john my friend you have saved the s,n, and all you board members to that have given your time , i thank you, you are the back bone of the s.n. along with all the s,n, family, once again, hats off to you,jim

and jim couldn't have lined his pockets without you. amen.

Posted by: underparmikey(56.0.163.---)
Date: Everyday, all day



Terry Zeringue

Man I'm glad I have a life away from disc golf.

I agree that you have to be careful about handing out beer. Not everything that works with ultimate will work with disc golf. Like not being fat and lazy works in ultimate, but seems to be something that only the top dgers ever think about. But if the SN BOD will let you, the food is another way you can pad your numbers and get it up over the 125% payout which Bob has already shown you is really easy to do. If you can include the food as maybe part of the player's pack, you can easily feed over a hundred people cheap stuff like red beans and rice or gumbo or sausage dogs or whatever for $2/head/mea, then list it as $5/head/meal. If you get a good sponsor, you can do it for free. Bob is right, $125 should be easy. Just ask him how and I bet he can show you. Lame post, Gary.
Mike, shut up. I think Bob is working in our best interest and every post you make at this point just hijacks the thread and distracts people into Mikey-bashing mode instead of serious-discussion mode.
John, set a date date for a final draft, then vote on it. If anyone isn't ready by that date, just leave them out. Zack and Bob will be there, and quite frankly, that's all we need.

Crow

Crow and sn members, I'll gladly resign my position on the board if that's what the majority would like to see. Seeing that the rest of us are inept, save for zack and bob, I'd hate to be responsible for the collapse of the SN. Just give me the word. Peace, out.

I didn't say you were inept, but Bob's the only board member here refuting Gary's post, and I know how Zack feels and how he runs tournaments. Why don't you say something on the issue. Get in the game, man!

sorry crow i got a few more bridges to burn...

By no means do I want to do anything alone! I only make suggestions which make good sense to me. Im not sure if anyone agrees with me but, if the board is going to ask a host city to try{do?} something at least someone should say how it can be done.I am a little confused by Gary's post cause i thought memephis had paid out over 125%. Not speaking for all of the board{even thou all votes where in favor of 125% MIN} Im just stating how I think it could be achieved. The board is working on it and things will change for the better.
Mikey, you better get off the bridge before you start the fire!

Memphis had and DID.....

Gary's post was likely meant to be something for the Board to consider....fodder for the guns of consideration....

I don't believe it was meant to become any sort of guideline.

It seems to be more of a "let's put on paper what some folks are suggesting we do"...

you guys are all about shootin' the messenger....did ya READ the message?

It was an OPINION....obviously something everyone would argue they have a right to have, right?

oh, right, we're all crooks, liars and thieves.....how silly of me....

Griff

You mean lawyers or Memphians? :)

I'm not disagreeing with Bob, if it's determined by the majority of board members that we should by the merchandise I'm fine with that. The board will be more involved in the SNAC and establish minimum guidelines but I don't want it to be the SN Board running the SNAC. That's why there are host cities. I don't anticipate vendors being used at future SNAC because it's not cost effective.

Back to the question I had before we got derailed. Should the host city be allowed to make any profit from the SNAC if the minimum guidelines that we establish are met? If so should there be a limit on the profit. In my opinion cities shouldn't go into the SNAC as a moneymaking venture. However I think that the host cities should be allowed to profit $500 if once again the SNAC standards have been met but that would be my limit. Anything over that should go back into the tournament. Given a situation like Wall Doxey that had a $4000 sponsor (thanks McDonalds) the 125% would be easy to obtain.

John k

I would like to think that host cities are begging to step up even when faced with the idea of no ability to profit from their endeavour.....

I'd bet that will not be the case.....

especially IF, as Gary had pointed out, the "minimum requirements" (whatever they may be) are not met due to no fault of the host (i.e.--weather, world events, whatever) and there is no protection for losses for the host...

I DO WHOLE HEARTEDLY BELIEVE that some profit is not a bad thing......but whatever profit COULD be made should be split....50-50 or even 30 city- 70 SN....that would stop the "accusations".....imho

Griff

Bob, I think we did pay out over 125% in the Am Tournament. My intent is not justify anything we did, but to express concern that this percentage, and other restrictions, may deter potential host clubs from taking on the event. Also, since I’m not sure what CFR stands for I can’t comment on that; but if Griff says we didn’t do it, then we didn’t.

Terry, if I were on the Board you would have my vote to host the next Am Tournament. I’m serious. Someone needs to step up and show us the way to cover all expenses and pay out 150% of what you take in because short of getting $5K in sponsors, I don’t know how it can be done. Obviously, there is a lot I don’t know, but I am willing to learn.

One thing you mentioned, Terry, was ordering $10,000 in discs. That’s a chunk of change! Getting the maximum wholesale/retail swing means ordering from a primary manufacturer. Whether it is Innova, Gateway, DiscCraft or whoever, these folks are looking for an individual, not a club, to personally guarantee payment. For Memphis, that’s me, so you may appreciate my concern about risk.

Traditionally, there have been two ways to get the merchandise for Am prizes: 1. order them from the manufacturer or, 2. go to a vendor. Obviously, the first option leverages the initial investment for greater value in payout, but it maximizes the risk for the person whose name is on the dotted line. The second option eliminates the risk, but the retail price to the club makes it nearly impossible, sponsorship not withstanding, to pay out more than you took in. My basic question is that if the Board took away any possibility of making money while allowing the very real possibility of losing money, why take the risk at all? Just let the retail vendors take the risk and buy the merchandise off their shelves after all the money is in hand. Do you suppose this line of thinking had anything to do with the most recent debacle?

There may be a third way: 3. let the SNDG Board fund the Am Tournament with merchandise from cash in hand and projected event entry fees. After all, that’s what the TD does, or is supposed to do anyway. The host club would pay the SNDG Board back from entry fees which are known quantities after the event. The risk would revert to the SNDG Board and the individual whose name is on the dotted line. The Board could set the fair market value of the goods, demand 125% payout (after expenses) and little or no profit for the host club because the host club is assuming little or no risk.

On another topic, we always have food at Bud Hill thanks to Danny and Barbara. However, over the years more than one person has wrecked, fell or been arrested for DWI during a tournament weekend. As long as I am in a leadership position with the MDGC and can potentially be enjoined in a lawsuit, all of our events will be BYOB.

Gary Wagoner, President
Memphis Disc Golf Club

my point was only that although we did have tournament stamped discs....it was not like it is today...

There was (I assume) some tourney discs sold beforehand by the SN....but back then it was nothing like it is today....i.e. now-a-days we have those CFR(Candy Fund Raiser) discs out WAAAAYY before the tourney and sold all over the SOuth--more $$.

To be totally honest, I may be confusing the Am. Champs with the Doubles Champs. in terms of how and where the extra $$ came from.

I did not mean to infer there were no tourney related attempts at making $$ on the front-side....

Our other officers (the ones with the invoices and books) could likely shed a clearer light....

Peace....OUT!!

Griff

SN Board Meeting – 30 Nov 05 – SNAC Guidelines / Sponsor Exemption

Members in attendance: Bill McCarty, Russ Corey, Robert McDonald, Bob Satter, and John Kittrell

Topics of discussion:

1. SNAC guidelines: The following points were discussed and approved;

...6.The tournament will be at a minimum 3 and ½ rounds. There can be a cut after the third round.

...7.Each division will have trophies/plaques for 1st, 2nd and 3rd.

...8.Sponsorship money: All sponsorship money raised by the host club can be designated as the sponsor/host chooses.

...9.Baskets:
.....a.Each division (except juniors) will have a basket whose quality is equal to the Innova discatcher pro / discraft chainstar for 1st place. (@ $360 retail)
.....b.Each division (except juniors) will have a basket whose quality is equal to or greater than the Lightning DB5 / Innova Discatcher sport for 2nd place. (@ $175-200 retail)
.....c.Exceptions will be made on the quality of the basket based upon the size of the division and amount of sn fees form that division. First place in those instances will be awarded a basket whose quality is equal to or greater than the Lightning DB5 / Innova Discatcher sport. (@ $175-200 retail)

An example of this is at future SNAC if there is a fielded adv womens division. Last year there was $426 in sn fees generated by the am women’s division. If the division split into am and adv womens divisions say 6 am women and 4 adv women the the $426 would be split per capita with $255.6 going into the am womens payout (42.6 x 6) and $170.4 going into the adv womens payout (42.6 x 4). Add entry fees to the equation (45 per) gets you to $525.6 for am women and $350.4 for adv women. Multiple that times the required 125% payout equals $657 for am women and $438 for adv women. Subtract players pack which are considered part of the payout (35 per) leaves you with $447 in am women and $298 for adv women. Even without figuring in the cost of trophies which count toward the payout the adv womens div wouldn’t justify a $360 basket but it would justify a $200 basket leaving $98 for 2nd place paying out 2 of 4 places.


.....d.The SN Board will provide the baskets for the SNAC. The baskets will be provided to the host at 50% difference between the actual cost of the baskets and fair retail value. I.e. if the baskets were purchased at $1000 wholesale and the fair retail value is $1400 then the baskets will be given to the host with a value of $1200 attributed to them. The profit to the SN ($200 in the example) will be used for expenses or promotion as the SN sees fit.

...10.The host city will provide to the SN Board a complete accounting of the money taken in (ie sponsorship money, SN fees, entry fees) and money paid out giving actual cost of item with photocopied receipts. Accountability is important.

(The board will communicate with the host to determine the best means of doing this, while we want to keep the process as simple as possible accountability is very important.)

...11.Fair Retail Value: This is the value of the merchandise at the average cost to a player buying from a vendor. The pricing of each type of disc used for payout (Dx, pro line, CE) must be approved by the SN board to ensure the pricing is fair.

...12.A minimum of 2 SN Board members will be present at the SNAC to ensure the quality of the event is maintained.

13.A minimum of two extra curricular events will be offered. Suggestions include:
.....a.putting contest
.....b.driving contest
.....c.skills contest
.....d.rings of fire
.....d.mini course
.....d.create your own contest



2. Can the host of the SNAC make money from the tournament?

It was discussed and was voted unanimously by the members present that the host club can profit from the tournament. A MAXIMUM of $500 can be made by the host/club if ALL the SNAC guidelines (ie 125% payout) have been met.



3. Sponsorship exceptions.

Sponsorship exceptions will be given to those individuals that don’t have SN points. The limit of exception is:
$200 for a player at the SNAC
$1000 for a player at the SNPC
Sponsorship can come from individuals or corporate but the sponsorship has to go to the respective tournament.



Very productive meeting, questions or comments are welcome…

John k




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2005 10:14AM by John K.

IMHO If a club spends soooo much time and effort into weeks/months of prep
for the SNAC I would think $1000 profit would be a better max.

Deano, that would be close to 14% of all fees taken in! they are allowed to do whatever they want with sponsorship money. They can also sell all they want so money is everywhere. Thanks for your comments, Boba

I like it! Good job guy's!


tpatL
PDGA #19488
May the Course be with you

im with deano, but i think the board decides what percent of return the hosting city should give back,and then check after the event if they did right. leave the rest up to the hosting city, if a city does a great job, the next time they host a event they will draw a great crowd, players just want to be treated fairly, your crowd will tell you if your doing things right,we are making to much work for the bod to do,even if it saved a few dollars , sooner or later we will have to pay someone to do the work, there goes your few dollare, let the hosting city do the work and let them be rewarded for it.now go ace one for me, jim

I'm stuck on 9 D the basket(s) purchase.
BY the example provided
$1k was spent to buy the baskets by the board. Fair retail value of said baskets is $1400. The baskets are then provided to the host site with a $1200 price tag. Exactly how does the SN profit by $200. Does the host site now owe that money ($200) in cash back to the SN? If that is the case then the host site is $200 short b4 they begin. If not then I do not see how the SN "profits"
Somebody help a brotha out.

JABBA
Where has Zack gone. Still no phone line ???



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2005 12:00PM by frzbman.

nope, still no land line!!!!!!!!! looking into internet via dish network. I have been in touch with all members of the board either by phone or email at work. I am in full agreement with the new guidlines. Should help The Sn series.

Jabba
The board will be buying the baskets for the snac. We should get a larger discount presumably by going to the manufacturer and buying "x" number of baskets for "x" number of years vs the host buying baskets for one year. Another way to put it is if we get the baskets at a 40% discount then we will give them to the host with an 20% discount. The sn will benefit 20% while still passing on half the saving to the host.

Does that help?

John k



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2005 12:33PM by John K.

good math, but is the 20% benefit to the host club better than the host club could do on its own buying for just one year. If the board stipulates a 125% payout and then cuts into the margin between wholesale and retail they are making it easier for the host club by handling some of the logistical details and ensuring a quality product but are making it harder for the host club to meet the required payout.

I see your point Chris and that was why originally I had posed the question asking if they should be at wholesale or retail. This was the compromise. Maybe the ideal solution would be for the host to get the baskets at the discount rate they could obtain on their own through the sn with the sn keeping the difference from that to presumably the larger discount obtain with more buying power.


John k

persuminably?

Hey Mikie was that the picture taken when bush was asked to explain what the Mayor and Governor were saying on National TV after Katrina?


tpatL
PDGA #19488
May the Course be with you

When you put it that way (the championship basket purchase) it sounds like the board intends to do the same thing that the 05 SNAC controllers are accused of - not using the SN Fees for the players at cost.

This is not necessarily an opinion against using SN fees for “expenses or promotion as the SN sees fit", even if the expenditures are unrelated to the championship.

I say don’t make the board a championship vendor. Make it’s role be an advocate and fiduciary for those who play in the championship.

I think we should stop with the fuzzy math. Let the board deduct a percentage of all fees for “expenses or promotion as the SN sees fit” if that is needed. Then account to the players for how the SN fees are spent.

That would make the series and the championship a true prize.

It may or may not be the same money either way. Just call it what it is.

I appreciate all the hard work of the Board regardless.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/01/2005 07:33PM by Discjazz.

Couple thoughts.

I think if the board stipulates that the payout must be x percent (say 125%) and then steps in as the middleman on the purchases of prizes they have also stipulated must be given) they are making things more difficult for the host city. If we accept that accountability will not be an issue going forward with receipts being required AND the Board (acting on behalf of the SN Series) wants to be the middleman, why not rather than taking 50% of the difference up front, take what is left over off the back end after the payout has been made.

Also, I think $1000 pro exemption is too high at the current time. I think $500 is a level that still says "serious" and yet is more attainable for a top pro who wants to go the extra mile to play but does not have points.