longo317
Jan 31 2011, 07:41 PM
How do you enable the feature that lets people sign up and pay through this site, for a tournament that is scheduled. Is that something that the PDGA charges for? What is the process-Just exploring this option.
cgkdisc
Jan 31 2011, 08:01 PM
No charge to TDs. You ask for the info to set it up when you send in your sanctioning form.
petershive
Feb 07 2011, 04:57 PM
to Longo317:
As Chuck says, there is no direct charge to the TD. But the charge to each individual player in your event can be considerable, particularly if you arrange the on-line signup through the PDGA. For example, the PDGA charges players $8.50 to register for the Memorial, and $7.50 for the Selinske Masters. I feel that these charges are excessive.
I offer two suggestions. First, explore other sites that offer on-line signup. There are many, and their charges are much more reasonable. Secondly, offer a mail-in registration option for those who would like to avoid the surcharge.
As Chuck says, there is no direct charge to the TD. But the charge to each individual player in your event can be considerable, particularly if you arrange the on-line signup through the PDGA. For example, the PDGA charges players $8.50 to register for the Memorial, and $7.50 for the Selinske Masters. I feel that these charges are excessive.
I offer two suggestions. First, explore other sites that offer on-line signup. There are many, and their charges are much more reasonable. Secondly, offer a mail-in registration option for those who would like to avoid the surcharge.
cgkdisc
Feb 07 2011, 05:12 PM
The PDGA does not charge the fee. The PDGA does not collect that fee. Breiner Enterprises does based on what the bank charges which is a flat rate fixed fee per transaction plus a percentage of the dollar value of the entry fee. What little profit Breiner might make is eaten up by the cost of setting up the events for TDs and supporting the website traffic. If other sites offer cheaper rates, it's likely they are using the fees as a loss leader to drive traffic to their site to sell other services.
As a TD these days, I would consider charging more for a mail-in reg than online pre-reg since it's a faster, easier process for the TD who rarely gets compensated for the time they expend.
As a TD these days, I would consider charging more for a mail-in reg than online pre-reg since it's a faster, easier process for the TD who rarely gets compensated for the time they expend.
veganray
Feb 07 2011, 05:16 PM
http://noethics.net/News/images/stories/apoligist.jpg
cgkdisc
Feb 07 2011, 05:18 PM
"Truth teller" is more apropos. No apology required.
veganray
Feb 07 2011, 05:20 PM
Wow, Chuck, your mastery of words is on a par (double-bogey?) with your mastery of numbers! "Apologist" has little to do with the typically-employed meaning of offering an apology. (And you've never shown any evidence that you deem the more obscure definition #2 of the word (emphasis added) to be "required" in any of your verbal emanations.)
apology |əˈp�ləjē|
noun ( pl. -gies)
1 a regretful acknowledgment of an offense or failure : we owe you an apology | my apologies for the delay | I make no apologies for supporting that policy.
2 a reasoned argument or writing in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine : a specious apology for capitalism.
apologist |əˈp�ləjist|
noun
a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial : an enthusiastic apologist for fascism in the 1920s.
ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from French apologiste, from Greek apologizesthai ‘give an account’.
apology |əˈp�ləjē|
noun ( pl. -gies)
1 a regretful acknowledgment of an offense or failure : we owe you an apology | my apologies for the delay | I make no apologies for supporting that policy.
2 a reasoned argument or writing in justification of something, typically a theory or religious doctrine : a specious apology for capitalism.
apologist |əˈp�ləjist|
noun
a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial : an enthusiastic apologist for fascism in the 1920s.
ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from French apologiste, from Greek apologizesthai ‘give an account’.
cgkdisc
Feb 07 2011, 05:52 PM
And you simply waste time trying to make mountains out of molehills. There was no "controversy" above just lack of complete information.
veganray
Feb 07 2011, 05:59 PM
controversy |ˈk�ntrəˌvərsē|
noun ( pl. -sies)
disagreement, typically when prolonged, public, and heated
I believe Mr. Shive's post:
I feel that these charges are excessive.
and your subsequent attempt to negate it:
Blah, blah, blah, [i]f other sites offer cheaper rates, it's likely they are using the fees as a loss leader to drive traffic to their site to sell other services.
constitute a controversy.
noun ( pl. -sies)
disagreement, typically when prolonged, public, and heated
I believe Mr. Shive's post:
I feel that these charges are excessive.
and your subsequent attempt to negate it:
Blah, blah, blah, [i]f other sites offer cheaper rates, it's likely they are using the fees as a loss leader to drive traffic to their site to sell other services.
constitute a controversy.
petershive
Feb 07 2011, 09:06 PM
to Chuck:
It makes little difference to the players who are getting soaked whether Breiner Enterprises or the PDGA is pocketing these fees.
If what you say is correct, then it would appear that the PDGA has made a poor choice of vendor. If they can find another vendor who will offer this service for about 50% of what Breiner charges (and I'm sure they could), then it would be a blessing to the membership if they would do so.
It makes little difference to the players who are getting soaked whether Breiner Enterprises or the PDGA is pocketing these fees.
If what you say is correct, then it would appear that the PDGA has made a poor choice of vendor. If they can find another vendor who will offer this service for about 50% of what Breiner charges (and I'm sure they could), then it would be a blessing to the membership if they would do so.
chappyfade
Feb 08 2011, 12:28 AM
The PDGA does not charge the fee. The PDGA does not collect that fee. Breiner Enterprises does based on what the bank charges which is a flat rate fixed fee per transaction plus a percentage of the dollar value of the entry fee. What little profit Breiner might make is eaten up by the cost of setting up the events for TDs and supporting the website traffic. If other sites offer cheaper rates, it's likely they are using the fees as a loss leader to drive traffic to their site to sell other services.
As a TD these days, I would consider charging more for a mail-in reg than online pre-reg since it's a faster, easier process for the TD who rarely gets compensated for the time they expend.
ACtually, if I use BEI for the online registration, I have to wait for a check from him, or I can wait for a check from the player. Makes no difference to me either way. It's perhaps more convenient for the player to register online, and that's the reason to offer online registration. Payment-wise, it makes no difference. Actually, if the player mails a check directly to me, I'll likely get it faster than I'll get it from BEI.
As far as the fees go, typically your credit card provider is going to charge the merchant anywhere from 2.5% to 4% for the transaction. The cheapest rate I've seen for BEI is 5.25% for a $100 Open player in Atlanta (and the other divisions are paying a higher percentage, due the the fact the flat $5.25 fee is a larger percentage of their entry). You have to get some money to run the service...you can't do it for free....there is overhead (website fees, checks to mail to TDs, registration lists, etc...). Whether or not the player chooses to pay the fee is up to them. If the TD is not providing a way to register by mail, he's doing a disservice to the players, IMHO, but that's the TD's call to make.
Chap
As a TD these days, I would consider charging more for a mail-in reg than online pre-reg since it's a faster, easier process for the TD who rarely gets compensated for the time they expend.
ACtually, if I use BEI for the online registration, I have to wait for a check from him, or I can wait for a check from the player. Makes no difference to me either way. It's perhaps more convenient for the player to register online, and that's the reason to offer online registration. Payment-wise, it makes no difference. Actually, if the player mails a check directly to me, I'll likely get it faster than I'll get it from BEI.
As far as the fees go, typically your credit card provider is going to charge the merchant anywhere from 2.5% to 4% for the transaction. The cheapest rate I've seen for BEI is 5.25% for a $100 Open player in Atlanta (and the other divisions are paying a higher percentage, due the the fact the flat $5.25 fee is a larger percentage of their entry). You have to get some money to run the service...you can't do it for free....there is overhead (website fees, checks to mail to TDs, registration lists, etc...). Whether or not the player chooses to pay the fee is up to them. If the TD is not providing a way to register by mail, he's doing a disservice to the players, IMHO, but that's the TD's call to make.
Chap
Jeff_LaG
Feb 08 2011, 12:39 PM
And you simply waste time trying to make mountains out of molehills.
Still up to his old tricks, huh?
User Lists > Add to Ignore List
If you put Vegan Ray on Ignore then you completely eliminate both molehills and mountains from your reality. I did so about a year ago on every disc golf message board and never looked back. There's no point in engaging with a person who only seeks to attack the efforts of others and hold back the sport of disc golf on a seemingly daily basis. What a miserable existence he must lead if this is what he puts his energies into.
What is especially sad though is that I've publicly stated on several occasions that he is on Ignore and yet I notice that he still toddles around after me and often makes a post after I do, presumably to refute a point of mine. He knows that I have him on Ignore and won't read his drivel, yet he still responds to me? How sad must someone's psyche be if this is indeed what he/she engages in.
Still up to his old tricks, huh?
User Lists > Add to Ignore List
If you put Vegan Ray on Ignore then you completely eliminate both molehills and mountains from your reality. I did so about a year ago on every disc golf message board and never looked back. There's no point in engaging with a person who only seeks to attack the efforts of others and hold back the sport of disc golf on a seemingly daily basis. What a miserable existence he must lead if this is what he puts his energies into.
What is especially sad though is that I've publicly stated on several occasions that he is on Ignore and yet I notice that he still toddles around after me and often makes a post after I do, presumably to refute a point of mine. He knows that I have him on Ignore and won't read his drivel, yet he still responds to me? How sad must someone's psyche be if this is indeed what he/she engages in.
veganray
Feb 08 2011, 01:06 PM
he still toddles around after me
Guilty as charged. I have photographic evidence to prove his point:
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/nozzle.jpg
Guilty as charged. I have photographic evidence to prove his point:
http://www.tripledisc.com/preview/msdgc/nozzle.jpg
Smitty2004
Feb 13 2011, 09:51 AM
Here is my question. Why can the online registration option not be supported by the PDGA for events that do not use BEI?
There are other companies that offer online reg. that you must go directly to their site to register. When I looked at BEI, they are a landscaping company? Why would the PDGA not let DG companies be responsible for the online reg? If the PDGA gains nothing from it, why not keep it in the DG family?
There are other companies that offer online reg. that you must go directly to their site to register. When I looked at BEI, they are a landscaping company? Why would the PDGA not let DG companies be responsible for the online reg? If the PDGA gains nothing from it, why not keep it in the DG family?
petershive
Feb 13 2011, 02:10 PM
Smitty2004:
In my opinion it should be opened up. It would benefit all concerned (except, I suppose, BEI).
It is curious that it hasn't been opened up. In 2007 the PDGA Board of Directors voted to request proposals for the on-line service contract, while using BEI in the interim. The RFP was to be issued in 2008 to take effect in the 2009 season. To my knowledge, the PDGA never issued that RFP.
So we are stuck with BEI as the single on-line service partner for the PDGA. The PDGA pushes BEI to TD's, and in some cases requires TD's to use BEI. Does the PDGA care what BEI charges? Apparently not, because in addition to the high charges for the Memorial and the U.S. Masters, there are some strange inconsistencies in the BEI pricing.
The PDGA should issue that RFP now. They should invite bids from all vendors that provide the service, and they should be willing to partner with any vendor that can meet their requirements. In other words, there is no need to have a single provider. TD's should be offered a choice.
In my opinion it should be opened up. It would benefit all concerned (except, I suppose, BEI).
It is curious that it hasn't been opened up. In 2007 the PDGA Board of Directors voted to request proposals for the on-line service contract, while using BEI in the interim. The RFP was to be issued in 2008 to take effect in the 2009 season. To my knowledge, the PDGA never issued that RFP.
So we are stuck with BEI as the single on-line service partner for the PDGA. The PDGA pushes BEI to TD's, and in some cases requires TD's to use BEI. Does the PDGA care what BEI charges? Apparently not, because in addition to the high charges for the Memorial and the U.S. Masters, there are some strange inconsistencies in the BEI pricing.
The PDGA should issue that RFP now. They should invite bids from all vendors that provide the service, and they should be willing to partner with any vendor that can meet their requirements. In other words, there is no need to have a single provider. TD's should be offered a choice.
Smitty2004
Feb 13 2011, 06:08 PM
Peter-
I agree with all the things that you have posted.
To me the biggest problem with the entire thing is that a company who uses a different online payment service, isn't allowed to have the online payment logo on the PDGA schedule. This may keep people from using online reg., they are forced to go to some outside website to register.
Just give the companies who have online services the use of the Icon.
Why should it be harder for me to sign-up for an event that doesn't use BEI?
I agree with all the things that you have posted.
To me the biggest problem with the entire thing is that a company who uses a different online payment service, isn't allowed to have the online payment logo on the PDGA schedule. This may keep people from using online reg., they are forced to go to some outside website to register.
Just give the companies who have online services the use of the Icon.
Why should it be harder for me to sign-up for an event that doesn't use BEI?
veganray
Feb 14 2011, 11:09 AM
The PDGA should issue that RFP now.
I disagree. While the preferred, single-source nature of the org's online prereg service is extremely lamentable, at least it is not 'hidden' by the org's issuance of an RFP. By that, I mean that the org has solicited proposals for other services before (Worlds DVD, for instance), then miraculously selected the incumbent over better qualified, lower priced bids, citing "comfort with dealing with the known quantity" as the justification. So why bother going through the sham RFP process when the "known quantity" is the pre-determined winner & the exercise merely fools the membership into believing that the org has selected the highest-quality, lowest-cost bid when, in fact, the crony was never in the slightest of danger of losing his fabulously meaty bone all along.
What really needs to happen is a paradigm shift in the PDGA's leadership so that instead of scheming for ways to enrich itself & its beloved cronies, it holds the maximization of betterment of the members & the wise stewardship of their money as its primary goals in every decision (that or the replacement of the leadership with other folks who already hold these values & need no paradigm shift).
I disagree. While the preferred, single-source nature of the org's online prereg service is extremely lamentable, at least it is not 'hidden' by the org's issuance of an RFP. By that, I mean that the org has solicited proposals for other services before (Worlds DVD, for instance), then miraculously selected the incumbent over better qualified, lower priced bids, citing "comfort with dealing with the known quantity" as the justification. So why bother going through the sham RFP process when the "known quantity" is the pre-determined winner & the exercise merely fools the membership into believing that the org has selected the highest-quality, lowest-cost bid when, in fact, the crony was never in the slightest of danger of losing his fabulously meaty bone all along.
What really needs to happen is a paradigm shift in the PDGA's leadership so that instead of scheming for ways to enrich itself & its beloved cronies, it holds the maximization of betterment of the members & the wise stewardship of their money as its primary goals in every decision (that or the replacement of the leadership with other folks who already hold these values & need no paradigm shift).
Angst
Feb 14 2011, 03:05 PM
Needless to say I was a little disappointed when I found out about this new rule this morning when a friend of mine posted the following message:
When did the PDGA board decide to stop allowing other online registration outfits to have a link on the PDGA schedule?
I provide another choice to TD's in the northwest for their event's online registration with Northwest Sign-Ups. Although I'm still deeply in the red, I support both northwest disc golf events & players with this online reg business. I am able to provide online registration to non-sanctioned events and I am working on providing a very detailed "who's registered" list to the site within a couple months.
As a disc golfer who embraces the PDGA and also tries to find ways to keep northwest money in the northwest, I find this to be a slap in the face.
Am I wrong for feeling this way?
Should I be looking at this differently?
In addition to the online registration service he runs, this guy has done nothing but support the PDGA over the years by running several events a year AND helping to organize numerous other events in the NW.
This is the thanks he gets for that support? Really?
I fully understand the need to support your partners, but giving them what is effectively a monopoly is just wrong. Please reconsider this position and allow your partners out here in the field to compete on a level playing field.
Jeff Hagerty
Co-TD Beaver State Fling
When did the PDGA board decide to stop allowing other online registration outfits to have a link on the PDGA schedule?
I provide another choice to TD's in the northwest for their event's online registration with Northwest Sign-Ups. Although I'm still deeply in the red, I support both northwest disc golf events & players with this online reg business. I am able to provide online registration to non-sanctioned events and I am working on providing a very detailed "who's registered" list to the site within a couple months.
As a disc golfer who embraces the PDGA and also tries to find ways to keep northwest money in the northwest, I find this to be a slap in the face.
Am I wrong for feeling this way?
Should I be looking at this differently?
In addition to the online registration service he runs, this guy has done nothing but support the PDGA over the years by running several events a year AND helping to organize numerous other events in the NW.
This is the thanks he gets for that support? Really?
I fully understand the need to support your partners, but giving them what is effectively a monopoly is just wrong. Please reconsider this position and allow your partners out here in the field to compete on a level playing field.
Jeff Hagerty
Co-TD Beaver State Fling
petershive
Feb 14 2011, 05:05 PM
Everyone:
Veganray's analysis is cynical but quite possibly correct. If so, and if BEI is truly predestined to win any "competition", then he's also correct that I'm wasting my time worrying about RFP's. His paradigm shift would be required to produce effective change.
Angst's post effectively points out how frustrating this monopoly is to vendors who have supported the PDGA for years.
The PDGA's current policy is damaging, not only to vendors who support it, but also to its own membership.
Veganray's analysis is cynical but quite possibly correct. If so, and if BEI is truly predestined to win any "competition", then he's also correct that I'm wasting my time worrying about RFP's. His paradigm shift would be required to produce effective change.
Angst's post effectively points out how frustrating this monopoly is to vendors who have supported the PDGA for years.
The PDGA's current policy is damaging, not only to vendors who support it, but also to its own membership.
ryangwillim
Feb 15 2011, 01:46 PM
I agree with the sentiments of Angst. We as TDs (I Co-TD at least 4 PDGA events a year) are already giving the PDGA hundreds of dollars from each tournament. Having the PDGA essentially blacklist us from advertising our own online sign-up is wrong. It's just one more thing to make devoted PDGA supporters, like myself, feel like we're battling the organization that we have supported for so long.
I know we're talking about something relatively inconsequential for many people, but let us run our events the way we want/need to. Please allow us to put direct links to our sign-up pages.
Ryan Gwillim
PDGA Member since 2001
Co-TD 2011 Wash Slosh - C Tier
Co-TD 2011 Bad Monkey Open - B Tier
Co-TD 2011 Fort Steilacoom Open - A Tier
Co-TD 2011 Next Adventure Amateur Championship - B Tier
Co-TD 2011 Leverich After Dark - XC Tier
I know we're talking about something relatively inconsequential for many people, but let us run our events the way we want/need to. Please allow us to put direct links to our sign-up pages.
Ryan Gwillim
PDGA Member since 2001
Co-TD 2011 Wash Slosh - C Tier
Co-TD 2011 Bad Monkey Open - B Tier
Co-TD 2011 Fort Steilacoom Open - A Tier
Co-TD 2011 Next Adventure Amateur Championship - B Tier
Co-TD 2011 Leverich After Dark - XC Tier
jconnell
Feb 15 2011, 02:39 PM
I'm a bit confused by all this. Not the BEI/RFP stuff, but by the implied loss of opportunity to "advertise" online registration. Maybe I missed something, but did an option once exist for there to be a direct link to online sign-up not hosted by PDGA/BEI? Because I don't recall being able to include a direct link to my own online registration for my tournaments in the past.
My understanding was that the only way that has ever existed to get this little icon (http://www.pdga.com/sites/all/modules/pdga_tour_manager/images/ink.png) next to one's tournament listing was to opt-in to use pdgasignup.com for registration. Otherwise, you get the standard website link in the Event Info area of the tournament listing (which I see no reason for folks not to use to link to their online registration spot). So this whole angst-filled (pun intended) diatribe about the PDGA "blacklisting" non-BEI-run online sign-ups rings a bit hollow to me. It's never been an option, and I don't see why they must make it so.
My understanding was that the only way that has ever existed to get this little icon (http://www.pdga.com/sites/all/modules/pdga_tour_manager/images/ink.png) next to one's tournament listing was to opt-in to use pdgasignup.com for registration. Otherwise, you get the standard website link in the Event Info area of the tournament listing (which I see no reason for folks not to use to link to their online registration spot). So this whole angst-filled (pun intended) diatribe about the PDGA "blacklisting" non-BEI-run online sign-ups rings a bit hollow to me. It's never been an option, and I don't see why they must make it so.
Smitty2004
Feb 15 2011, 08:31 PM
JConnell-
In the past if your event had any kind of online reg., you where allowed the Icon you posted. It didn't matter if you used the PDGA or any other company that runs online reg. to benefit TDs.
Now if you don't use the PDGAs online service you are not allowed to have the Icon.
Many of these companies run multiple events for the PDGA, and pay 1000's of dollars in PDGA sanctioning fees, tourney fees, and non-member fees.
In the past if your event had any kind of online reg., you where allowed the Icon you posted. It didn't matter if you used the PDGA or any other company that runs online reg. to benefit TDs.
Now if you don't use the PDGAs online service you are not allowed to have the Icon.
Many of these companies run multiple events for the PDGA, and pay 1000's of dollars in PDGA sanctioning fees, tourney fees, and non-member fees.
jconnell
Feb 15 2011, 08:55 PM
JConnell-
In the past if your event had any kind of online reg., you where allowed the Icon you posted. It didn't matter if you used the PDGA or any other company that runs online reg. to benefit TDs.
Guess I never realized I could have had my registration site linked directly from the PDGA listing. The sanctioning agreement didn't have a place to include that link that I ever saw.
Regardless, I don't think this is such a big deal. Personally, I'd rather have players having to read my tournament flyer or website before registering for my event. Better that than registering blindly without knowing any event details. Therefore, I'd rather have players navigating to my registration page through my tournament flyer or website instead of direct from any schedule listing, PDGA or otherwise.
In the past if your event had any kind of online reg., you where allowed the Icon you posted. It didn't matter if you used the PDGA or any other company that runs online reg. to benefit TDs.
Guess I never realized I could have had my registration site linked directly from the PDGA listing. The sanctioning agreement didn't have a place to include that link that I ever saw.
Regardless, I don't think this is such a big deal. Personally, I'd rather have players having to read my tournament flyer or website before registering for my event. Better that than registering blindly without knowing any event details. Therefore, I'd rather have players navigating to my registration page through my tournament flyer or website instead of direct from any schedule listing, PDGA or otherwise.
ryangwillim
Feb 15 2011, 08:57 PM
So this whole angst-filled (pun intended) diatribe about the PDGA "blacklisting" non-BEI-run online sign-ups rings a bit hollow to me.
JConnell,
You are correct. I apologize for the "blacklist" comment, that was out of line and I retract that statement. I get a little excited sometimes.
As a constant TD, I would still like to have the option to direct link to my info page (which I have), and my sign-up page (which I don't have).
I will never use the PDGA signup process. It charges the players too much money (I was told that signing up for the Memorial was a $7 service fee this year?!), and I've heard nightmares from other TDs trying to get player's lists and other info from whomever runs it (I think Breiner?).
-Gwillim
JConnell,
You are correct. I apologize for the "blacklist" comment, that was out of line and I retract that statement. I get a little excited sometimes.
As a constant TD, I would still like to have the option to direct link to my info page (which I have), and my sign-up page (which I don't have).
I will never use the PDGA signup process. It charges the players too much money (I was told that signing up for the Memorial was a $7 service fee this year?!), and I've heard nightmares from other TDs trying to get player's lists and other info from whomever runs it (I think Breiner?).
-Gwillim
cgkdisc
Feb 15 2011, 09:05 PM
As a constant TD, I would still like to have the option to direct link to my info page (which I have), and my sign-up page (which I don't have).
There are two links TDs can use on the tournament page, the Event Info link and the Website link which you could direct to your signup system.
There are two links TDs can use on the tournament page, the Event Info link and the Website link which you could direct to your signup system.
Paul Taylor
Feb 16 2011, 09:26 AM
Knowing what I know now, thanks to the many post above, I thought the online sign-up benefited the PDGA monetarily, but NOOOOOOOOOOO. I guess we are stuck using BEI for the majors, but for others, send me the information for snail mail sign-up if you are not going to give me other options.
cgkdisc
Feb 16 2011, 10:05 AM
I was mistaken in an earlier post that the PDGA does not make any money from their online sign-up service run by BEI. They do make something but I'm not sure how much.
jconnell
Feb 16 2011, 10:28 AM
There are two links TDs can use on the tournament page, the Event Info link and the Website link which you could direct to your signup system.
Two?
Here's a screen grab of the current sanctioning agreement, both online and Excel:
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/1389/pdgasanctioning.gif
Only one entry for a website of any kind to be listed on the tournament info page. So I don't think any TDs will be sneaking their sign-up link into the listing without sacrificing a direct link to their general tournament info page.
But I want to re-iterate that I don't understand the big deal. The PDGA offers an in-house sign-up option (setting aside the issues with the pricing, etc). Why should they be obligated to lessen the value (perceived or real) of that service by allowing alternatives in its place? Isn't it a bit like asking McDonalds to put Whoppers on their menu? Because geez, McDonalds gets all kinds of my money when I buy their fries and shakes and mcnuggets and mcmuffins, why can't I buy a Whopper there so I don't have to drive down the street to BK?
It truly should not be viewed as an inconvenience if a player has to click through your tournament flyer/site to get to your online sign-up. As I said before, don't you WANT players reading up on your tournament before they make the commitment to sign-up?
Also, could someone confirm that it used to be an option to have a direct link to a non-PDGA/BEI online sign-up page? Because I went back through my old sanctioning agreements since pdgasignup.com was started up, and I can't find a single instance where I could include a direct link to my sign-up in addition to the standard website link. I still have my doubts that it has ever been an option for TDs.
Two?
Here's a screen grab of the current sanctioning agreement, both online and Excel:
http://img840.imageshack.us/img840/1389/pdgasanctioning.gif
Only one entry for a website of any kind to be listed on the tournament info page. So I don't think any TDs will be sneaking their sign-up link into the listing without sacrificing a direct link to their general tournament info page.
But I want to re-iterate that I don't understand the big deal. The PDGA offers an in-house sign-up option (setting aside the issues with the pricing, etc). Why should they be obligated to lessen the value (perceived or real) of that service by allowing alternatives in its place? Isn't it a bit like asking McDonalds to put Whoppers on their menu? Because geez, McDonalds gets all kinds of my money when I buy their fries and shakes and mcnuggets and mcmuffins, why can't I buy a Whopper there so I don't have to drive down the street to BK?
It truly should not be viewed as an inconvenience if a player has to click through your tournament flyer/site to get to your online sign-up. As I said before, don't you WANT players reading up on your tournament before they make the commitment to sign-up?
Also, could someone confirm that it used to be an option to have a direct link to a non-PDGA/BEI online sign-up page? Because I went back through my old sanctioning agreements since pdgasignup.com was started up, and I can't find a single instance where I could include a direct link to my sign-up in addition to the standard website link. I still have my doubts that it has ever been an option for TDs.
cgkdisc
Feb 16 2011, 10:36 AM
The first Tournament page you see after clicking on a Tour calendar listing shows an Event Info link and a Website link but maybe they are the same link by default (which seems redundant). Perhaps if you list two URLs on the Sanctioning Form, you can get a different link on each one.
jconnell
Feb 16 2011, 11:01 AM
The first Tournament page you see after clicking on a Tour calendar listing shows an Event Info link and a Website link but maybe they are the same link by default (which seems redundant). Perhaps if you list two URLs on the Sanctioning Form, you can get a different link on each one.
I assume you're talking about the Event info link (blue) and the Website space (blank) in this sample:
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/9194/pdgalisting.gif
The Event Info links straight back to the PDGA results page for that event, no where else (and I double checked against other events that didn't leave the website entry blank). The Website link is the only one editable by an individual TD.
I assume you're talking about the Event info link (blue) and the Website space (blank) in this sample:
http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/9194/pdgalisting.gif
The Event Info links straight back to the PDGA results page for that event, no where else (and I double checked against other events that didn't leave the website entry blank). The Website link is the only one editable by an individual TD.
petershive
Feb 16 2011, 11:28 AM
jconnell:
Most PDGA members are somewhat detached from this issue because on-line registration involves service (not merchandise) and requires a TD choice (not a player choice). They can't understand how it hurts them, or why other vendors feel so alienated.
Suppose the PDGA did this with merchandise. Suppose they picked Gateway as their "favored disc partner", pushed Gateway discs to TD's on sanctioning agreements, and required players to use Gateway discs at majors. The PDGA could make a lot of money because of the quid-pro-quo they could extract from Gateway. But imagine how Discraft and Innova would feel. And imagine how you would feel. You might prefer to use different discs, and it wouldn't be long before you noticed that Gateway discs were costing a lot more than they used to.
Most PDGA members are somewhat detached from this issue because on-line registration involves service (not merchandise) and requires a TD choice (not a player choice). They can't understand how it hurts them, or why other vendors feel so alienated.
Suppose the PDGA did this with merchandise. Suppose they picked Gateway as their "favored disc partner", pushed Gateway discs to TD's on sanctioning agreements, and required players to use Gateway discs at majors. The PDGA could make a lot of money because of the quid-pro-quo they could extract from Gateway. But imagine how Discraft and Innova would feel. And imagine how you would feel. You might prefer to use different discs, and it wouldn't be long before you noticed that Gateway discs were costing a lot more than they used to.
jconnell
Feb 16 2011, 12:02 PM
jconnell:
Most PDGA members are somewhat detached from this issue because on-line registration involves service (not merchandise) and requires a TD choice (not a player choice). They can't understand how it hurts them, or why other vendors feel so alienated.
Suppose the PDGA did this with merchandise. Suppose they picked Gateway as their "favored disc partner", pushed Gateway discs to TD's on sanctioning agreements, and required players to use Gateway discs at majors. The PDGA could make a lot of money because of the quid-pro-quo they could extract from Gateway. But imagine how Discraft and Innova would feel. And imagine how you would feel. You might prefer to use different discs, and it wouldn't be long before you noticed that Gateway discs were costing a lot more than they used to.
Peter,
I'm not even trying to get into the issue of whether or not Breiner being the PDGA's choice is proper or not. I frankly don't care who the PDGA contracts their online registration out to. I have my own online registration option so I have no need for the PDGA-offered services.
I'm merely arguing against the notion that the PDGA should provide a direct link via this (http://www.pdga.com/sites/all/modules/pdga_tour_manager/images/ink.png) icon to 3rd parties as some here wish they would. My argument holds regardless of who the PDGA contracts for their online sign-up service. If the PDGA issued the RFP and awarded the contract to some other business (marshall street or titledisc or whomever), they'd still retain the right to only provide a direct link through the http://www.pdga.com/sites/all/modules/pdga_tour_manager/images/ink.png icon to their service and not 3rd parties.
Now, if the PDGA did not offer their own sign-up service (regardless of the contractor used, it is still pdgasignup.com), I could see the argument for giving TDs the direct link to their online signup service of choice. But since they do have their own, it's just poor business for them to do anything that can confuse their product with one over which they have no control.
Most PDGA members are somewhat detached from this issue because on-line registration involves service (not merchandise) and requires a TD choice (not a player choice). They can't understand how it hurts them, or why other vendors feel so alienated.
Suppose the PDGA did this with merchandise. Suppose they picked Gateway as their "favored disc partner", pushed Gateway discs to TD's on sanctioning agreements, and required players to use Gateway discs at majors. The PDGA could make a lot of money because of the quid-pro-quo they could extract from Gateway. But imagine how Discraft and Innova would feel. And imagine how you would feel. You might prefer to use different discs, and it wouldn't be long before you noticed that Gateway discs were costing a lot more than they used to.
Peter,
I'm not even trying to get into the issue of whether or not Breiner being the PDGA's choice is proper or not. I frankly don't care who the PDGA contracts their online registration out to. I have my own online registration option so I have no need for the PDGA-offered services.
I'm merely arguing against the notion that the PDGA should provide a direct link via this (http://www.pdga.com/sites/all/modules/pdga_tour_manager/images/ink.png) icon to 3rd parties as some here wish they would. My argument holds regardless of who the PDGA contracts for their online sign-up service. If the PDGA issued the RFP and awarded the contract to some other business (marshall street or titledisc or whomever), they'd still retain the right to only provide a direct link through the http://www.pdga.com/sites/all/modules/pdga_tour_manager/images/ink.png icon to their service and not 3rd parties.
Now, if the PDGA did not offer their own sign-up service (regardless of the contractor used, it is still pdgasignup.com), I could see the argument for giving TDs the direct link to their online signup service of choice. But since they do have their own, it's just poor business for them to do anything that can confuse their product with one over which they have no control.
petershive
Feb 16 2011, 05:45 PM
jconnell:
If all "good business" means is to make as much money as possible (in this case from their own membership), then I agree with you. Denying other vendors access to the signup logo would be "good business" because it maximizes the PDGA's profit. Then it would also be "good business" to choose an exclusive disc partner, as in my example, and deny as much business access as possible to all the others.
I'm arguing that "good business" requires broader responsibilities. The PDGA is a nonprofit. Its sole reason for existence is not to squeeze every cent it can out of us. I believe that "good business" means serving its membership as effectively as it can. In that sense a healthy, level, competitive environment in the vendor community within which the PDGA exists is not "poor business".
If all "good business" means is to make as much money as possible (in this case from their own membership), then I agree with you. Denying other vendors access to the signup logo would be "good business" because it maximizes the PDGA's profit. Then it would also be "good business" to choose an exclusive disc partner, as in my example, and deny as much business access as possible to all the others.
I'm arguing that "good business" requires broader responsibilities. The PDGA is a nonprofit. Its sole reason for existence is not to squeeze every cent it can out of us. I believe that "good business" means serving its membership as effectively as it can. In that sense a healthy, level, competitive environment in the vendor community within which the PDGA exists is not "poor business".
16670
Mar 14 2011, 08:44 PM
i bet the PDGA wishes that people didnt know they made money from online signups thru BEI.it might seem alot like the $10 lets all be tds fee for NT events.the good news is not many people use this site so your secret is safe..:)
petershive
Mar 15 2011, 05:29 PM
to 16670:
The PDGA makes 50 cents from each entrant that uses BEI. BEI then makes an additional profit which is, to put it mildly, considerable. All told, PDGA/BEI charges about 50% more than the competitive rate from independent vendors.
If the PDGA eventually required all sanctioned events to use BEI, then they would collect about $50,000 from us, and BEI's additional profits would be enormous. And why should the PDGA stop at 50 cents? If they raised it to $1.00 they would make $100,000. And so on.
The PDGA makes 50 cents from each entrant that uses BEI. BEI then makes an additional profit which is, to put it mildly, considerable. All told, PDGA/BEI charges about 50% more than the competitive rate from independent vendors.
If the PDGA eventually required all sanctioned events to use BEI, then they would collect about $50,000 from us, and BEI's additional profits would be enormous. And why should the PDGA stop at 50 cents? If they raised it to $1.00 they would make $100,000. And so on.
© 2008-2018 Professional Disc Golf Association. All rights reserved.