From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Wed Sep 8 13:11:08 1999
Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA06741
for britdisc-outgoing; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:09:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daffodil [137.205.192.30])
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA06735
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:09:38 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mailgw.chelt.ac.uk (mailgw.chelt.ac.uk [194.81.184.203])
by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA04069
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:09:37 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk (exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk) by mailgw.chelt.ac.uk
(Content Technologies SMTPRS 2.0.15) with ESMTP id <B0001134461@mailgw.chelt.ac.uk>;
Wed, 08 Sep 1999 13:07:07 +0100
Received: by exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
id <NP14P0KM>; Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:08:43 +0100
Message-Id: <8102C4585310D211858D0060B01A41337ED594@exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk>
From: "HUGHES, Chris" <CHughes@chelt.ac.uk>
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk,
"'Simon P Barlow'"
<dgcltd@dgcltd.screaming.net>
Subject: RE: nationals
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 1999 13:08:42 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Si - I'll reply a bit more seriously than Ben ;-) (I can't comment on
specific Red issues)
I've had this argument before with people, but you say you've organised
tennis events - I don't know how they relate in terms of organisation when
compared to Ultimate events, but at least you know what is involved.
Organising any event like this take a lot of time and effort, and very few
people are going to do it out of the kindness of their heart - they are
doing it for a reason; be that reason as basic as their team wants to have
some warm up games before Worlds without having to travel too far, or their
club wants to raise funds to be able to buy team kit, or an individual wants
to raise money for the GB juniors to go to a foreign tournament. Your
suggestion that we all do it for free / next to nothing isn't going to wash.
So what are the two scenarios;
1) That those people organising events charge you - make a profit, and then
put that money back into the sport somewhere, by paying to go to other
tournaments, either as individuals, or as clubs, in this country or abroad.
They use those profits to pay for BUF fees. So the people who lose out here
are those people who don't organise tournaments - they end up paying for
everyone else's ultimate.
2) all the tournaments are run at cost / small profit, and every club runs
one - in which case its fair; I don't pay over the odds to go to your
tournament, and you don't pay over the odds to go to mine. But as soon as
some teams don't organise an event then they are expecting other people to
put in the hard work to allow them to play. So I start charging more because
I have to travel 300 miles to go to a tournament, rather than the 50 miles
down the road.
So how do we shift from 1 to 2. Well when the requests for bids for events
starts for next year - and it will start soon!!, you put in a bid that
matches or surpasses everyone else's, but you quote a lower entry cost,
undercut everyone else so that we can all play for cheap. Meanwhile, as you
say the people that moan, grumble and complain because everything is not
exactly how they would like - start up without any concept of how much
effort it is.
Why the rising costs of tournaments - because players now expect more; we're
no longer happy playing in some farmers field dodging the cows, we expect
clubhouse / marquee to shelter from the weather, we want food, first aid
cover, quality pitches. We are no longer happy with 24 teams attending
Nationals to be played on four pitches, with games 45 minutes long. Instead
we want everything, and as you alluded to, nothing is for free. This year to
fit a 16 team event in the tour format we need 8 pitches. That means
including BUF tax each team has paid 40gbp just for a piece of turf - you've
not even got lines, cones, water bottles, scoreboards, invites, PA system,
discs, firstaid cover, massage, clubhouse / marquee, food provision, party,
trophies, publicity. Any accommodation is extra - most people don't realise
that almost any venue that allows you to camp on site will charge you extra
for the privilege.
People will quite happily spend over 40gbp at the bar in an evening, and
another 15 quid for a curry, but object to paying more than a fiver for a
weekends entertainment.
Other questions you raised; Yes Leicester were the only bid for Nationals,
and there were only 4 bids for the 5 tour events, Aberystwyth (sp? - sorry)
had to pull out, which was why T1 at Hitchin was so late in being organised,
and why we had to twist Kev's arm to run T5. So more bids welcomed next year
- if you don't like traveling, organise one on your doorstep. Also BUF tax,
yes this has gone up slightly, and yes it is annoying but it is due to be
scrapped as part of the conversion to the BUA, so expect tournament prices
to come down if it goes through.
My apologies for going on so long, although I'm sure this debate will happen
again sometime soon (Eastbourne?)
Chris
DoC
> ----------
> From: Simon P Barlow[SMTP:dgcltd@dgcltd.screaming.net]
> Sent: 07 September 1999 18:44
> To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
> Cc: Leicester Ultimate Club; HUGHES, Chris
> Subject: nationals
>
> Ben & Chris
>
> My comments were meant slightly tongue in cheek to put forward the point
> that tournament directors/clubs make far too much profit out of a tourney
> .And how the price of entry to tournaments has increased considerably over
> the past couple of years since the introduction of the "compulsory
> tournaments".
> I feel personally that if / when the UK Ultimate community decide to
> form the BUA to take over from the BUF, then when these compulsory
> tournaments in the future are put on then all the profits/less reasonable
> expenses, should go back to the BUA instead of the present situation that
> we have found ourselves in where certain individuals profit. Before you
> say BUF TAX let me point out that I feel this rate needs to be increased.
> And as to your comment Ben about Victoria park being free!! You told me
> that you didn't have to pay for tour 1 as Leicester council decided/never
> asked for the money after the event. And Red never gave anyone any money
> back!!! (so did you make £50 for every pitch you didn't pay for last
> time).
> I'm not bothered as these days you don't get anything for free and if they
> do it again this time then you can consider yourselves luckier/ (Richer)
> !!!
> Also doesn't one of the Red players work for Leicester council??? Red tape
> , Lost invoices and all that !!!!
> And by the way how many teams did bid for this years nationals!! apart
> from "Leicester city council"
>
> Si.b now nursing my hands after having my knuckles rapped
>
> P.S I know how difficult it is to run Tournaments as I have run many
> tennis (week long) tournaments that's why I don't want to run an ultimate
> one as I know how many moaning players there are in our wonderful sport.
>
> Ben I now expect pooper scoupers by every pitch !!
>