if competing was free

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 11 Mar 2006 04:46

Would you be more likely to compete if it was free to do so?

Lackey82 · Post by **Lackey82** » 11 Mar 2006 05:55

Nah, man.
If I wanted to compete in something (even if it's novice for me) I would pay the money. Getting to get in free would be a bonus, but I don't think it would be a deal breaker either way.

Will Digges · Post by **Will Digges** » 11 Mar 2006 06:04

Agreed, but at funtastiks I did not compete because I didn't have enough money... sooo it might help me out

qphox · Post by **qphox** » 11 Mar 2006 11:13

Also, by paying, I think people are pushed to increase their level of play, and thus everyone's level of play. This is a good thing.

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 11 Mar 2006 14:57

I don't think paying increases level of play.. I think entrance fees keep a lot of good players out of the competition. I think the general thought process goes like this in some instances: "I have zero % chance of beating [insert amazing player name here] so why chip in [insert entrance fee amount here] just to have my ass beat?"

If entrance fees were only required for players that were interested in winning cash prizes (that is, non-paying players would be ineligible to win cash, but could still win plenty of bragging rights by placing high..) I think we might find there are a lot of people out there that might enjoy competing just to put on a good show (or for whatever other reason).

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 11 Mar 2006 15:37

If you, as a tournament director, have no income, and you don't charge everyone for registration, or only charge from those who expect to win prize money, you have no prize money.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 11 Mar 2006 16:48

Yeah, I think if you're running a tournament that has specific costs needed to recoup - such as hiring out venues, players packs etc. then charging an entry fee is fair enough. However I think using it for prize money is not encouraging in the slightest and I also think it's much better to play judges and officials before paying players - just like every amature sport I've been involved in. Good judging and good tournament organisation is way more important than any prize money and should be encouraged. I don't think prize money encourages many people to compete. Also if you're paying judges and tournament organisers it creates an expectation that they'll do a good job and it takes away their ability to complain about being a volunteer if they make mistakes.

That said I'd definitely compete regardless of the entry fee and regardless of my chances of winning.

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 11 Mar 2006 17:21

Jeremy wrote:Yeah, I think if you're running a tournament that has specific costs needed to recoup - such as hiring out venues, players packs etc. then charging an entry fee is fair enough.

That's what sponsors are for.

However I think using it for prize money is not encouraging in the slightest and I also think it's much better to play judges and officials before paying players - just like every amature sport I've been involved in.

Also if you're paying judges and tournament organisers it creates an expectation that they'll do a good job and it takes away their ability to complain about being a volunteer if they make mistakes.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but paying the organizers (i.e. myself) while sanctioned by a non-profit organization (i.e. me

profiting) is reeeeeal illegal. Players are then just required to claim said prize money on their taxes.
It only makes sense, if you think about it. When sanctioned by the IFPA, you're barred from putting any sponsor money toward prizes--they can only be used to cover hard costs. When you have all your hard costs covered (venue, sound, shirts, etc.) covered by a sponsor(s). Then, 100% of entry fee cash goes toward prize money. Tell me where else prize money is going to come from, when you're a teenager and too young to hold a job anyway.

I don't think prize money encourages many people to compete.

Yes, it does. I know CSS would not have had near the tournout it did this year or last year if it weren't for the prize money.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 11 Mar 2006 18:08

I'm sorry but you're completely wrong on two accounts:

First holding an event that is IFPA sanctioned does not in any way mean that you have to abide by the rules for a non profit organisation. In fact non profit organisations often have relationships with profit organisations and there is nothing illegal about this at all. Sanctioning events is just the IFPA saying that they approve the event. You could keep all the money from the event and it wouldn't in anyway effect the IFPA non profit status. It may have negative consequences for yourself but individuals are legally not the IFPA.

Secondly non profit organisations can definitely have payed employees and can also out source work to profit organisations. For example right now the IFPA is paying a printing company to print a book of rules. That printing company is clearly profiting from the IFPA and that's perfectly ok. The IFPA can spend its money on whatever it thinks will benifit the sport - and if that means paying judges or organisers then that's perfectly ok. There are many non profit organisations that employ people. For example I am employed by the wilderness society of Australia - a 30 year old non profit organisation that has a large paid team of admin staff. This year we were audited by the tax office and they found that everything was in order.

brian relly · Post by **brian relly** » 11 Mar 2006 19:03

You're right. However, I believe my points about using registration fees for prize money are still valid--you could address those. I don't feel a need to pay myself as the main organizer, and I know prize money is far more effective for attracting good players than quality of judging.

Sporatical_Distractions · Post by **Sporatical_Distractions** » 11 Mar 2006 20:08

footbag needs all the money it can get, whether it be directly to the ifpa, or for things such as site rental. The money plays no influence in whether I compete or not.

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 11 Mar 2006 21:40

The only reason I would give a crap about prize money, is if I could make a living off it, or just so I can tell my friends that I won $xx.xx at this championship to reinforce the fact that footbag is a real competitive sport that you can make money from.

I don't think any footbag event has giving more than about 2 grand ever, and lets face it, with the amount of time we spend practicing footbag, we could make a hell of a lot more than 2 grand.

The only reason I support having prize money at footbag events is to make the sport more professional, because footbag will not be a profession for anyone untill prize money is enough to live off (not taking into account sponsorship deals).

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Mar 2006 03:17

Ok,

So first I want to be clear that personally I'm happy to organise and judge tournaments for free. I certainly don't do those things for profit - nor have I profited for that envolvement. In fact it's probably counter productive for my personal gains to for judges and organisers to be paid because I think that would influence the growth of the sport and since I make a significant amount of money out of performing footbag due to its obscurity (amongst other reasons).

The idea of judges and organisers being paid is not based around the fact that I think those people wouldn't be happy to work for free and that I think more people would do it. It's about professionalism and priorities. When you look at the problems with events and competitions - as far as I know the main problems are either that people aren't happy with the judging - which demonstrates a break down in communication and transparency as well as possibly the knowledge and skills of the judges; and problems with the organisation of the event - things like events not running on time, venues not being up to scratch, venues not being accessible to underage people etc.

When an event has one of these problems it can often be significant enough that it over shadows the rest of the tournament. If you're trying to promote an event and your city as a place for shredders to come, what you don't want is people remembering your venue as the place where the world champion couldn't go to the awards ceromony because the organisers didn't think anybody under 18 would attend. Negative things stand out a great deal more than positive things, especially when those negative events were easily correctable.

I'm not saying that I don't think prize money is a bad thing. If I had a big enough budget for the next event I'm organising (aus champs 2007) I would certainly offer substantial prize money. In fact there is a good chance that there will be prize money. However if there is prize money there certainly won't be any entry fee. In fact people entering the 2007 Aus champs will get free tickets to a very big popular music event in Tasmania (Falls Festival - which sold all the tickets in less then 2 days this year) as well as other benifits.

The thing about paying people is that it makes them accountable. I've debated the level of judging at particular tournaments for a long time - asking for more professionalism and the strong arguement that always comes up is that the judges at these tournaments are volunteers and giving up their time etc. so we shouldn't expect them to be too professional. The obvious way to get around this issue is to pay the judges. Strong tournament organisation leads directly in my opinion to strong tournaments. Strong tournaments lead to more sponsors and more promotion and money for the sport. If I'm paying people at the next Aus champs then I'll really expect them to do a good job and I'll have reason to complain if they don't.

It really comes down to priorities. The priority for now should be organising solid tournaments that both encourage people to compete but also can be used for further promotion and will build the sport further and set the level of professionalism that will hopefully be part of the sport.

A great example of this is touch football (touch rugby) - which you probably know I've been playing for a while at a fairly high level. Touch football is a newer sport than footbag is. When the first world championship event in footbag was held touch football didnt' even exist. Yet now touch is a much much stronger sport than footbag with a very strong organisation and it is starting to generate a signifcant amount of money. There are a few reasons for this, but I think one of the significant ones is this. The best team in touch football you can get into is the Australian team - which has never lost a game in men's or women's open divisions at the world cup. If you play for Australia you have to pay all your costs. Ok so sometimes there are sponsors and fundraising events etc. but it's an amature sport - you don't get paid for playing. However the coaches, the refs, the organisers, the nutritionists, the sports psychologists and the managers all get paid. Heck I got paid for referreeing school games of touch football. I didn't get paid a significant amount to earn a living off - but the fact that I was being paid meant I felt obliged to do a good job. The strong infestructure that touch football is definitely a significant reason why it's such a fast growing and popular sport. I believe that we should be focusing on building that same kind of infestructure rather than paying a small amount of players for their skills in competition.

Lets be clear, I'm not opposed to prize money - I just think the money can do a lot more for footbag if it goes to other things.

On the initial question - I think charging a players entry fee is ok if it's neccessary but not charging a players entry fee should definitely be something tournament directors should aim towards if they have the resources.

BalinorNZ · Post by **BalinorNZ** » 12 Mar 2006 03:29

I must say I agree totally with Jeremy on this one. Good post J-banger.

ptaku · Post by **ptaku** » 12 Mar 2006 03:33

I agree with Jeremy too.

Rieferman · Post by **Rieferman** » 12 Mar 2006 04:51

Excellent post Jeremy.

To Barnes on one of his early points.. Yes, it is often times necessary to rely on monetary participation from players in order to not lose your shirt running an event (I've actually run 1 or 2 events over the course of time) but competition fees and simply entry fees are different. Charging players $10 per head to cover venue costs is different than charging an additional $40 to compete. Especially when even that high competition fee rarley amounts to a windfall for any single player and certainly doesn't amount to big bucks for multiple players.

I would argue that most players attend competitions to show off their skills, see others' skills, and have fun hanging out - therefore, making high entry fees an obstacle to competing just seems silly for most.

And again, Great post Jeremy. The quality of the event is priority number 1. Once that's an assured item, working out prize money is among the items that can attended to.

cd · Post by cd » 12 Mar 2006 17:45

I think that a lot of tournament directors would make more money AND more people would compete if the cmpetition fee was kept very low. More people need to be encouraged to participate, even if they know they are not going to win their money back. A $30-40 fee would almost certainly prevent me from entering unless it was a huge event.

And I don't like the idea of an entry fee (unless it's for tickets to a big show, like the Montreal Footbag Challenge in 03, or any Worlds). Everyone should be allowed to participate for free if they want. This way, most players will compete and pay the fee, but those who just want to come to the event and shred all weekend can do so without having to pay.

ptaku · Post by **ptaku** » 13 Mar 2006 00:01

I would like to add that if no entry fees would bring more people to competing then it would be better for our sport. If there were more competitors on events then it would show the big potential of our sport.
Sponsors, comapnies and etc. would see that there is a lot players, and that it's really good deal to invest some money on the ground of footbag.
I think that more competitors = fastest grown of the sport.

Just my 2 cents...

CIC flurry · Post by **CIC flurry** » 13 Mar 2006 22:08

We had no entry fee for competition @ last year's New Year's Jam. There was a massive amount of competitors! Lots of prizes were given out across the board, thanks to our (freestyler) sponsors.

crazylegs32 · Post by **crazylegs32** » 13 Mar 2006 23:01

Entry fee cost is a lame excuse, nobody is out to profit off of entry fees. If you spend 100+ hours shredding why wouldnt you spend 10-20 to enter the contest.
The reason I havent entered sometimes is because I had no confidence in my game, and I still usually buy the event shirt to help support things. Some great players dont want to compete and thats a better reason than to say you cant afford it.