on lower? That might make more sense than chasing off the future tournament players of the sport.



I like this idea...but will it encourage more sand baggers??? I dont see how this increase will encourage any non-members or the up and coming future pro discgolfers to join . It seems to me that everyone here feels that it shouldnt go into effect, and I am sure most of us probably pay our membership fees every year. I think we(the PDGA memebers) have spoken our opinion here that is should not go into effect!!! We(the members) still have a say right??



Joe, I too am concerned that having a tiered non-member fee might lead to some bagging. By the way, I think we lost our say in the PDGA decision making process a couple of constitution changes ago. :D

I think membership should be mandatory to compete in PDGA events, I think monthlies and local events are where players can play until they figure out if they want to take their game further.

I have been involved with allot of different activities that operated under a sanctioning and in ALL of them you were required to be a member to compete. I would interested to hear of an organization that does not require membership to compete.

I don't think the PDGA gives allot of bang for your buck to its members but for now it is the only game in town, and if you want to play you have to pay.

~Chris

When I started this thread, I was not sure what I thought.

On the bagging issue, at most tournaments the entry fee structure already encourages bagging by non-members.

If the PDGA goes through with this, and you are a TD who thinks that this will hurt your attendance, I'll have a couple of suggestions for you. But there is no reason to discuss ways to frustrate the Board's efforts to do whatever it is they are trying to do here until they've decided that they are sincere about wanting to frustrate our efforts to do what we are doing. And if the Board is doing something well thought out that they want to share, I'll probably just go along and get along.

What we are doing is drawing huge numbers of non-members to PDGA events by running great events for amateurs. We had about 50 non-members among the 140 players at our last tournament. This sport needs to build a bigger base if it wants to support a heavier top. This decision seems like a scam-the-base scheme.

Jason, I am really trying my best to put this in such a way that you can get what I am saying. I have no innate desire to feud or argue with you, really.

To put it simply, you can easily become a completely positive force in promoting disc golf world-wide by plugging in to the network of people, events and participants that operate on a world-wide level. You do not have to reinvent the wheel or take on all of the tasks that this combined effort takes on. You do not have to start your own standards, rules, competition, tour, affiliate clubs, player ratings, course evaluations, educational and other projects and committees. You do not need to track players and put out a world-wide publication. You do not need to come up with basic event standards shared around the world. You do not need to create a world-wide network by which you can promote your events or dvds or other merchandise.

You are completely 100% right that that would be WAY TO MUCH for any single person or even small group of folks to do, let alone know how to do.

You certainly don't have to be chummy with every one of those people, or approve of every one of their standards, or agree with them more than sharing the understanding that they, like you, in your little neck of the woods are doing your very best to move our sport forward, are doing the exact same thing. Try approaching them like they were folks ready, willing and who actually show up to help you (free of charge) to take care of all those �world-wide� promotional efforts that you, understandably, don't know how to do, let alone would ever want to take on all by yourself.

In short, you need to realize that when you insult the PDGA, you are, whether you mean to or not, insulting all of the folks that are doing all of the work that you neither know how to do nor would, if sane, every want to do all by yourself. So if you are serious about being a positive player in promoting disc golf on the world-wide level, then keep that in mind when you throw hurtful and harmful stingers at these folks.

You can still be critical, Lord knows I am, just frame it within an understanding that you acknowledge and respect all of the work (mostly done out of pure love of the sport and similar to your MSDGC motivations) on your behalf with their only pay being the knowledge that what they are doing is helping you on the local level while being a part of the global effort to bring disc golf out of the darkness.

Honestly, ask yourself, would the MSDGC exist without all of the work and resources of the PDGA, even with it not even being a PDGA event? Consider it on every level? Soup to nuts. Do you really think that you have done something 100% unique and without precedent? Sure it is great and unique in character from all accounts, but how much of it is owed to the blood sweat and tears of all the organizers who build the courses, to get the player base, to formulate the standards, to promote the sport, to provide you with top players from around the US?

This is too long. Jason, I am trying to reach you. Yes, you can laugh this off as another Kight tirade, but I hope you consider more seriously what I am trying to communicate to you. That you being a part of the world-wide effort to promote disc golf need not be a rewriting of the book, that you can primarily focus on doing your thing, and in your neck of the woods, it is a CHOICE by you. A choice to join this vast and very functional network that already exists, with a talented and committed bunch of folks, AND DO YOUR PART WITHIN IT TO MAKE IT BETTER.

THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT SIMPLY MUST BE DONE FROM WITHIN THE WHALE JONAH!

I don't think that this will affect the larger markets nearly as much as the smaller ones. When you are trying to get people to play in the beginning, cost of the tournament is a huge factor. I've met alot of girls that would like to play, but stay away because of the cost. Many of us have children to begin with, so anytime we go out we have to get a sitter. This alone makes the cost to play almost double anyone else. Around here, we only have 2 or 3 pdga tournaments in a year. More than half of the players aren't pdga members. If you up the fees, they probably just won't play, and stick to the monthlies. Even at $8 a tournament, with only 3 tournaments, it won't convince anyone to join. It will only convince them to stay away.

Why don't the TD's that are thinking of not sanctioning because of the fee change post which events this could effect? Would it be worthwhile to put together a formal petition before it is finalized?

This is the event that I am considering not sanctioning
Riverpark Open
Ogden, UT
C Tier

I was planning to put together the Utah Womens Championship which we would have tried to sanction as a D-Tier.

Let me summarize all of Nick's posts:

"If they don't want to pay $8, screw them, they shouldn't be playing PDGA events anyway and should play non-sanctioned"

Yes Nick, wonderful strategy to increase PDGA membership. I can see perfectly clearly how running away the future of the sport is a productive course of action. If only every decision was this easy.

How can anyone in their right mind think that charging more than someone wants to pay will be an incentive? The line of reasoning presented earlier was that the more expensive single tournament fee will push them into buying a full membership. Yes...they don't want to pay $8, so now they're going to fork over $40 to the organization they already don't want to give $8 to? You're approaching this from the position of a established disc golfer, not your average Joe-casual who is the potential future member.



You have misunderstood. Playing in PDGAs is more of a commitment than just amount of entry fee. Future members, I believe come from local events and activities. If the only local activity you have is a PDGA then I think something is very wrong with the manner in which you hope to build a player base or "get people to play in PDGAs".

Disc golf addicts will naturally gravitate towards PDGAs, folks who don't get it won't. Pretty simple really.

I'm not saying don't welcome them or make their time at your event a the best they've ever had, I'm just saying that if they are ready to try out, or have already tried out, a PDGA then they are going to join in regardless of the price and the fee is understood. Sure they'd like it to be free, but so do I when I go to a 5 star restarant and order a fillet mignon and lobster tail.

You pay for what you get. Don't sell your events value short.

This is an interesting discussion and, having spent time on the board, I�m aware of the time the board puts into decisions such as this. When I was active in that circle our office space �costs� were limited to the meager rent that was paid to Brian Hoeniger, who ran the operation out of a room in his house in Toronto. I don�t think anyone can argue the value of the National Disc Golf Center (if so, take it to another thread ;)), but there are both project costs and ongoing overhead costs attached with this opportunity. I see this step as a move by the board to support the National Disc Golf center � and you may be ok with that logic. Such a facility can be leveraged in many ways to grow the sport � the increase will ultimately provide a great �return� for the investment.

If the PDGA is looking for ways to leverage assets to support the growth of the sport, I wonder if they may be taking on too much or not considering all of the options. Quite before my time on the board, the PDGA�s relationship with the DGWN was formed as a win, win, win. It enabled a glossy, color magazine that was great for publicity, it put players names and their results in the pages of the magazine � really cool for the members, and it helped Rick Rothstein grow his newsletter into a business that provided some profit. Everyone �won�. I have to ask myself whether that is still the case � you may agree, let�s throw some numbers around. Per the website, the PDGA has 9231 members. Pro�s count for 26% which at $55per brings in $132k, the ams, roughly, $273k. Out of that $405k, the magazine is a key benefit. When I was around that cost was between $12 and $13 per member � let�s say with postage increases that number is now $14. That totals roughly $129k. Historically, the membership size accounts for approximately 20% of the total tournament players (one can easily calculate from the published demographics). Let�s extrapolate that from the 9231 members to about 46,000 fee payers being generated from sanctioned events. Here�s a wild guess, but let�s say that 25% of those fee payers are one day memberships. In numbers the $3 increase means about - $34,500 to the bottom line.

Hmmmm�. $129k for the Magazine compared to a tenuous change that will net $34k. The sport now has 2 magazines, the other one is given away free. Could the PDGA info be published there and be mailed to your house as a membership benefit (postage roughly $23k per year)? That would net the PDGA approximately $106k to the bottom line! I would think that it�s worth consideration.

I realize that pushes DGWN out of a comfy nest (its nice to have your circulation locked). Let me state, I respect Rick Rothstein and admire everything he has done and continues to do for the sport. I bring this up not as an attack on Rick�s status as an treasured icon of the sport but merely to question whether the logic that made sense 10 year�s ago still holds water, particularly now at the potential expense of those first experiencing the PDGA.

As a member, you would still get a magazine. You could also subscribe to DGWN (I know I would). I�m not saying that the people behind Disc Golf Magazine would even play ball, I�m just asking the question�

If you agree with this, say so. For a group of volunteer board members, it�s tough to make a change with a partner and former board member who has meant so much, one way to get the topic formally addressed at a board meeting is to file a petition with 20 signatures. I�d sign it. If your bashing the PDGA for conceptually sticking it to our future members maybe your logic is sound � but you can also something about it� just food for thought�back to work..

Pat Govang
#13902
The happily married, way too busy former commish

Great idea Pat! It is certainly time to reexamine this relationship.

I support the idea to terminate a % of our fees automatically going towards a magazine subscription. The money saved would certainly be welcomed into the budget of the many projects currently being developed. I would definitely feel better sending in my renewal fee this year.

Signed,
Current member #15505

pat, thanks for the post.

everytime i'm in a borders bookstore reading magazines i marvel at the amazing variety of micro-niche publications and wonder why disc golf world news isn't there . . . and then i remember that i get one sent to my house four times a year automatically.

if i had to buy a copy at borders i would, and thousands of people that had never heard of disc golf would pick up a copy and be introduced to the sport through a sweet publication.

Frozen Forest was considering being a PDGA event. This increase will likely push me to the indy side. Probably close to 1/3 of our players would be non-PDGA, and charging them $28 and everyone else $20 seems kind of sucky.

Raising this charge just seems to reignite the flames.

I would buy a DGWN subscription. I get people all the time ask why disc golf doesn't have any magazines on the shelves.

Thanks Pat.

You can't just increase income by raising prices. If you could we'd be charging $50 for rec entry fees rather than $20. Our attendance skyrocketed when we dropped our entry fee from $25 to $20 for lower divisions. Especially we started drawing a lot more non-members. Clearly there is a point somewhere between $20 and $30 where a rec player decides it is too expensive.

The board may be right if they are thinking that most non-members will just pay the $8 or join, but I don't see it. You can take $8 from a rec player every weekend if you just give him cheesy PDGA minimum payouts, but I don't think you can advertise it on your flyer and get it every time. They'll just play the unsanctioned tournaments in Joliet.

i tried to explain it in economic terms, but no one seems to be listening. what you know intuitively, bruce, is also verified by the formulas. obviously from this thread, most players get it also. we'll see what the board does. it would be gratifying to see them actually plug some numbers in, draw out the graphs and use empirical evidence as part of their decision, rather than just doing the ol' poke'n'hope.

The numbers have been crunched. Alternatives analyzed. Tradeoffs estimated. Teleconference tonight. More later.

:D

Thanks for the timely post, Pat. I've run the numbers in my head a few times along these same lines and the figures involved are staggering.

I suppose there won't be any Fiddy Hose tourneys anytime soon.

Let me know if you get hooked up with the local community station and I'll send some recent stuff your way.

Joe

While I think this will potentially screw Ints/Recs more than anyone (and I agree with Bob Graham, who originally said this should be applied to Pro/Adv only way upthread), I don't see the PDGA losing that much money here. They'd need more than 1/3 of the current non members to stop playing to lose $$, since 2 guys paying $8 gets them more than 3 paying $5.

If they lower it to $3 then they'd need 2 extra players per tourney to just break even, and I don't see that happening. At least not around here.

Sure they'd like it to be free, but so do I when I go to a 5 star restarant and order a fillet mignon and lobster tail.

Again you fail to see it from the position of the type of player this will drive away. The casual player sees it as an Applebees burger, not a Ruth's Chris steak. Having them pay filet mignon fees for what they value as an Applebees fajita will not fly, ever.

Yep, the intermediates and rec players who are not yet interested in becoming members will be far less likely to play their first or second PDGA event, as the non-member fee goes up. For someone who has never paid more than $6 to play a disc golf tournament (and may have been attracted to the sport because it is inexpensive), even shelling out $20-$30 to play intermediate (without the $8 extra fee) is substantial. Add the fee to the advanced and pro divisions (membership really should be mandatory to play pro), but don't raise the fees on the folks we're trying to get hooked on tournament DG.

i think you all missed Nick's and the PDGA's point:

WE DON'T NEED YOU AMATEUR SCUMBAGS CROWDING OUR EVENTS. WE THE PDGA ARE SO DARN GOOD, YOU SHOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR OUR ALLEGED "SERVICE" TO THE DISC GOLF COMMUNITY. WE ARE WAY TOO SMART TO EVER LISTEN TO ANYONE, NOW GO PLAY A MINI SOMEWHERE YOU SCUMBAGS.

sheesh, when will you all realize that the PDGA isn't for everyone? according to Nick, it's only for "serious" people who should be grateful the PDGA DID IT ALL FOR THEM!!! DISC GOLF WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT NICK AND THE PDGA, SO WHY QUESTION THEIR ALLEGED WISDOM?

:D:o

I would like to see the non PDGA fees for all Pros increase to $10.00 & keep all ams at $5.00.

Underpar , your sarcastic answer is not so far from the truth IMPO . I am NOT bashing the PDGA but really is a PDGA tourney for EVERYONE ?? I really dont think so .

I do believe the PDGA is sorta trying to regulate who plays at a pdga event without sayin so .
I am not really against that either .
Tourneys I run , I let people who want to play in them know if it is a good VALUE for them to play in ( financially ) or something they may GAIN MORE KNOWLEDGE OUT OF WATCHING ( another value maybe from gaining rules experience without actually being stroked , viewing another much better player without worring about their own score or shot ) .

PDGA events show showcase the BEST talent on the course on that weekend ( from hopefully a wide range of mileage from that area ) IMPO .

NON PDGA sanctioned pro am type tourneys should provide an arena for all participants ( at a good value ) to play and experience disc golf compitition .

i can't disagree with that sentiment, dog. the PDGA has done a fine job of running people away from the PDGA, perhaps that is what is making our sport grow. i know it wasn't the PDGA that built 2000 courses for us to play on after all. i know it wasn't the PDGA who ran 2,000 tournaments last year.

wow, i'm getting more respect for the current PDGA BOD all the time. by totally repulsing players away from this inept, wasteful, and corrupt organization, they ARE making the sport grow! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!

Keep the PDGA PRO and everyone else should go

We had 42 Rec division players at our last IOS event this year. We had 39 Intermediate players at the same event. These are not the "best of the best" players. Most of them are fairly new to the competitive side of the sport and are still learning. For some of them this was there first tournament. Some of them are PDGA members and like to track their ratings on line. You're saying that these people should not be playing a PDGA event? Where are the next Adv and Pro players going to come from? Is the added cash fairy now also delivering mature players to tournaments? I would expect that half of the guys that played their first tournament at IOS #7 will probably only play that event on that course because it is their home course. A few probably found out that they don't like competition. Some of them will probably enter a few events here and there. But there will also be the guys who become addicted to the competition. They will come back and play 5 or 6 IOS events next year. They will join the PDGA. A few of them will become pros one day. Maybe one of them will be the guy who steps up and helps run a few tournaments in a few years.

We have no competitive future if we push these players away.

Milking the Ams is what gives the PROs the purse they shoot for. Why not let the PDGA build the purse and stop using the AMS to make their events. They bring in enough cash, why raise the fees for the ones that are playing for fun? This makes no sense to me.

Please do raise the amount so they will find a better source to play with.

The AM's seem to be the ones that buy things, the PRO's don't spend as much on T-shirts, fund raiser discs, and other tournament paraphenalia. Which is why the WVO did not lobby to be an NT event..that would mean PRO only. Since the PDGA is not throwing cash and Corp. sponsors our way we need to get the cash any way we can.

Why not let the PDGA build the purse...


What does this mean? :confused:

The AM's seem to be the ones that buy things, the PRO's don't spend as much on T-shirts, fund raiser discs, and other tournament paraphenalia. Which is why the WVO did not lobby to be an NT event..that would mean PRO only. Since the PDGA is not throwing cash and Corp. sponsors our way we need to get the cash any way we can.



You can run an Amatuer A-tier concurrent with the Pro NT.

It seems that you're making a mountain out of a molehill. In our area rec players get in for about half price anyway so a small $3.00 increase will not make or break whether a new player plays the local tourny or not. But it will make it more attractive for people who play 4 to 5 tournies a year to pony up and join the pdga. At St. Pat's this last year PDGA membership was MANDETORY for all divisions except Rec and the field still maxed out at 188 players. This might not have been true in your area, but when people are told what you get with the membership, combined with the fact that 5 at $8 vs. 8 at $5. The membership will pay for itself. I think the PDGA will find even more people opting to join. Personally I'm grateful for everything that's going on in the name of the PDGA . This website, DG news, Worlds, Player Ratings etc. and if they feel they should charge non-members a little more so be it.

You can run an Amatuer A-tier concurrent with the Pro NT.



Thread drift..

And the only benefactor of this scenario would be the PDGA as we would have pay the fee to have an "A" teir and the fee for an NT event...as it stands now we pay only one fee to the PDGA and that is the cost to get an "A" teir listed on the schedule....and what do we get in return?...the tournament listed on the schedule. (period) :mad:

WVO, you are way off base. You get a lot more! You get the hassle of looking up every player to see if they are current or not, you get billed $25 if you don't want to fill out the 18 million item PDGA TD report, and, you get to wait and see if the PDGA will even approve your event date, PLUS you get the joy of the PDGA Executive Director talking down to you at every chance he gets.

WHAT A GREAT DEAL!!! THE PDGA DOES IT ALL! I LOVE THEIR FLUFFY MAGAZINE WITH THE SAME ARTICLES OVER AND OVER EACH ISSUE! I MEAN, HOW MANY ARTICLES ABOUT THE GIRL SCOUTS DO WE GET TO READ? IT NEVER GETS OLD. NEVER.

Craig,

It may be a molehill in NorCal. But in much smaller disc golf markets it is a mountain. Many of us TD's have been following the Field of Dreams mentality of "If you build it they will come". By holding quality sanctioned events, we are hoping that PDGA membership will increase. When PDGA memberships increase we are able to hold bigger, better and more numerous tournaments. In Utah there are 3 sanctioned tournaments a year. I know for a fact that this will keep players from going to sanctioned tournaments especially a one day C-Tier.

Thanks Mikey...your sarcastic point of view put a smile on my face!

It seems that you're making a mountain out of a molehill. In our area rec players get in for about half price anyway so a small $3.00 increase will not make or break whether a new player plays the local tourny or not. But it will make it more attractive for people who play 4 to 5 tournies a year to pony up and join the pdga. At St. Pat's this last year PDGA membership was MANDETORY for all divisions except Rec and the field still maxed out at 188 players. This might not have been true in your area, but when people are told what you get with the membership, combined with the fact that 5 at $8 vs. 8 at $5. The membership will pay for itself. I think the PDGA will find even more people opting to join. Personally I'm grateful for everything that's going on in the name of the PDGA . This website, DG news, Worlds, Player Ratings etc. and if they feel they should charge non-members a little more so be it.



I never said that the $3 increase would keep a player from playing. However, some people have said or implied that we don't need the lower amateur divisions at PDGA tournaments and I disagree with that.

I'm going along with Bruce on this one and taking a wait and see attitude if the PDGA does follow thru on increasing the non-member fee to $8. If the lower division players make it clear that they would rather play unsanctioned than pay an additional $3, then I will have to consider that in the future.

Rob,

I checked out the entrants to your Riverside open. 22/41 were non-pdga including the Open Winner. If GOOD players can enter a tournament without PDGA membership for only $5 whats the incentive to join? Also, whats to prevent non-pdga players from bagging your Am 2 division? I'm all for encouraging new players especially in the juniors, rec, and womens ams divisions. Keep those fees low or eliminate them entirely. Raise the fees in the others, at least for B tier and above.

Just a thought.

Raising fees is not the way to go. We want to grow the sport, not push newbies away. I remember going to my first tournament saying $25 + $5 fee is a little steep to be playing "disc golf". You have to remember, $30 is a lot for someone not knowing what to expect and is probably not going to cash. Its not the right thing to do and I hope the PDGA will seriously reconsider this.

Of course we need the lower am divisions. That's what keeps our sport growing, and they are the hardest players to keep around. Its easy being a big fish. It's hard to keep coming back if you are on the bottom end of the food chain.

Responding to my brother Jon, either you mssed my last post or I forgot to hit the post button. I went over to the hysterical opposition camp. :D

Remind me to remind you of my idea for the "third way" to deal with this if it goes through. I think there's a way to triagulate the dilemma whether to sanction.

Meanwhile, I can't emphasize enough that for most of our players it will be $8 more and not $3 more. Most of our non-members are first-year tournament players. In 2006 they will mostly be players who never paid $5 so they are looking at a flyer that says:

<table border="1"><tr><td>PDGA Members</td><td> Non-members
</td></tr><tr><td>All pro divisions</td><td> $45</td><td> $53
</td></tr><tr><td>All Advanced</td><td> $36</td><td> $44
</td></tr><tr><td>Int. and Rec.</td><td> $22</td><td> $30</tr></td></table>

The difference between 8 and 5 is irrelevant. It's not like we are publishing a column for last year's prices.

Responding to my brother Jon, either you mssed my last post or I forgot to hit the post button. I went over to the hysterical opposition camp. :D

Remind me to remind you of my idea for the "third way" to deal with this if it goes through. I think there's a way to triagulate the dilemma whether to sanction.

Meanwhile, I can't emphasize enough that for most of our players it will be $8 more and not $3 more. Most of our non-members are first-year tournament players. In 2006 they will mostly be players who never paid $5 so they are looking at a flyer that says:

<table border="1"><tr><td>PDGA Members</td><td> Non-members
</td></tr><tr><td>All pro divisions</td><td> $45</td><td> $53
</td></tr><tr><td>All Advanced</td><td> $36</td><td> $44
</td></tr><tr><td>Int. and Rec.</td><td> $22</td><td> $30</tr></td></table>

The difference between 8 and 5 is irrelevant. It's not like we are publishing a column for last year's prices.



The last post of yours that I saw on this topic you talked about the economics of raising the fees and that you didn't think it would be a revenue producing venture.

That doesn't sound like hysterical opposition.

I also agree with you that most of the non-members are not going to say "Well, only $3 more, guess I'll play!" They're going to say "Man, $30. Joe, you got twenty-one fifty I can borrow?"

What kind of money are we talking about? PDGA - How much money does the PDGA collect from non member fees over a year?

I'm baffled why the flyers wouldn't look like this:

<table border="1"><tr><td> Division</td><td>Entry Fee</td><td>PDGA members
</td></tr><tr><td>Pro</td><td>$53 </td><td>$45
</td></tr><tr><td>Advanced</td><td>$44 </td><td>$36
</td></tr><tr><td>Int & Rec</td><td>$30 </td><td>$22
</td></tr><tr><td></tr></td></table>
3-month PDGA membership $10
(includes magazine, sticker, $8 event discount)

Point taken Mr. PDGAHQ. Although that was a one time good deal. And I can think of no other person or tournamnet that has a product to benefit a Tournament, any other purchase would be benefitting a business entitiy...I work my toucas off for the WVO at NO benefit to me. Do you know of anyone else that works as selflessly as I do?

Question: how much money did the PDGA Worlds spend on WVO wooden minis this past summer, in support of you and the A tier event you mention?

PDGAHQ



Point taken Mr. PDGAHQ.



Point NOT taken, Mr. PDGAHQ.

Does the PDGA provide similar financial support to every other A-tiers as part of the Sanctioning Agreement? Because unless those dollars came out of the PDGA's regular financial support package for A-tiers and are given to EVERY A-tier, the fact that the PDGA purchased wooden minis from the WVO is irrelevant to the question of what a TD/event receives in exchange for paying the sanctioning fees.

There are so many volunteers and those who have produced handmade trophies over the years who don't do it for a business, not that people don't appreciate what you do, too. Marshall Street has been sending out lots of free DVDs, volunteers have made custom tee signs for courses as donations to their community, etc.

I'm baffled why the flyers wouldn't look like this:

<table border="1"><tr><td> Division</td><td>Entry Fee</td><td>PDGA members
</td></tr><tr><td>Pro</td><td>$53 </td><td>$45
</td></tr><tr><td>Advanced</td><td>$44 </td><td>$36
</td></tr><tr><td>Int & Rec</td><td>$30 </td><td>$22
</td></tr><tr><td></tr></td></table>
3-month PDGA membership $10
(includes magazine, sticker, $8 event discount)



Because that is called lying, and we try our hardest not to lie to our players. Payouts as currently defined by the PDGA as a percentage of the entry fee. If we advertise an entry fee of $30, but then base the payout on $22 (after we set aside $8 for the PDGA), then we are lying to our non-member players.

No lies involved. The basis for payout is very clear. It's the amount after excluding all local, club, basket fund, series, greens fees, park fees, regional and/or national fees. Why would you include some of those fees in the entry fee and not others? The discount approach should be used by all TDs if they want to be more effective at marketing.

Hey Mr. PDGA Headquarters, do you know Brian Hoeniger? He works in your office. He's the really really grouchy guy who needs anger management. Yeah, that guy. How much does he make? Okay, if that's too direct a question, how many non-members at PDGA tournaments would have to pay the extra $3 to cover his salary? I'm just curious. See, I hear about this Hoeniger guy being like totally selfless, that he worked for the Peace Corps or something, and one whole year ate only bugs so the natives would have enough food to go around. I'm wondering why no one knows what his salary is. It seems a funny thing to keep secret, especially when the job seems to involve all this financial and budget stuff. It just doesn't make sense.

Anyway, I had this idea. If we could find out his salary (and the other salaries), and if we think those are too much -- like way more than the best player earns in prize money -- we could just vote or something to cut his salary and we wouldn't have to worry about increasing the non-member fee to $8.

That way we could get more people to play the game, and fewer people would say all those bad things about the PDGA. Just an idea.

Anyway, if you see Mr. Hoeniger tell him Jason says hello and gives him a big hug. He probably needs a big hug.

If you were a member, you'd see it in the PDGA pages of the Spring issues of DGWN. There's an item for Personnel that lists who's included. It's common for small groups to not break it out into individual salaries for widespread publication, but even looking at the total would make most candidates think twice whether it was worth it for what he sometimes has to put up with from nonmembers...

This thread has been going on for 17 pages and I have yet to post.

This thread is offically a thread now.

Chuck, by non-members do you also mean non-current members?

I truly do appreciate Mike giving me a big break in proving that he is clueless


i think you all missed Nick's and the PDGA's point:

WE DON'T NEED YOU AMATEUR SCUMBAGS CROWDING OUR EVENTS. WE THE PDGA ARE SO DARN GOOD, YOU SHOULD BE PAYING MORE FOR OUR ALLEGED "SERVICE" TO THE DISC GOLF COMMUNITY. WE ARE WAY TOO SMART TO EVER LISTEN TO ANYONE, NOW GO PLAY A MINI SOMEWHERE YOU SCUMBAGS.

sheesh, when will you all realize that the PDGA isn't for everyone? according to Nick, it's only for "serious" people who should be grateful the PDGA DID IT ALL FOR THEM!!! DISC GOLF WOULD BE NOTHING WITHOUT NICK AND THE PDGA, SO WHY QUESTION THEIR ALLEGED WISDOM?



You got one thing right, the PDGA as currently configured really isn�t for everyone. Here�s a brief list of those who it is not for:

1) True Amateurs
2) School Children
3) Folks that don�t want to spend more than $8 to play in an event.
4) Folks that don�t like to follow the rules of play
5) TDs that don�t like to follow the standards of PDGA events
6) Conspiracy Theorists

If a significant portion of your event participants are not PDGA members then you likely do not have the player base to really run a PDGA yet.

According to me PDGAs are for true disc golf addicts who like to know what they are getting themselves into when they go to an event, that certain standards will be met, that players will play by the rules, that the TDs will enforce the rules.

Who is going to provide all that, you Mike? Jason? Mike Crump? I wish you luck. Just don�t cry foul when the rest of us start lobbing tomatoes at your attempts that are extremely likely to be incomplete and fleeting in nature.

Oh yeah, and Mike, your mom is so fat, when she walks out of the candy store with a red turtle neck on people start yellin "Kool Aid".
:D

This thread included all who would have to pay the nonmember fee. Non-currents might have saved older DGWN issues to look up PDGA financial info.

Ok,my 2 cents....

1. If someone is choosing to play in a PDGA tournament, they should have to pay a fee to play. You don't walk up to a gym where you are not member and expect to get in for free.

2. It's just three bux fellows - if someone can't afford three bones, then they shouldn't be spending money on disc golf tournaments.

i can't disagree with that sentiment, dog. the PDGA has done a fine job of running people away from the PDGA, perhaps that is what is making our sport grow. i know it wasn't the PDGA that built 2000 courses for us to play on after all. i know it wasn't the PDGA who ran 2,000 tournaments last year.

wow, i'm getting more respect for the current PDGA BOD all the time. by totally repulsing players away from this inept, wasteful, and corrupt organization, they ARE making the sport grow! KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!



As opposed to your efforts Mikey? If they followed your model think about what we'd all have?

Yeah, it doesn't take long to think about that one. NOT A FAT LOT.

Besides, the PDGA is not only the volunteers in the Board of Directors, or the volunteers working in all of the committees; they ARE the TDs running PDGAs and the players that have the commitment to join the PDGA and much more.

I think that you, Mike Crump and Jason are just bent out of shape because your egos got bruised and you aren't the types of guys to move on. You'll carry your silly and wasteful grudges to your graves.

Which is pretty dang pitiable.

Raising the non-member fee from $5 to $8 may not be advisable in your opinions, but it certainly is no indication of some insidious conspiracy, but if that's what gives you a rise to think about then go for it. It is pretty funny stuff.

Ok,my 2 cents....

1. If someone is choosing to play in a PDGA tournament, they should have to pay a fee to play. You don't walk up to a gym where you are not member and expect to get in for free.

2. It's just three bux fellows - if someone can't afford three bones, then they shouldn't be spending money on disc golf tournaments.

Your analogy doesn't work because they aren't paying the fee to "the gym." "The gym" does not get dime one of the $10 or $11 that player is paying to the PDGA. They are paying the money to "the gym's franchisor" and it really should be none of his business what arrangement the gym makes with non-members. I think it is sufficient that the non-member pays the same $2 or $3 fee as the member since the PDGA does less for non-members than it does for members.

Jon, there is a gap in you logic in my opinion.

You provide the reason why certain Rec/Int players join the PDGA and play in PDGA events.

All the reasons you supply for why those who find no reason to join the PDGA should play in PDGA events are the same for non-PDGA events. Why not run events specifically for those players needs? Why do we need to dumb down the PDGA events to meet the needs of players who by definition �have not found a good enough reason or the level of commitment to join the PDGA�?

So that they might find a reason?

That makes no sense. These players will either discover the reason to join on their own or not. If you as a TD are so committed to your cause of attracting non-PDGA players then raise the cash sponsorship to pay the fees for them.

It is not a matter of trying to �force� them to join, or dissuading them from participating, as it is a way to defray administrative costs that are normally paid by all the PDGA Members. They will join or not join for reasons beyond just saving a dollar or two.

At least I hope they will. I mean what kind of member is more likely to help out, or someday run and event, or serve as a volunteer in the PDGA? A person that begrudges a couple bucks, or one that understands what you and the PDGA are doing for disc golf and is appreciative?


We had 42 Rec division players at our last IOS event this year. We had 39 Intermediate players at the same event. These are not the "best of the best" players. Most of them are fairly new to the competitive side of the sport and are still learning. For some of them this was there first tournament. Some of them are PDGA members and like to track their ratings on line. You're saying that these people should not be playing a PDGA event? Where are the next Adv and Pro players going to come from? Is the added cash fairy now also delivering mature players to tournaments? I would expect that half of the guys that played their first tournament at IOS #7 will probably only play that event on that course because it is their home course. A few probably found out that they don't like competition. Some of them will probably enter a few events here and there. But there will also be the guys who become addicted to the competition. They will come back and play 5 or 6 IOS events next year. They will join the PDGA. A few of them will become pros one day. Maybe one of them will be the guy who steps up and helps run a few tournaments in a few years.

We have no competitive future if we push these players away.

You can run an Amatuer A-tier concurrent with the Pro NT.



Thread drift..

And the only benefactor of this scenario would be the PDGA as we would have pay the fee to have an "A" teir and the fee for an NT event...as it stands now we pay only one fee to the PDGA and that is the cost to get an "A" teir listed on the schedule....and what do we get in return?...the tournament listed on the schedule. (period) :mad:



If you truly believe that Mark, then don't have it sanctioned, pretty simple.

Don't use the insurance coverage either.
Don't use this message board to sell wooden minis either.
Don't use this message board to put out event information either.
Don't use this website to post results either.
Don't use the PDGA Rules of Play either.
Don't use the PDGA Event Standards either, none of them.
Don't use the PDGA Player Ratings to determine which divisions amateurs play in.
Don't use the don't allow PDGA Members to participate either.
Don't use the sponsorship dollars and merchandise that go along with an A tier either.

To do so would be shamefully hypocritical wouldn't it?(Period!)

Responding to my brother Jon, either you mssed my last post or I forgot to hit the post button. I went over to the hysterical opposition camp. :D

Remind me to remind you of my idea for the "third way" to deal with this if it goes through. I think there's a way to triagulate the dilemma whether to sanction.

Meanwhile, I can't emphasize enough that for most of our players it will be $8 more and not $3 more. Most of our non-members are first-year tournament players. In 2006 they will mostly be players who never paid $5 so they are looking at a flyer that says:

<table border="1"><tr><td>PDGA Members</td><td> Non-members
</td></tr><tr><td>All pro divisions</td><td> $45</td><td> $53
</td></tr><tr><td>All Advanced</td><td> $36</td><td> $44
</td></tr><tr><td>Int. and Rec.</td><td> $22</td><td> $30</tr></td></table>

The difference between 8 and 5 is irrelevant. It's not like we are publishing a column for last year's prices.



The last post of yours that I saw on this topic you talked about the economics of raising the fees and that you didn't think it would be a revenue producing venture.

That doesn't sound like hysterical opposition.

I also agree with you that most of the non-members are not going to say "Well, only $3 more, guess I'll play!" They're going to say "Man, $30. Joe, you got twenty-one fifty I can borrow?"



Then lower your entry fee by $3...

Point taken Mr. PDGAHQ. Although that was a one time good deal. And I can think of no other person or tournamnet that has a product to benefit a Tournament, any other purchase would be benefitting a business entitiy...I work my toucas off for the WVO at NO benefit to me. Do you know of anyone else that works as selflessly as I do?



Yes, about 20 in the MADC region alone.

Advice: Don't ask questions you don't want the answers to.

We can't lower our entry fee any further and run the kind of event we want to run. We have to cover fixed costs like sanctioning and insurance, and fixed per player costs like player packs and trophies, and then there's payouts and CTPs. We are attracting 120 amateurs to an ordinary event because we run good events for amateurs.

The bottom line is that the PDGA wants $11 for a one-day membership from every non-member who plays one of our events. That works out to over $4000 per year! :eek: They should at least get a clubhouse and electric carts for that kind of money. :D They are getting nothing for their $11.

Then you should raise more sponsorship. Why are you putting this off on someone else?

Are you charging $11 for Int and Rec?


We can't lower our entry fee any further and run the kind of event we want to run. We have to cover fixed costs like sanctioning and insurance, and fixed per player costs like player packs and trophies, and then there's payouts and CTPs. We are attracting 120 amateurs to an ordinary event because we run good events for amateurs.

The bottom line is that the PDGA wants $11 for a one-day membership from every non-member who plays one of our events. That works out to over $4000 per year! :eek: They should at least get a clubhouse and electric carts for that kind of money. :D They are getting nothing for their $11.

every business knows (well, every successful business) that new customers cost money.

the model that makes most sense if for the PDGA to figure out the cost of a 3 or 6 month membership. a couple mags, a record or two in the ratings database, 3-4 automated emails, a temp membership card, and USPS for two followup mailings to the individual.

sounds like about $3 to me.

in cynical mode, the pdga wouldcharge this amount to the player.

in base-building, support-the-grassroots mode, the pdga would eat the cost and mark it down as advertising/marketing/membership development.

in i-dont-understand-econ101 mode, the pdga will charge the player 5 or 6 times the cost, mark it down as a brilliant piece of profittaking, and later wonder why its so freakin difficult to bring in new long term members.

here's hoping tonights conference call goes in the correct direction.

The PDGA is not for:

1) True Amateurs
2) School Children
3) Folks that don�t want to spend more than $8 to play in an event.
4) Folks that don�t like to follow the rules of play
5) TDs that don�t like to follow the standards of PDGA events
6) Conspiracy Theorists




I understand that the PDGA stands for Professional Disc Golf Association. But isn't it really just the Disc Golf Association and the "Professional" was tacked on because DGA was already taken?

I strongly disagree with Nick's post. I would think that the PDGA would want to get as many members as possible. If the PDGA were able to accept all of these $5/$8 members as "one year first time PDGA members" and thus bump up their numbers from 10,000 to 25,000, then this would demonstrate to potential sponsors that disc golf is real and is growing. And is growing fast!

It would also demonstrate to MBNA that the PDGA is ripe for an organizational credit card for its members whereby every purchase kicks 1/2% back to the PDGA.

Growth of membership is the key. And I say Amateurs, School Children and Conspiracy Theorists all make great members. And raising the charge to non-members will discourage growth, therefore it is a bad idea.

well put, steve!

I don't like the idea of the $8 fee at all PDGA tournaments.

how about this though

D-tier events, small $2/3 fee

C-tier events, $5 fee

B-tier events, $8 fee

or you could go with the

Rec $2/3 fee
Am $5 fee
Adv $8 fee
Pro $10 fee

Something along those lines.

This is what I see happening. Less C and B tier events. Actually that would be a good thing for those that stay PDGA events.

Jason, you had some good posts here. I really liked the one where you admit that you use PDGA resorses and admit that the real problem with you and the PDGA is B&B (and maybe a little Nick)

I don't have time to go through 185 replies, so I'll just put in my .02.

Firstly, I've only been playing since this May.
I knew I wouldn't be competing in any tournaments this year so membership never entered my mind, but I know next year I'm going to........
Knowing that, It only makes sense for me to pay the $40.
Not only for the $5 (or $8) discount at a PDGA tournament, but I think what they give you for that $40 is a great deal.
If I only play 2 PDGA tournaments the entire year, I'll be saving $10 (or $16) &amp; still have all the "extras" the membership provides.
I just noticed they don't give the extras to existing members &amp; I think that's a bad deal. I think EVERYONE deserves at least a free disc along with their yearly fee.

Again, since I know I'll be competing. It only makes sense to join, so I don't care if they changed the $5 to $8. I'm not going to be the one paying it. :D

Pizza God,
I like your idea. A and B tiers are great for larger dg communities, but C and D tiers work alot better for smaller communities. If I were in charge, , it might go something like this. A and B tiers, $10 nonmember, can be applied towards membership. Any open field $10 nonmember(a,b,c, or d) C and D tiers, leave it at $5. You have to have some type of tournament that gets the players interested in the PDGA before you can expect them to pay more. Isn't this the goal of the lower tiers? As far as what the PDGA staff makes, they should be able to make enough to support their families. You just won't be able to get the same level of work/commitment out of the office unless they can make enough to make it a full time job. Why does everyone feel like they need to volunteer for everything? I know if I was working for nothing, or next to it I would burn out quickly. Just be careful about raising fees, if you do, you may find more tournaments going unsanctioned. At the Riverpark Open, I believe the check cut to the PDGA was higher than the check for 1st. Oh, and by the way the guy that won it may never join the pdga because he won't play sundays, and the Riverpark Open is the only 1 day tournament around here, and the guy in 3rd already joined. ;)

The bottom line is it is cheaper to be a member and for the 40 bucks you get a pretty good deal. The website the ratings and the mag to me are worth 40 bucks which is why I will keep paying it prolly for the rest of my life. That and if I wasnt a member I couldnt play Majors or A Tier which I love to do and now that the non member fees are 8 bucks a tournament I would prolly end up spending double or triple what a membership would cost me in the first place.

The way I put it to people when I say they should become a member is. You get a magazine 4 times a year thats pretty sweet. You get a rating which is like a handicap in ball golf so you can compare yourself to others and see how you progess. Plus you dont have to pay the stupid per tournament fee that non members pay.

This could either really boost membership or it could turn away a ton of potential members. I am not yet sure which one it will do but I guess we will find out in 2006.

OK, I'm wrong...Nick and Chuck have it all figured out.
I'll just let them come up with the $2000-$3000 in sponsorship the minis create each year for the WVO.

My wife will appreciate not being a lathe widow for most of the year.

It is not just a matter of turning off non-member disc golfers. It is also going to make some tournaments go unsanctioned. If I don't need the insurance for a particular event, and I'm running eight or nine tournaments, that one will be unsanctioned, because I do want to bring in some players.

This is the easy way to explain it to PDGA members who don't get it. Suppose the flyer for an unsanctioned tournament said:

<table border="1"><tr><td>Entry fees:</td><td> PDGA Members</td><td> Non-members
</td></tr><tr><td>All Pros</td><td> $50</td><td> $42
</td></tr><tr><td>All Advanced</td><td> $40</td><td> $32
</td></tr><tr><td>All others</td><td> $30</td><td> $22</tr></td></table>

So you call the TD and say, "What do I get for my $8 extra?" and he says, "Um, absolutely nothing." Are you playing that tournament? So why are non-members going to play the sanctioned tournament?

See thats not the way to spin it though.

What you should do it put out a flyer that says.

Open $50
Advanced $40
All Others $30

Then when everyone gets there to sign up all the PDGA members suddenly get an 8 dollar discount for being PDGA members. Thats how you have to spin it if you want to gain membership. That way people say HOLY [I'm a potty-mouth!] if I become a member I will get an 8 dollar discount at every tournament I play. If you post it the other way then sure people are going to be like why the hell do I have to pay 8 extra bucks.

No matter what disc golf is going to grow and gain member I just dont know if this is going to help or hurt it. Doesnt matter to me cuz im going to renew and I dont have to worry about that fee.

Really, as a TD, what do i need the PDGA for? i might get 2 extra players who want a PDGA rating...big deal. as Tricky Dick Nixon said, it's the TD's responsibility to enforce the rules, so how is the PDGA helping me? they don't send marshalls to b-tiers or c-tiers.

why should i pony up a few hundred dollars to the PDGA and have to waste time checking people's PDGA numbers to see if they're current?

you see, i'd really like to support this worldwide organization by being a PDGA TD. but the tremendous fees and extra workload just aren't worth it. i don't make a profit off my tournaments; should i gouge my players to pay the PDGA? HOW IS THAT GONNA GROW OUR SPORT?

you see, a good TD doesn't need the PDGA to be a success. I bust my [I'm a potty-mouth!] for months rounding up sponsors, posting flyers, and cleaning up courses. Why in the hell would any sane TD want to fork over hundreds of dollars to the PDGA which does NOT listen to its TD's, in fact talks down to us like we're idiots and acts like the PDGA is the sole reason this sport exists?

See thats not the way to spin it though.

What you should do it put out a flyer that says.

Open $50
Advanced $40
All Others $30

Then when everyone gets there to sign up all the PDGA members suddenly get an 8 dollar discount for being PDGA members. Thats how you have to spin it if you want to gain membership. That way people say HOLY [I'm a potty-mouth!] if I become a member I will get an 8 dollar discount at every tournament I play. If you post it the other way then sure people are going to be like why the hell do I have to pay 8 extra bucks.

No matter what disc golf is going to grow and gain member I just dont know if this is going to help or hurt it. Doesnt matter to me cuz im going to renew and I dont have to worry about that fee.



Go back and read the table. You didn't read the table. You just thought you knew what it said. Bruce's example is a fictional example to help people understand what is going thru the heads of the non-member players.

Then lower your entry fee by $3...



It is irrelevent what our fee is or even if we dropped the entry fee to $0. That does not change the non-member fee.

It is not just a matter of turning off non-member disc golfers. It is also going to make some tournaments go unsanctioned. If I don't need the insurance for a particular event, and I'm running eight or nine tournaments, that one will be unsanctioned, because I do want to bring in some players.

This is the easy way to explain it to PDGA members who don't get it. Suppose the flyer for an unsanctioned tournament said:

<table border="1"><tr><td>Entry fees:</td><td> PDGA Members</td><td> Non-members
</td></tr><tr><td>All Pros</td><td> $50</td><td> $42
</td></tr><tr><td>All Advanced</td><td> $40</td><td> $32
</td></tr><tr><td>All others</td><td> $30</td><td> $22</tr></td></table>

So you call the TD and say, "What do I get for my $8 extra?" and he says, "Um, absolutely nothing." Are you playing that tournament? So why are non-members going to play the sanctioned tournament?



Ah! Now you are onto something Bruce. You, for some reason that I won't guess why, are being obtuse in your answer to the non-PDGA member at your PDGA events then.

For a longtime TD and organizer to get caught with no answer to that question goes to the very heart of this issue. Primarily, that apparently they themselves, the TD, has not come to terms with what PDGA Events really do and what making an event PDGA really means.

All PDGA TDs should have informed and accurate answers to such questions ready and waiting for participants and potential participants. If you don't then you are obviously unprepared to be a PDGA TD.

The purpose of holding a PDGA event is to promote organized disc golf competition at its highest standard. No event, even the MSDGC can surpass it, only approach it. By being a PDGA event it is a part of the Worldwide effort on the part of a huge, knowledgable, experienced, hardworking, committed and tireless network of TDs, Organizers and Players to show disc golf at it's finest.

So to say that you don't know what that $8 goes towards really would not be honest, or at the very least not informed.

What you get as the TD is the benefit, without lifting a finger, of all the promotional and administrative efforts of the combined PDGA; the insurance, the player statistics support, the event statistics support, the best practices delved from 25 years of experience and trial and error, the advertisements, the DGWN and DGM, the documents and experience of a vast network of folks skilled at getting new courses in, of how to start a local club, a state by state line of communication directly with the PDGA (PDGA State Coordinators) and a long list of best practices for how to seek and secure sponsorship and advertisements.

What this newbie, non-current or disgruntled member gets is the opportunity to benefit from all of that and play in an event usually more than less financed on the entry fees of PDGA Members and certainly which standards are set on the longterm efforts and financing of the PDGA and its members. They also get their statistics calculated along with the PDGA Members in case they ever join the PDGA and they want a history of their activities at PDGA events (Player Ratings, Finishes, etc.).

Sure Bruce, you can look at it as if only you Bruce Brakel have done all of the work and were born to a thrown where all of the resources, knowledge and benefits created by the combined network of PDGA organizers was already endowed to you. That you receive no value from a connection with our sports only Worldwide Promotional Entity or those who have through the years added a stone to the building of what we have; but would that really be accurate or unselfish?

The short answer is quite simple: The $8 goes to support the Worldwide effort to promote organized disc golf.

More?

To support the administrative costs covered normally by PDGA Membership Fees.
To support programs such as PDGA Standards, Rules, Course Development, Educational Initiatives, the Course Directory, Player Ratings, Course Evaluations and other direct methods of promoting organized disc golf.

If you aren't ready and waiting to answer those sorts of questions then I really have to question whether you have done any homework at all, not to mention how you substantiate running any PDGAs at all.

And you do, so why do you? For some other reason than taking a direct role in building organized disc golf on a Worldwide level? What?

No lies involved. The basis for payout is very clear. It's the amount after excluding all local, club, basket fund, series, greens fees, park fees, regional and/or national fees. Why would you include some of those fees in the entry fee and not others? The discount approach should be used by all TDs if they want to be more effective at marketing.



It would be a REALLY deceptive practice. I realize that some people in business and marketing are fine with practicing deceptive tactics. Bruce and I are not. Bottom line is, it is NOT a discount, it is a fee being paid by the non-member players. You say spin, I say highly objectionable approach to disc golf marketing..."Let's call the whole thing off!" :D

Mike, if this is all so clear to you, then yes, you really should just quietly go away. We do not share your stinking thinking on this topic. If we did none of us would join the PDGA, nor attend PDGAs, nor run PDGA events.

We do, AND YOU DO TOO, so get real or get lost.


Really, as a TD, what do i need the PDGA for? i might get 2 extra players who want a PDGA rating...big deal. as Tricky Dick Nixon said, it's the TD's responsibility to enforce the rules, so how is the PDGA helping me? they don't send marshalls to b-tiers or c-tiers.

why should i pony up a few hundred dollars to the PDGA and have to waste time checking people's PDGA numbers to see if they're current?

you see, i'd really like to support this worldwide organization by being a PDGA TD. but the tremendous fees and extra workload just aren't worth it. i don't make a profit off my tournaments; should i gouge my players to pay the PDGA? HOW IS THAT GONNA GROW OUR SPORT?

you see, a good TD doesn't need the PDGA to be a success. I bust my [I'm a potty-mouth!] for months rounding up sponsors, posting flyers, and cleaning up courses. Why in the hell would any sane TD want to fork over hundreds of dollars to the PDGA which does NOT listen to its TD's, in fact talks down to us like we're idiots and acts like the PDGA is the sole reason this sport exists?

Is it just me, or are you also glossing over Bruce's example. Because in Bruce's example the guy who is paying the $8 fee is getting nothing for it. Bruce's example is a fictional unsanctioned tournament in which the PDGA member is paying the $8 fee...for nothing!

And that is EXACTLY what the non-member is getting when he pays $8 to the PDGA in non-member fees.

As a TD I get nothing from the non-member fee also. I get all the benefits from the PDGA when I have no non-members playing my tournament as when I get 50 non-members playing my tournament. I get all the benefits that you described a PDGA TD getting by sanctioning my tournament and running it, as best I can, in accordance with the sanctioning agreement. I don't get any extra benefits because I take in extra non-member fees. And I wouldn't get any "discounted" benefits if I gave the PDGA members a "discount" on their entry fee.

No lies involved. The basis for payout is very clear. It's the amount after excluding all local, club, basket fund, series, greens fees, park fees, regional and/or national fees. Why would you include some of those fees in the entry fee and not others? The discount approach should be used by all TDs if they want to be more effective at marketing.



It would be a REALLY deceptive practice. I realize that some people in business and marketing are fine with practicing deceptive tactics. Bruce and I are not. Bottom line is, it is NOT a discount, it is a fee being paid by the non-member players. You say spin, I say highly objectionable approach to disc golf marketing..."Let's call the whole thing off!" :D



Jon,

That is not entirely true. I clearly recall Bruce using the fees to substantiate higher return of value on his event, when he challenged anyone to beat it. He subtracted the fees and then compared that number to the total payouts. By your suggested criteria here, that is dishonest.

So which is it?

By the way I creamed his event with the 2003 MADCi return of value. Yes, I had to go our and raise sponsorship that he conveniently labelled some of which series taxes to escape the reality that I had achieved 275% return of entry fee value (INCLUDING PDGA FEES!).

You are flip flopping on this to suit your immediate needs. Which is it? Fees count towards payouts and return of value or not?

No lies involved. The basis for payout is very clear. It's the amount after excluding all local, club, basket fund, series, greens fees, park fees, regional and/or national fees. Why would you include some of those fees in the entry fee and not others? The discount approach should be used by all TDs if they want to be more effective at marketing.



It would be a REALLY deceptive practice. I realize that some people in business and marketing are fine with practicing deceptive tactics. Bruce and I are not. Bottom line is, it is NOT a discount, it is a fee being paid by the non-member players. You say spin, I say highly objectionable approach to disc golf marketing..."Let's call the whole thing off!" :D



Jon,

That is not entirely true. I clearly recall Bruce using the fees to substantiate higher return of value on his event, when he challenged anyone to beat it. He subtracted the fees and then compared that number to the total payouts. By your suggested criteria here, that is dishonest.

So which is it?

By the way I creamed his event with the 2003 MADCi return of value. Yes, I had to go our and raise sponsorship that he conveniently labelled some of which series taxes to escape the reality that I had achieved 275% return of entry fee value (INCLUDING PDGA FEES!).

You are flip flopping on this to suit your immediate needs. Which is it? Fees count towards payouts and return of value or not?



I think you need more sleep or something Nick. How can you not see the difference between calculating tournament value and advertising a per player fee as a discount?

Two more things about that comparison. Bruce compared it that way because that is the PDGA formula for calculating payout %.

Number two, I can't be accused of flip flopping based on something that Bruce did! WE ARE TWO DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Heck, he probably pisses me off more than he pisses you off! We have a poll somewhere that almost definitely proves that we are two different people. Honest!

Go back and read the table. You didn't read the table. You just thought you knew what it said. Bruce's example is a fictional example to help people understand what is going thru the heads of the non-member players.



I understand it just fine. I dont think you understand what I am saying.

All TDs post the PDGA entry fee when they should really be posting the non member entry fee as to not surprise the non member that comes with 42 dollas and then your like your not a member you have to pay an extra 5. I know sometime I come to a tournament with just enough money to pay my entry fee and 5 bucks for lunch.

If the PDGA fee is 42 bucks then you put 50 on the flyer so that all the people that see it show up expecting to pay 50 instead of expecting to pay 42 and having to pay 50. Its all in the way you present it.

If the flyer says 50 and I want to play the tourney Ill bring 50 no problem. If it says 42 and I get there and you try and charge me 50 im going to be [I'm a potty-mouth!] cuz its like you tried to pull one over on me.

Now do you understand what I am trying to say???

Jon,

Is his example really accurate to a non-member playing in a PDGA event?

Is this player not receiving the full benefits of PDGA membership during that event?

Is the player not receiving the full benefits of the PDGAs Standards, Promotional Efforts, and Programs during that event?

Is the player not getting his results posted at the PDGA website and in the official results, and in the DGWN just like every other PDGA member?

To say he is getting absolutely nothing is like saying Bruce invented the game of disc golf and his events owe nothing to those who put in courses, build player bases, and figured out all of the best practices on how to run events all under the umbrella of promoting organized disc golf Worldwide.

Is that what you, or he is saying?


I don't get any extra benefits because I take in extra non-member fees.



Perhaps not immediate, but you are conveniently blocking out all of the benefits the PDGA does for you, the TD, on a broader more Worldwide level of benefit. Besides, can you say that your benefit is absolutely and for certain decreasing?

It is perhaps difficult to focus on things beyond our immediate surroundings and needs, that is understandable. It is not acceptable however to base broader more longterm and inclusive planning and action on such shortsighted perceptions or "feelings" or ways of looking and things.

The immediate benefit to the non-current or non-member is that they can pay the $8 right then and there rather than the $40 or $50. If they know they are playing in more than 5 PDGAs for the year, then they can benefit by purchasing a membership. Those are clear and easy benefits. The fact that they would rather pay nothing is like saying I'd rather not pay when I have lunch at a restaurant. If they or you are capable of looking beyond the immediate for benefit, then there is a world of benefits to be considered (already discussed at length).


Is it just me, or are you also glossing over Bruce's example. Because in Bruce's example the guy who is paying the $8 fee is getting nothing for it. Bruce's example is a fictional unsanctioned tournament in which the PDGA member is paying the $8 fee...for nothing!

And that is EXACTLY what the non-member is getting when he pays $8 to the PDGA in non-member fees.

As a TD I get nothing from the non-member fee also. I get all the benefits from the PDGA when I have no non-members playing my tournament as when I get 50 non-members playing my tournament. I get all the benefits that you described a PDGA TD getting by sanctioning my tournament and running it, as best I can, in accordance with the sanctioning agreement. I don't get any extra benefits because I take in extra non-member fees. And I wouldn't get any "discounted" benefits if I gave the PDGA members a "discount" on their entry fee.

I do not like the increase from $5.00 to $8.00. I don't seee how it can possibly benefit the PDGA if it will alienate so many tournament directors and players.

Will Developmental D-Tiers still be exempt from collecting the non-member fee? I think TD's that are trying to get new players exposed to competitive disc golf and the PDGA should consider running D-tier events. D-Tiers are limited to one event per venue, per year.(You can even get an exception to this rule from the Competition Director.) So areas like Utah or the Brakels events could still host three different events at three different courses and still offer "PDGA" benefits. Hosting D-Tier events gives TD's the advantages of a PDGA event, without the high fees. The advantages are that PDGA players still receive ratings and points and non-members do not have to pay a $5.00 (or $8.00) non-member fee.

Why aren't TD's in growing areas or areas with many recreational and intermediate players running D-tier events??

As much as it pains me to admit it, this would not be a bad practice. All that would be necessary is for their to be a note saying PDGA Members get an $8 discount. There is absolutely nothing deceptive about it, certainly no more than saying non-PDGA Members pay an additional $8.

It suggest the proper presentation as well, that the events are primarily for PDGA Members and that non-members are paying guests of the organization and its TDs and Members.



Go back and read the table. You didn't read the table. You just thought you knew what it said. Bruce's example is a fictional example to help people understand what is going thru the heads of the non-member players.



I understand it just fine. I dont think you understand what I am saying.

All TDs post the PDGA entry fee when they should really be posting the non member entry fee as to not surprise the non member that comes with 42 dollas and then your like your not a member you have to pay an extra 5. I know sometime I come to a tournament with just enough money to pay my entry fee and 5 bucks for lunch.

If the PDGA fee is 42 bucks then you put 50 on the flyer so that all the people that see it show up expecting to pay 50 instead of expecting to pay 42 and having to pay 50. Its all in the way you present it.

If the flyer says 50 and I want to play the tourney Ill bring 50 no problem. If it says 42 and I get there and you try and charge me 50 im going to be [I'm a potty-mouth!] cuz its like you tried to pull one over on me.

Now do you understand what I am trying to say???

As much as it pains me to admit it, this would not be a bad practice. All that would be necessary is for their to be a note saying PDGA Members get an $8 discount. There is absolutely nothing deceptive about it, certainly no more than saying non-PDGA Members pay an additional $8.




This way the non member say HOLY [I'm a potty-mouth!] if I become a member I get an 8 dollar discount on all my entry fees AND I get a magazine and a rating!!! Then you tell them its only 40 bucks and they are like HOLY CRAP if I play 5 tournaments I would have payed 40 bucks anyway, where can I sign up to be a member???

so...... WHAT THE BOARD DISCUSS AND DECIDE LAST NITE?


ps. nick is an id[/b]iot. but he'll never know cuz he has me on ignore and he's too much of a re[/b]tard to finger it out for himself :D

Suzette,

I don't like or dislike the increase, nor do I make any point one way or the other for it. What I defend is the practice of providing a discount to PDGA Members in Good Standing at PDGA events. Also I defend the right of the PDGA to request this as a standard at PDGA Sanctioned events. Lastly that there absolutely ARE valid and convincing reasons for it and that it is completely false to say that the non-member player gets no benefit from it.

Whether individual TDs need to do more to increase PDGA Memberships in their local or regional areas is an entirely different question, as is in what way the PDGA can assist them in accomplishing that goal.

I know that some regions are years behind, or just at different stages of development, and yes we should do what we can to support them to grow; the challenge is how to do that without taking steps backwards in other areas or betray the understanding that we are involved in a greater more broad effort than simply local or in-front-of-nose benefits.

The debate about the $5 > $8 increase in PDGA Member Discount is separate from staying focussed on the very real and tangible benefits the PDGA provides. I do not support the bashing of our Worldwide promotional efforts as a valid reason to not raise the discount.

This way the non member say HOLY [I'm a potty-mouth!] if I become a member I get an 8 dollar discount on all my entry fees AND I get a magazine and a rating!!! Then you tell them its only 40 bucks and they are like HOLY CRAP if I play 5 tournaments I would have payed 40 bucks anyway, where can I sign up to be a member???



That's how I see it happening too. I think it will help increase membership if that is the goal.
Like I said earlier, I plan on paying and even I only play 2 tourneys then I will still feel my money was well spent.
I get all the extras that membership provides, save on tourneys & get a cool PDGA #.
So I'm all for an increase, because I'm not paying it. :)

Mike, if this is all so clear to you, then yes, you really should just quietly go away. We do not share your stinking thinking on this topic. If we did none of us would join the PDGA, nor attend PDGAs, nor run PDGA events.

We do, AND YOU DO TOO, so get real or get lost.





could you repeat that in English? me no comprehende. i'm not a small mind reader so i can't understand what eminates from your head.

Nick you've never been to the MSDGC, so you can not tell anyone that it's not as good as a PDGA event. okay, you can say it, but like most of your statements, it's rubbish.

As much as it pains me to admit it, this would not be a bad practice. All that would be necessary is for their to be a note saying PDGA Members get an $8 discount. There is absolutely nothing deceptive about it, certainly no more than saying non-PDGA Members pay an additional $8.




This way the non member say HOLY [I'm a potty-mouth!] if I become a member I get an 8 dollar discount on all my entry fees AND I get a magazine and a rating!!! Then you tell them its only 40 bucks and they are like HOLY CRAP if I play 5 tournaments I would have payed 40 bucks anyway, where can I sign up to be a member???



I'm not saying that PDGA membership is not a good value. I think you are underestimating the intelligence of our non-member players. They KNOW that they are paying more than the member player. I think most of them will know that they are paying a fee if we were to offer a discount to the members. If it smells like a fee, looks like a fee and tastes like a fee, it must be a fee! One difference between a fee and a discount that you might understand is where the money is coming from and going.

We might decide one day to offer a discount for early registration. Let's say it is $5 off the regular registration fee. When we calculate the payout on the day of the event, we will add all the entry fees together and base the payout on the total. Basically all the early registrants are getting a little bit higher of a payout and all the late registrants are getting a little bit lower of a payout.

In the case of an extra fee, we will collect the entry fee plus the extra fee, let's say it is $5. We add up the $5 fees and send those to the $5 fee association. Then we add up the entry fees and calculate the payout.

I think that is the basic issue that I have a problem with. There is a BIG difference between a fee and a discount. And no matter what Nick, Pimp and Chuck say, it IS deceptive to call a fee a discount.

We do not share your stinking thinking



Nick, do you have a mouse in your pocket? Speak for yourself.

Discount, Fee, Fee, Discount----Whatever

The bottom line is that the PDGA needs more revenue--
--new employees
--National Disc Golf Center
--Ongoing tournament support

They can do this many different ways, raise membersip fees, player fees, sanctioning fees, blah, blah, blah

Do they need to provide more benefit to both player and tournament, absolutely. They know this and are working on it.

Do they need to tax the new player to the PDGA Tournament. Very little if at all, but non-members pay a price in all sports. In some sports, non-members can't even play. EXAMPLES for competition in other sports:

NORBA (Mountain Biking)
Stopped giving one-day memberships
$5 per race (riders often race several races in a weekend)
$30 Yearly race liscense (not membership, liscense)

USA Canoe and Kayak
$10 Non-Member fee
$55 Yearly membership ($145 for a 3 year)

National Pro Rodeo
$75 Yearly Membership
Non-Members can ride, but get taxed with about 4 add-on fees

USA Table Tennis
Non-Members can't compete in most events
$40 Membership

Bottom Line-It pays to be a member, helps build the organization and supports the sport you love.

Your assignment: Come up with cost effective ways the PDGA can increase membership and sanctioning value.

There is a BIG difference between a fee and a discount. And no matter what Nick, Pimp and Chuck say, it IS deceptive to call a fee a discount.



How about your own perspective? What if you looked at it from the viewpoint that PDGA Events are sanctioned by, run by, financed by and run primarily for PDGA Members. They are the target demographic. They are the folks you want to show up in droves.

So if the $5 or $8 is considered in that context, then what is it to the target demographic? If no non-members come, what is it considered by the tds, players and anyone looking on? What if 10 or even 45% of the participants are non-members? How do the PDGA Members consider it? They paid $5 or $8 less right?

From the PDGA perspective it is a discount.

You "CHOOSE" not to look at it that way because, I know I wasn't going to discuss this, because you, on some level do not really believe in the "VALUE" and "BENEFITS" the PDGA is providing to these non-member players.

You see, I have no such doubts, I know the value they get for those $5 and $8, as I know the value members get for their $40 and $50. Heck, there are plenty of folks that understand the value folks get for hundreds even thousands of dollars!

These folks ARE THE PDGA, they believe in what we are doing together and have no squirmishness in supporting it wholeheartedly.

Until folks can find their own reasons to support the PDGA, and understand the benefits it provides (through all of it's members and efforts) $5 to $8 per event is not too much to ask in my opinion.

Nick, do you have a mouse in your pocket? Speak for yourself.



WVO, that's not a mouse, it's a gerbil. And it's not in his pocket!

We do not share your stinking thinking



Nick, do you have a mouse in your pocket? Speak for yourself.



Mark, please be funnier.

If you shared his thoughts and you are still a PDGA Member then you are a "Self-Hater" like Spiteful Micheal.

(I'm taking notes on the meglomaniacs and where they tend to always fall on these topics. 100% consistency so far.)

Mike, Yo momma's so fat that she's half Scottish, half Irish and half American

Ah! Now you are onto something Bruce. You, for some reason that I won't guess why, are being obtuse in your answer to the non-PDGA member at your PDGA events then.

For a longtime TD and organizer to get caught with no answer to that question goes to the very heart of this issue. Primarily, that apparently they themselves, the TD, has not come to terms with what PDGA Events really do and what making an event PDGA really means.



Nick - it is you who do not get Bruce's point. It has nothing to do with what TD's say, don't say or know or don't know. It has everything to do with what a potentially new PDGA tournament player will perceive when he sees a tournament flyer on a course kiosk. He will get a very bad perception and will never even call the TD and give the TD the opportunity to schmooze him with all the wonderful ideas you suggest.

Bruce is right on in how he is presenting this.

Discount, Fee, Fee, Discount----Whatever

The bottom line is that the PDGA needs more revenue--
--new employees
--National Disc Golf Center
--Ongoing tournament support

They can do this many different ways, raise membersip fees, player fees, sanctioning fees, blah, blah, blah

Do they need to provide more benefit to both player and tournament, absolutely. They know this and are working on it.

Do they need to tax the new player to the PDGA Tournament. Very little if at all, but non-members pay a price in all sports. In some sports, non-members can't even play. EXAMPLES for competition in other sports:

NORBA (Mountain Biking)
Stopped giving one-day memberships
$5 per race (riders often race several races in a weekend)
$30 Yearly race liscense (not membership, liscense)

USA Canoe and Kayak
$10 Non-Member fee
$55 Yearly membership ($145 for a 3 year)

National Pro Rodeo
$75 Yearly Membership
Non-Members can ride, but get taxed with about 4 add-on fees

USA Table Tennis
Non-Members can't compete in most events
$40 Membership

Bottom Line-It pays to be a member, helps build the organization and supports the sport you love.

Your assignment: Come up with cost effective ways the PDGA can increase membership and sanctioning value.



This is the best post on this thread. Period!!!

Ah! Now you are onto something Bruce. You, for some reason that I won't guess why, are being obtuse in your answer to the non-PDGA member at your PDGA events then.

For a longtime TD and organizer to get caught with no answer to that question goes to the very heart of this issue. Primarily, that apparently they themselves, the TD, has not come to terms with what PDGA Events really do and what making an event PDGA really means.



Nick - it is you who do not get Bruce's point. It has nothing to do with what TD's say, don't say or know or don't know. It has everything to do with what a potentially new PDGA tournament player will perceive when he sees a tournament flyer on a course kiosk. He will get a very bad perception and will never even call the TD and give the TD the opportunity to schmooze him with all the wonderful ideas you suggest.

Bruce is right on in how he is presenting this.



How so?
Do potiential customers of a private golf club feel put off when they have to pay a higher greens fee?
How about potential members of all those sporting associations Yeti cited? Do they?

Besides, which should the PDGA be more conscious of, the perceptions of proven contributors or folks that don't really understand why or what the PDGA does?

It is a Member Discount. That non-members see it as an additional fee is up to them and their perception of the PDGA and what they see it do for them or not. The most we, PDGA Members, can do for them is educate ourselves and then help them to understand what the PDGA is doing for them without them even having to contribute more than a couple $5 to $8 fees here and there.

If you feel the value is not enough, then why are you running or participating in PDGAs? You need to answer that question before you can provide one to a newbie or PDGA-Hater.

I'm just throwing this out and it may already be happening, but what about the PDGA encouraging TD's to run "Member Drive" tournaments and/or divisions? There would be a low ($15 or so) rec level entrance cost without any "fees" or "discounts," a player's pack that's worth while (a disc or two perhaps) and the payout would be a free, one year membership or credit twards a membership. Anyone with a PDGA number woudn't be allowed to participate in the "Member Drive" division. With the low payouts you could send more money twards the PDGA without the appearance of gouging non-members since the whole tournament or division is geared twards them. The idea of winning a membership as a prize may make having a membership appear more valueable to non-members. I'm no marketing guru or anything, but I'll bet it's easier to get people to renew memberships than it is to get them to start new ones.

If the PDGA needs more money, then that could be a business case to raise fees. All I saw in the minutes was that they were raising fees, not a business case. I'm still willing to listen to a business case for raising fees. I still don't think that raising the non-member fee will increase revenue in the long run. It might increase revenue from some select events, but in the long run I do not see this as a revenue producing move.

Last I saw the PDGA had a $200,000 nest egg. Did that get spent on something? I thought we only added one full time employee. I did not think that the PDGA was hurting for money.

Your assignment: Come up with cost effective ways the PDGA can increase membership and sanctioning value.



Yeti, if that's the goal of the increase in non-member fees, I don't think it'll work. To increase membership, you have to show the value that membership provides. It involves marketing and communicating what the PDGA does for the sport of disc golf.

By increasing non-member tournament fees, you accomplish two things. You turn some people off from sanctioned play and you get some players to join for the cost benefit but they really don't believe in supporting the PDGA. The latter will also not renew once the number of tournaments they play drops to point that it is cheaper to pay the non-member fees again.

Marketing the value of the PDGA is the best way to increase membership.

Last I saw the PDGA had a $200,000 nest egg. Did that get spent on something? I thought we only added one full time employee. I did not think that the PDGA was hurting for money.



Asok, you need to get some help. You didn't see the PDGA Financials; they don't exist. Or at least, when you ask for them per the PDGA Consitution, you are treated like you're asking for the last known location of Amelia Earhart!

OK, I have two final thoughts before I go back to work for the day:

1) There is value in a tournament being sanctioned by the PDGA. That's why we do it. However, to the average first time tournament player, who doesn't even know what the PDGA is, there is no value. Value is in the eye of the person paying the money. Why would the PDGA, that they've never heard of, hold any value for them? They are going to learn that value by playing sanctioned and unsanctioned events and comparing them. They will not, I assure you, contemplate the global rewards that their fee will provide even if the TD wrote it on a $5 bill and gave it to the player. They will, by playing sanctioned events, learn that sanctioned tournaments have a good value to the member and non-member alike. They will, by playing with PDGA members, learn that being a PDGA member has value. If we lose X% of those people because we want to charge them an $8 fee, we might not ever get the chance to teach them the value of the PDGA. I like PDGA events, I like being a volunteer for the PDGA and I think the PDGA provides great value to me, that is why I am NOT saying that I won't sanction my tournaments next year. If the PDGA does increase the non-member fees there WILL still be great value in the PDGA events. The PDGA will have to find some added avenues to recruit new members if this pushes some people to never try a PDGA event.

2) A fee is a fee and a discount is a discount. If I am offering a discount to one group and collecting the difference between the full price and the discount from another group and sending it to an association, it is a fee. If I am offering a discount to one group and not sending a corresponding amount collected from the non-discounted group to the association then it is not a fee.

Final word from me....The WVO is an A Teir so PDGA memebership is required ($5 or $8 fee is irrelevant)...What we do is provide a discounted entry ($20 discount) fee if registered for the event two weeks ahead.

The WVO will continue to do what we feel is best for the WVO, no matter what Nick, Chuck or Joe Schmo thinks.

I wish you all the best in your effort to debate this topic...but my Mother always told me "Don't get in a fight with an ugly person, they have nothing to lose".

This coming from a guy with a bag over his head LOL . Sorry I could not resist :D :D:p

...... but non-members pay a price in all sports. In some sports, non-members can't even play. EXAMPLES for competition in other sports:

NORBA (Mountain Biking)
Stopped giving one-day memberships
$5 per race (riders often race several races in a weekend)
$30 Yearly race liscense (not membership, liscense)

USA Canoe and Kayak
$10 Non-Member fee
$55 Yearly membership ($145 for a 3 year)
.....



True enough. But....this does not mean that those organizations are not having the same discussion/arguement that we are having right here.

IMO, the PDGA (and other such organizations) is competing with local clubs' events for newbie's loyalty and $$. It is all consumers' responsibility to make decisions based on the value propositions available to them. In that regard this is a good and healthy discussion.

If a goal of an organization is growth by adding newcomers and retainning current members, their policies should reflect that. You mention that this might be driven by a need of the PDGA to produce revenue. These goals seem to be in opposition to eachother.

Jon,

Is this player not receiving the full benefits of PDGA membership during that event?




No. Ratings for non-members are not posted once official results are in. The only time non-members do get ratings for their rounds are when people like Jon do a great job and have the results posted unofficially before the players get home.


What this newbie, non-current or disgruntled member gets is the opportunity to benefit from all of that and play in an event usually more than less financed on the entry fees of PDGA Members and certainly which standards are set on the longterm efforts and financing of the PDGA and its members. They also get their statistics calculated along with the PDGA Members in case they ever join the PDGA and they want a history of their activities at PDGA events (Player Ratings, Finishes, etc.).



So when my new membership does finally get sent in from the last IOS, all my tourneys this past year will all of a sudden have player ratings and linked to my profile? That would be a nice bonus.

And raising the charge to non-members will discourage growth, therefore it is a bad idea.



Thats what I said 20 posts ago.

I think the percentage would be less. If a non-member chooses not to play, the PDGA loses more than just the non-member fee. They also miss out on the other tax, the per-player fee.

I think the elasticity and resultant impacts vary by event. For past Charleston events where we had 50+ players on the waiting list, we still would have sold out irrespective of the amount of the non-member fee. For our event in Savannah ( a winter time event in a relatively new disc golf market), the added fee may dissuade some local non-members from playing. This would hurt us as the event producer, diminish the prizes awarded to the winners, and attenuate the benefit Savannah's disc golf scene receives from the event.

There is no doubt that PDGA sanctioning adds value to our events. We will continue to sanction to support the organization and to benefit the players who attend our events. We will do this despite the fact that the non-member fee increase does nothing to help, and might actually hurt, local players and event organizers.

Value flows from the bottom up in disc golf just as it does in most other communities. The PDGA should realign their policy to reflect this reality. One way this potential negative could become a positive if the non-member received full player benefits right away and in a manner that generated little or know extra work for the TD.

Take care,
Harold

One way this potential negative could become a positive if the non-member received full player benefits right away and in a manner that generated little or know extra work for the TD.

exactly! wouldnt it be great if the nonmember fee generated a pdga membership, temporary as it may be, for the player - along with pdga number, etc.

that way the player could see his player rating from the first event he played... and subsequent events would use the same pdga number - although granted he may be in the lapsed status. both the player and the organization benefit hugely from this approach.

One way this potential negative could become a positive if the non-member received full player benefits right away and in a manner that generated little or know extra work for the TD.

exactly! wouldnt it be great if the nonmember fee generated a pdga membership, temporary as it may be, for the player - along with pdga number, etc.

that way the player could see his player rating from the first event he played... and subsequent events would use the same pdga number - although granted he may be in the lapsed status. both the player and the organization benefit hugely from this approach.



We could take this a step further and call the non-member fee PDGA Day Membership dues. All PDGA events would require all players (except Jrs.) to be members. We would always be willing to sell memberships (Day and Year) at the event. A tiers and higher would still require a Year membership. The Day membership would entitle the player to a unique lifetime PDGA number, participate in the event, get their scores AND rating calculated and posted/published. It would NOT include the magazine, voting rights, ability to hold a PDGA office or invites to Majors. The Day member would then be elligible to become a Year member once they have paid enough Day dues to pay for their Year membership. This would then give them all the benefits of a regular Year membership. The membership would expire at the end of the calendar year just like all other regular memberships.

This could grow our membership AND expose these players to the benefits of being a member.

I also know of a few non-members who are young adults, first out on their own, paying rent and car insurance for the first time, who would have to skip playing a few tournaments in order to afford a membership. But they have the $5 extra every time. It would be a service to them to let them buy their membership on the installment plan.

I like this idea. If everyone was tracked by their pdga #, because everyone has them, it might not be as hard as it sounds. I personally would still pay mine upfront, because I'm already adddicted ;). Just let them pay their $5, don't send them the DGWN or whatever, until they've reached $40. Look at it as $5 pays for you to play one tournament, and get it rated. Maybe you could track it by adding an extra line to the tournament. When you pull up someone's results, Tournament A-$5, Tournament B-$10, Tournament C-$15, Once they reach 40 they get full benefits. If they don't reach 40, they never become a full member, but we still discourage sandbagging, because everyone has a rating. I guess the question is, can you afford to rate someone at $5 a tournament and still come out in the green?

PDGAOffice: thats what computers are for. i'm willing to bet that we could fashion a system that would make it not a whole lot more timeconsuming than tracking a membership that is 5000 members bigger than it is currently - and i'm sure a 5000 member bump would be welcomed with open arms!

i'll eagerly and happily volunteer to add the creation of such a system/tool to my volunteer website development efforts.

I like all the ideas that differentiate the tiers, thus making it possible for more people to be attracted to the PDGA. I am not out to "bring it all down." I consistently preach "include all people." Ask anybody.

Nick I give you full props for your sincerity and passion, but I can't respond directly to all your points cause they seem like the same point when you scan and scan and scan and are overwhelmed by the sheer volumne, the misdirections and assumptions of what I and others were saying, I can't respond. You are nuts, but you win. If you can limit your quotations to two levels and your rants to a single paragraph, I may start reading. I won't put you on ignore but I've been thinking about it.

I will stop attacking the PDGA for now cause a what my wife said I'm not saying what she said but I'll stop. You beat me Nick by sheer number of pushups. I concede all points. Nick is great.

And to Mikey's point -- Mikey being our very favorite non non-heterosexual (careful wording) -- everyone is welcome here if they have the balls to come. Wow that came out bad.

I also believe in double standards, as far as number of paragraphs go.

Force for the positive, but no promises. Some things sometimes gotta be said.

The Day member would then be elligible to become a Year member once they have paid enough Day dues to pay for their Year membership.

Jon: Intriguing idea. Question: practically speaking, how much new effort by PDGAHQ (staff hours/cost) would it take to track this "day members into year members" fee system, given an estimated 500 B/C tiers cross-country and ~ 5000 different individual "day members"?



I thought about that and was thinking that it might be able to be tracked in the same manner that points are tracked online.

Perhaps a more practical question is how much more money will it cost to process the Day Memberships? They will need to get a number and I assume that means being added to a data base with their name and contact info. That being said, the non-members are already input into some kind of data base when the TDs include their info in the TD report, right? We could use the current soft cards that are already distributed to TDs as their Day Member card. Then when they get a number the TD can add the number to the card at the next event.

There would be some logistical hurdles to be worked out both on the TD end and the PDGA office end. I'd be willing to represent a TDs perspective on it if anyone wants to discuss the matter.

The Competition Committee had a good discussion on this topic last night. With respect for the Board, no details until they have a chance to review our recommendations which include alternatives to the flat $8 nonmember fee previously approved.

D-tiers have never had nonmember fees and they were not being added. That would defeat the purpose of this introductory event. The nonmember fees are only part of B & C tiers.

Regarding weekend temporary member fees, they have been discussed. However, the mechanics of the current developmental 3-month memberships still don't work as well as we'd like for TDs to promote them. It slows down their registration lines. Many prefer to just charge the nonmember fee and not even inform players of the 3-month membership.

Our committee, with staff assistance, would like to pursue some ideas for improving the soft card process. If that can be made to work better, the next step would be to see if a suitable process to generate temporary event memberships can be worked out so that everyone playing an event is a member of some sort. As the PDGAOffice points out, the economic viability may not be there unless an efficient way to do it can be determined.

If I don't need the insurance for a particular event...

What event wouldn't require insurance? If someone gets injured guess who is (potentially) getting sued? Not just the thrower but also the TD and the PDGA. There are very good reasons for having insurance in todays litigious society...

Regarding 'soft' memberships, I like the idea of assigning a PDGA number to every person who plays a PDGA event. If TDs can enter scores online then they can certainly add new PDGA members online (either permanent members or 'soft' members). These would be tagged by the computer system until the PDGA receives the payment from the TD. At that point the member kit gets sent out with their new computer generated PDGA numbers. 'Soft Members' would just receive a computer-generated mailer with their new number while year members would get their full kit (disc, magazine, sticker, etc.). The computer would know when the 'soft' membership has accrued $40 within a year and automatically send out the full member kit.

...With full memberships PDGA is getting new income to cover this. The $5 temp fees received under the current system are already used to cover various expenses in the budget. Thus the proposed system would generate no new income to offset the associated costs, as for example a raise in non/noncurrent-member fees has the potential to do, and thus its feasibility is not immediately apparent.

Note: the PDGA does not or has never had a "$200,000 nest egg." What we strive to ensure per basic business management is that we always have a minimum of 2 months operating costs in the bank as organizational security...



Any guess as to what the cost of the Day Membership plan would be? It would not add a lot of expense. You would not have the expense of the full fillment house since the Day Members would not be getting anything from the fullfillment house. I believe some of the $5 money goes toward mailing thank yous to the non-members who paid the $5 fee. Someone is already processing the name and address, so that wouldn't add anything. Assigning and tracking the PDGA number is the only additional work for the PDGA office that I can think of, but I might be missing something. Or assigning/tracking the number might be more expensive than I realize.

The additional revenue would come from new regular members who continue to renew every year after discovering the benefits of membership. This might not be additional revenue though. I think Pat Govang said something about this several years ago when the PDGA raised member dues. I think he said that the PDGA makes more profit on non-member fees than if the average person were to join. So, if we get more people to join, the PDGA's non-member revenue stream might go down. Short term reduction in revenue but a possible long term benefit for the organization as a whole.

I say "nest egg" you say "organizational security". Isn't it the same? My point was that the organization has been able to generally maintain "organizational security" so I didn't see the need for increasing revenue through increased fees. That doens't mean that I'm right, I just don't see the need. Show me the money (or lack of it)! :D

If I don't need the insurance for a particular event...

What event wouldn't require insurance? If someone gets injured guess who is (potentially) getting sued? Not just the thrower but also the TD and the PDGA. There are very good reasons for having insurance in todays litigious society...



THREAD DRIFT, THREAD DRIFT, THREAD DRIFT!!!!

I know this is difficult to understand, but insurance brings litigators out of the wood work. Lawyers only sue people who have money.

PDGAOffice: i agree the operational impact must be assessed. after all, a system that costs for to run than it saves is a losing proposition.

with 25+ years in process and business operations analysis as it applies to IT systems, plus 20 years developing business and functional requirements for such applications, plus 15+ years managing the projects that ensued to actually create and implement the systems, i believe that i am well qualified to lend a hand in this effort.

i am optimistic that the temp membership problem could be solved in such a manner that it creates no significant additional demands on the staff. i'd bet that if we looked at the membership operations at the higher level, we could create a system that supports both the current activity plus the temp memberships and actually reduces the time spent.

when the time is right for you, i will be happy and eager to discuss how we might approach this effort.

The Day member would then be elligible to become a Year member once they have paid enough Day dues to pay for their Year membership.

Jon: Intriguing idea. Question: practically speaking, how much new effort by PDGAHQ (staff hours/cost) would it take to track this "day members into year members" fee system, given an estimated 500 B/C tiers cross-country and ~ 5000 different individual "day members"?



For anyone who actually knows how to use a spreadsheet or a database ratehr of just enter data, the amount of time and work it would take is trivial.

i didn't know that felix could be MEAN!!!

:eek:

After having read every bleeding post in this thread (took 2 smoke breaks and a pot of coffee, at last tally), here's the ideas that have struck me as 'good'.

(currently in place, as I understand it)
D Tiers, no nonmenber fees
C Tiers, yes nonmember fees
B Tiers, yes nonmember fees
A/NT, no nonmenbers

The primary discussion is $5 vs $8.
$5 at C Tiers and $10 at B Tiers has been mentioned. I like this. This leads to the logical:

D Tiers: Get em thirsty.
C Tiers: Get em ready.
B Tiers: Get em hooked.

Players shoot a few D Tier events and decide they think they're ready for better competition. They try a C Tier or two and do well, and decide to try a B Tier. They're moving up just like MA-3 -> MA-2 -> MA-1. The MA-3s in C Tiers are likely the MA-2s in D Tiers (ratings ignored and whatnot).

For future growth, perhaps splitting B Tiers across 2 days, where Saturday is run a lot like a C Tier Pro-Am or something where anyone can compete with no nonmenber fees, with prizes being barely over the entry fees, and top spots get free entry into sunday. This gives players a chance to come out and compete without the high cost of the B Tier event(in their eyes), against the same players. I know I'd travel a day earlier to an event and pay a $10-$15 entry fee into a Saturday event(if I was already going to be traveling) to get a look at the course, with the chance of winning my entry into the event.

Now I know that TDs don't have enough on their plates, so perhaps these saturday mini-B/maxi-C tier events are a great spot for a new TD to whet their lips on running an event. These could be unsanctioned, or something along those lines, who knows?

The overall goal of this would be to attract new players to the experience of a disc golf tournament on a larger scale, without the super competative experience of a B-Tier. I was in a C-Tier for my first tournament and the experience got me hooked and I ended up playing in 11 sanctioned events this summer, including 5 of the 6 DMDGS events. If more players came out and really had fun in their first exposures to big tourneys, they might travel like I did. The reason I suggest bundling C Tiers with the B Tiers is that some players only get 1 sanctioned tournament within a close driving distance and seeing a B-Tier entry fee is very likely to scare them away.

My opinion on the short term memberships is sort of 'meh'. I basically see this as a way to milk a few extra bucks off of people who aren't really likely to join full time. From the point of view of my sister (who only played 1 event this summer, and whom I talked to about this), she actually said "Sounds like they're trying to make a couple extra bucks off of me".

I think I've ranted enough. I'm sure more will come to me later.

Pat Erley
PDGA 27365

Two reactions to this post:

1) Most first time tournament players are oblivious to tiers. They show up randomly to C and B tiers plus there are very vew D tier tournaments. So, to think that we could charge less at a C than a B because players would be moving up the ladder is naive to how Rec and Int players chooses their tournaments. Most Recs and Int players do not travel, they just play whatever tournaments happen to be in their town.

2) The "short term" membership is what I was calling the "Day" membership and would take the place of and be the same cost as the non-member fee that we currently collect. The exact value of the Day membership and the cost to implement them would be yet to be decided.