USPSA's Value Proposition

[Brooke]

Without a national organization for rules, RO's, competitions, publicity, and control of of chaos (entropy is always running downhill and requires work to pump it back up). Without a national organization we can just all shoot beer cans in a field while consuming the contents to create new targets and shoot the other competitors when we get all the targets we need. There can be no debate that a national ruling organization is necessary to have a national sport.

Everybody has some kind of cheap shot problem with the national organization, its officers, or employees. Usually its someone who offers no ideas or efforts just carps at the efforts of others (though I admit that is not a universal truth, some carpers got butt hurt along the line).

This entire election cycle from hell (which I hope is now complete) has been all about the above. Too many members or non-members expect perfection from the organization while adding nothing of their own to it. It's time to pull together and make this thing work perfectly. Our presumed new president is smart, creative, effective, and dedicated. Let's get behind him and make USPSA the best it can be!

My first suggestion: My club (and many others like it) puts on 24 matches a year. The cost is $20 per shooter with a $5 discount for local club members. I believe there should be a penalty (or a discount for USPSA members) also. Maybe $25 per shooter with a $5 discount for USPSA members and another $5 discount for local members. The non-member fee would stay with the local club, but it wouldn't take long for people to figure that they can join USPSA for $25 and save themselves much more than that.

Why would I do this? Because except for the first time shooter (where the fee could be waived), those shooting and not belonging are cheating all of us who do belong. The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

I really hope the entire membership will get behind the president and help make USPSA the best shooting organization known to mankind. We can do that.

[cnote]

The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

.

Exactly what is wrong with society today. This is now accepted as normal!

[motosapiens]

The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

.

Exactly what is wrong with society today. This is now accepted as normal!

perhaps, but in this case it's entirely false. We are not idpa (thank god), so we don't rely on membership dues to keep the lights on. Every shooter pays activity fees as part of their match fees. I personally pay 2 or 3 times as much in activity fees as I do in membership dues. Folks that aren't members still pay those fees, and still support the organization, they just dont get the benefits of classification, RO training, a super awesome magazine, and spam emails peripherally related to shooting. That seems fine to me. The system works.

[Brooke]

The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

.

Exactly what is wrong with society today. This is now accepted as normal!

perhaps, but in this case it's entirely false. We are not idpa (thank god), so we don't rely on membership dues to keep the lights on. Every shooter pays activity fees as part of their match fees. I personally pay 2 or 3 times as much in activity fees as I do in membership dues. Folks that aren't members still pay those fees, and still support the organization, they just dont get the benefits of classification, RO training, a super awesome magazine, and spam emails peripherally related to shooting. That seems fine to me. The system works.

Everyone has an opinion and deservedly so, however, I agree with IDPA....you pay if you want to play. No exceptions. I have a hard time believing that most people do not agree with that. I pay the fees and the membership. You should not be allowed to shoot if you have no intent to belong.

Edited December 1, 2015 by Brooke

[motosapiens]

The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

.

Exactly what is wrong with society today. This is now accepted as normal!

perhaps, but in this case it's entirely false. We are not idpa (thank god), so we don't rely on membership dues to keep the lights on. Every shooter pays activity fees as part of their match fees. I personally pay 2 or 3 times as much in activity fees as I do in membership dues. Folks that aren't members still pay those fees, and still support the organization, they just dont get the benefits of classification, RO training, a super awesome magazine, and spam emails peripherally related to shooting. That seems fine to me. The system works.

Everyone has an opinion and deservedly so, however, I agree with IDPA....you pay if you want to play. No exceptions. I have a hard time believing that most people do not agree with that. I pay the fees and the membership. You should not be allowed to shoot if you have no intent to belong.

sure, everyone has an opinion, but mine is right, and yours is wrong. lol. that's the whole point of activity fees for matches.

IDPA gets no money from the matches, so if you don't join, they get nothing. In uspsa, they get money whether you join or not. You are already paying to play. If uspsa wants to ditch the activity fees, then sure, it's reasonable to make people join.

[GunBugBit]

From a less experienced USPSA member's point of view (mine), there is some value in seeing how I shoot compared to people beyond those at my local club. This is the case now and probably will be for a while, until my enthusiasm starts to wane, which it never has this year, my first year of competing. I don't have any major phases of life to complete beyond retiring and dying, so the shooting is a big cherry on top of what has been a good life. USPSA is something to belong to and is kind of a make-good for the prior chapters of my life where I have not been a joiner.

If I'm able to get into the higher classes, there won't be much in the way of bragging rights. Almost no one in my non-shooting social circles has heard of USPSA so I don't even bother to mention my little shooting matches unless my wife brings it up and someone feigns interest for 20 seconds. Anyone who would understand what my classification means probably already knows me and shoots with me, and they won't be any more impressed with me if I make M or GM than they are right now as the C shooter that I am. They care more about whether I picked up their brass on that last stage.

[Brooke]

The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

.

Exactly what is wrong with society today. This is now accepted as normal!

perhaps, but in this case it's entirely false. We are not idpa (thank god), so we don't rely on membership dues to keep the lights on. Every shooter pays activity fees as part of their match fees. I personally pay 2 or 3 times as much in activity fees as I do in membership dues. Folks that aren't members still pay those fees, and still support the organization, they just dont get the benefits of classification, RO training, a super awesome magazine, and spam emails peripherally related to shooting. That seems fine to me. The system works.

Everyone has an opinion and deservedly so, however, I agree with IDPA....you pay if you want to play. No exceptions. I have a hard time believing that most people do not agree with that. I pay the fees and the membership. You should not be allowed to shoot if you have no intent to belong.

sure, everyone has an opinion, but mine is right, and yours is wrong. lol. that's the whole point of activity fees for matches.

IDPA gets no money from the matches, so if you don't join, they get nothing. In uspsa, they get money whether you join or not. You are already paying to play. If uspsa wants to ditch the activity fees, then sure, it's reasonable to make people join.

Look, I am not trying to start a pissing contest. USPSA has nearly 25,000 members who either pay $25 or $40 each to belong. Let's just assume it averages out to $32 each. That works out to slightly over $750,000 annually in dues revenue. That has to be the main revenue stream to support the organization. If clubs pay the national organization for each shooter that includes those shooters who belong.

So if you don't belong, you don't support the organization to the same extent that I and other members do. That is not right. If everyone took that approach the organization would not survive. If you don't belong then you are letting those who do pay the freight. That should bother you

[motosapiens]

USPSA has nearly 25,000 members who either pay $25 or $40 each to belong. Let's just assume it averages out to $32 each. That works out to slightly over $750,000 annually in dues revenue. That has to be the main revenue stream to support the organization.

why does it *have* to be the main revenue stream? What makes you think it is? Most of the people I know pay significantly more in activity fees than dues. If someone only wants to shoot a few matches a year and not join, I'm happy to take their $4/match (we do 2 classifiers each month) and forward it to USPSA.

I'm too lazy to look but it seems perfectly plausible that activity fees could equal or even exceed membership dues. If you find out exactly how much revenue comes from each source, please post it here. In the meantime, please try to understand that non-members *are* supporting uspsa every time they shoot a uspsa match. They may not support it as much as I do, but they get less out of it than I do too, which seems fair and reasonable to me.

A policy like IDPA's simply drives less serious shooters away. Like me, for example. I would shoot a couple idpa matches every year, but not really enough to justify membership. since they require membership, I just don't shoot them. I see no reason that uspsa should pursue that same failed and flawed business model when the current one works perfectly well.

edit: okay, i decided to stop being lazy. in 2013 member dues were $770k, and activity fees were $394k and championship entry fees were $357k. So it looks like there is a LOT of money coming from sources other than membership dues. http://www.uspsa.org/document_library/2014%20USPSA%20Annual%20Report.pdf

Edited December 1, 2015 by motosapiens

[Chills1994]

guidestar.org is where you want to go to see USPSA's tax return, Form 990.

While you're at it, feel free to look at other non-profits like the NFL or the Red Cross.

[Nimitz]

First off, I'd love to see USPSA go back to just 2 divisions: factory stock (you can use a gun off an approved list as it comes from the factory - no mods, period); and open: do whatever you want against a general set of guidelines ....

As for membership I'm not 100% on the mandatory individual memebership since you would still be paying activiy fees although Having 2 tiers of fees would probably force clubs to charge more for non memes which could entice people to join if they do the math .....

But where I am hardover is with clubs advertising and running 'USPSA-like' matches without being affiliated and basically stealing uspsa's intellectual property ... Pick a club to make an example of and sue them (I'm sure there is at least one lawyer in USPSA who would do some pro bono work). Make a nice public spectacle of it and put all clubs on notice that they will be sued if they continue without affiliation and I suspect you would see some changes in behavior .....

[Nik Habicht]

The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

.

Exactly what is wrong with society today. This is now accepted as normal!

perhaps, but in this case it's entirely false. We are not idpa (thank god), so we don't rely on membership dues to keep the lights on. Every shooter pays activity fees as part of their match fees. I personally pay 2 or 3 times as much in activity fees as I do in membership dues. Folks that aren't members still pay those fees, and still support the organization, they just dont get the benefits of classification, RO training, a super awesome magazine, and spam emails peripherally related to shooting. That seems fine to me. The system works.

Everyone has an opinion and deservedly so, however, I agree with IDPA....you pay if you want to play. No exceptions. I have a hard time believing that most people do not agree with that. I pay the fees and the membership. You should not be allowed to shoot if you have no intent to belong.

sure, everyone has an opinion, but mine is right, and yours is wrong. lol. that's the whole point of activity fees for matches.

IDPA gets no money from the matches, so if you don't join, they get nothing. In uspsa, they get money whether you join or not. You are already paying to play. If uspsa wants to ditch the activity fees, then sure, it's reasonable to make people join.

Look, I am not trying to start a pissing contest. USPSA has nearly 25,000 members who either pay $25 or $40 each to belong. Let's just assume it averages out to $32 each. That works out to slightly over $750,000 annually in dues revenue. That has to be the main revenue stream to support the organization. If clubs pay the national organization for each shooter that includes those shooters who belong.

So if you don't belong, you don't support the organization to the same extent that I and other members do. That is not right. If everyone took that approach the organization would not survive. If you don't belong then you are letting those who do pay the freight. That should bother you

It's not the main revenue stream -- but that's largely because membership dues are an obligation for the organization. They're used to subsidize deliverables -- like Front Sight -- and to pay for member services, such as managing renewals, answering questions, etc. The relative value of those obligations are a different discussion.......

[Nik Habicht]

Without a national organization for rules, RO's, competitions, publicity, and control of of chaos (entropy is always running downhill and requires work to pump it back up). Without a national organization we can just all shoot beer cans in a field while consuming the contents to create new targets and shoot the other competitors when we get all the targets we need. There can be no debate that a national ruling organization is necessary to have a national sport.

Everybody has some kind of cheap shot problem with the national organization, its officers, or employees. Usually its someone who offers no ideas or efforts just carps at the efforts of others (though I admit that is not a universal truth, some carpers got butt hurt along the line).

This entire election cycle from hell (which I hope is now complete) has been all about the above. Too many members or non-members expect perfection from the organization while adding nothing of their own to it. It's time to pull together and make this thing work perfectly. Our presumed new president is smart, creative, effective, and dedicated. Let's get behind him and make USPSA the best it can be!

My first suggestion: My club (and many others like it) puts on 24 matches a year. The cost is $20 per shooter with a $5 discount for local club members. I believe there should be a penalty (or a discount for USPSA members) also. Maybe $25 per shooter with a $5 discount for USPSA members and another $5 discount for local members. The non-member fee would stay with the local club, but it wouldn't take long for people to figure that they can join USPSA for $25 and save themselves much more than that.

Why would I do this? Because except for the first time shooter (where the fee could be waived), those shooting and not belonging are cheating all of us who do belong. The members are paying for the infrastructure provided by the national organization. There is absolutely no reason I should subsidize someone who chooses not to support the organization. Hell, should I buy him ammo too? Maybe a gun!

I really hope the entire membership will get behind the president and help make USPSA the best shooting organization known to mankind. We can do that.

The MidAtlantic Section tries to encourage USPSA membership. Join at a match and you'll shoot that match for free -- we just pass the membership fee along to HQ. Don't join, and we charge $25 to shoot match; members pay $20. Members of the hosting facility, i.e. the club, may be offered a discount. At Central Jersey club members paid $15 to shoot the match -- regardless of USPSA membership.

Even if you shoot one match only every month -- you'll pay $60 in extra fees, unless you're a CJ member shooting at CJ only. If you shoot multiple matches a month, a USPSA membership might pay for itself in less than two months.....

[Brooke]

Moto, thanks for the numbers. Good job! I think they show my point that dues are the primary revenue stream, but they also show other significant revenue streams.

Nik, revenue is incoming money. Outgoing money is expense (either capital or non-capital). You don't discount revenue by the obligations incurred by accepting that revenue. The biggest incoming stream appears to be dues as I said. Theoretically all the revenue of USPSA is offset by expenses since USPSA is a non-profit. Non-profits are allowed by IRS to accumulate some funds to offset a rainy day problem, but let's ignore that for now. All revenue is eventually spent so that the org is a non-profit.

So back to my point and I appreciate the inputs from you both. Moto identified 3 fairly large revenue streams and I am sure there are some smaller ones. The point is that local clubs pay a little to the national organization for each shooter (member or non-member). Those who shoot nationals pay an entry fee presumably set to offset the actual cost of putting on the match.

So non-members contribute along with everyone in generating the fees. Non-members can't shoot the nationals so they are not involved in that revenue and neither are members who do not shoot nationals. The thing that non-members do not do is pay dues. Therefore my point that if I and a non-member shoot exactly the same matches all year, I contribute more to support USPSA than the non-member by the amount of my dues. If all shooters quit USPSA they would lose a three quarters of a million dollar revenue stream and not survive unless they adjusted something else like the match fees to make it up.

Thus my point the members are subsidizing the hobbies of non-members and that is not right. I like the solution that Nik presented...the club simply collects the shooters dues and sends it in to USPSA.

Edited December 2, 2015 by Brooke

[kneelingatlas]

my point the members are subsidizing the hobbies of non-members and that is not right.

I am fully aware of this situation and voluntarily pay my membership dues, this is my definition of "right"

[dkizer]

Maybe the non-members should also be exempted from pasting/resetting targets, keeping score and running timers too. That way it will be all about them and members can be their......[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[motosapiens]

Therefore my point that if I and a non-member shoot exactly the same matches all year, I contribute more to support USPSA than the non-member by the amount of my dues. <snip>

Thus my point the members are subsidizing the hobbies of non-members and that is not right.

But the non-members aren't getting the value (classification and an awesome magazine and so forth) that members are getting. To some extent, non-members are subsidizing *my* hobby by coming to our matches and giving us money for entry fees and helping us set up and tear down. And typically they get bit by the bug and join up within a few months.

Looking at our clubs results for the last year, it looks like we see between 15% and 40% non-members, with the highest percentage of non-members in the middle of summer (following our charity outreach events, and after the start of the weeknight steel matches which bring in lots of new shooters). What actual costs do these non-members cause uspsa to incur? Would forcing them to become members discourage some of them from shooting at all (thus depriving local clubs of money and manpower)?

IMHO, this being america and all, decisions like this are best left to clubs. The clubs are the ones that make sure USPSA continues to exist, by affiliating and by putting on matches.

Having studied the soviet union during the cold war (and spent 9 years listening in on their communications), i don't think we need all centralized power and for everyone to belong to the party. It's the obligation of the party to make it worth joining. For some people it may only be a couple times a year. There are lots of shooting disciplines, and I think it's nice to not have to take each of them seriously enough to join the national sanctioning body just to participate, especially when it is really the local clubs doing all the real work.

Having said that, I would not at all be opposed to the idea of charging a slightly higher activity fee for non-members.

Edited December 2, 2015 by motosapiens

[Brooke]

Therefore my point that if I and a non-member shoot exactly the same matches all year, I contribute more to support USPSA than the non-member by the amount of my dues. <snip>

Thus my point the members are subsidizing the hobbies of non-members and that is not right.

Having studied the soviet union during the cold war (and spent 9 years listening in on their communications), i don't think we need all centralized power and for everyone to belong to the party. It's the obligation of the party to make it worth joining.

Neither is it my (the members) responsibility to provide the party for slackers to attend.

[motosapiens]

Neither is it my (the members) responsibility to provide the party for slackers to attend.

I don't know how many matches you are involved with putting on. I am involved with putting on dozens of matches every year. If people show up, pay the entry fee and help with setup or teardown, I would not call them slackers (at least not any more than than the uspsa members that don't work or direct matches). I would welcome them with open arms. As local MD, I get nothing from those people joining uspsa. As a local MD, I lose if I turn them away.

At any rate, it doesn't really matter. There doesn't appear to be any kind of traction at any level for your proposal, because the system is working perfectly already, so this is just an internet rant.

[TJART]

Maybe the non-members should also be exempted from pasting/resetting targets, keeping score and running timers too. That way it will be all about them and members can be their......[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

24+ matches a year for my club. No one really gives a sh1t if you're a member or not. But don't reset targets, or tape 'em up after a round... that'll get you put out of the pack REAL quick.

[9x45]

Maybe the non-members should also be exempted from pasting/resetting targets, keeping score and running timers too. That way it will be all about them and members can be their......[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? Go find your own match. And it's NOT called "pasting" It's called taping. No one would let a newbie score or RO! Have you really ever shot a USPSA match? It's not called "running timers" either... WTF, over.

[Brooke]

Maybe the non-members should also be exempted from pasting/resetting targets, keeping score and timers too. That way it will be all about them and members can be their......[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? Go find your own match. And it's NOT called "pasting" It's called taping. No one would let a newbie score or RO! Have you really ever shot a USPSA match? It's not called "running timers" either... WTF, over.

You are making the assumption that the non-member is a newbie. I am not concerned with newbies. It's the non-newbies who are sucking off members dues that get me excited. I agree that no non-member should be ROing since they can not be legit ROs. There are plenty of non-members who are very experienced and can (and do ) help as score keepers. No matter what you call it in California, in the east we call placing a paster on a target "pasting".

I'm not sure the nomenclature is all that important, I'm just saying....

Edited December 3, 2015 by Brooke

[9x45]

Everyone has an opinion and deservedly so, however, I agree with IDPA....you pay if you want to play. No exceptions. I have a hard time believing that most people do not agree with that. I pay the fees and the membership. You should not be allowed to shoot if you have no intent to belong.

You haven't been to enough IDPA matches. If you only shoot at one club, that may be true, but of the several clubs in SoCal they all have a "club" level policy...

[motosapiens]

You are making the assumption that the non-member is a newbie. I am not concerned with newbies. It's the non-newbies who are sucking off members dues that get me excited.

How are they 'sucking off members dues'? do they get the awesome magazine? no.

are they eligible for subsidized training? no

do they get classified? no.

do they get to enter level 2 and up matches? no.

they get none of the services that the dues are for. they get to shoot matches, and that's it, and they pay the match fees to do that.

[PatJones]

I agree that no non-member should be ROing since they can not be legit ROs. There are plenty of non-members who are very experienced and can (and do ) help as score keepers.

The RO running the clipboard and recording scores is also a Range Officer.

[wtturn]

Maybe the non-members should also be exempted from pasting/resetting targets, keeping score and running timers too. That way it will be all about them and members can be their......[emoji6]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Really? Go find your own match. And it's NOT called "pasting" It's called taping. No one would let a newbie score or RO! Have you really ever shot a USPSA match? It's not called "running timers" either... WTF, over.

Settle down, Pompous McGrumpypants.

I say "pasting" targets and "running" timer, myself.