World Footbag?

hacksterbator · Post by **hacksterbator** » 12 Feb 2006 16:58

vindicator, you're outta your element son.

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 12 Feb 2006 18:31

Iain wrote:if worldfootbag was hurting the shred scene, then shouldn't the scene be getting smaller?

Doesn't footbag.com hurt the shred scene? I'm not accusing everyone of the WFA of Blougchi mastery-but they follow the same principal. They have a mass amount of influence and could be using it in a positive way. They could be selling Nastases instead of Smiths. They could offer many more freestyle products for the freestylers they sponsor. They could help the exceleration of the sport with better equipment!

I'm not being malicious-I'm trying to explain how WFA could better the footbag community & improve business.

Iain · Post by **Iain** » 12 Feb 2006 20:30

have you seen those vote commercials for the election in '04. You know, the one with the running facet and no one does anything or the one with the trash right next to the garbage can. Everyone complains, but does nothing about it. Yeah, for some reason that just popped into my head. Kinda strange

Muffinman · Post by **Muffinman** » 12 Feb 2006 21:18

I'm pretty sure worldfootbag sells/sold Juice footbags, which were basically the only choice footbags around a couple years back...

I understand what you're saying, and you definately shouldn't change how you feel, just to fit in, even if legends like Ken Somolinos, Bob Riefer, Jon Schneider, and Mads Hole argue otherwise (and it bothers me too to see poor shred bags promoted); but at the same time these guys really know what they're talking about...

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 12 Feb 2006 21:48

Erik Chan wrote:I'm pretty sure worldfootbag sells/sold Juice footbags, which were basically the only choice footbags around a couple years back...

I understand what you're saying, and you definately shouldn't change how you feel, just to fit in, even if legends like Ken Somolinos, Bob Riefer, Jon Schneider, and Mads Hole argue otherwise (and it bothers me too to see poor shred bags promoted); but at the same time these guys really know what they're talking about...

I appreciate that-and I felt a little like once they chimed in. But I was hoping to see someone else with the same opinion before I brought it to WFA's attention. They do an amazing job for the advancement of footbag-but they could use some fixing. Maybe a kicking, freestyling, and net section of products. I respect and appreciate them-but I feel they could be doing more and better. Not only for footbag, but also themselves.

Modified doesn't make $ off of the stitcher's sales. WFA could? and the world would have better shred bags because of it. I just don't know if the stitchers would submit to going through a third party-it seems a little 'walmart to me'.

Do you guys see the ideas I'm throwing out here?! We would all benefit if WFA carried freestyle bags

atze · Post by **atze** » 13 Feb 2006 05:12

anybody who is anybody in footbag business will tell you:

there is no business in freestyle! (and far less in net).

so we in fact have to be gratefull that companies like the wfa invests in stuff like world championships at all! they could be doing much better stuff with their money, believe me. the only companies supporting "real" footbag do so because they have a personal interest/connection to the scene. but if you want to make a living off of footbag you have to cater to the needs of the hacky slackers.

we should be gratefull to companies like wfa, freedom footbags, trio, etc. who take an active interest in the sport and *waste* their hard earned money on us. we "pro" players are certainly not giving them anything back.

yes, wfa could be doing more upfront towards promoting freestyle but the question is always if the time/money invested is justified by the results. i would guess it is not.

what we, as a dedicated footbag scene must start to realize is that we need to actively support those companies that invest in the scene. the wfa has invested in the sport of footbag for longer than most of us are alive and continue to do so. any other shop that sells lavers doesn't care a fig about footbag either way.

and we should forgive the wfa for some of the advertisements they phrase for their bags. but in the end they're only trying to do business. and the more business they do, the better for us.

and once again on a side note: if you're a hacky slacker, and through wfa you get your hands on even a normal juice this will already provide you with soo many more possibilities than you ever had before with your crochet or hacky sack. either that's enough to hook you, get you interested and lets you find a "pro" sticher when you're ready for it, or no carol bag on earth would have helped.

thats the reason it is stupid to tell newbies to get a pro bag. in a lot of cases it's a waste of money. and a waste of the stichers recourses. better to tell them to get a dirtbag, a juice or whatever for less money and see if they want to get into freestyle at all.

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 13 Feb 2006 05:48

Vindicator, don't feel like the number of tricks you can hit makes your opinion less valid - no one meant to imply that. I think it's good that you're expressing an opinion.

Sure, it would be great if WF sold top quality bags (i.e. hand stitched etc.) and the like, but they have margins to guard and as someone else pointed out, 99% of the kickers out there want a crocheted bag with their name on it

Also, when you're beginning, the bag doesn't really matter in my opinion. I learned my first 30-40 tricks playing in a pair of nike sneakers with a Sipa Sipa. So, I don't think WF is hurting anything >> they're answering demand, staying in business, and still providing some mid-level shred bags for the masses that can't find a good hand-stitched one.

Skippy! · Post by **Skippy!** » 15 Feb 2006 20:05

A little bit of a sidenote. I was cruising footbag.org and noticed a little poll:

How do you play footbag?

6.07% I am mainly a footbag net player/competitor. (186)

34.39% I consider myself an advanced freestyle player (though I may not compete). (1053)

57.71% I am a circle-kicker and don't compete in tournaments. (1767)

1.83% I play other footbag sports. (56)

mosher · Post by **mosher** » 15 Feb 2006 21:18

"As a stitcher, I would not want to further reduce my profit margin with a third party. I stitch more as a hobby than anything else and so it makes me just enough for beer money. I have trouble enough as it is to getting bags made and sent out in a good and timely fashion where I'm happy with the product. I do not want a hacky sacker who cannot appreciate the good work I have done on the bag to toe scrape it and say how much this tiny bag sucks because they don't understand its purpose. In the tiny community of Modified, there seems to be enough orders to fulfill the time I wish to dedicate to stitching and I have set up a system to sell my own bags. Hacky sackers can go buy a dirtbag or a hackysack with their name on it. If they see the price of a handmade footbag, many people, not knowing any better, are going to go by price to judge what they think would be best. This is not necessary for everyone's needs and especially not hacky sackers. I support World Footbag's efforts to promote both footbag and to produce a profit margin with the hackers. That way, good bags can be appreciated by the people who actually care about them."

~~TomPeng.

Bander87 · Post by **Bander87** » 15 Feb 2006 21:25

I've been thinking. If I'm a circle kicker and just like to have fun hacking, why would I bother wasting my money on more expensive bags when I can have the same amount of fun with a $5 bag? Most circle kickers will be surprised if someone spends $10 on a bag. I'm not also going to buy shoes when I'm a circle kicker, my vans are great. Selling shoes to people who are intested (freestylers) in improving their game that arn't really recomended is a waste for everyone. Whos is going to buy them? Certianly not the freestyler or circle kicker, so why even sell them? WFA may be partly directed at the circle kicker, but circle kickers don't need to waste money on "higher" end stuff.

Just to note, I have expressed my concerns to to .com by emailing them.

the Executioner · Post by **the Executioner** » 16 Feb 2006 14:08

Back in the early 1980's, when alot of the players that are on this forum were'nt born yet or were in diapers, the WFA was busting their asses grass-roots style to try to make this game a sport. They ran and sponsored the world footbag championships for nearly 15 years. They were in the position that the IFPA is in now--they were the world organization for footbag. These are people who have been with footbag since nearly DAY 1, and are STILL promoting footbag in their own way. They deserve nothing but respect. To say that they are hurting the game is a joke and shows a serious lack of real knowledge about footbag and it's history. Bruce Guettich, the head of the WFA, has done more for the game in the long run than anyone besides Shults or Goldberg. It's easy to sit behind a keyboard and criticize, but it doesnt hold up to 25+ years of service to the game of footbag.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 16 Feb 2006 14:27

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 16 Feb 2006 15:49

the Executioner wrote:Back in the early 1980's, when alot of the players that are on this forum were'nt born yet or were in diapers, the WFA was busting their asses grass-roots style to try to make this game a sport. They ran and sponsored the world footbag championships for nearly 15 years. They were in the position that the IFPA is in now--they were the world organization for footbag. These are people who have been with footbag since nearly DAY 1, and are STILL promoting footbag in their own way. They deserve nothing but respect. To say that they are hurting the game is a joke and shows a serious lack of real knowledge about footbag and it's history. Bruce Guettich, the head of the WFA, has done more for the game in the long run than anyone besides Shults or Goldberg. It's easy to sit behind a keyboard and criticize, but it doesnt hold up to 25+ years of service to the game of footbag.

No one [being me] is denouncing that. But I want to know why they are advertising this for 'serious freestylers' http://worldfootbag.com/catalog2/show/868

Would it kill them to sell FF's instead?

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 16 Feb 2006 17:27

It's just advertising. Genuine serious freestylers will know better and people who buy that bag because of what the comment says will no doubt become more serious and move beyond their current level. I can't see how it's hurting the sport in any way.

footbinc · Post by **footbinc** » 17 Feb 2006 07:36

TheVindicator wrote:They help the shred scene but hurt the potential shredders. They impair beginner footbaggers by misleading them. Almost all of their bags are novelty. Not to mention-who uses stan smiths? Why don't they invest in G's and Climas?

They hurt potential freestylers. Those who dream of one day graduating the hackin lifestyle go to WFA and are mislead by shoddy products. Just like Wham-o

Stan Smiths are a good net/takraw shoe. More to footbag than shred...

sen · Post by **sen** » 17 Feb 2006 07:42

Somehow I knew Ben would say something like that.

I figure if the WFA provides with the shoes we want (lavers) and lets us support footbag while buying them, then why not buy from them.

Plus, after reading Peter's post, they have done soo much for footbag, and they deserve our respect.

Guest_2 · Post by **Guest_2** » 17 Feb 2006 08:17

sen wrote:Somehow I knew Ben would say something like that.

I figure if the WFA provides with the shoes we want (lavers) and lets us support footbag while buying them, then why not buy from them.

Plus, after reading Peter's post, they have done soo much for footbag, and they deserve our respect.

No one disagrees with that!

But they should sell more freestyle products so people quite buying the 'juice dirt' expecting an awesome 32

Freedom Footbags is arranged so that you understand:
Hemp bags=kick bags
Dryden=stall bags
Sandbags=trick bags
abshires=shred bags

WFA would benefit from that also, and so would the community

sen · Post by **sen** » 17 Feb 2006 11:04

I wasn't saying anyone disagreed with that, I was just throwing my opinion in the ring. Sorry if it came out wrong.

I also understand what you mean about the difference between how freedom and WFA are set up. I personally like how freedom is set up more, but I wonder which company makes more profit, and therfore can support the IFPA more?

Just some more thoughts.