Okay here's the question that Rich and I have debated for some time now... Should I renew my PDGA membership?

Pros:
Supporting the sports governing body.
Message bored access.
Ratings.
Cachet of being an affiliated club.
The magazine.
I'm a professional athlete. ;)

Cons:
Supporting the sports governing body.
The message bored.
Higher cost at PDGA tourneys.
Embarassment of being an affiliated club.
The magazine.

The governing body consistently presents itself as self-important nerds who have done some good things, but this sport is so small time, and populated with dopers and drunks it's tough to take it seriously.

The message bored has become much more uptight and less fun than it was two years ago. Yes limiting posting to members has gotten rid of a lot of the trouble makers, but the wild west flavor is gone. No I'm not upset that I've been asked twice to change avatars. I'm a guest here, so I'll abide by their rules, but the bored itself is slow and creaky when compared to what Metl set up for me essentially overnight.

Ratings are something that Amateurs care more about than Pros. As a bottom Z-tier feeding pro I have no actual interest in ratings anymore. Three years ago I anxiously awaited each update, and now I marvel at the hundreds of posts on the Ratings Update thread with bemused disdain.

As a non-member I would have to pay (currently $5 probably a tad bit more in 2007) extra per PDGA tourney. However I'll probably limit myself to about 5-7 PDGA tourneys next year so the extra non-member fee is probably less than the $75 pro membership fee.

Being an affiliated club is kind of cool as I have my own vanity thread on the bored (such as it is) but now having our own bored makes this seem redundant and small time when compared to the freedom I and my club members enjoy on our own bored. I understand the logic of wanting to put on a good face to the great non discing masses who stroll through here daily, but I think we need to accept the reality of who and what this sport is.

I don't even read the magazine. I got mine yesterday and flipped through it in about four minutes flat. It's full of ads which is a positive, but the editorial content is drivel. Do you really need box scores from some C tier in Idaho four months after the fact? The most talked about article over the past couple of years was the discing at the Playboy Mansion.

By ponying up my $75 I do still get to tell people that I'm a professional athlete. There is some comedy value in that.

So there you have the points that Rich and I have discussed during several conversations over the past year regarding what are we as members really getting here, and is it worth it?

Please vote below, and comment either for or against renewal.

What Would Max Do?

What Would Max Do?



He'd settle (http://abc.typepad.com/3blindmice/smite-thumb.jpg) some scores.

Should I renew my PDGA membership?



IMO, the PDGA is hurting its own cause. Although I make enough to pay the membership fee, THE MEMBERSHIP FEE STRUCTURE IS A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!

Example A
Pro Membership = $75
Am Membership = $50
What extra benefits are given to pro players to justify a 50% increase? (Please don't feed me this Supertour crap and benefits that only a handful of players receive)

Example B
If I don't renew, I would have paid $20 in PDGA fees and $20 for an annual subscription to DGWN.

Example C
There are no incentives to renew for multiple year memberships. The PDGA must understand that its players have alternative uses for their money, and a discount would certainly provide incentive. Also, the PDGA would benefit by having a guarenteed revenue stream.

Example D
Pro Worlds videos
Although these videos are awesome, the PDGA must recognize that its members dues should not be an allocated subsidization. If the Pro Worlds videos don't pay for itself, it should be made. I think the 2005 videos lost ~$10,000 (this may not be right but is made as a point)
$10,000 = 133 pro memberships or 200 Am Memberships.

MY SOLUTIONS:
A. Membership fees should be the same amount for all Am & Pro players. A reduced fee for the Jr. divisions would be necessary to continue growth in the age brackets, and new members in the Jrs. would increase #s for futures years.

B. Treat this organzation like a business with a sense of social responsiblity. Would the "Big Wigs" spend $10,000 of their own money to make a video? No.... Then don't do it with our money.

C. Provide incentives for members to renew for multiple years.

D. Transparent accounting :) Maybe I have missed, but a details of budgets and actual results should be given frequently to members (much like companies do for their investors)

Do you really need box scores from some C tier in Idaho four months after the fact?



This is about the only thing I agree with in this diatribe. We need more course & equipment articles and abolish the tourny box scores altogether in DGWN. We get tourny results on the PDGA website typically within a week after the event - why do we need to see them in print months later? A decade ago the tournament results were an essential part of the magazine; now they are just entirely wasted space.

Should I renew my PDGA membership?



IMO, the PDGA is hurting its own cause. Although I make enough to pay the membership fee, THE MEMBERSHIP FEE STRUCTURE IS A JOKE!!!!!!!!!!

Example A
Pro Membership = $75
Am Membership = $50
What extra benefits are given to pro players to justify a 50% increase? (Please don't feed me this Supertour crap and benefits that only a handful of players receive)

Example B
If I don't renew, I would have paid $20 in PDGA fees and $20 for an annual subscription to DGWN.

Example C
There are no incentives to renew for multiple year memberships. The PDGA must understand that its players have alternative uses for their money, and a discount would certainly provide incentive. Also, the PDGA would benefit by having a guarenteed revenue stream.

Example D
Pro Worlds videos
Although these videos are awesome, the PDGA must recognize that its members dues should not be an allocated subsidization. If the Pro Worlds videos don't pay for itself, it should be made. I think the 2005 videos lost ~$10,000 (this may not be right but is made as a point)
$10,000 = 133 pro memberships or 200 Am Memberships.

MY SOLUTIONS:
A. Membership fees should be the same amount for all Am & Pro players. A reduced fee for the Jr. divisions would be necessary to continue growth in the age brackets, and new members in the Jrs. would increase #s for futures years.

B. Treat this organzation like a business with a sense of social responsiblity. Would the "Big Wigs" spend $10,000 of their own money to make a video? No.... Then don't do it with our money.

C. Provide incentives for members to renew for multiple years.

D. Transparent accounting :) Maybe I have missed, but a details of budgets and actual results should be given frequently to members (much like companies do for their investors)




I agree with everything Putt_like_Tiger says...especially that everyone should pay the same and that their are no incentives to renew anyway...what are we paying for?

The other issue I have with the PDGA (the more I think about this the more I'll remember) is the divisional structure. There amount of divisions that can occur at a tourney is absurd. This is the Gangloff argument, but why can't there be just one pro division and one am division? Do we really need to let everyone feel good by ensuring that only a handful of people don't win shiny new plastic? Why can Masters with 1000 ratings play in a protected division? Why have protected divisions based on anything other than ratings? Wouldn't that be an actual use of the ratings? How about four divisons? 950+, 900-949, 850-899, and everyone else below and unrated. Have each of these divisions play for money and be paid out by the table. This is afterall supposedly a Professional sport. This would still enable the current female pros to play for money since often at best two show up at an event. This would also eliminate all of the age protected divisions and award ceremonies featuring seven-nine divisions:


Today we had three Senior Grandmaster ladies come out...

Do you really need box scores from some C tier in Idaho four months after the fact?



This is about the only thing I agree with in this diatribe. We need more course & equipment articles and abolish the tourny box scores altogether in DGWN. We get tourny results on the PDGA website typically within a week after the event - why do we need to see them in print months later? A decade ago the tournament results were an essential part of the magazine; now they are just entirely wasted space.



I like the box scores and for people who never get on the site it is their way of looking at results around the world. :D

I like the box scores and for people who never get on the site it is their way of looking at results around the world. :D



With a few clicks of your mouse on the PDGA website, you can access results from all around the world to your heart's content.

And don't feed me that crap about "what about people without internet access." It's almost 2007 - do people like that even exist anymore?

Yes, people like that do exist. I regularly hear people complain that they don't know how to use the website (unlesss their spouse helps), or there are those that don't have a computer (or a library card). As crazy as it seems to those that use modern technology, some people who really love Disc Golf just have no desire to step up to this kind of information age, especially those that make very little money in their minimum wage jobs. The costs involved to buy a computer and get internet service don't seem to fit in their budget, since they would have to do without beer, smoke, or other staples of their life. Sad, but true. And many of this type of people have a lot of free time which they enjoy spending on the golf course, which does fit into their budget. Not all of these players are going to put up the money to join the PDGA, but we shouldn't exclude them just because they aren't into internet information.

Do you really need box scores from some C tier in Idaho four months after the fact?




What's wrong with Idaho?

Do you really need box scores from some C tier in Idaho four months after the fact?




What's wrong with Idaho?



Nothing if you're in an airplane flying over it.

I see a lot of people voting yes, but no one is making a case for why.

I won't say whether you should renew or not, that is up to you. I did renew, and I did for five years. The benefit here is that if the cost goes up over the next five years, I don't have to pay the extra amount. Is that a big benefit? No. But it is something.

As a member you also get an election ballot. It may be a small power, but it gives you a chance to have input about whether the people at the top are doing what they should be.

I also renewed because this is a growing sport and by renewing I would think that I am helping in some way.

...cuz it's $.21/day...$1.44/week...$6.25 month.

There's LOTS of ways to pi$$ away more money than this...especially at these rates.

PDGA membership? Well worth it, IMO.

is it worth 75$ to support disc golf? certainly.

but i think some people(including me) are getting a bit fed up with the lack of accountability to the membership of the leaders of the PDGA.
does everyone wany DGWN? probably very few do after seeing DGmonthly blow it's doors off. i think maybe the time has come for that magazine to fly on it's own. who exactly gets the ad money from it? the pdga? after all, it is mostly ads. very few stories worth reading anymore, when it does happen to actually show up.

and raising membership dues is really the wrong way to go to increase revenue. if you decrease dues, maybe you could increase membership and overall income. putting the membership higher and higher only prices a large part of this "can't afford a computer" group out of your ranks. and from what i understand nonm-current members can still renew at the old rates, but CURRENT DUES PAYING MEMBERS must pay the new higher rates. so if i didn't suppor tthe pdga the last couple years i get a discount? huh?

and for the people with a computer, it is quite obvious the pdga refuses to accept that hosting websites is not their forte and allow a professional hosting company handle it. the website sucks. period.

i think the main problem is the structure of the pdga overall. the decisions are made by a very small group of people, limiting idea input opportunities and oversight. if there is a published financial report each year, it is hidden away as best as possible as i have never seem one in my years as a member and state coordinator. how much do we pay these guys working for the association? how many hours a week do they work? maybe thye work long hours for small pay, who knows?

the overall closed attitude and non-responsiveness of the current pdga leadership seems to reek of good old boy cronyism. I'm sure i am not on their good side with this post, but i've always been one to speak my mind. not that the pdga has ever listened...

if the new "by-laws" had not been approved, you would have been able to ask the guy you elected as oversight director to obtain that information for you.

Yes, and you would spent a lot of time doing it.t

The budget is posted in the PDGA pages of DGWN. I have read it severerl times.

As far as what we pay the administration, not even the going rate for what they do. When it was 2 people, they were working 7 days a week, all day long. At least they didn't have to drive to work everyday :D

if you read the PDGA pages of the DGWN, you would know where the PDGA has been spending money. It is no secret.

if the new "by-laws" had not been approved, you would have been able to ask the guy you elected as oversight director to obtain that information for you.



Give me a break.....

I appreciate the hard work that many volunteers put into the PDGA.

However, I don't remember a vote where the by-laws stated that "members of the organization should not be privy to essential information."

PDGA members are voicing their concerns in a constructive manner with possible solutions to their concerns, and they get a response like "blah blah blah if the by-laws."

The financial viability of this organization is an issue of utmost importance.

If you want to charge $75, provide a product worth $75.

I am a member of a professional accounting organzation, which requires a $250 membership. That includes 10-meals, 10 hours of continuing professional eduction (which typically range from $50-100 per hour), and the ability to mingle with industry peers. THAT'S VALUE.

$75 for a plastic membership card, access to post message on a website with friends who's phone #'s that I have, online ratings, and a magazine that isn't worth $20 doesn't strike me as a value!

Why do I renew???

#1 To be current

#2 To be a part of the governing body of Disc Golf (also why I have been an ACE club member EVERY YEAR)

#3 To be able to post on the board :D

#4 To get DGWN (which I had a subscription to before and had at least 1 year left)

#5 To get the cool Ace Club Shirt or Ace Club mini.

#6 It's only $150 per year.

#7 I can't quite afford to pay the $2000 Eagle Club membership yet. (I hope to next year)

I'll be renewing next year. I'll probably be playing around 20 events again so it's worth it to me. I'm also a certified official and state coordinator. I agree that the increase did not please me and i'd rather have the magazine cut from my membership if the price stayed the same. I think the PDGA haa some momentum building and this price increase might push some new memers away next year. Maybe, maybe not.

I think people think the PDGA is this huge coorporation with many people working for them. Besides a few full time employess there is not much to the PDGA besides the hard work of those people and many volunteers. I would hate to see where disc golf would be without the PDGA.

I however would like to see the PDGA spend some time revamping the website and sending out some type of monthy newsletter to the members with official updates. I'd like to know how the Summit went, what is going on with the PDGA, & financial information.

I regularly hear people complain that they don't know how to use the website (unlesss their spouse helps)



I will have to take your word for it. I honestly cannot fathom that there are people out there that are too dense to type 'www.pdga.com' into a web browser, click on 'PDGA Tour' and find their desired tournament results.

How about a new slogan for our magazine:


Disc Golf World News: Tournament Results for People Too Stupid to Use the Internet!

Hey hawk ,
first of all hope to see you in Codorus this coming sat the 21st
Second , I agree with the statement that the PDGA has lots of things going on that dont make senseto alot of us and more to the point there are lots of people benifiting from the horrible divisional structure that you elaborate on .

With saying all this I do plan to renew .
THe main reason is this ( as rich says ) the money spent on supporting the sport is worth it
I look at it this way .
I am a union member and the LEAST I can do for the union is pay my dues . IT is the bottom tier of helping out .
Some of us do more for the pdga ( run tourneys , hold clinics , all the way up to volenteer for the verbal beating those people take on this message board ) but the least we can do is pay for a membership .
I will also say that I agree that a pro membership and am membership should be the same price

Hey Jeff ,
I know some people that do not like computers and do not like to use them .
PERSONALLY I LOATHE computers , and had it not been for the PDGA and them sorta forcing me ( via communication and td reports ) to use them I probably would not own one at home .
The computer is another tool that people CAN use to help them find info faster however I personally would rather use the phone .

Jeff, I don't know the kind of people you are around in your career or personal life. Where I spend a lot of my time is in the construction industry, which has a very wide variety of folks, from people with Doctorate degrees to people with no education past the 8th grade. Many of these people are just barely getting by on their minumum wage, manual labor positions, and they have no desire (or the means) to get into the internet age. I'm not trying to be condescending, I just don't think it's fair to presume everyone has access to the things some of us take for granted.

Who pays for the courses you play? Who maintains the courses? Who helps get courses into the ground?

True, in some areas all that is done strictly by government entities. But, I'd bet that more are done by local clubs. Do you belong to a local club?

Think of the PDGA as a world-wide club. It helps support installations (through articles and other info online), opportunities to play (tournaments, yes usually sponsored by local clubs, but there ya go again), and helps with publicity to increase the general public's awareness of this great sport .

Personally, I don't like taking advantage of others' work unless I do at least a little bit to help out. Paying the PDGA membership does that, as someone else said it's the LEAST that you can do.

As for pro vs am dues, how about another tier: Touring Pro, for those who play more than 25 tour events a year, or 3 SuperTour events, Local Pro, and Am. Maybe even Touring Am and Local Am.

The other issue I have with the PDGA (the more I think about this the more I'll remember) is the divisional structure. There amount of divisions that can occur at a tourney is absurd. This is the Gangloff argument, but why can't there be just one pro division and one am division?



The more people you can make feel good about competing, the more people will compete. My daughters are competitive figure skaters. They have more than 8 levels of skill (Pre-preliminary, preliminary, pre-juvenile, juvenile, open juvenile, intermediate, novice, junior, senior). And that is doubled because the men and women compete separately.

On top of that, any time there are more than 8 to 10 competitors in a division, they split it up into two groups. Each group has a first place, second place, etc. The kids feel just as excited about winning, even if they know there are two or three groups. They don't sit there and rationalize "maybe I wasn't the best". They enjoy it.

And by the way, no no one complains about whether they could be earning more prizes because all they play for is trophies, as it should be for disc golf (my opinion, obviously).

Theo Pozzy
PDGA Commissioner

I agree that the PDGA does a great deal for this sport. I do also agree that there needs to be a better dividing of level of play. I will also Renew, I am also a PDGA Certified Official. I will also register my newborn daughter so she has her "Lifetime" PDGA Member - I do not however renew my oldest (3 years old) daughters membership - as she in no way benefits at this time.

REC, INT, ADV, PRO is not enough - Do away with "Protected" divisions - big deal so you are 40 years old - why should you be able to play in a protected division when you are still beating most of the Advanced players or would at least be in the top 5 in tournaments.

I feel there should be another division between INT and ADV. As well as another one between ADV and PRO.

The Rec division has been a great addition to the mix as it helps get those occasional players to a PDGA event and they find out there is more to the sport than going out on Tuesday after work to through a round with some friends.

By putting in a division in the gap between INT and ADV players would fill a void of people getting frustrated because they pay a large entry fee get a low quality players package and get beat by some guy who feels good about beating the same group of people event after event.

This is just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Okay here's the question that Rich and I have debated for some time now... Should I renew my PDGA membership?





if you and rich are smart you would renew NOW (before nov 7th) for 5 years thereby locking in the 50 per year rate and paying "only" 250 bucks which saves you:

A)at least $25 per year if rates DON'T go up in the next 5 years

B)lets you forget about having to ask this question every year,keeps us entertained with ask hawk threads and finally

C)i already showed rich how easy it was earlier in the year when he whined about renewing online and you can ask him how nicely that went :D

just my opinion from someone who renewed the next morning after the rate increase was announced months ago for 5 years for me and LORELEI saving myself even more with the family membership :D:D

Or pay $2000 and never have to pay a PDGA yearly dues again.

I will say that my family all has PDGA numbers, however I am the only membership I keep current.

If you pay the $2000 do you get the magazine for life too?

If you pay the $2000 do you get the magazine for life too?



For $2000 I would Hope SO!!!

First time reading this thread and these are my 5 comments...(both serious and not serious)

1. While the PDGA does have some flaws, it is far and away the best thing we have as an overall governing body in the sport. I've made this arguement before - just look at this website. On this site, you can go see sponsers of the PDGA, read articles on whats up in the disc golf world (Which I feel should be updated a lot more often than it is), look at every rule for the sport, join the association, look at who is playing any tournament in the world (provided TD's take the 5 mins it takes to do it), look at scores from tournaments, purchase merch, listen to a weekly radio show, get contact info for anyone, get a listing for every course in the world, and obviously, use the discussion board. Now within each of these things lies even more stuff. The PDGA may not be great, but nothing will come close to topping what they do.

2. You start serious threads Hawk?

3. I agree the 75 dollars is a little rediuculous, especially when the PDGA uses the argument that they give back to the pros by supporting tournaments which they should re-word by saying we give it back to the top pros by supporting NT's and majors.

4. The discussion board is great, however, nowhere neat as fun as it use to be.

5. No matter what you do Hawk, you will have supporters, unlike the Load who continues to make promisses to people and never comes through with them.

NO!!
split the cost share the magazine and password.

Second

A couple of really devious people who weren't concerned about a player rating could share an entire membership number, and both play as number whatever, and avoid the non-member fee at tourneys. It's not like TD's check ID's. Sure there's the fact that everybody tends to know everybody, but you could definitely do this on the road. Hmmm...

SHHHHHHHHHH

These are Pro costs...


...cuz it's $.21/day...$1.44/week...$6.25 month.

There's LOTS of ways to pi$$ away more money than this...especially at these rates.

PDGA membership? Well worth it, IMO.



AM costs are $.14/day...$.96/week...$4.17/month.

The price of admission...

Without the PDGA, and their membership fee's , none of you guys would have anything to b i t c h about. Where would your lives be if you did not have this??????
Love it or leave it. The BOD is elected in a true democratic fashion. Did you vote???
" well I did not like the cantidates "
Get off you arse , do the work and run for office next year.

So many want change, and they are willing to sit aside and HOPE somebody makes it for them.

If you want something done right, do it yourself. OR, quit complaining.

P.S.
I will be renewing, reaping the rewards of other peoples hard work. I will make a mental note of all this drivel. Next time I play a sanctioned event, I will think of all this wonderful b.s. and be greatful that I have to opportunity to do what I love. Thanks for all the hard work PDGA, past present and future! Be expecting my dues!

when it shows up is right!! Haven't seen one in a year or more. so many ads and nothing of real value to me THE ADVANCED AMATEUR DISC GOLFER!! i would call or email someone that i haven't recieved da mag but really don't care. The site it probably worth renewing...i guess?..

[QUOTE]
The governing body consistently presents itself as self-important nerds who have done some good things, but this sport is so small time, and populated with dopers and drunks it's tough to take it seriously. [QUOTE]

TRUE DAT HAWK
[QUOTE]

I think people think the PDGA is this huge coorporation with many people working for them. Besides a few full time employess there is not much to the PDGA besides the hard work of those people and many volunteers. I would hate to see where disc golf would be without the PDGA.
[QUOTE]

No offence but where are we now,does anyone think in our life time Disc golf will be main stream with attention our sport deserves.Even Kurlings a fricking olympic fricking sport :eek:

We know that that CHING!...is music to our ears!! Long live DG!! :cool:

Diana, Kelsey, Kira, Emily, Jenny and I will all renew because

(a) the Waterford Junior Girls' Club had a good year, and it pays dues for its active members when it can afford to

(b) I might want to run a tournament next year

(c) Several of us will probably play ten tournaments next year

(d) Several of us will probably play a Major or an A-tier next year.

I know that there are many am players who will not renew at $50 per year. I spoke to some of them at our tournament yesterday. Others won't join at $50 per year. The guys who play trophy-only because they don't have $35 don't have $50 also.

There have got to be a lot of pros who won't renew. There seem to be a lot of B/C pros who don't play the super expensive tournaments and don't play 15 tournaments a year.

For a lot of people decisions about money are mainly about the money. For a lot of people it just comes down to the number of tournaments they think they'll play, and whether they'll play a Major or A-tier.

For a lot of people decisions about money are mainly about the money. For a lot of people it just comes down to the number of tournaments they think they'll play, and whether they'll play a Major or A-tier.



If money is an issue, you should not be paying to play. Go support yourselves of your famalies. Having said that, you would probably lose about half of the members!

For a lot of people decisions about money are mainly about the money.



That's the problem. Money should not be an issue.

Memberships should be $15-20/year with the option to get the magazine.

If people want to play tournaments, the PDGA should charge a $3 per tournament(hypothetical amount and more if not current).
1. This allows people to stay an active part of the organization.
2. This provides the revenues that the PDGA is trying to gain by increasing fees while passing along the fees to the players of the tournaments.
3. This avoids a unfair fee structure and reduces the overall cost to casual members. (Unfair = a 970 player donating cash to 1000 rated players on a consistent basis and paying higher dues b/c they don't want to be an Adv. bagger)

Please read these comments as constructive criticism aimed at solving the problem. The point is - changes are needed, and the rising costs of dues are perceived as a problem by many. FIX IT

Please do not reference ice-skating, tiddly winks, or beer pongs as comparable sports.

With all due respect...

For me, joining the PDGA goes beyond what tournaments I will play and "what's in it for me".

Becoming a member of the PDGA helps aid in the promotion of the sport on a professional level. Being a CURRENT member helps the guarantee to see our sport excel.

Supporting an association that promotes disc golf is enough for me to want to renew every year.

We wouldn't be playing this game if it wasn't fun so let's focus on the other things that will help us see disc golf on ESPN one day.

Thanks to the hard working employees and volunteers of the PDGA, these are just some of the benefits:

Player stats and ratings
World wide tournaments at a discounted rate
Disc Golf World News subscription (some are for it, some against. I do believe an option to exclude the magazine would be something to discuss. I know I enjoy it, though.)
Lifetime PDGA number
Rule book
Friendships across the GLOBE...(can be done without a membership but you are more likely to play in an A tier in Europe being a PDGA member)
Watching Microtel and other corporate sponsors wanting to latch on to the sport
Seeing the growth in memberships and tour events
Course evaluation program
Affiliate club program...

This is by far my favorite though....
The IDGC (International Disc Golf Center) and the new PDGA Headquarters in Augusta, GA. is where I always start when telling people about the perks. This facility will be host to three championship level courses, Disc Golf Hall of Fame, Ed Headrick Museum, a pro shop, and the PDGA offices. (I know you all already know this but I was pointing these out to the Southern Nationals players who had the same questions about joining/renewing).

If there are problem areas let's come up with solutions:

Give ideas of what is needed and/or wanted. We will grow together.

Fill in the blanks...(many of you have already offered solutions/options, so thank you! Feedback is a wonderful tool!)

"If the PDGA offered __________ then I would consider renewing/joining."

"I think it would be awesome to see _________________ for disc golf in the future"

What do people want out of their memberships? What do they want to see happen with disc golf in the future?

I don't know about you, but I don't have to explain disc golf to as many people as I used to. The knowledge of the sport is getting around and I know the PDGA plays a huge part in that.

~Addie

Of course everyone should renew; Ive mentioned several times it should be $200 for pros and $50 for everyone over 16 and $20 for Jr's!
Lets see;
For $55 I get to support the main governing body of disc golf and not just because they/we really need the money.

I get a quartlerly magazine, a chance to meet new people and make new friends (and Customers) :Dthrough events and the discussion board.
I also get to find out about cool events, new products, new course, new clubs, my results are tabulated for the events I play in and recorded for a player rating( even if I think it needs improving, sorry chuck! ).
The feeling of helping out financially and being a part of something bigger is nice, especially for the sport we all love anyway. This alone should be reason enough, everything else is just icing on the cake.


What else can I get for $55?
Saturday night I went camping, bought a 6 pack of fat Tire for me, Captain and Coke for her, some munchies, a bag of ice and a tank of gas. Even with Free camping and a blugrass band, It still costs me more than a membership.
Today I spent $22 on breakfest for me and a few workers, $28 on lunch and by the time I order a Pizza I'm well over the membership.
Tomorrow I could fast just so I can afford to re-up my membership. :confused:

My local club membership is $20 and the national one is only $55, it seems like a pretty good deal. For $75 I'm all in!

There is just about nothing you can get for $55 that lasts the whole year long, I ive seen disc golfers spend $20 for 3 minutes at a strip club, (sometimes 3 times a night),

I just wish you could post Anonymously, it was WAY more fun! ;)

beer pong as comparable sports.

I beg to differ
I may not be the best disc golfer but I will take anyone on at beer pong ( one bounce on a real pong table ) I guarentee I will give anyone a run for the money ( or beer )

And don't feed me that crap about "what about people without internet access." It's almost 2007 - do people like that even exist anymore?




Not only do these people exist, but there are people out there without voicemail. However I don't think the magazine should waste pages catering to them. If you're living without internet in Portland, Maine then it's unlikely you care about some C-tier in Phoenix you're never going to play in anyways.


...cuz it's $.21/day...$1.44/week...$6.25 month.

There's LOTS of ways to pi$$ away more money than this...especially at these rates.




The actual cost of the membership doesn't bother me all that much. My bigger issue is whether it's worth it to belong to the PDGA? I get a rating that doesn't interest me anymore, and if I don't renew then I pay an extra whatever at the handful of PDGA tourneys I plan on playing in 2007 which is less than the membership. I lose the magazine... /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif :p and the official affiliation with a sport most noted for pot smoking to the general public. The irony to this is the number of friends I've made discing who are in one type of recovery or another.


first of all hope to see you in Codorus this coming sat the 21st




Bill,

I'm 95% there. Play Pro Masters. Beat me again. I hate you.


On top of that, any time there are more than 8 to 10 competitors in a division, they split it up into two groups. Each group has a first place, second place, etc. The kids feel just as excited about winning, even if they know there are two or three groups. They don't sit there and rationalize "maybe I wasn't the best". They enjoy it.




Theo you just described field day in an elementary school, not a professional sport. Which is the PDGA supposed to be?


And by the way, no no one complains about whether they could be earning more prizes because all they play for is trophies, as it should be for disc golf (my opinion, obviously).




I do agree that Am's should play for trophy only, and the sport needs to break it's other addiction...to plastic.


if you and rich are smart you would renew NOW (before nov 7th) for 5 years thereby locking in the 50 per year rate and paying "only" 250 bucks which saves you:




As Rich noted the price saving seems to be only for lapsed members which he is correct is a scam. If you click the membership/renewal link up top you'll see that it still is for 2006, and it mentions that 2007 renewals for existing members will commence sometime in November. I think Rich is right that existing members should get the price break over the great unwashed.


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you pay the $2000 do you get the magazine for life too?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



For $2000 I would Hope SO!!!




I would think that for $2,000 they would promise to not send you the magazine.


2. You start serious threads Hawk?




There's something waiting for you at the bottom of the bored.


No matter what you do Hawk, you will have supporters, unlike the Load who continues to make promisses to people and never comes through with them.




Thanks fan.


Where would your lives be if you did not have this??????




I'd be back in porn. You?


If people want to play tournaments, the PDGA should charge a $3 per tournament(hypothetical amount and more if not current).
1. This allows people to stay an active part of the organization.
2. This provides the revenues that the PDGA is trying to gain by increasing fees while passing along the fees to the players of the tournaments.
3. This avoids a unfair fee structure and reduces the overall cost to casual members. (Unfair = a 970 player donating cash to 1000 rated players on a consistent basis and paying higher dues b/c they don't want to be an Adv. bagger)




This makes a frightening amount of sense.

If people want to play tournaments, the PDGA should charge a $3 per tournament(hypothetical amount and more if not current).

The PDGA already does charge $3 per tournament for B-tiers. Doh! :D

Well put, Addie and Dave!

The PDGA's got room to grow, but is still the best thing going for the sport. (Texas-10, Southern Nats, Marshall Street are all cool, though)

I'm a broke college student, but still have no problem with paying my PDGA dues, just like my WWOZ membership! (Other than that, it all goes to The Man!)

the only reason hawk doesn't want to renew is because it's the only way to hault his rating from plummeting :eek:

really though, i could care less about getting the magazine. the news is dated but it's good for an occasional pic. the content is usually irrelavent. i'd prefer to receive the newspaper tabloid style one that we always get in players packs (i forget what it's called). it's probably a lot cheaper to produce and a better read. it could save the pdga some money and we'd probably be able to get it more frequently.

if you and rich are smart you would renew NOW (before nov 7th) for 5 years thereby locking in the 50 per year rate and paying "only" 250 bucks which saves you:




As Rich noted the price saving seems to be only for lapsed members which he is correct is a scam. If you click the membership/renewal link up top you'll see that it still is for 2006, and it mentions that 2007 renewals for existing members will commence sometime in November. I think Rich is right that existing members should get the price break over the great unwashed.





BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!! !!!!!!!!

as usual rich is WRONG....just like he was WRONG earlier in the year....

if you would trust me hawk you would find out....
if you want to continue to believe people you beat the snot out of in disc golf then you'll never know....

call the membership # and do it NOW please...

the pdga needs guys like the hawk to balance everything else out :D

Is there any possiblity of forgoeing the magazine to save me $5 per issue, per yearly membership?

Hmmm... (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Board=Players&Number=601020&Searchpage=0&Main=592139&Search=true&#Post601020)

This is the kind of stuff that makes me rethink the renewal.

Are you planning on making a run at ROY ?

rookie of the year is just a popularity contest.

Happy Birth, MD 2020

rookie of the year is just a popularity contest.



I think it's more of a familiarity contest.

Often the voters will selecting the players they are most familiar with. If you are in the running for ROY, a publicist would help. :cool:

The PDGA dues increase is just a small part of a bigger trend in the sport to transition from "free" to paying for some of the huge volunteer and civic contributions that have allowed players to play mostly free for a long time. Forgetting about the PDGA for the moment, estimate the true value of the services you've received in a year by playing free both recreationally and from volunteers running leagues and events where they've paid back equal or more than they've taken in in entry fees.

It's no different at the national level. Although some of you may not seem to receive the full value of your annual dues in tangible benefits, the total value of services generated for the sport on a national level from PDGA efforts with their partners far exceeds what the PDGA takes in in annual revenues when you value the time and effort of all the people who have worked for years as volunteers at the national level and will continue to do so. The bulk of the dues increase will go toward hiring additional staff. This is essentially a gradual conversion from members getting some of their benefits free via volunteer contributions, to paying for some of these services either as salaries or contract fees. In some cases such as the technology area, we haven't been able to properly harness volunteer efforts and need to start paying for some of these services or they won't get done.

This gradual increase in fees will be seen at the local level as more places start to charge user fees and/or courses open with pay for play fees. Hopefully, this also means an increase in quality and services provided to justify the fees. Tournament promoters will gradually start keeping more of the revenue generated from events to cover expenses and reward the volunteers who contribute to the success of events. Hopefully, this leads to increased quality of events.

The sport will continue to be a great value despite these increases in fees in several areas of the sport. People will still find free courses to play, event promoters and volunteers willing to work free to host events and volunteers to be PDGA Board members or serve on national committees. But hopefully, the courses where you pay to play, the events where promoters make money and a higher budget PDGA will all offer services that are better for everyone to expand and improve the sport we love.

Do you really need box scores from some C tier in Idaho four months after the fact?




What's wrong with Idaho?



Nothing if you're in an airplane flying over it.

I see a lot of people voting yes, but no one is making a case for why.




I would be at an emotional loss without the presence of My Disc Golf Hero on the message board. I'm sure many others would as well.

...This gradual increase in fees will be seen at the local level as more places start to charge user fees and/or courses open with pay for play fees. Hopefully, this also means an increase in quality and services provided to justify the fees. Tournament promoters will gradually start keeping more of the revenue generated from events to cover expenses and reward the volunteers who contribute to the success of events. Hopefully, this leads to increased quality of events...


I think I would pay for an even higher increase in dues if some greater attention could be paid to the drug problem at our tournaments and within our membership. I don't know what the answer is, but it's a big concern, and it's one of the reasons I wouldn't be interested in paying too much to the PDGA until the PDGA cleans up not just its image but its reality out there. Does anyone know if there some initiative being considered to address this problem? If there was such a program that needed funding, I'd pay for the next 5 years up front right now.

I think my membership fee is still $150 so there wasn't an increase for me to complain about. :cool:

Of course you should renew!

Be an active contributor and play a part in the growth of this sport! Renewing your PDGA membership is a start. Sorry to read that you may have jumped to the Pro ranks before you were really ready to compete at that level.

* * * * *

I am a PDGA snob.

I can't help myself - but I give more credibility to the opinions and ideas of active PDGA players than I do of the non-members.

Non-members are essentially recreational/casual golfers to me. Yeah, their opinions count too, but their dedication/committment to the sport shows up to me as being "suspect." (If they were really dedicated and/or committed to the sport, they'd be a PDGA member.)

All of the people that I know and respect most are active PDGA members. I rarely ever see non-PDGA members getting involved in growing the sport...usually they are the ones sitting on the sidelines complaining about one injustice or another without taking any active role toward "fixing" whatever it is.

Although that isn't true 100% of the time, we all know it is true most of the time.

The growth of disc golf is very much still on the rise. I get great personal satisfaction from knowing that I am a part of the organization most responsible for its growth at an National/International level. I also heavily support my local club for the same reasons.

I rarely ever play in non-PDGA sanctioned events. Why? Because I believe that the PDGA generally institutes rules and policies that ensure fairer competitions, and fairer payout structures.

I see a tremendous direct value in my membership because of the amount of information I can get from this website at my convenience. DGWN doesn't provide the same currency of information that it used to, but it is still worthwhile - even the advertising is valuable as a source of "what's new" in commercial world.

I can't help it, but I look "down" at non-PDGA members because it seems like they aren't making any contribution towards growing and improving the sport...they are just "leeching" off from the efforts of others who are making those contributions.

My membership allows me the opportunity to vote for the BOD members so that I have a feeling of having some hand in the direction that the sport is taking. That is of value to me...and any time I choose to, I can vote for different BOD members or I can actually get involved with the organization to effect change.

$50 or $75 is a small price to pay to see the continuing growth of disc golf and the structured framework of competition that the PDGA gives us.

I'll be renewing - I hope that you will be too! :D

There have been a lot of concrete reasons both for and against renewing that have been posted here. The biggest reason I renew is intangible.

A couple of months ago an upscale neighborhood put in a brand new course in Northwestern Houston. The course is not the greatest course ever built but it is a very, very good course. The setting is gorgeous, the Tees are concrete and beautifully constructed, and the course is groomed and well maintained.

There is no question that without the structure and influence brought to this sport by the PDGA, this course would not have been built. Yes, the designer, Andi Lehmann could have argued that it would be beneficial, and the developer who plays might have discovered disc golf without the PDGA and PDGA sponsored events, but the likelihood the course would have gone in, in the absence of the PDGA is pretty small.

The PDGA, good or bad, gives the sport credibility, not just by being in existence, but because of the structure, promotion, and goals that it sets. No group of local clubs, or promoters could wield the same influence. Even if the organization was a sham, and it is not, it would still add some credibility. The fact is that the organization is very credible and gains more every year. The credibility impacts the decision makers at Parks, in neighborhoods and cities, and it also impacts sponsors. Disc golf would not be what it is without the PDGA.

BTW - like him or not, Brian is the person who made the PDGA that influential, for that he deserves kudos.

BTW - like him or not, Brian is the person who made the PDGA that influential, for that he deserves kudos.


<font size="5">WORD!!!</font>

Larry and Lyle, I have to agree with both of you 110%

And like Gary, my membership went up a few years ago to $100, then to $150. I would still join if it went up to $200. (but please leave the Ace Club at $150 for now )

Za,

You're makin' me feel guilty, maybe I better finally take out that Birdy membership...

It looks like I'm in the minority, but I really enjoy the magazine. I get DGW and Disc Golf magazine and I love them both.

I think a lot of the discussion regarding the pros and cons of renewing is gettting lost in a sidetracked conversation regarding the coming dues increase. For Rich and I the extra $25 for our pro renewal isn't the issue. Rich can blow $25 on one Arby's drive through jaunt, and I take that much in supplements every month. The questions is whether or not the product supplied by the PDGA is worth continuing to support. It would appear that the PDGA itself has some of the same questions and concerns as evidenced by it's willingness to grant bottom feeding pros like Rich and myself the privilege of slinking back to the Am kiddie pool between now and the end of the year with no questions asked.

Actually, most will view the "Amnesty for Pros" topic as a positive in that the PDGA is listening to feedback and finding ways to accomodate players with options as concerns come forward.

Having weighed both sides of the issue I've decided not to renew and to no longer have my club be a PDGA affiliated club. The cons far outweigh the pros. Good luck & Godspeed to the rest of you.

Well while trolling the bored this morning I stumbled across this. (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=624412&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=7&fpart=1#Post625783) While flattering, amusing and annoying all at the same time it appears that the decision was made for me, and that I am back in 2007. I just confirmed this with someone I believe named Dottie down in Wonderland. This raises several interesting issues:

1. It was certainly kind of Pozzy, Dodge, Lyksett, Decker and May (I don't know the last three) to pony up the membership fee. Though Theo and Steve may regret that here on the bored. As I stated before the money itself wasn't an issue, but whether the PDGA is an organization deserving my (and your) support. I believe that question is still up in the air. I don't want to reject the generous offer the boys made, but I also don't want to feel indebted so I would like the five of them to pick a charity and I will send that charity a $50 contribution in their or the PDGA's name. PM or post here what you guys pick.

2. They renewed me as an am which says either after analyzing my play and results they see my professional status as a sham, or the five of them agree with those who feel the extra $25 is a rip. While pondering my renewal I had decided that if I renewed I would do so as an Am so that all worked out fine.

3. The Association is like the mob. Once you're in you can't get out.

We played a round today a talked about renewal. Four of us Ams are probably not going to renew. We play one, maybe two PDGA's a year. I played none last year. Fifty bucks for what? To support the PDGA? Get me a "stipped-down" membership for $25 and I am glad to pay. I don't want the magazine, and I'll even pay $5 for any PDGA event I enter. But $50 ??? No thanks PDGA! First time in 9 years I am not renewing.

I wish they would offer a cheaper membership.

I must say I agree with you Rob.

The PDGA wants to gain national attention and national sponsorships for its Pro NT Tour, yet it's isolating itself from the bulk of disc golf players - the recreational players - by increasing AM membership to $50.

It's my understanding the Disc Golf World News won a bid for publication among all PDGA members, so they cannot offer different levels of membership. (if I'm wrong on this, someone please correct me.) How long the contract is, I do not know. Players *should* have the option though of not receiving the full magazine. A simple, low-cost quarterly newsletter with tournament results and PDGA news would suffice.

Rec. AM players are not going to pony up the money to support the PDGA and the un-seen, untangible benefits to the sport (especially when they see all course maintenence and most tournaments done on a local level.)

If the PDGA dropped AM membership fees substantially, they could easily lure many of the rec players to the PDGA. It would increase overall membership numbers (better for sponsorship) and help retain members.

I think the PDGA made the wrong move in raising AM membership fees, and I'm willing to bet this will become apparant with 2007 membership numbers. The sport is growing with new courses and more exposure, so an increase in new membership is inevitable. I think we'll lose a lot of existing members from this increase though. I hope I'm wrong.

Frederick Doot
#27259

PS: NEFA (New England Flying Disc Assoc.) has a membership drive which offers a discount when an existing member signs up a new member. I think it's been effective. The PDGA should explore a similar strategy.

I think the idea behind offering a five year membership for a price no less than 5X that of a one year membership is so that when the fee goes up to $100 dollars next year you will have saved $25. How much more incentive do you guys need?

Also, can you not drop back down to am, pay the $50 fee, and then move up to pro via phone call to the pdga, thus bi-passing the $25 dollar increase in membership? Or would that be too non-supportive? I know that when I went to renew I was surprised to say the least at the price jump. Is there somewhere on this site explaining the need for such a drastic increase in fees?

I expect to see some huge cash payouts in the Majors this year, or does the PDGA even have anything to do with added cash to any tourney's?

1. It was certainly kind of Pozzy, Dodge, Lyksett, Decker and May (I don't know the last three) to pony up the membership fee. Though Theo and Steve may regret that here on the bored. As I stated before the money itself wasn't an issue, but whether the PDGA is an organization deserving my (and your) support. I believe that question is still up in the air. I don't want to reject the generous offer the boys made, but I also don't want to feel indebted so I would like the five of them to pick a charity and I will send that charity a $50 contribution in their or the PDGA's name. PM or post here what you guys pick.





since you didn't listen to me before when i was trying to help you i doubt you'll do it now...but just in case the holidays made you wiser :D... why not make your donation to the disc golf foundation or the idgc which benefit ALL disc golfers in some way.....


much like some of your posts amuse some disc golfers all of the time

just a thought....

keith johnson #10444


ps... her name is addie and she is a fine lady who the pdga is lucky to have helping them out..

how about at least treating some people who are helpful to you with some kindness once in a while.....

you don't ALWAYS have to be ON for your fans...just my opinion :eek:

Although I didn't read all 8 pages of this thread I read several and found out that I'm not the only one that feels that the PDGA does not do much for me as an occasional tournament player. When I've brought this up with other local players the most common response is 'to support disc golf'. I wasn't going to renew in '05 but decided to solely because I planned on going to World's. Then in '06 did it to help the local club through the affiliate club and because I thought I would play more tourneys than I did. This year I probably won't play 10 tournaments to offset the $5 temp fee. Partially because most tournaments are either sanctioned or gone from C to B-Tiers, which means they are more expensive. I only play Adv and pay $40+ for most tournaments. It's tough to play 2 or 3 a month when it costs that much, then throw in the $60+ A-Tier and it gets pretty ridiculous how much money gets spent. And for the few friends of mine that moved to Open this year, they cut way back on number of tournaments because of the high cost of entry fees. My understanding of the high cost of entry fees is because of the PDGA fees. Yes, I understand that the insurance alone is worth the fees but when a non-sanctioned event can have an almost equal payout for almost half the price it just doesn't add up in my book.

Sure, I like the magazine. And the boards come in nice when I'm traveling to a new area to find out the best courses and to try to get someone to meet me for a round, otherwise we have an excellent forum on our local site. As for ratings, not that important, I know where I stand against other players in my area, who's better and by how much, ratings aren't worth $50 (and if you pay the $5 temp fee, shouldn't that tournament count towards ratings, afterall, you were a member for that tournament?). Otherwise, the rest of the website I can access.

I feel my money is better spent on my state and local clubs. They are the ones proposing and designing courses, getting together volunteers to help upkeep courses, playing and running tournaments (granted, mostly sanctioned events), and out promoting the sport and the local club at the local courses. I know these guys and I help them. The PDGA isn't out here trying to get courses put in or going to city council meetings.

I agree, the touring pros benefit the most. Afterall, the P does stand for PROfessional. But if the PDGA fell apart tomorrow most of the tour events would still happen, would they not? Because they are run by local clubs.

my 2 cents,
-mikew

I have posted rarely on these highly entertaining threads, and forgive me all if this question has been answered previously - Why are Pro memberships more than Am memberships? Has anyone answered this question? Do we get anything additional from the PDGA? I would love a cogent (really) response to this (simple) question. Thanks!

I agree, the touring pros benefit the most.


Actually, I doubt the fee increases benefit them much either.


.........................................
Daniel, I've asked this a number of times. Chuck has given some less than persuasive reasons (to me at least), but I've never heard the leadership answer this question.

Chuck stated:

the cost of promotion benefits pros only, therefore they should pay for it.

the disciplinary process costs money. Pros apparently need more discipline than ams.

I'm not sure on this one, but he might have included the cost of subsidizing the NT tour and Pro Worlds.

There might have been others, but I can't recall.


.........................................
I suspect it was included in either a mailout, or in one the newsletters I've received, but I can't find it. Where does one go to renew online?

I suspect it was included in either a mailout, or in one the newsletters I've received, but I can't find it. Where does one go to renew online?



PDGA Pro Shop (http://www.pdga.com/pdga_pro_shop.php)

thanks.

I have posted rarely on these highly entertaining threads, and forgive me all if this question has been answered previously - Why are Pro memberships more than Am memberships? Has anyone answered this question? Do we get anything additional from the PDGA? I would love a cogent (really) response to this (simple) question. Thanks!



Dan, according to the 2006 Budget Summary ( http://www.pdga.com/org/documents/2006/0506FinancialDGWN77.pdf ) looks like $95.5k was spent on the Major/NT Tour. That alone accounts for more than what's brought in with a $25 additional cost of membership for pro. ( 2582 pro men + 194 pro women x $25 = $69,400 ). Plus $61,700 for the Marketing Director (DVD, etc) (most of which would benefit the NT Tour.) That gives us $157,200 that's mostly spent on Pros only, while the extra $25 brought in $69,400.

A lot more money is spent to support the Pro's (although it's mostly the touring pros who benefit, not local pros.) AMs also benefit from the PDGA's spendings too..

I'm not trying to pick sides, but the $25 is justifiable IMHO..I also will say that what's done now by Pros (and what has been done in the past) has major intangible benefits to AMs. Some of us AMs will benefit down the road from what monies put out by current pros (as a barely cashing AM2 player, I know I have a long road ahead..)

I just realized something.

The BOD has tried to lower entry fees for tournaments by giving recomendations on entry fees.

By Texas standards, these were lower entry fees.

The results were that several Texas tournaments lowered there entry fees.

Now they raise up our membership fees????

There is this thing called economics. What i am affraid will happen this year is fewer renewals and fewer new PDGA members. This could negate the increase expected in income.

A smaller increase in fees might not have made any differance, but a large increase might have a negitive effect.

What will remain to be seen is the effect on A-tier events where ALL players have to be members to play.

I know for a fact that there are players who will not play a PDGA event just because of the $8 they would have to pay the PDGA at a B-tier event. (non PDGA members)

(sorry, my computer is acting up, eevery feew words it typess doubles leetteres, it makes it a pain typing)

that is a very good point.

You might have taken some liberty in interpreting those numbers. The PDGA tour line is an aggregate sum of "event sponsorships, Marshals program, insurance policy, Worlds invitations & registration, Tour equipment, TD paypal, and awards." I have no idea of the relative contributions of each subcost, but if broken down, it might not support a thesis that "mostly pros are benefitting."

For example, I have no idea how much insurance is, but it benefits everyone. In fact, it is used by more ams than pros (based on participation). Tour invitations: more are given out to ams. Event sponsorships: what is this?

As to the marketing director line item, it is unreasonable to pin this on pros only. First of all, promotion benefits all disc golfers, not only present and future pros, but current and future ams as well. Disc golf radio: a pro benefit? Disc golf live: what is this? The DVDs: are these only made for and sold to pros?

My suspicion, which has percolated since no actual reasons have been given to fill the void, is that the BoD, made mostly of ams, and if they are in touch with many pros, it is probably of the top class variety, probably honestly thought that the PDGA benefits pros more than ams, and since there is little pro representation on the BoD, the premise was never questioned and debated. That is just my guess. I doubt we will ever know.

You might have taken some liberty in interpreting those numbers. The PDGA tour line is an aggregate sum of "event sponsorships, Marshals program, insurance policy, Worlds invitations &amp; registration, Tour equipment, TD paypal, and awards." I have no idea of the relative contributions of each subcost, but if broken down, it might not support a thesis that "mostly pros are benefitting."

For example, I have no idea how much insurance is, but it benefits everyone. In fact, it is used by more ams than pros (based on participation). Tour invitations: more are given out to ams. Event sponsorships: what is this?

As to the marketing director line item, it is unreasonable to pin this on pros only. First of all, promotion benefits all disc golfers, not only present and future pros, but current and future ams as well. Disc golf radio: a pro benefit? Disc golf live: what is this? The DVDs: are these only made for and sold to pros?

My suspicion, which has percolated since no actual reasons have been given to fill the void, is that the BoD, made mostly of ams, and if they are in touch with many pros, it is probably of the top class variety, probably honestly thought that the PDGA benefits pros more than ams, and since there is little pro representation on the BoD, the premise was never questioned and debated. That is just my guess. I doubt we will ever know.



I did take liberty in interpreting those numbers, but it does make sense. There were 9 Pro Majors and 4 AM Majors..There also were 11 Pro NT Events..PDGA offers stipends for each of these events ranging from $1000-$6000. They also had paid marshalls at these events.

I agree PDGA Radio, Disc Golf World Live, and Worlds DVDs benefit both AMs and Pros, and I support their production, although I don't think any of them are financially "profitable."

I believe the primary focus of the PDGA is to get the Pro Tour and Majors national exposure. This will bring in the sponsors and benefit ALL disc golfers (Pros, Ams, and non-PDGA recreational players.) As such, that's where a majority of the money goes (and justifies a higher fee for Pro Memberships..)

I believe the primary focus of the PDGA is to get the Pro Tour and Majors national exposure. This will bring in the sponsors and benefit ALL disc golfers (Pros, Ams, and non-PDGA recreational players.) As such, that's where a majority of the money goes (and justifies a higher fee for Pro Memberships..)


I wouldn't agree with the first sentence at all, or your conclusion that that is where all the money goes, but nonetheless, if you agree that those "investments" benefit all disc golfers, why should pros pay disproportionately more?

the "purpose" of the PDGA, as defined by the ByLaws is:

1. to promote the development of disc golf as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness;

2. to establish and maintain rules of play and high standards of professionalism, amateurism and good sportmanship;

3. to foster national and international professional and amateur disc golf tournaments and competitions;

4. to communicate event results, opinions, and other information beneficial to the sport via electronic and printed media; and

5. to acheive standardization in the Rules of Play, equipment used for play, tournament formats and all other aspects of the sport of disc golf.

it seems all of these apply to pro and am, dont they?

(i really like the part about "to communicate...opinions...via electronic media" VIVA LA MESSAGE BOARD!!! :D)

Yeah Message Board!!!

In response to James.

Would you not agree that a majority of the $157k is geared to promoting and funding the Pro events? Again, there are only four Am majors but 15 events for Pros (Majors and the NT Events.)

I do not have access to the figures, but I'm inclined to think much more of the money goes towards the collective Pro events, rather than the AM events.

I do not have a problem with the difference between AM and Pro membership fees.

For me, knowing much of the funding goes into these NT and Major is inspiration to elevate my game to competitive levels in Pro.

the "purpose" of the PDGA, as defined by the ByLaws is:

1. to promote the development of disc golf as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness;





It's a bunch of white guys standing around in a park drinking beer (etc. ;)) and then walking 250'. This isn't going to meet the Presidential Fitness requirements we all did back in elementary school.

hmmm, good point .... maybe we are still in the "promotion" and "development" phases? :D

Would you not agree that a majority of the $157k is geared to promoting and funding the Pro events? Again, there are only four Am majors but 15 events for Pros (Majors and the NT Events.)



I have no way of knowing given the nature of the aggregate numbers. Like I said, insurance covers all PDGA events, not just majors, and there are more world invitations to process for ams. The only viable argument I can imagine is that the PDGA kicks in X amount for NTs and Worlds, and feels that all pros should pay that subsidy whether they play those events or not. If this is the case, they should have asked the pro membership first, or make it an optional fee at renewal.

the "purpose" of the PDGA, as defined by the ByLaws is:

1. to promote the development of disc golf as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness;

2. to establish and maintain rules of play and high standards of professionalism, amateurism and good sportmanship;

3. to foster national and international professional and amateur disc golf tournaments and competitions;

4. to communicate event results, opinions, and other information beneficial to the sport via electronic and printed media; and

5. to acheive standardization in the Rules of Play, equipment used for play, tournament formats and all other aspects of the sport of disc golf.

it seems all of these apply to pro and am, dont they?

(i really like the part about "to communicate...opinions...via electronic media" VIVA LA MESSAGE BOARD!!! :D)



i'd like to see one of the statements tweaked to say something like:

to provide a platform for the best professional disc golfers in the world to showcase their talents at sanctioned competitive events; and to sanction competitive events wherein amateur disc golf enthusiasts can display and develop their skills.

we could probably make ^ it ^ more concise and polished though...

(rather than contacting the PDGA privately i'd rather bring it up here and see what others think -- probably we can improve it)

the "purpose" of the PDGA, as defined by the ByLaws is:

1. to promote the development of disc golf as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness;





It's a bunch of white guys standing around in a park drinking beer (etc. ;)) and then walking 250'. This isn't going to meet the Presidential Fitness requirements we all did back in elementary school.



**** shame to think members of the BoD ponied up $50 to cover his membership and he's already painting the sport in a negative light.. tsk, tsk..

Hawk, play Campgaw Mtn. (NJ) in its summer layout (up and down short ski-hill three times per 18 holes) and you'll quickly learn its physical requirements (and I do NOT mean this as a criticism. I love my home course.)

I have no way of knowing given the nature of the aggregate numbers. Like I said, insurance covers all PDGA events, not just majors, and there are more world invitations to process for ams. The only viable argument I can imagine is that the PDGA kicks in X amount for NTs and Worlds, and feels that all pros should pay that subsidy whether they play those events or not. If this is the case, they should have asked the pro membership first, or make it an optional fee at renewal.

[/QUOTE]

Actually insurance is covered by the PDGA for NT and SuperTours (A-tiers) but is $50 for B, C, D-Tiers..

I do agree with you that Pros could have been asked first, but that's why we elect the BoD..to make the decisions on our behalf's (Pros and Ams).

BTW, I'm not saying this because I'm an Am. I'll still support my views when/if I ever turn Pro..

i know some of those numbers, but i am not sure what would happen if i released them. i will ask for permission first.

that caricature is not badmouthing the sport... take a look at most courses and even sanctioned events. while there are some truly demanding courses, disc golf is basically a walk in the park. i'd be surprised if the average round meets the Presidential Fitness requirements we all did back in elementary school. sanctioning one day events makes it even more of a stretch. of course, Members like one day events, so they're prolly a good thing. as a lifelong sport, sure... but disc golf as serious exercise? not so much. nothing wrong with that, but lets not delude ourselves.

in today's terms i think it is a good idea to promote disc golf as an activity that promotes fitness and health -- especially given the average American diet and the amount of time a lot of youth spend at a computer or tv ...

i think we should read Hawk's comment as an attempt at humor -- not a put down of the PDGA. a lot of Mikey's comments too seemed like lampoons but got reacted to as "attacks"

I know his comment was not malicious, but it's an image disc golf is trying to shed. I'm an overweight beer guzzler too, but competing in the sport at the pro level does require significant athletic ability..

If the insurance paid by the TDs at B, C, and D tours covers all the cost and is only $50, then the cost for the NTs and the Majors would be somewhere around $1,000, and not be a significant chunk of the 95.5K.

So, I still don't know what the relative amounts are, BUT, if tour subsidies was the bulk of that item, and the reason pros pay a larger renewal fee, then that cost should be shown in isolation on the budget, or at least presented in some PDGA statement. You know, a statement to the effect of "We, the PDGA have decided to add $90,000 to these tournaments and have decided to foot the bill through higher pro renewal rates."

It's possible that no one but me would have cared, but it is also possible that a lot of people subjected to the fee might have been interested.

the "purpose" of the PDGA, as defined by the ByLaws is:

1. to promote the development of disc golf as a means of healthful recreation and physical fitness;





It's a bunch of white guys standing around in a park drinking beer (etc. ;)) and then walking 250'. This isn't going to meet the Presidential Fitness requirements we all did back in elementary school.



I also take umbridge with this. Come down to Houston and play Wilmont in the summer. It's sort of like education, it's what you make of it.

in today's terms i think it is a good idea to promote disc golf as an activity that promotes fitness and health -- especially given the average American diet and the amount of time a lot of youth spend at a computer or tv ...

i think we should read Hawk's comment as an attempt at humor -- not a put down of the PDGA. a lot of Mikey's comments too seemed like lampoons but got reacted to as "attacks"


The American Heart and several Fitness Associations have established taking 10,000 steps a day for a healthy active lifestyle. Des and I have worn pedometers on many courses around the nation and disc golf courses seem to average between 4,000-6,000 steps in a hour, hour and half round. Plus with short bursts of muscle tension and mental strategy disc golf becomes a pretty easy start to good health. Or at least helps counter balance the other unhealthy activities during some folk's disc golf "exercise".

Oh, and the worse you play or more errant your shots, the more "steps" exercise you are achieving. :o

DGWN is a fine mag, but the fact is, I haven't taken one out-of-the-bag in years.

Now, the PDGA expects me to move out of [the greater part of] North America, just to have the option of saving $20 to renew. That's political Usury.

....the Thanks I get, for providing your Members sanctioned events.......

Now, the PDGA expects me to move out of [the greater part of] North America, just to have the option of saving $20 to renew. That's political Usury.



Lol. I just looked at that. Having German and Swiss citizenship, but living in the US, I might just do that. I am "International" I'll have my mom from Germany, or my brother from Switzerland pay for my membership as a late x-mas gift. I'll have them fill in their address with my name on it. No magazine.....the membership is only $30. And with the exchange rate, that's only like Euro 25.

I should qualify for the $30 membership. If the PDGA wants to increase international membership - I am in. As far as I know, I don't even have to qualify for the Am Worlds. It's good enough if I want to represent Switzerland...and I am in. Right?

Thirty bucks I am sold....

i dont see anything that would prevent such an approach. you might even get the "distance travelled" award at many events!

Oh, and the worse you play or more errant your shots, the more "steps" exercise you are achieving. :o

dats funny! so if i drink more beer and throw worse shots then i am actually increasing the health effects of disc golf! woooohooo! i knew beer was good for something :D

i know My Hero has carried his GPS a lot during rounds... the average round on a course of 5500 feet was coming in at 9000-10000 feet walked if i remember his numbers right.

I'm sure the stress detriment from playing poorly more than outweighs the "extra steps" benefit. :mad:

I'm sure the stress detriment from playing poorly more than outweighs the "extra steps" benefit. :mad:



that's a good point. so the key seems to be not to get stressed out over a bad round -- or -- play great but play with others who are going to make you walk all over the place to get to their lies :eek: :D

<font color="red"> POSTING AGAIN for hawk since he ignored it last time :D</font>




1. It was certainly kind of Pozzy, Dodge, Lyksett, Decker and May (I don't know the last three) to pony up the membership fee. Though Theo and Steve may regret that here on the bored. As I stated before the money itself wasn't an issue, but whether the PDGA is an organization deserving my (and your) support. I believe that question is still up in the air. I don't want to reject the generous offer the boys made, but I also don't want to feel indebted so I would like the five of them to pick a charity and I will send that charity a $50 contribution in their or the PDGA's name. PM or post here what you guys pick.





since you didn't listen to me before when i was trying to help you i doubt you'll do it now...but just in case the holidays made you wiser :D... why not make your donation to the disc golf foundation or the idgc which benefit ALL disc golfers in some way.....


much like some of your posts amuse some disc golfers all of the time

just a thought....

keith johnson #10444


ps... her name is addie and she is a fine lady who the pdga is lucky to have helping them out..

how about at least treating some people who are helpful to you with some kindness once in a while.....

you don't ALWAYS have to be ON for your fans...just my opinion :eek:

Keith,

Addie and Dottie sound a lot alike over a cell phone. Dodge suggested a charity to send the money to, and unless I hear from one of the other boys with a counter proposal that's where it will go.

Your post just wasn't that interesting.

I'm sure the stress detriment from playing poorly more than outweighs the "extra steps" benefit. :mad:

you didnt think i was serious did ya? i'm not a big fan of beer on the course, just to clear that up.

Keith,

Addie and Dottie sound a lot alike over a cell phone. Dodge suggested a charity to send the money to, and unless I hear from one of the other boys with a counter proposal that's where it will go.

Your post just wasn't that interesting.



that's more like the hawk i know :D

I'm sure the stress detriment from playing poorly more than outweighs the "extra steps" benefit. :mad:

you didnt think i was serious did ya? i'm not a big fan of beer on the course, just to clear that up.



Translation: I'm more a crystal meth guy.

hey, gotta get that chem degree working for me somehow, ya know what i mean? :D

so, if that is what we presume you did with a chem degree, you working on the MBA means you are going into what business???

i hear the palestinians are in need of some money management help, so i thought i might go over there, do a little consensus building, and get that mess smoothed over.

To me, $50 from $40 is not the issue. In my industry, fee is only questioned in the absence of value. I have the right to raise my fee. My clients have the right to question my fee. If they feel that I do not provide value to their portfolio as their advisor, then they'll dispute or question my fee.

I love disc golf. I even like DGWN. However, this year I sit on the fence as to whether I'll renew or not.

Does being a PDGA member provide any value to you?

One huge benefit (in my eyes) of the PDGA surfaces whenever a Disc Golfer approaches a City Parks Dept., County official, or other landowner about installing a Disc Golf course. They always want to know more about the sport and it's history, as well as what the sport can offer the landowner. Being able to inform them with documents and other items provided by the PDGA is invaluable. That may not seem like much to the average disc thrower, but to those who are actively trying to advance the sport in their area, it's a BIG bonus.

Does being a PDGA member provide any value to you?



This was my original thrust. Someone like Erick who is only playing a handful or less of events a year can simply pay the $5 extra for non-members. Of course the PDGA's response will be to jack the non-member fee up so that the average number of events played times the fee will be greater than the membership. That's how they think.

Lot's of memberships are simply disguised magazine subscriptions. The Smithsonian Institute, the Audubon Society, and the National Geographic Society are examples. I think the PDGA falls into that same class. Unless you care about ratings, as an Amateur who just plays, it seems to make very little sense to be a member. You will hear that you are,


Showing support for the sport.




Helping the sport grow etc...



This makes the PDGA seem like one of those people standing at red lights with cardboard signs asking for donations.

Pros need to be members to play in the higher tiered events (per PDGA rule ;)) and need a body to resolve disputes during competition.

Not being a fan of the magazine, and disagreeing with much that is done by The Association I began to feel that I didn't really need to be a member and play in Association events. There are enough Z-tiers out there for competitive play.

since your reply seemed to be to me, I'll take the liberty of answering the question.
"Does being a PDGA member provide any value to you?"
Yes...
I actually was given the website address the first time I ever approached a course. If I remember correctly, that was December 2001. I only threw a few holes that day because the person running the mini at the course I visited told me that there was a mini going on and many of the holes were full and the next weekend was a big tournament, VPO. He suggested I go to PDGA.com to learn more about the sport. So, my friend that I went to the course with and I threw a few holes. I went home that Sunday afternoon, looked up the PDGA website, read the rules of the game, printed them off, went to Play-It-Again, bought a few discs -- all too heavy for me -- went back out to the course, from then on alone. Many of the guys at the course introduced themselves to me, helped me out, especially with putting -- I think that is why my putting progressed while my drives are still so lousy. Then I went back to PDGA.com, looked up the rules some more, printed them out and took them with me to the course. It helped me learn how to play the game. Don't you read the rules before you play any game, beginning in elementary school with the board games? Nothing really helped me learn how to throw the discs, except a little bit of help from the people I met at the courses. I looked up the location of another local course on the website. Went with the friend that introduced me to that course, and we played it. There was dead beaver in the creek at Z-Boaz that day that stunk really aweful. That was my most prevelant first Z-Boaz memory.
Later, I became closer friends with some of the people at the course, I noticed the magazine at someone's house. I got the info from there to sign up to become a member. The first tournament I played was the Ice Bowl. I admire the PDGA for organizing and promoting the charitable tournament to benefit a local food bank type charity for all areas. The next tournament I played was a non-sanctioned event (Texas 10) which was also a charitable event. I admire that. Even though it was non-sanctioned, the TD and other players adhered to PDGA rules and support the PDGA. Gave me reason to support the PDGA even more. I have now been playing for about five years. I have been a member the whole time. I met my husband on a disc golf course. He was a PDGA member at the time. We now have a family membership, since we got married at a tournament (non-sanctioned,but supportive of PDGA).
I have ordered discs and minis from one of the disc manufactures on two separate occasions. That company supports PDGA sponsored tournaments. It is my understanding that the people I dealt with at that company are PDGA members. That should influence my decision to continue my membership. Again, withougt PDGA approved discs, people could throw anything and call it disc golf. Without the PDGA rules/regulations, we do not have what we call disc golf.

So, to summarize:
1) PDGA.com -- membership pays for this to be updated, hosted, etc.
2) as a member of other oganizations, it seems only natural to me to become a member of something I want to support. I enjoy disc golf, want it to grow, have witnessed the growth both in players and courses in my area and know that without an organization like PDGA to back it up, the sport could not be growing like this.
3) Tournaments, a great way to test your skills, meet people, etc. without an organization, like PDGA. It would not be organized. Every tournament would be different.
4) the message board...I'm here so often, that alone is worth the price to me :D
5) worlds
6) worldwide reputation, recognition, tournaments, courses -- again presumably with some consistency
7) IDGC in GA -- wow hopefully I can visit there some day.
8) many, many more reasons to support the PDGA that I just can't come up with at the top of my head.
Sure, the PDGA is not perfect.
Sure, there are things I would like to see improved, changed, corrected on all of the areas I am interested in from 1-7, but I evidentally have not wanted to see the improvement enough to donate my time (in my priorities several items have come above disc golf - family, work, a few other organizations to which I belong) otherwise I would be more active in donating time. If you are that upset with PDGA that you do not want to renew, you should consider stepping up and volunteering and changing the organization from within instead. Change best comes from within an organization, not from without it. It may be difficult, it may take time and more money than just a renewal, but if you really want something to change that badly, it may be worth it. If it does not change, then maybe the rest of the membership disagrees with you...or maybe it will just take a little longer, a little more effort, and a lot more patience to make that change happen.
Also, to be honest, I have not sent 2007 fees in for the Q family yet. However, it is sitting next to me at my desk with the water bill and my auto registration renewal. They will be paid as soon as possible. (next pay period is 1/5/07)
BTW, while the PDGA membership may seem steep to some, it is much less than my membership fee to some other organizations to which I belong. ( actually a little more than some of them, also)

Basically, it comes down to if there was no PDGA, there would be no disc golf as we know it today. Although, I realize it all started with Ed Headrick and the PGA. I don't believe either is around any longer. Therefore, PDGA it is.

Pat, I think it would take way more than an MBA to smooth that mess out. Maybe if you gain enough experience and knowledge from PDGA and ADGA, you can go to mid-east and give it a try. I would suggest doing by internet and avoid the upclose face-to-face approach with Palestinian affairs, though, just so we play a round together again some day. ;)

Great Post Laura.

I remember you playing the Athens tournament when you first started out. I thought it was cool for a girl to travel to a tournament on her own. (not a tag along girl friend)

BTW, I sent in my tournament cash and paperwork today. The total for the Carrollton Open came to about $935 in fees. So I rounded it up to $1000 just because.

Because why???? Because I support the PDGA even though I disagree with some things they do.

I received my renewal package today. I really like the PDGA Legacy bag tag included with my tour card. it has my name and PDGA number on it, VERY COOL..

Thx PDGA.

Not too much longer before I get mine :D

I received my renewal package today. I really like the PDGA Legacy bag tag included with my tour card. it has my name and PDGA number on it, VERY COOL..

Thx PDGA.



Sounds Cool .So what else comes with the package beside a Bag tag and the Rule book and Membership Card??

correct me if i'm wrong but the Legacy bag tags are reserved for 20??? year members

I think that is correct.

I am sitting at 17 years as a member (1990)

However, I played my first PDGA tournament in June of 1988

Yes, it's 20 I joined in 1987.

I think that is correct.

I am sitting at 17 years as a member (1990)

However, I played my first PDGA tournament in June of 1988



Exactly the same for me. I joined the PDGA in 1990, but played my first PDGA event in July 1988, and started playing in 1985. When I was on the BoD, I had the strange distinction of being the youngest person on the BoD, yet I also had the lowest PDGA# (5559)

Chap

IT is trure tha Ed isgone His ashese are inthe discs.
But we have to support the pdga jst to keep theses ideas alive. <font color="green"> </font> <font color="green"> </font>

I have a set of Steady Ed ashes discs. Purchased them right after they were available. Only $200 bucks for 2 discs. Steady Ed is in my bedroom

Ahem.

Here's news for the naysayers who spend their time on DISCussion saying that things are bad, the PDGA is broken and needs to be "fixed," its leadership and staff are out of touch, and so forth - including those whose words are aimed at persuading people not to renew:

* In 2006, PDGA membership grew about 20 percent and reached surpassed all previous membership numbers.

* In 2007, right now, the PDGA is more than 25 percent ahead of even last year!

Complain, complain, complain, pick, pick, pick, all you naysayers. Disc golfers are speaking with their dues: renewing and joining in more record numbers.

It's hard to argue with success :DHooray for the PDGA!

Ahem.

Here's news for the naysayers who spend their time on DISCussion saying that things are bad, the PDGA is broken and needs to be "fixed," its leadership and staff are out of touch, and so forth - including those whose words are aimed at persuading people not to renew:

* In 2006, PDGA membership grew about 20 percent and reached surpassed all previous membership numbers.

* In 2007, right now, the PDGA is more than 25 percent ahead of even last year!

Complain, complain, complain, pick, pick, pick, all you naysayers. Disc golfers are speaking with their dues: renewing and joining in more record numbers.

It's hard to argue with success :DHooray for the PDGA!



Terry, that's great news -- thanks for sharing it. Exactly what figures are you using and where did you get them?

Also, do you know what percentage of 2006 members have already renewed?

terry, you confuse naysaying with trying to convey alternative ideas. you have never once clearly responded to any suggestions as to alternative ideas for the direction of the pdga and neither has any BOD member so far as i know, with the possible excepption of pat and steve who you consistently denigrate with negative attitude and comments.

disc golf is taking of because it is fun and possibly the pdga is growing "in spite" of the way it is doing business. clearly you can spout positive numbers, but regardless of those, we have retained less than 1/3 of all people who were ever a member and have 1/25th the members of the american poolplayers association. "Today, the APA, also known as the Canadian Poolplayers Association in Canada, has grown to more than 250,000 members" is it any wonder how they get on espn and we don't. if you are happy wioth 10-15,000 members be prepared to stay in the little leagues in terms of sports. if you want to be a major sport, you need numbers, and clearly we aren;t getting them. and if you think member numbers may not be everything, you may be right. check out this blurb from the american biathlon association which has been on espn way more than disc golf and is ACTUALLY AN OLYMPIC SPORT!! We can't enev get involved woth the fringe X-GAMES!
"The US Biathlon Association (USBA) has been the national governing body for the sport in the United States since 1980. A member-based organization, the USBA now has 18 clubs national-wide, 4 Regional Centers of Excellence, and over 1000 members, who compete in both the winter and summer versions of the sport. The USBA, through the efforts of Marketing director Max Cobb has put biathlon on television in the US. In cooperation with Kent Gordis Productions, the Outdoor Life Network and the IBU, a weekly series of World Cup broadcasts has caught the eye of over 1.7 million viewers. With growing interest in Biathlon, the USBA sees the coming years as a period of continued growth, with more talented athletes vying for podium positions and by hosting increasing numbers of prestigious international events"

(we) have 1/25th the members of the american poolplayers association. "Today, the APA, also known as the Canadian Poolplayers Association in Canada, has grown to more than 250,000 members" is it any wonder how they get on espn and we don't.



Good stats! One other huge hurdle we face however, is that it takes 2-3 cameras and very small production staff to provide a compelling live (or taped) game of pool. It would take enormous effort and cost to produce an equally compelling production of a disc golf tournament.


check out this blurb from the american biathlon association which has been on espn way more than disc golf and is ACTUALLY AN OLYMPIC SPORT!! We can't enev get involved woth the fringe X-GAMES!
"The US Biathlon Association (USBA) has been the national governing body for the sport in the United States since 1980. A member-based organization, the USBA now has 18 clubs national-wide, 4 Regional Centers of Excellence, and over 1000 members, who compete in both the winter and summer versions of the sport. The USBA, through the efforts of Marketing director Max Cobb has put biathlon on television in the US. In cooperation with Kent Gordis Productions, the Outdoor Life Network and the IBU, a weekly series of World Cup broadcasts has caught the eye of over 1.7 million viewers. With growing interest in Biathlon, the USBA sees the coming years as a period of continued growth, with more talented athletes vying for podium positions and by hosting increasing numbers of prestigious international events"



Biathlon is huge in Scandanavia. I am highly doubtful that it got into the Olympics based on the efforts or merit of the USBA. Likewise, it was most likely Biathlon's inclusion in the Olympics that has landed them on TV in the US.

I am on the same page with you in your perception ("terry, you confuse naysaying with trying to convey alternative ideas. you have never once clearly responded to any suggestions as to alternative ideas for the direction of the pdga"), but touting the accomplishments of unsimilar sports' success does not do much in your efforts to exact change for the better.

Ahem.

Here's news for the naysayers who spend their time on DISCussion saying that things are bad, the PDGA is broken and needs to be "fixed," its leadership and staff are out of touch, and so forth - including those whose words are aimed at persuading people not to renew:

* In 2006, PDGA membership grew about 20 percent and reached surpassed all previous membership numbers.

* In 2007, right now, the PDGA is more than 25 percent ahead of even last year!

Complain, complain, complain, pick, pick, pick, all you naysayers. Disc golfers are speaking with their dues: renewing and joining in more record numbers.

It's hard to argue with success :DHooray for the PDGA!



Terry, sometimes healthy skepticism is mis-taken as criticism. Have you factored into your above presentation that offering the less expensive 2006 renewal rate for people renewing by mid-November as well as offering all Pros the opporunity to renew as Amateurs no questions asked may have prompted a rush to renewal?

Also, could you give the actual numbers that are behind your presentation? do you mean we have had 25% more people become PDGA members this month than we did in January 2006? :confused: surely you are not counting Pros who changed their status to amateur as "new" ... (?)

when you don't give the numbers behind the good news it is hard not to be skeptical about the 'good news.' not only that, but i have set the bar high: i want PDGA membership to hit 100,000 in 2007. (i think lowering membership fees and charging a little more in per event fees is the way to accomplish that too).

rob, remember the fee increase convinced some to renew earlier, so a relative increase at this point would seem expected. or, maybe we are witnessing records being set in the sport andthe pdga will have 15,000 Members this year. that would be awesome. but my conclusions at this point and with this info are not as grand as He Who Has Phlegm. simply, great job with Memberships on 06, and the news is hopeful for 07 so lets keep it on track.

according to the most recent minutes (http://www.pdga.com/documents/boardminutes/2007-01-03BODMeetingMinutesApproved.pdf) , the 2006 number was 17.4%. a more precise statement might have claimed "greater than 15%", or even "more than 17%".

it also says "in the first week of january 2007 memberships are 7% ahead of the same time last year." if that refers to only Memberships that arrived during the first week, then thats good news too.

Another couple of thoughts about this apples to oranges comparison of sports.

The American Poolplayers "Association" is not a membership association. It is a privately held company, whose "membership" is a product sold by the owners. It is, to be concise, a database of players who sign up with local bar-owners to play in leagues. It's a totally commercial venture. Their materials state that they are amateur, but with cash prizes. Interesting.

US Biathlon, on the other hand, is a national subsidiary governing organization, under the immediate control of the US Olympic Committee and the ultimate control of the International Olympic Committee. If you want to compete in Biathlon, with a chance to qualify for national, world, and Olympic competitions, you have to belong. There's no "weekend" fee or opportunity for non-members to participate. And along with that goes the agreement that you will submit, at any competition and any venue, including practices, to random drug testing through USADA or WADA. That, along with the fact that the equipment, training, and venue costs run into the many thousands of dollars (skiis, $6-700 per pair; rifle, $2,500 and up; specialized courses that are only open when staffed) and you have a sport that is not much of a 'people's' sport. Add to this the fact that in their events the top three finishers in each division (senior, junior, and youth men and women) get medals, with no other payout, and you have a true amateur sport.

Neither of these examples works with what the reality of disc golf is today, nor will likely become.

The complexities of televising tournament disc golf approach those of traditional golf, in terms of number of cameras, logistics, etc., and with the broad demographic of our player base and the lack of spectators, we don't exactly have what it takes to attract the big money sponsors it would take to pay for such a production. While videos like MSDGC and CoolShots are entertaining and reasonably well done, they wouldn't nearly stand the test of broadcast quality, nor would their content bring in the non-initiated TV viewer that is necessary to satisfy sponsors' needs for numbers. If we were to multiply our membership by a factor of 25 or 50, no matter how, and every member watched a single broadcast, it would still be a miniscule portion of what a sponsor would be looking for.

And no matter what your personal preference is on the "image" side of disc golf, the fact of the matter is that we need to sell the sport to sponsors who have their own idea of what "image" is. Read DaveD's recent post on the parallel thread about drug, alcohol, and tobacco use, for a pretty enlightened view from one of the pioneers of our sport. Maybe once we get General Motors to bankroll our TV production and get us some visibility, we can cast them aside in favor of a more "X-games" type of show, but until then, we need to work a bit on the mainstream side of things.

Again, as I've said before, I'll seriously consider any proposal or idea that is presented, with supporting information, directly to me or the Board. My email is [email protected]

The complexities of televising tournament disc golf approach those of traditional golf, in terms of number of cameras, logistics, etc., and with the broad demographic of our player base and the lack of spectators, we don't exactly have what it takes to attract the big money sponsors it would take to pay for such a production. While videos like MSDGC and CoolShots are entertaining and reasonably well done, they wouldn't nearly stand the test of broadcast quality, nor would their content bring in the non-initiated TV viewer that is necessary to satisfy sponsors' needs for numbers. If we were to multiply our membership by a factor of 25 or 50, no matter how, and every member watched a single broadcast, it would still be a miniscule portion of what a sponsor would be looking for.

And no matter what your personal preference is on the "image" side of disc golf, the fact of the matter is that we need to sell the sport to sponsors who have their own idea of what "image" is. Read DaveD's recent post on the parallel thread about drug, alcohol, and tobacco use, for a pretty enlightened view from one of the pioneers of our sport. Maybe once we get General Motors to bankroll our TV production and get us some visibility, we can cast them aside in favor of a more "X-games" type of show, but until then, we need to work a bit on the mainstream side of things.

Again, as I've said before, I'll seriously consider any proposal or idea that is presented, with supporting information, directly to me or the Board. My email is [email protected]




since ball golf already has the money, cameras, etc., and since the disc golf vs. ball golf events i have heard about and/or witnessed ended up being cool for participants on both sides and also left the unitiated with a great appreciation for disc golf, disc golfers, and the similarity of the two sports -- i think the PDGA should focus on trying to get a ball golf vs disc golf event with some of the very best against the very best for a noteworthy charity. it could be on a ball golf course with the basket to the back/sides of the greens. it would make cool tv, great publicity for our sport, and would help a charity. sponsors might want to get on board or even help organize the thing.

Is ti even worth the effort to respond to these trolls?

Biathlon? The military based sport of cross-country skiing and then stealthily shooting your enemy in the back, sniper style?

dude, biathalon rocks.

but rhett, since we have agreed a few times lately, try not to see the differences in the 2 associations i picked and look for similarities. or pick another association that is more relevant. rather than take the same tack as terry and call me a naysayer, contribute a positive idea.

i think aviar's idea is cool.

i also think that if we lowered fees rather than raising them, we would gain members. how's this of ran idea john. 10$ non-touring membership for the average joe on the course who doesn't play pdga events. they would still pay the non-member 5$ per event, but we would call it the non-tour player fee.

if you go to any course you see dozens if not hundreds of people rool through each weekend, yet only 12,500 or so members? 5 per course? we could do alot better. i'd like to hear from any BOD member as to why we aren't doing better.

i'd like to

dtake the same tack as terry and call me a naysayer



Hmm, I distinctly recall not mentioning any names when I referred to naysayers. Looks to me like you have self-selected. :cool:

way to avoid responding to the actual questions in true BOD form terry.

i also think that if we lowered fees rather than raising them, we would gain members. how's this of ran idea john. 10$ non-touring membership for the average joe on the course who doesn't play pdga events. they would still pay the non-member 5$ per event, but we would call it the non-tour player fee.



I like the idea of a cheaper membership fee for players who don't compete in sanctioned events much, especially if they then still pay the extra $5 when they do. Something like this has been looked at time and time again, but issues arise:

(1) How many people who join the PDGA now and do not compete much, if at all, would then be able to satisfy their need to be PDGA members for $10 instead of $50+? For every one of those the PDGA would then lose $40+ it is getting now.

(2) Even a $10 membership requires dollars, staff, and volunteer time to satisfy the fulfillment of the membership. It still costs money to, if nothing else, maintain their data records in the database. If we also send them anything in the mail, etc., the costs go up. I doubt that even $10 would satisfy the minimum costs in terms of staff time and dollars and that we would be in essence losing money for each one.

We've now got a very nice central office and five (5) full time employees. Any financing/funding/dues changes need to be sustainable in terms of supporting that and other ongoing costs.

If someone thinks they can rapidly build up a membership (not a league or tournament series), nationally or whatever, of disc golfers on an annual dues fee of $10/year, then they should go right ahead and do it. It would be wonderful for the sport no matter who does it - I think the reason the PDGA hasn't is that it would really cost a lot more than that.

For that matter, just try to build up an email list of lots of non-PDGA members. It's hard. I know, in the last two years I was a board member, I built up such a list of 10,000+ non-PDGA members for the PDGA. It wasn't easy, and I didn't even bother with names and addresses, just email addresses, but it was worthwhile. Some of those new members we are getting are joining because of the email communications the PDGA is regularly sending to that list.

If *you* know of non-PDGA member disc golfers, get them to join that list to hear from the PDGA once in a while. They should send an email to "[email protected]" with the word "subscribe" in the Subject line of their message.

way to avoid responding to the actual questions in true BOD form terry.


Actually, the only questions in your post that I quoted from asked Rhett, not me, if he doesn't see lots of non-PDGA members playing disc golf. And asked Jon Lyksett, not me, what he thought of the smaller dues idea. Go ahead, read your own post again and you'll see.

You didn't ask me or the generic readership anything. You also did request to hear comments on your idea from board members. But I am not a board member, remember, that's why I can be so aggressive on here.

Nonetheless, I was composing my next post anyway - giving my opinion on the question you asked board members to respond to, even as you were wroting your erroneous allegation about nonresponsiveness. :D

When you make a false allegation or statement, as you did, and which I corrected, it becomes a part of the fact base of the thread unless it is corrected at once. A lot of words get wasted here trying to correct such lies.

Why don't you just try telling the truth and saying what you mean? Maybe suggest an idea without incorporating a needless and false allegation in the same post?

Terry, if you (or the PDGA) really want to make a numerical case for success, then present all the numbers, not necessarily to win some argument on the discussion board, but as honest feedback that all organizations crave.

Is total membership level all that revealing? I've argued with Chuck for a long time that total membership, or total membership growth is meaningless without comparing it to disc golf as a whole. What is the PDGA membership compared to total disc golfers. What if this is 5% for example. Is that success? What if total disc golf is growing at a higher rate than PDGA memberships? And while you are at it, please use longer term rates of growth, rather than just 2005-2006. Those are inherently more honest and meaningful.

Also, as pointed out by Dr. Evil, what % of members lose interest and leave? This can probably be measured many ways, but from the PDGA management's point of view, an accurate measurement seems incredibly important. It answers the basic question "Are we doing our job in a way where existing members are satistied and wish to remain."

Additionally, in sheer numbers, how do we weigh the enthusiasm of a new member unfamiliar with the organization against the dis-enthusiasm of leaving members. In other words, what is the relative value of opinions: someone who is familiar with the process and has rejected it, or an unfamiliar face who is enthusiastic.

btw. The stats may support that the PDGA is growing faster than disc golf, grabing an increasing portion of new golfers, retaining a successful percentage of existing and long-term members. I don't know. It is impossible to determine from Terry's presentation of one small part of the total picture. The fact that other necesary stats are not enthusiastically presented makes me wonder if I didn't merely hear a sales call.

dude, biathalon rocks.


I absolutely agree with that statement.

But biathlon is so not like disc golf that it make the comparison seem like a troll.

Maybe we should compare cycling. Is there a cycling org similar to the PDGA? I don't know if there is. I'm happy with the state and direction of the PDGA so I won't bother looking that up, but cycling has easy entry for rec players (buy a cheap bike and ride where-ever), upgrade paths for serious rec (buy a revolution bag and CE...er, buy a more expensive bike and ride), pay-to-play organized rides with entry fees, and pro events like the Tour de France for the elite riders.

I think mountain biking and orienteering might be comparable since both require a course. However, mountian biking, just like any alternative skiing activity like biathlon, gets the benefit of the same equipment being used under a broader sports umbrella. If we had stayed with frisbees instead of beveled edge discs, we might actually be a more mainstream sport today than we are because the amount of space for courses would be reduced, layouts would be safer in multi-use areas and the average person could play immediately without buying or learning new equipment.

*** then present all the numbers *** what % of members lose interest and leave? *** other necessary stats are not enthusiastically presented



James, remember, I am not on the PDGA Board of Directors and do not speak for the PDGA. I also do not have access to additional numbers unless I want to spend time - like any member could - getting them from the staff, understanding them, and working with them.

When I was on the board and did work with the numbers - the PDGA's annual renewal percentages were well within what literature published by the American Society of Association Executives considers to be a good rate of renewal and, in fact, nearly identical with my own employer, a very successful 501(c)(3) nonprofit.

Perhaps someone would like to volunteer, we are a volunteer-run organization, after all, to once again, as I did before, work with the past several years' worth of membership data and (a) come up with hard percentages and then (b) compare them to benchmarks from other organizations?

I do not volunteer for this. This is my year to get seriously back into competition. Plus, been there done, that. Things looked good.

Something that a lot of you don't realize. There are TONS of Disc Golfer who will NEVER play a tournament. There are LOTS of Disc Golfers who will play a tournament one time and never play again for various reasons.

We (the PDGA) can not be everything for everybody. There are tons of disc golfers out there that the PDGA is just not for them.

My wife and both son's have PDGA #'s, however they don't play tournaments so I don't renew them. (They all throw occasionally, but only my 5 year old son loves the game)

I guess what I am trying to say is I see your point on trying to get players who only play one or two events a year a membership, however is that what we really need. If you are not a tournament player, a PDGA membership is really not important and not needed.

But as I stated before, I think the membership fee has reached the point of deminishing returns. (the point where you get less current members) But is it at the point where we get less income off membership. (I noticed Membership fees make up most of the income for the PDGA)

Here are some numbers to provide some indication of activity. In 2006, 9703 players with PDGA numbers played at least one rated round (not all of them were necessarily current in 2006). The average number of rated rounds their rating is based on was 15.0 and the median was 11, meaning half of the players played more and half less than 11 rated rounds in a one year time period. I would estimate roughly half of our members saved a minimum of $20 in nonmember event fees.

Just for fun, here are the players with the most rated rounds to produce their December 2006 rating. It's almost a Carolina sweep with MTL leading the way:

<table border="1"><tr><td> Last</td><td>First</td><td>PDGA</td><td>City</td><td>State</td><td>Rounds
</td></tr><tr><td>Leonard</td><td>Robert J.</td><td>21676</td><td>Raleigh</td><td>NC</td><td>109
</td></tr><tr><td>Hofmann</td><td>Mike</td><td>17402</td><td>Raleigh</td><td>NC</td><td>107
</td></tr><tr><td>Sprague</td><td>Chris</td><td>16425</td><td>Springfield</td><td>OR</td><td>104
</td></tr><tr><td>Hatfield</td><td>Coda</td><td>23651</td><td>Oklahoma City</td><td>OK</td><td>103
</td></tr><tr><td>Sauls II</td><td>Travis</td><td>20237</td><td>Columbia</td><td>SC</td><td>102
</td></tr><tr><td>Yoo</td><td>Kirk</td><td>6161</td><td>Knightdale</td><td>NC</td><td>101
</td></tr><tr><td>Slater</td><td>Steve</td><td>23634</td><td>Lemont</td><td>IL</td><td>99
</td></tr><tr><td>Johnson</td><td>Stephen BS</td><td>21066</td><td>Raleigh</td><td>NC</td><td>99
</td></tr><tr><td>Schweberger</td><td>Brian</td><td>12989</td><td>Tarboro</td><td>NC</td><td>97
</td></tr><tr><td>Ogburn</td><td>Eddie</td><td>23102</td><td>Raleigh</td><td>NC</td><td>97
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

"Here's news for the naysayers who spend their time on DISCussion saying that things are bad, the PDGA is broken and needs to be "fixed" this is an exact quote terry. you lum ped us all in as naysayers, including me. thus my statement was neither a false allegation or statement and to further imply later in the sentence it was a lie is rather distateful. whether you are a board member or not, you are more of a divisive influence than any of us every could be. please do don falsely accuse me of lying in the future or i may be forced to take further action. and that's no lie!

"2) Even a $10 membership requires dollars, staff, and volunteer time to satisfy the fulfillment of the membership. It still costs money to, if nothing else, maintain their data records in the database. If we also send them anything in the mail, etc., the costs go up. I doubt that even $10 would satisfy the minimum costs in terms of staff time and dollars and that we would be in essence losing money for each one.
"

if it costs us more than 10$ to mail a sticker/patch and magzine and enter the info into the database, we are in serious trouble. but even if the cost is 15$ or 20$ there should be a rec level of membership and a touring level like we currently have. this would more closely fuflill our organizations's primary purpose of growing the sport of disc golf. more members would obviously help with sponsors, even if they weren't tournament players, much like thewre are tons of usga members, but few who play a pga event. for us to move forward into the mainstream we need to actualize the huge amounts of people i see out there playing on the course in sponsorships and exposure. period..

Ok what is wrong with the $10-$20 membership deal? I mean raise the PDGA fees per event $2 and you will make thew money back if not more.

Kinda like selling gas for $3.00 a gallon and selling 1000 gallons a day which means you get gross $3,000 and Net $1500 after the wholesale price on gas. Now reduce it down $2.00 and everyone in town will want to get some gas and you sell 3000 gallons of gas. You gross $6000 and net $1500 once again. This will also encourage more people to join and if we have 30,000 members instead of 10,000 we may bring in some bigger sponsors who are attracted to our higher membership.

The reduced membership rate would not come with the PDGA disc or magazine. I personally enjoy the magazine but many people do not and dont' really want to have to pay an "included" $20 fee for magazine if the don't have to. Unfortunantly they do and many choose not to join.

All of these hypotheticals don't account for the reality of the current actual financial structure. The Board is not in a position to make a large step change in the membership structure when the current one is sufficiently "successful". The downside risk is too great to just experiment in the hopes it will work. Any new membership proposal must provide incremental income improvement with minimal or no downside risk that could undermine the financial obligations, especially staffers, that have to be met.

All of these hypotheticals don't account for the reality of the current actual financial structure. The Board is not in a position to make a large step change in the membership structure when the current one is sufficiently "successful". The downside risk is too great to just experiment in the hopes it will work. Any new membership proposal must provide incremental income improvement with minimal or no downside risk that could undermine the financial obligations, especially staffers, that have to be met.



Ok so since I have joined the PDGA the amount of PDGA #s has doubled but what i would like to know is has the active members also doubled? If not then I would not say that the PDGA has a suffecient and definantly not an efficient system in place.

"2) Even a $10 membership requires dollars, staff, and volunteer time to satisfy the fulfillment of the membership. It still costs money to, if nothing else, maintain their data records in the database. If we also send them anything in the mail, etc., the costs go up. I doubt that even $10 would satisfy the minimum costs in terms of staff time and dollars and that we would be in essence losing money for each one.
"

if it costs us more than 10$ to mail a sticker/patch and magzine and enter the info into the database, we are in serious trouble. but even if the cost is 15$ or 20$ there should be a rec level of membership and a touring level like we currently have. this would more closely fuflill our organizations's primary purpose of growing the sport of disc golf. more members would obviously help with sponsors, even if they weren't tournament players, much like thewre are tons of usga members, but few who play a pga event. for us to move forward into the mainstream we need to actualize the huge amounts of people i see out there playing on the course in sponsorships and exposure. period..



Ok what is wrong with the $10-$20 membership deal? I mean raise the PDGA fees per event $2 and you will make thew money back if not more.

Kinda like selling gas for $3.00 a gallon and selling 1000 gallons a day which means you get gross $3,000 and Net $1500 after the wholesale price on gas. Now reduce it down $2.00 and everyone in town will want to get some gas and you sell 3000 gallons of gas. You gross $6000 and net $1500 once again. This will also encourage more people to join and if we have 30



Sorry, but true evaluation using the laws of economics requires looking at both changes before reaching a conclusion. You state on one hand that the laws of economics support the premise that lowered membership means more members. But then you state that we should raise PDGA fees, obmitting what the laws of economics would have to say concerning raising PDGA fees per event (by $2.00) and what the overall drop in the number of sanctioned events would be.

In other words, if you raise fees, many TDs will find it more attractive not to sanction the tournament. Simple economics, and if you are going to apply it to one scenario, be sure to do the same for the other before you look at it as a revenue replacement to justify your first premise.

But it's financially successful. That doesn't mean ideas to improve aren't acceptable, just that they need to take the existing scenario into account and not start from scratch with a hypothetically better system that's untested and risky.

If someone thinks they can rapidly build up a membership (not a league or tournament series), nationally or whatever, of disc golfers on an annual dues fee of $10/year, then they should go right ahead and do it. It would be wonderful for the sport no matter who does it - I think the reason the PDGA hasn't is that it would really cost a lot more than that.



Terry, there are positives and negatives to every option -- it's not like the status quo method does not entail negatives. Also, you agree that a smaller membership fee would attract more new members and more retention -- $10 would not have to be the amount. a compromise between that figure and the present amount would be worth consideration too.

how much total revenue was generated last year in fees per participant per event? if we up the fee $1 or $2 we could significantly increase that method of revenue and therefore proportionately decrease the upfront membership fee revenues we feel are necessary to keep the PDGA ship sailing. most of our future members will first join when they are young and in general won't have a lot of discretionary income, so we should try not to weed them out. in other words, it is easier for people without a lot of income to pay a few dollars more per event they enter than to come up with $50 for membership when they have non-sanctioned options to play instead. They may be people who later will give a lot to our association if we reel them in when they are forming their interests.

have we looked at ways we could decrease PDGA expenditures? using computerized automatic membership processing and other virtual tools for things like summits might save a lot in travel and staff expenses.

it seems top me the goal should be to get the membership large enough to attract sponsors and look to bring in revenue that way -- not by cannibalizing ourselves ;)

Again, there is neglect in making the 'We can raise fees to make it up' argument without considering the economic consequence of what percentage of TDs would then consider not sanctioning their tournament.

Again, there is neglect in making the 'We can raise fees to make it up' argument without considering the economic consequence of what percentage of TDs would then consider not sanctioning their tournament.



Hopefully the raised fees won't be needed to make up for anything as the increased amount of members should be able to do this.

Even if some events decided to be not sanctioned what percentage do you think that would be? I don't think that many events would and in reality you do not need to raise the PDGA fee per event because it was just acting as a cushion for the PDGA revenue. Most events lose players when they choose not to sanction and I think that they would rather santion and pay the higher fee then not and loose ten players or more.

The main thing is that the PDGA needs to find a big sponsor and until the membership grows we will probably not find one. The fact that the dues are going up will discourage memebers from joining resulting in fewer members. If we lower dues more players will likely jion resulting in a larger membership base with a higher probability of getting a big sponsor.


We need to work along our economic efficiency frontier which will get the most members with the lowest opportunity cost.

But your point was even if we lose money or overall revenue on the reduced $10-$20 membership, we could get it back in increased per event fees. And although stated as so, it is not fact in itself.

Based on some of the comments I see here, I would say that the percentage of tournaments that wouldn't sanction would be substantial.

Again, there is neglect in making the 'We can raise fees to make it up' argument without considering the economic consequence of what percentage of TDs would then consider not sanctioning their tournament.



Are you serious? If the entry fee to a tournament is $60 to $100 you think the PDGA asking an extra $1 or $2 per entrant is a deterrent to sanctioning? it is such a small percentage of the entry fee that i have to think there must be other reasons the TD's would prefer non-sanctioning their event (mandated payout percentages, etc.) and this is just the straw breaking the came's back. :confused:

We already know the fees are relevant. Otherwise the lower fees of the SN series wouldn't be as attractive and they might sanction more PDGA events.

Matt, my 5 year old son is PDGA #19100, he is one of the members who joined when they were born (I know of several others who have done the same thing) There is zero reason for me to keep his membership active. When he and if he ever starts to play tournaments, then I will renew him.

Matt, my 5 year old son is PDGA #19100, he is one of the members who joined when they were born (I know of several others who have done the same thing) There is zero reason for me to keep his membership active. When he and if he ever starts to play tournaments, then I will renew him.



The reduced fee would be used to encourage players who participate in one or two events a year to join. Also maybe it would be a lot easier to retain players because they will see a $20 membership a lot more reasonable then a $50 one.

oh yea, one more point you are not considering matt, if you lower fees and get more memberships, it cost you more to take care of those members. So if we use your 1000/3000 numbers to make $1500, think of the work those 2000 extra members would take, you would now be paying overtime or hiring new staff. Now you have to raise fees again to pay for it.

We already know the fees are relevant. Otherwise the lower fees of the SN series wouldn't be as attractive and they might sanction more PDGA events.



apply the same logic to the annual cost of PDGA membership. if we lower annual membership rates PDGA membership will be more attractive and we'll get more people signing up / renewing. the problem is that if we want to cast a wide net and get every young potential athlete out there into disc golf and the PDGA -- we need to set membership fees at a cost even low income kids/families can afford. or have some sort of cheaper junior and student membership at least... a large membership is the key to leveraging sponsors and moving out of the scenario where we are playing for each other's money as our purse

oh yea, one more point you are not considering matt, if you lower fees and get more memberships, it cost you more to take care of those members. So if we use your 1000/3000 numbers to make $1500, think of the work those 2000 extra members would take, you would now be paying overtime or hiring new staff. Now you have to raise fees again to pay for it.



What do the members require? I am not trying to troll but what do the staffers have to do? I know that they have to process new members and members who are renewing(this is easier for online reg), they have to answer questions when a member calls the office, they have to give players ratings, and they have to give the members points.

The other things like E-mails and such shouldn't effect anything since it is sent to all members with one button. After you enter the members into the database there shouldn't be too much more.

Also the $1-$2 increase in PDGA fees would take care of this.

oh yea, one more point you are not considering matt, if you lower fees and get more memberships, it cost you more to take care of those members. So if we use your 1000/3000 numbers to make $1500, think of the work those 2000 extra members would take, you would now be paying overtime or hiring new staff. Now you have to raise fees again to pay for it.



the cost per member for such services should go down the more members you have. for example -- it is cheaper per item to print 200,000 magazines than it is to print 9000.

Again, there is neglect in making the 'We can raise fees to make it up' argument without considering the economic consequence of what percentage of TDs would then consider not sanctioning their tournament.



Are you serious? If the entry fee to a tournament is $60 to $100 you think the PDGA asking an extra $1 or $2 per entrant is a deterrent to sanctioning? it is such a small percentage of the entry fee that i have to think there must be other reasons the TD's would prefer non-sanctioning their event (mandated payout percentages, etc.) and this is just the straw breaking the came's back. :confused:



Yes I am serious. It has nothing to do with how much the players are paying. It has to do with how much the TD is sending to the PDGA, and his/her impression that value is coming from it. There are countless posts where TDs have expressed concerns over the fees they send to the PDGA for a given tournament. Increase these, and they will now have a bigger number to consider, and will have a bigger reason to explore other options. Have you missed some of the posts from the SN TDs or the IOS TDs?

To make the assumption that increased event fees won't result in a decrease in sanctioning totally ingnores basic economic behavior. Seriously.

Also the $1-$2 increase in PDGA fees would take care of this.



This is not fact, and stating it as so doesn't change that. You are omitting basic economic principles while trying to make the same argument on another aspect of the equation (the effect lowering membership fees has on the overall membership numbers).

Again, there is neglect in making the 'We can raise fees to make it up' argument without considering the economic consequence of what percentage of TDs would then consider not sanctioning their tournament.



Are you serious? If the entry fee to a tournament is $60 to $100 you think the PDGA asking an extra $1 or $2 per entrant is a deterrent to sanctioning? it is such a small percentage of the entry fee that i have to think there must be other reasons the TD's would prefer non-sanctioning their event (mandated payout percentages, etc.) and this is just the straw breaking the came's back. :confused:



Yes I am serious. It has nothing to do with how much the players are paying. It has to do with how much the TD is sending to the PDGA, and his/her impression that value is coming from it. There are countless posts where TDs have expressed concerns over the fees they send to the PDGA for a given tournament. Increase these, and they will now have a bigger number to consider, and will have a bigger reason to explore other options. Have you missed some of the posts from the SN TDs or the IOS TDs?

To make the assumption that increased event fees won't result in a decrease in sanctioning totally ingnores basic economic behavior. Seriously.



so i enter a tourney where the entry fee is $70 and the PDGA gets $2. Next year they bump it up a dollar. The TD is still going to charge the same entry fee and that extra $1 will simply come out of the payouts (aka: the purse), and with the way we round off payouts anyways it really will be almost unnoticeable to anyone except the PDGA gets more revenue. if you re-read my response above, i am not disregarding the other posts, i am saying there is something more behind the resistance to sanction some series and it probably isn't simply about the fees, though that is the tip of the iceberg protuding to the surface.

Do you TD events and begrudge sending the PDGA the fees? :confused: or is the logical extension of your so-called economic argument that we should have no per-event PDGA fees at all?

Also the $1-$2 increase in PDGA fees would take care of this.



This is not fact, and stating it as so doesn't change that. You are omitting basic economic principles while trying to make the same argument on another aspect of the equation (the effect lowering membership fees has on the overall membership numbers).



Ok you keep saying the same thing but this organization has already gone in the wrong direction by raising the membership fees and the PDGA has also decreased its possible number of members who will join and possible sposors at the same time.

Like I said there will probably be a very very small amount of events that will find the $1-$2 increase large enough to make them keep it unsanctioned. For example, let's say that an event normally has 100 entrants so $500 goes to the PDGA fees (in an increased fee system) right? Now if they unsanction it they will likely lose 20 entrants. If the event had 100 players at an avg entry fee of $50 then event has $4500 after PDGA fees to use for merch , cash, insurance, etc. Now if they don't have those 20 guys they have $4000 to use as payout without the PDGA fees.

That actually looks like the guy is getting $5 per player more when the event is unsactioned right? So then why would he want to sanction the event? Well let's suppose they are all AMs and they are getting $8 discs for $16 in both events. So they are getting rid of $9000 in merch for $4500 in the sanctioned event while the unsanctioned is getting rid of $8000 merch for $4000. The sanctioned has grossed $500 more for that event then the unsanctioned and thus the two events made just as much $$$ and the incentives should remain the same for both.

If the event included pros then it would make even more sense to sanction it because if you do not you would have a lot of Ams stepping up which would reduce the amount of $$$ you could get from the merch and use towards all the resources needed to run the event.

I do not TD nor would begruge sending the fees to the PDGA. But I do hear the argument against it, both in my area and on this board. So do you if you think about it.

My point has nothing to do with whether we have fees, reduce fees, increase fees or multiply them tenfold. My point is that any of these actions will have certain results and these results have to be considered. Its basic economics, and its not 'so called'.

I do not TD nor would begruge sending the fees to the PDGA. But I do hear the argument against it, both in my area and on this board. So do you if you think about it.

My point has nothing to do with whether we have fees, reduce fees, increse fees or multiply them tenfold. My point is that any of these actions will have certain results and these results have to be considered. Its basic economics, and its not 'so called'.



okay, but then basic economics also says that if we decrease membership costs it will be more attractive, and also that raising fees $1 per event will proportionately seem tiny, yet it will bring more revenue to the PDGA.

yes, higher per event fees have some drawbacks, but there are also drawbacks to having higher membership fees and lower per event fees: namely a smaller PDGA membership. However keeping things the way they are does have that formidable barrier erected around it: the high and mighty Status Quo. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif :D

"Today, the APA, also known as the Canadian Poolplayers Association in Canada, has grown to more than 250,000 members" is it any wonder how they get on espn and we don't.


"The US Biathlon Association (USBA) has been the national governing body for the sport in the United States since 1980. A member-based organization, the USBA now has 18 clubs national-wide, 4 Regional Centers of Excellence, and over 1000 members, who compete in both the winter and summer versions of the sport. The USBA, through the efforts of Marketing director Max Cobb has put biathlon on television in the US.



Curiously I've never noticed any of the players (http://www.billiardspress.com/bca2003allison.jpg) running off into the stands in the middle of a match to grab a little weed, and I figure these guys (http://library.thinkquest.org/J002862/media/graphics/biapic.jpg) probably have some strict rules about that since firearms are involved.

that raising fees $1 per event will proportionately seem tiny, yet it will bring more revenue to the PDGA.



I strongly disagree with this statement. It has no basis in fact.

As Tkieffer keeps pointing out, raising the per player fee at events can and will have a direct effect on whether events sanction or not. If events do not sanction the PDGA stands to lose much more money than they will gain. Even if events only sanction "down" a tier (go from A-tier to B-Tier and so on) the PDGA stands to lose a great deal of revenue.

Case in point: If the So Cal Championships decided not to sanction as PDGA event this year, the PDGA could lose the $978.00 we paid last year in fees and sanctioning costs. This event could sell out with or without PDGA sanctioning. I am sure there are other events around the country that could also say the same. How many new events will it take to replace the revenue from this one PDGA event? From 5 PDGA events? From 100 events?

Sure a TD can collect this extra dollar from the players, but if the TD doesn't think it is a good value to send the money to the PDGA in the first place, they can easily collect the extra buck and put it in the payout.

I know for a fact that there are already events that sanction "down" to C &amp; D-tier to avoid the additional player fees imposed on A &amp; B-tier events. If the So Cal Championships sanctions as a C instead of a B this coming year the PDGA will lose $283.00. The PDGA already lost $283.00 and $198.00 each of the past two years because the event was purposely not sanctioned as a A-tier.

This idea to raise player fees $1.00 may sound good on paper, but when the PDGA can stand to lose from $198 to $1,000 from just one event's decision to sanction down or not sanction at all, it is time to realize the risk of raising the per player fee is probably much greater than any potential or actual gain.

I have provided some basic reasons WHY this is not a good idea. Can the proponents of this increase supply some type of figures to back up their claims it will increase revenue?

i'm with discette and tkeiffer on this one. raising event fees MIGHT not have a negative affect, but they sure COULD have a big one. anyime you increase the cost, you force people to reevaluate their purchases. increases can lead to substitution... whether that means sanctioning down, going no-sanction, or taking in a movie instead of playing a tournament depends on the particulars, but raising prices extremely rarely increases the potential customer base.

similarly, small decreases do not always result in increased sales and reveneues. the decrease needs to be big enough to make a difference to the purchaser. if $30 is too much for an indivudual, then lowering a fee from $53 to $51 is not going to alter his behavior.

i'd rather see us focusing on cost controls, improving efficiencies via technology, and enhancing the perceived value of Membership and sanctioning than trying to wrestle the last but of cash possible out of a players wallet.

i'd rather see us focusing on cost controls, improving efficiencies via technology, and enhancing the perceived value of Membership and sanctioning than trying to wrestle the last bit of cash possible out of a players wallet.



While I don't often see eye-to-eye with Pat, the above statement gets my vote as the most sensible, intelligent and informed post by a PDGA BOD member, ever!!!!

Pat - when you find out how to enhance the perceived value of membership, please pass the information on the those of us that try to do that for our local clubs and organizations.

when you find out how to enhance the perceived value of membership, please pass the information on the those of us that try to do that for our local clubs and organizations.



I think a lot of times percieved value of membership is lost because we have to do nothing more that cough up 50-75 bucks annually to become a member. Now if you actually had to earn membership status , members would hold a higher regard for fellow members, because they earned the right to be there. A badge of honor. Perhaps make it mandatory that
to become a member ( on top of your fee ) you must complete an 8 hour workday @ a local disc golf course / facility.
Keep a certified official on hand to document attendee's , and time spent. At worst , you put in your time, pay the money and you are a member. Think about how much we could get done as a commuinty of disc golfers, acting together.
Courses would be well kept, new courses would be built, and it would shine a spotlight on the disc golf community's efforts for the surrounding community. Logistically , it would be a pain in the arse. When you look @ a fellow member and know that his blood, sweat, or tears were shed on the same golf course as yours, a bond will form. That bond equals value , of which only a member can share. Call me crazy, but if we had 10,000 members that put in 8 hours of work for the sake of disc golf , the world would be a better place . THINK ABOUT IT !

i didn't realize that some tournaments really wrestle with not sanctioning over the small PDGA fees that come out of the per participant entry fee -- i have always looked at it as a way to support the PDGA and the sport i love. in fact while i would rather see entry fees lowered at least 33%, i would have no problem with paying $5 in PDGA fees per event to help make annual membership cheaper as a means of appealing to a greater number of disc golfers out there and having them join. i'd like to say to Nike or whoever we are an association with 250,000 members (consumers)... :confused:

i also agree with Pat's point that curbing expenditures by making better use of technology is a great direction in which to look.

PS: i realize emulating Hawk in terms of the thread title might not be applauded by everyone, but i couldn't resist...

rob, i suspect a TD is thinking something like this... "hmmm, i can charge $50 entry, but then $3 goes to the PDGA plus i pay whatever for sanctioning.... hmmmm... if i can figure out how to fly unsanctioned, i can provide $4-5 per player to the payout, or add a couple Jacksons to my profits."

purely from this player's perspective, i have seen non-sanctioned events rise in quality to approach or equal sanctioned events... particularly now that our dedicated TDs have a decade or more experience. If players demand sanctioningm, for ratings and points and whatever other reasons, the TD might go along with it. but given two equally wonderful events, some players will choose bigger payout over points and ratings - especially Ams. when was the last time points truly mattered for anything significant in the Am scene?

i didn't realize that some tournaments really wrestle with not sanctioning over the small PDGA fees that come out of the per participant entry fee -



It is interesting to note that $283.00 or even $978.00 is a small PDGA fee where you come from. Where I come from the $283.00 we did not have to send to the PDGA by sanctioning down one tier was not considered a small fee.

when was the last time points truly mattered for anything significant in the Am scene?




It still means enough and it's on the way to meaning more. Our forecast is that over 800 people might want to play the Am Worlds this year based on how far people came to Tulsa and how many more members are closer to Milwaukee. With growth mostly in the AM ranks, points will be very important for Worlds and potentially other majors like Am Nats.

i didn't realize that some tournaments really wrestle with not sanctioning over the small PDGA fees that come out of the per participant entry fee -



It is interesting to note that $283.00 or even $978.00 is a small PDGA fee where you come from. Where I come from the $283.00 we did not have to send to the PDGA by sanctioning down one tier was not considered a small fee.



When you set an entry fee knowing you will have each entrant pay $3 for the PDGA fees, you simply up the entry fee -- it's not like you don't find out you are expected to collect $2 or $3 from each entrant to go to the PDGA until you already have a big pile of cash from all the entrees in front of you :p

so anyone who goes to Bowling Green can play worlds, and those woh dont cant... or at least have some serious catchup to do :D

The Bowling Green massive points "problem" is being addressed by the Comp Comm.

rob, i suspect a TD is thinking something like this... "hmmm, i can charge $50 entry, but then $3 goes to the PDGA plus i pay whatever for sanctioning.... hmmmm... if i can figure out how to fly unsanctioned, i can provide $4-5 per player to the payout, or add a couple Jacksons to my profits."

purely from this player's perspective, i have seen non-sanctioned events rise in quality to approach or equal sanctioned events... particularly now that our dedicated TDs have a decade or more experience. If players demand sanctioningm, for ratings and points and whatever other reasons, the TD might go along with it. but given two equally wonderful events, some players will choose bigger payout over points and ratings - especially Ams. when was the last time points truly mattered for anything significant in the Am scene?



in this area (Cincinnati), we have weeklies, monthlies, and PDGA's. the PDGA's trump the others in terms of payout (and per entrant cost) and in the sense that they provide tougher competition and are more formal and since they yield ratings as well as results which get posted at PDGA.com and partially in the DGWN. but if there are events in your area that are successful without the PDGA fees and membership requirements -- i guess that does indeed warrant considering not increasing fees (and membership costs)...

then again i am just posting on DISCussion and not a BoD member like suuuumbody /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif :p :D

Let me point out another fee that the So Cal Championships is forced to pay so you don't see this one $283.00 expenditure as something I can easily collect by raising the entry fees charged to players. The Championships paid the County of Los Angeles $728.00 in park fees in 2005 and we paid $1025 in 2006. This money comes out of the fees I collect from players and cannot go to payout. The less I have to pay the PDGA, the less I have to collect from my players.

This is just ONE real world situation where a tournament is sanctioning down to save money. I could sanction down even more and save even more money to go to payment of the outrageous park fees. Yes, it would be cool to host the Championships at another venue, but there are no other dual 18 courses here in So Cal.

I certainly do like to support the PDGA. I just wanted to point out the flaw in your logic that I can simply raise entry fees to pay these additional fees.

It's not that simple. The $750 that a successful IOSeries event sends to the PDGA is a $750 line item on the expense side [four or five line items actually, but anyway]. At the end of a tournament Jon has to walk away with that money and then send it to the PDGA. If we don't make $750 for the clubs and schmoes running the tournament, it makes us wonder why the PDGA should make $750.

We don't make $750, either. We wonder every time.

That number does not need to go any higher.

we have the luxury here of not having park fees assessed by the County, but i still think you are taking for granted the membership fee which i was trying to offset by per entrant fees. Players might be more okay with $1 more per event if their memebrship fees were substantially reduced. Also, all of us are paying members -- i am trying to incline all of the disc golfers out there who are not PDGA members to join, and lower membership fees seem one great way to do it. if you look at all the discs that are sold each year -- what percentage are bought by PDGA members, and how can we get that percentage to go up? if it goes up substantially, finding sponsors will become easier and the extra fees might not seem so bad...

maybe another idea worth considering is a smaller introductory year's membership for new PDGA players to help them get their feet wet (aka: get addicted) :D

Suzette, I think with more and more pay-to-play courses getting used for PDGA events, "greens fees" will become a more common part of the entry fee process that players expect. In your case, I would start identifying the park fees as "greens fees" that run $5 per player. When looked at this way, it's not too bad to get two rounds a day for $5 or $1.25 a round in a 4-rounder. If you ran a miniature golf event, you would expect to pay $3-$5 a round.

How do I decide? I look to the person in our local DG scene that I respect the most. In my opinion, this person does an astounding amount of work to get new courses put in, TD tournaments, run our local club, and help junior players in our area. He renews, so I renew.

nanook

Chuck, as more and more pay2play course get used, the pressure on fees will increase. one does not justify the other. instead, a city-imposed fee is a lot more "mandatory" than a PDGA fee. regardless of where the fee comes from, it causes players to consider alternatives. some of us dont give a crap about miniature golf, but we might want to keep those extra 5 bux so our kid can ride the carousel at the mall a coupla times.

My point is that players will be getting used to the fact that it's not "free" to play in disc golf events in terms of expecting 100% payback based on the total entry fee they paid. It wasn't "free" in past but it seemed that way because TDs wouldn't take any compensation and in fact many times added cash from their own pocket. I believe those days are coming to a close and fees will become a regular part of the landscape like it already is in several areas. Hopefully, increses in sponsor contributions will help offset this so events are still a good value for players.

i hope so too. someone's gonna have to pick up the costs, or we're gonna find our cost structures a little bit ahead of the times.

After much soul-searching I have decided not to renew this year. The reasons are numerous and mostly subjective. I believe that in general the PDGA will continue to be force for much good in our sport, but I feel my resources, time and talents can be better used to promote disc golf under the Southern National model.

Thanks to all who have provided constructive criticism to ideas I have voiced here and who have labored hard to promote disc golf on all fronts, PDGA and otherwise.

I'm going to renew eventually, which means I'll be re-joining, I guess. Right now the priorities are elsewhere.

Prove your value. What have you done to benefit the PDGA since having your membership renewed?
-drunkentroubadour
today




Quality entertainment baby. However you miss the point. I don't have to prove my value to the PDGA. They, as a business wanting me as a customer, have to prove their value to me. They had failed to do so when I first put this thread up, and have continued to not impress me since several BOD members ponyed up money to keep me here. Of course that could have been a secret way to get a Diabetes Association contribution from me. As a member of the Association the only thing I can do to really make a dent in their way of thinking is to deny them my business. Since 80% of the Association revenue comes from memberships and tourney related fees; by not continuing to blindly march in lockstep with their vision via my participation in their Association or by playing their sanctioned events, can I and others make our opposition felt. Obviously I am one of the few willing to do this, but if enough players eventually walked away and adopted a Z-tier lifestyle the hierarchy may then be forced to react. The fact that the Association has been unable to convert so many Z-discers into members is a damning indictment on the organization as a whole. At this place and time the Association won't even sanction an event if some TD tries something progressive like running a ratings based tourney.

They, as a business wanting me as a customer, have to prove their value to me.



Perhaps that's the message you haven't gotten. It's a non-profit where members provide much of the benefits with the hope that every member will provide some value to the organization. Although for most, it's their support with dues and fees which we still appreciate.

chuck, that really sounds like you are saying its all about extracting money from Members. no wonder some players are confused about exactly what they get in return.

chuck, that really sounds like you are saying its all about extracting money from Members. no wonder some players are confused about exactly what they get in return.



I'm not sure that's what Chuck said. No wonder some members are confused.

On the other hand, I think Hawk's position is an interesting one. So Hawk, what services/benefits do you think are warrented by our cost structure? What are you looking for? BTW - anyone else who is interested, by all means comment.

What is it that the PDGA should be providing?

its all about extracting money from Members.


Well Pat, that's pretty true. It doesn't matter how much people volunteer, the only way to have paid employees in a non-profit organization is from dues and fees. I'm sure the paid employees appreciate dues and fees much more than volunteer work.

In the association world, there is one categorization of member motivations that has "what's in it for me" (WIIFM) at one end of the axis and "I support the good work" (ISTGW) at the other.

The best kind of members for an association to have are the ISTGW members. What happens when you overbalance toward the WIIFM members is that you end up with an increasingly demanding, voracious membership that wants "things" from the association.

You know, kind of like our situation with Am tournaments where some players expect heavy payouts.

We're lucky that the vast majority of PDGA members are of the ISTGW variety, as proven by hard-working TDs and other volunteers, as well as by past surveys.

Maybe there's room out there for a disc golfers' association that is primarily WIIFM members. I wish it well. I would even join it, also, and [I]Support That Good Work. :cool:

Good post Terry. Sometimes it's hard to seperate the 2 types. Take churches for example. Most people join churches and tithe because of ISTGW. However, many outside the church (and at the top), view it as WIIFM. THis is analogous to our organization. Most local clubs survive, grow, and prosper based on the ISTGW crowd. However, on the broader scope, many people value the PDGA as WIIFM. If the cost outways the percieved benefit, most of the WIIFM won't join and you will have mostly ISTGW. I think its important to find the balance between the 2. We don't want to look like so many "money grubbing" churches where all they do is ask for money and the preacher has a $1million+ salary.
I think many of the WIIFMers "percieve" that the PDGA wastes money. For example, I've heard many times that people don't want the magazine, don't care about the marshall program, don't care about worlds, etc.
One way to solve this is by having regional memberships that vary in price because it seems as though many of the benefits of the PDGA are locationally biased.
Why would an AM in South Dakota care about the Marshall Program, Worlds, USDGC, IDGC, etc.? This limits us to only vary committed ISTGWers.

That's a good point that members can have mixed motivations. Someone who would pay the Ace Club membership, no matter what the bennies are, still likes to get the right kind of shirt.

I'm not gonna argue in any detail against regionally-based membership fees except to say that the logistical and administrative costs are likely to outweigh any benefits, not to mention the political nightmare of establishing those regions and the varying rates! :D

I think some of the recent changes are providing some WIIFM stuff that even the most ISTGW members like: better membership cards, the bag-tags for long-term members, and so forth. Other things I would like to see are small disc-shaped window stickers so that players can put one on their windshield for each sanctioned event they play (kind of like Air Force Aces painting airplanes on their fuselages). In the years when I played 12-15 events a year, it would've been cool to have those displayed!

As for the magazine, I think that's a Catch-22 situation. I think that by allowing some members to opt out, we would still be unlikely to reduce much of the cost to the PDGA, because I don't think that the Disc Golf World publisher makes enough money (profit) as it is to be able to continue regular publishing if the roughly 25 percent of members that said in the surveys they would select that option did so. I could be wrong. However, I am basing that on what would certainly be the case for my own employer-organization. We've looked into it, and if 25 percent of our members were allowed to opt out and paid proportionately lesser dues, we would not be able to continue publishing it - and we do it entirely in-house.

In the end, since despite some who posture otherwise, we have a representative form of governance, and we entrust our elected board members to have the good sense to not waste our money, at least most of the time.

Myself, I've never understood or appreciated the National Tour (I think it's premature.) although I respect the opinions of others who do, and voted on occasion to support it when I was on the board of directors.

Even some other things that we sometimes assume would obviously be good for members - such as huge outside sponsorship dollars or entrance into the Olympics for disc golf - may not look so great upon deeper examination. I've had the privilege of serving on the volunteer group which recently made recommendations to the current board about the candidates for PDGA executive director. (Not exactly a WIIFM exercise!) Some of the questions we asked them, to see how the candidates think on their feet, involved such hypotheses as the ones I just mentioned, and the responses were enlightening. Whoever the board selects is *good* - we had a great crop of candidates and finished with nothing but good choices.

chuck, that really sounds like you are saying its all about extracting money from Members. no wonder some players are confused about exactly what they get in return.



I'm not sure that's what Chuck said. No wonder some members are confused.

On the other hand, I think Hawk's position is an interesting one. So Hawk, what services/benefits do you think are warrented by our cost structure? What are you looking for? BTW - anyone else who is interested, by all means comment.

What is it that the PDGA should be providing?



Lyle,

To keep someone like me interested the PDGA has to provide a legitimate competitive structure. The fact that I'm currently eligible to play in four divisions is absurd. The competitive aspect of The Association is watered down to a ridiculously embarassing level.

The PDGA has to get serious about the drug use among players during tournaments. The "sport" won't grow on a sponsorship level ($33,500 in 2006 revenue vs. $714,000 in member dues and tourney fees) until it's clean enough to crawl out from underneath it's "athletic" rock.

The PDGA needs to stop supporting a magazine. I'd like to know how much of that $154,000 went to pay for Disc Golf World.

I can play in Z-tiers with more interesting and legit structures (last weekend three divisions Gold-Silver-Bronze) at less cost, and I know I'm going to see illicit conduct, but at least no ones trying to pretend to be professional. Just dudes in the park.

Rich and I were chatting about this issue this morning, and we both agreed that the PDGA like the Cannibis Flyers or just about any club anywhere shakes you down for dues and when questioned about what one actually gets in return the best answer is usually:


Think of it as supporting the sport.



That means... (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=659828&Main=601579#Post659828)

In the association world, there is one categorization of member motivations that has "what's in it for me" (WIIFM) at one end of the axis and "I support the good work" (ISTGW) at the other.

The best kind of members for an association to have are the ISTGW members. What happens when you overbalance toward the WIIFM members is that you end up with an increasingly demanding, voracious membership that wants "things" from the association.

You know, kind of like our situation with Am tournaments where some players expect heavy payouts.

We're lucky that the vast majority of PDGA members are of the ISTGW variety, as proven by hard-working TDs and other volunteers, as well as by past surveys.

Maybe there's room out there for a disc golfers' association that is primarily WIIFM members. I wish it well. I would even join it, also, and [I]Support That Good Work. :cool:



Hot Tub,

You can't expect all the members to support the "good work" when they are opposed to the direction the "good work" is heading and when other good work needs are being ignored.

the PDGA has to provide a legitimate competitive structure. The fact that I'm currently eligible to play in four divisions is absurd.



On this point I agree one thousand percent.

I agree.

I think its rediculous that b/c I have some talent and I'm young I can only compete in 1 division yet older people who aren't as talented can compete in many.

Just absurd.

chuck, that really sounds like you are saying its all about extracting money from Members. no wonder some players are confused about exactly what they get in return.



I'm not sure that's what Chuck said. No wonder some members are confused.

On the other hand, I think Hawk's position is an interesting one. So Hawk, what services/benefits do you think are warrented by our cost structure? What are you looking for? BTW - anyone else who is interested, by all means comment.

What is it that the PDGA should be providing?



Lyle,

To keep someone like me interested the PDGA has to provide a legitimate competitive structure. The fact that I'm currently eligible to play in four divisions is absurd. The competitive aspect of The Association is watered down to a ridiculously embarassing level.

The PDGA has to get serious about the drug use among players during tournaments. The "sport" won't grow on a sponsorship level ($33,500 in 2006 revenue vs. $714,000 in member dues and tourney fees) until it's clean enough to crawl out from underneath it's "athletic" rock.

The PDGA needs to stop supporting a magazine. I'd like to know how much of that $154,000 went to pay for Disc Golf World.

I can play in Z-tiers with more interesting and legit structures (last weekend three divisions Gold-Silver-Bronze) at less cost, and I know I'm going to see illicit conduct, but at least no ones trying to pretend to be professional. Just dudes in the park.

Rich and I were chatting about this issue this morning, and we both agreed that the PDGA like the Cannibis Flyers or just about any club anywhere shakes you down for dues and when questioned about what one actually gets in return the best answer is usually:


Think of it as supporting the sport.



That means... (http://www.pdga.com/msgboard/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=659828&Main=601579#Post659828)



I agree, I'm not as rabid about the magazine as you are, and I wouldn't have stated it quite so harshly, but still... I agree. Those are low cost, hard to implement changes. I don't say hard to implement to be negative, I think they're worth doing, simply that getting buy in and making the change will be hard.

Thanks Hawk

They, as a business wanting me as a customer, have to prove their value to me.



Perhaps that's the message you haven't gotten. It's a non-profit where members provide much of the benefits with the hope that every member will provide some value to the organization. Although for most, it's their support with dues and fees which we still appreciate.



Chuck you just described a club, not a professional sport.

They, as a business wanting me as a customer, have to prove their value to me.



Perhaps that's the message you haven't gotten. It's a non-profit where members provide much of the benefits with the hope that every member will provide some value to the organization. Although for most, it's their support with dues and fees which we still appreciate.



Chuck you just described a club, not a professional sport.



While I think the point you're making has merit Hawk, we're only marginally above a club as a Professional sport...

I also suspect that in theory, Chuck might not disagree with your points, that is a better structure without significant spending might serve the sport well.

It's interesting, when people complain about lack of services, I often assume they mean something that may be incorrect. As they say, when you assume... I have to wonder, is the majority of the we need more from the PDGA crowd arguing for two things: Clearer comunication and "better" stewardship of our competitive structure?

Chuck you just described a club, not a professional sport.



And your point?

A professional sport would be managed for profit and all administrative functions and services handled by paid personnel. The professional members would actually be more like customers than members. They would have to qualify to become members and would likely be required to become members.

We are a sports club with the hope of eventually becoming professional by having a professional name and tournament rules for a sport worthy of becoming professional. Maybe we'll get there, maybe not. It wouldn't be the worst thing if the sport remained purely the type of amateur play sanctioned by our sports club that most of us enjoy today. Seriously.

Chuck you just described a club, not a professional sport.



And your point?

A professional sport would be managed for profit and all administrative functions and services handled by paid personnel. The professional members would actually be more like customers than members. They would have to qualify to become members and would likely be required to become members.

We are a sports club with the hope of eventually becoming professional by having a professional name and tournament rules for a sport worthy of becoming professional. Maybe we'll get there, maybe not. It wouldn't be the worst thing if the sport remained purely the type of amateur play sanctioned by our sports club that most of us enjoy today. Seriously.



Chuck,

Then seriously the PDGA isn't needed and all the "sport" needs is local clubs/individuals to put on Z-tiers. I'd before careful about what you say here though as your acknowledgement of no apparent value will have you reigned in from this debate like you got yanked out of the last one.

I "self yanked" myself from the last discussion because I had more productive disc golf activities to do including one I'm under contract for. No one said a word.

You underestimate the interest people and clubs have for collaborating, sharing information and following agreed upon standards for play, equipment, course design and tournament formats on an international level let alone comparing themselves via ratings. Some type of pro competition is irrelevant for the future of the PDGA and in some ways drags its advancement where the developing player interest resides.

Do you think people renew because Barry or Ken play as pros or would quit if there were no PDGA pro competition? They buy discs with their names on them which is one type of true pro activity we have. Endorsements. In addition, we have a handful of teaching pros like Des, Jay and Monroe. Many sports thrive as purely amateur activities with the few pros making their money by teaching and exhibitions.

Many sports thrive as purely amateur activities with the few pros making their money by teaching and exhibitions.


....such as.....?

No A tiers or traveling just because mostly everything is volunteer based? No ratings, general understanding of rules, sanctioning body, equipment specifications and the like just because we are mostly volunteer based? No Worlds, demographics gathering for sponsors, helping with new courses?

I don't get the correlation, and I can't see where this would still be a 'club' if everyone just went back to where we were in the early 70s throwing lids at objects.

Just take a look at many of the Olympic sports. Gymnastics, archery, curling, weightlifting, fencing, judo, speed skating, handball, and so on.

Oh ok. I see the thinking. Chuck said "sports", which really means "competitions".

I was talking with some folks about this and softball is an example of a huge, mostly amateur sport where the pros are primarily teachers or those doing exhibitions.

and that is not hardly ever on espn.

some of the responses have seemed like it is just assumed that a membership costs 42 dollars to fulfill. appealing to the higher good is fine, but it cant be out of line to want to receive some direct value for the hard costs. some Members have expressed their concern that the direct value they actually receive is less than what they might expect for the price. that is one reason the mag will be optional in 2008.

interestingly, it might be much easier to convince the public of the actual value being created if a more detailed budget were published. that way it could be known just how well the limited resources of the association are being leveraged for the greater good.

When the magazine becomes optional, will it be replaced by a hard copy newsletter for those that are not internet savvy ?

Has the cost of providing alternative printed information to those members been compared to the price of the magazine ?

I would like to see the numbers if it has been done, and the reasoning behind not supplying those members with printed news if it hasn't.

as per the minutes, the magazine will be put out to bid for 2008. so the bidding process should provide a fair arena for all creators and suppliers of "printed information" to take their best shot. as far as numbers go, you know Members are not allowed to know stuff like that. :cool:

I "self yanked" myself



And so concludes another long cold Minnesota winter.

You can't expect all the members to support the "good work" when they are opposed to the direction the "good work" is heading and when other good work needs are being ignored.

Where to start?

(a) Stating that potentially useful other projects are "needs" and are "ignored" is both factually wrong and unpersuasively hyperbolic.

(b) I believe that ISTGW members (Not "all" members, more hyperbole there.) do support the good work even if they don't like all of it (Which would include me.) because their support is not for each individual project, it is for the overall balance of good work.

(c) The direction of the good work is set by the decisions of leadership elected by the membership of this private club. If you don't like it, your beef is with the membership.

And so concludes another long cold Minnesota winter.



(I felt you needed an opportunity for humor to break your drought) :p

The direction of the good work is set by the decisions of leadership elected by the membership of this private club. If you don't like it, your beef is with the membership.

no, the beef would be with the elected folks. if you don't like W's behavior, don't blame the people who elected him. people are responsible for their own actions. if someone has an issue with the policies and direction of this club then the proper people to discuss it with is the BoD. Directors are responsible to the Members. Management is responsible to the BoD. there is no real responsibility that comes with simply being a Member.

[T]here is no real responsibility that comes with simply being a Member.



Once again you prove how different our perspectives on governance are. If you really don't believe that members are responsible for whom they elect, then we can barely talk with each other about governance. I've never been a member of anything for which I did not undertake some degree of real responsibility. But you digress:

The point is that the best members, for the PDGA as a membership association, are those who join and renew because they support the good work, overall, of the PDGA.

show me one piece of responsibility that a Member accepts when he/she sends in a membership check.

Abiding by the Rules on the Discussion Board since only members can post.

nope. that responsibility is accepted only when posting.

Supplying accurate contact information such as address and email. Members are also subject to any PDGA rules that might result in suspension.

By the very nature of being a club, it is each member's shared responsibility to vote. For if no one voted, then the club ceases to exist. So, by extension, it's the responsibility of every member to vote, even though many do not fulfill this fundamental responsibility.

show me one piece of responsibility that a Member accepts when he/she sends in a membership check.



It is the same responsibility that any person takes on when they participate in a Democracy. You are responsible for how you vote and who you vote for. I understand that in America very few want to take responsibility for their actions, your point of view seems consistant with that general malaise. Nonetheless, the best Democracies are ones where those who vote feel their vote matters and is important.

If you're truly convinced that there is no responsiblity, implied or otherwise, then you should be moving to eliminate the voting process. We should simply hire the most experienced manager we can get, let them run the show and hold them accountable.

BTW - For another clear example of this look at Pacifica Radio. They have a clear Democratic Process that centers around "membership," essentially making a donation. They expect and recieve great support and conscious decisions by their membership. They fully admit that without volunteers they would fail, and yet, they have a whole lot more money (and equipment) than we do.

You can't expect all the members to support the "good work" when they are opposed to the direction the "good work" is heading and when other good work needs are being ignored.

Where to start?

(a) Stating that potentially useful other projects are "needs" and are "ignored" is both factually wrong and unpersuasively hyperbolic.

(b) I believe that ISTGW members (Not "all" members, more hyperbole there.) do support the good work even if they don't like all of it (Which would include me.) because their support is not for each individual project, it is for the overall balance of good work.

(c) The direction of the good work is set by the decisions of leadership elected by the membership of this private club. If you don't like it, your beef is with the membership.



There is a great deal of truth and importance in what Terry is writing. Many of the things that Hawk doesn't like are things that are accepted by and were requested by members! They aren't just decisions made off the cuff by the BOD.

That doesn't mean that the BOD shouldn't look beyond those things. IMO - enlightened leadership doesn't just respond to membership requests. They try and do more. But, blaming them for responding to membership requests, and doing so very well, is a waste of time.

Better to do two things: Lobby to the BOD to change the system to one that is more "beneficial" to the greater good of the sport, while remembering that your "notion" of "beneficial" may be skewed by your own needs. Lobby members to put pressure on the BOD to change in the direction you wish to go.

Lobbying the membership is a lot easier than people think it is. I've done it twice in the past 5 years. It's really simple, ask the BOD to set up a direct question in the annual questionaire addressing your issue. They've done it both times I've asked.

Keep in mind, that in neither case did I really ask. I simply participated in an open discussion in this forum that the BOD decided, all on their own, should be forwarded to the membership as a whole. Darn, those guys are good!

that's IF you vote. otherwise you are saying, as i believe chuck is saying, that the majority of our Members are irresponsible (because they dont vote).

Last question. If you feel, and I'm not saying that you do, that the services of the organization are deficient, what is it that you're looking for? What is it that you think we need? Elaborate.

that's IF you vote. otherwise you are saying, as i believe chuck is saying, that the majority of our Members are irresponsible (because they dont vote).



While that may be what Chuck is saying, and I'm not sure it is, the simple fact is that not voting is in essense voting. It can say one of several things: I'm satisfied with the way things are, or I'm completely unsatisfied. It can also say, I simply don't care.

Last question. If you feel, and I'm not saying that you do, that the services of the organization are deficient, what is it that you're looking for? What is it that you think we need? Elaborate.

not sure who that was addressed to. i dont feel that way, and i am not gonna elaborate, even if i could, on that type of hypothetical.

It's not personal. It's not Chuck's rule. Voting is the responsibility of all clubs or democracies with bylaws. If I'm the tiebreaker vote when on the Board, it's specifically my responsibility. Otherwise, it's my responsibility to make sure or know that there are others voting as my proxy if I can't, won't or forgot to vote.

the right of Members to vote shouldnt be confused with a responsibility to vote. otherwise not voting could become an issue for the disciplinary committee.

Last question. If you feel, and I'm not saying that you do, that the services of the organization are deficient, what is it that you're looking for? What is it that you think we need? Elaborate.

not sure who that was addressed to. i dont feel that way, and i am not gonna elaborate, even if i could, on that type of hypothetical.



This makes no sense to me. Do you feel that the organization is doing an adequate job? Yes or no? If the answer is no then what is it that you feel needs to be done? That isn't hypothetical.

Oh, and the question is posted to you Pat.

BTW - it's not meant to be offensive or agressive. As a member, I'd like to know. Furthermore, I might I agree with your goals. Finally, If I did, then I could vote in a way that supports your goals.

hahaha... you must think i have no memory of the beating i was subjected to when i posted my thoughts previously. forget it.

show me one piece of responsibility that a Member accepts when he/she sends in a membership check.

When you become a member, you purchase a vote. Whether you exercise it or not, that vote, like everything else you purchase, becomes your responsibility. To put it another way, a "vote" is sometimes also called a "voice" in governance. Surely you would not argue that a person is not responsible for their voice. But you digress:

The point is that the best members, for the PDGA as a membership association, are those who join and renew because they support the good work, overall, of the PDGA.