2020 Nationals Awards / Prizes

[RJH]

48 minutes ago, B_RAD said:

 

So, I want to be careful on how and what I say. For a couple of reasons. First, it's easy to criticize when you're spectating. Meaning not out there working. Monday morning quarterback. Second, it's difficult to get across true thoughts and feelings thru text. Lastly, I'm still new and inexperienced with USPSA and nats. This was my 4th year and my 2nd Nats. That may be why I feel the way I do about things. I may not know any better? 

 

Saying all that, I'll give my thoughts. 

 

I think Nationals should be a bigger deal than any other match. That means stage design/quality, prizes, trophies, atmosphere. It's easy to say "XYZ needs to be better at Nats" but not offer how or why. I'm worried I may be guilty of this a little.  Some just want to be critical to be critical. I'm trying not to do that. So, back to what I was saying. If you're gonna offer trophies and prizes, I'd like to see them be a big deal. What's a "big deal"? Yeah, that's based on opinions.

 

Look at the prizes and the trophies given out over all the national matches. Were they equal in quality or value? If not, why? Are some divisions looked at more favorably or as more important than the others? Why? 

 

I think most would agree that match quality, stage design is most important for any match. Prizes are cool but we all know that any prizes won is won at a deficit, but we see a lot of shooters enjoy getting something really big/expensive. Nobody cares about winning a cleaning kit but just about everyone wants to win a gun!

 

Trophies are another interesting issue. A lot of people say they don't care and maybe they don't, but a lot of people do! If you win a trophy that says you were the best shooter at the national level, wouldn't you want it to be an indication of that achievement?

 

 

I thought the match itself was good!  I had a great time. I'm not dissing the prizes table or the trophies either. Just thinking out loud.  

 

 

[MikeBurgess]

1 hour ago, shred said:

 

 

Times have changed, other matches got better, the level of stage props and decoration has declined overall

 

I think the overall level of matches has gotten better making it harder to have nationals be a "better" match at the stage level, with the you-tube match video explosion there is more pressure on local clubs to raise the level of the matches they put on,  also the nature of the sport has changed quite a bit, the current ethos in stage design is centered more on shooting and less on props than in the past also at larger matches the emphasis has changed to how do we get more shooters into the match so schedules are tighter and anything that could cause any type of delay is excluded. 

 

 

 

[BritinUSA]

If there were a single Nationals event then cash from sponsors would be more forthcoming, rather than 2-3 sets of prizes for each separate Nationals then a single cash infusion may end up costing them less overall. The rest of the world seems to have little problems attracting cash sponsorship.

 

For those that have competed overseas, you know how much better their stages are in terms of appearance/design.

 

USPSA would also need to increase the return on investment for those sponsors; I think at the moment they get very little return for their support and that needs to change, increases in video and photographic coverage would help. If the stages are better presented then things look better on digital media and that increases interest.

 

Give the sponsors free photographs of their sponsored shooters that they can use in advertising. Make sure the sponsor banners are visible in videos. Sometimes its the little things that make all the difference.

 

We can do coverage of Nationals in a way similar to that employed by golf tournaments, streaming coverage from multiple stages can be done using existing technology. Though interest outside the sport will be low to start with, that could change. Politicization of many main-stream sports may be driving some spectators to look for new events to follow.

[Southpaw]

Nationals needs to have stages like this!

 

 

[shred]

On 11/6/2020 at 2:15 AM, BritinUSA said:

If there were a single Nationals event then cash from sponsors would be more forthcoming, rather than 2-3 sets of prizes for each separate Nationals then a single cash infusion may end up costing them less overall. The rest of the world seems to have little problems attracting cash sponsorship.

 

Yeah.   IPSC doesn't do half a dozen different nationals, it's everyone run what ya brung.  And they still can't get the big boys like HK & Glock to throw down.

 

Quote

For those that have competed overseas, you know how much better their stages are in terms of appearance/design.

 

Well.... I've shot a lot overseas and stages are certainly different.  If you like the 'Clean' style of IPSC stages, then they have that in spades these days.  If you like crazy props and such, not so much.

 

 

Quote

USPSA would also need to increase the return on investment for those sponsors; I think at the moment they get very little return for their support and that needs to change, increases in video and photographic coverage would help. If the stages are better presented then things look better on digital media and that increases interest.

 

This is the elephant in the room.  Sponsors get little from sponsoring a match and I don't think a few more photos and banners is going to fix it unless you can get those photos and videos in front of a lot more people that aren't USPSA shooters.

 

I've said it and been confirmed by other sponsors-- there is almost no ROI from sponsoring matches.  Shooters may lean towards purchasing from sponsors, but its kind of like 'Made in USA' in that regard-- a few people value it highly, some use it as a tiebreaker, most would rather save a buck. 

 

Sponsoring shooters is a noticeably better return and lasts longer.  Who can remember who sponsored Max or Stoeger 2 years ago, versus who sponsored any of the Nationals 2 years ago?

 

I still sponsor matches even still, because I think it's the right thing to do, but if we could figure out how to get sponsors a measurable return?  Katie bar the door.  It's going to take a lot more eyeballs though, and that's a tough one. 

 

[BritinUSA]

It bothered me a lot about the ROI for sponsors; That’s why I never charged them for any of my photos, lost count of how many ended up in magazine ads and catalogs...

 

The live streaming could bring in more viewers, its doable now. It would not cost much.

 

 

[nso123]

On 11/6/2020 at 4:40 PM, BritinUSA said:

It bothered me a lot about the ROI for sponsors; That’s why I never charged them for any of my photos, lost count of how many ended up in magazine ads and catalogs...

 

The live streaming could bring in more viewers, its doable now. It would not cost much.

 

 

The thing sponsors get now is an increased footprint on social media, and it has very little cost. Let’s say company x provides you with a 20% discount on their product and they know you have a good social media presence.  You make posts every time you shoot a match and do well thanking them for their support. If that influences a couple of your followers to make a purchase they are getting a return, plus they are writing your discount off. I am sure they follow who is tagging them and posting about them to a degree. I have a small fly fishing business and use this exact strategy. I am able to see where customers come to my website from (Instagram for example) and can track the purchases. I can also see orders roll in when one of my “ambassadors” has made a post with my materials in it. 
 

Basically, what I am saying is that I am willing to bet individual sponsorship, if done with a bit of strategy, might have a larger return than a prize table does. 

[BritinUSA]

I agree completely.
Sponsoring shooters will give a better return, the more they post on social media the more revenue can be generated. 
Adverts in magazines and online require good photos, does USPSA help in that regard?

[shred]

On 11/6/2020 at 5:21 PM, shred said:

Sponsoring shooters is a noticeably better return and lasts longer.  Who can remember who sponsored Max or Stoeger 2 years ago, versus who sponsored any of the Nationals 2 years ago?

13 hours ago, nso123 said:

Basically, what I am saying is that I am willing to bet individual sponsorship, if done with a bit of strategy, might have a larger return than a prize table does. 

I think I mentioned that Most sponsors I've talked to seem to have picked up on it too.  Sponsoring a match is pretty much a one-shot deal.

Shooters that want to be sponsored should take note...

 

[MVPFc]

FWIW from a company who’s sponsored a match or two...

 

The problem for companies and sponsorship is that outside of Nationals, there is zero USPSA oversight. Even at the state and area level. If a company sends $5k in product to an area match multiple things can happen with the product:

Put on shooter prize table.

Put in shooter bags.

Used in random draw.

Put on RO prize table.

Raffled off for cash.

Given as prize for “x” place.

Never makes it past staff hands.

 

If a company sends product and the last example happens, there is zero recourse for the company. USPSA does not oversee any matches besides Nationals. By no oversight that means no financial accountability from match fees or proceeds, no guidance or rules on sponsorship. The only real accountability is that in order to be a sanctioned match, USPSA rules must be followed. 
 

Could the company sue, sure. But the exuberant legal fees and the backlash from shooters would be detrimental. 
 

I know that if there were more checks and balances when it came to sponsorship, donated items and financial responsibility, more companies would come back to sponsoring matches. 
 

I do know that USPSA has been doing much better in recent years for Nationals sponsors. Even though I couldn’t make the match, I saw plenty of PT and Blue Bullets logos in videos and saw quite a few of their sponsored shooters in USPSA’s posts. 
 

ROI is a different story. I’ll skip the book I could write on it and just say... If matches had accountability and sponsors ready to donate, it would be much easier for sponsors to work with the match to ensure their investment sees a return.