Limited optics strong early showing

[RJH]

15 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Looks like Iron Nats has 500 shooters at 325 so 162k vs this area at 450 shooters and 210 ea. so about 95k. So Nat's starts out with almost $70k extra plus obviously they get more in sponsor money.

 

But, you could be right maybe expecting Nat's to not loose lots of money is asking to much. Or maybe your other comment is right, when you said Nat's shouldn't loose lots of money. Who knows, you certainly can't make up your mind.

 

Around 80 of those at Ironsight Nationals are staff. So you're not gaining $325 per head there you're losing quite a bit for hotels, per diem, travel, etc. 

 

I have no idea what it cost to put on a major match. When I used to do my matches, I was happy when I got the targets and s*** paid for. But those were just local matches, and the staff was me and some slaves, errrr my kid and wife

[whan]

Caveat that I don't know the ins and outs of the costs to put on a major match

 

That being said, as a broader concept, I view nationals in two ways

1. In the current format, where nationals is essentially a mostly amateur event with a few pros sprinkled in, it should be running at breakeven or a profit. Given it's mostly a large fun event for amateurs, largely made up of non GM/Ms that won't be close to competing for the overall title, the org should be making a profit on people who are attending for fun. Whether that's via trimming down the costs or increasing participation fees doesn't matter as much for me.
2. If nats was slimmed down to a smaller event, filled with actual title contenders (or at minimum top performers from area matches), and was a more polished event that drew actual membership interest, you could make an argument for having it running at a loss. However, it would have to actually be an event that drew significant interest and excitement from the membership, sort of how the Crossfit Games do for that sport

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Looks like Iron Nats has 500 shooters at 325 so 162k vs this area at 450 shooters and 210 ea. so about 95k.

I think you just like to argue.  210 is pretty cheap for a modern area match. A2 is $325.

 

I don't know if A2 has to pay a bunch to rio salado, but I suspect nationals pays quite a bit to the host sites (talladega, universal, etc....), and I also know A1 paid very little to our club in terms of 'rent' or fees, but we did use the match to fund some range improvements that will outlast the match.

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

 

Around 80 of those at Ironsight Nationals are staff. So you're not gaining $325 per head there you're losing quite a bit for hotels, per diem, travel, etc. 

 

 

Oh yeah, forgot Area matches don't have staff. 

[RJH]

20 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Oh yeah, forgot Area matches don't have staff. 

 

Yeah but that's a $26,000 hickey left out, I'm just trying to be consistent. I'm not saying they're doing everything right at Nationals, but if we're going to do figures we need to figure things.

 

And that 26,000 is just entry fees you're not collecting, not 500 each or so in hotels in per diems. At 500 each that's 40 Grand so now we've had a $66,000 swing, and if it's closer to a thousand each well now we're up to 106,000. I don't know what the actual exact figures on per diems and such are, but you can't just rule that stuff out and say 500 * 325 = x, when in actuality it equals x - quite a bit

[RJH]

It would be interesting if USPSA published a spreadsheet or something with income and outgoing at Nationals, id it was justified people could shut up, and if it wasn't well we could figure something out LOL. But it looks like right now we just get to do a lot of the speculation

[Racinready300ex]

50 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

Yeah but that's a $26,000 hickey left out, I'm just trying to be consistent. I'm not saying they're doing everything right at Nationals, but if we're going to do figures we need to figure things.

 

And that 26,000 is just entry fees you're not collecting, not 500 each or so in hotels in per diems. At 500 each that's 40 Grand so now we've had a $66,000 swing, and if it's closer to a thousand each well now we're up to 106,000. I don't know what the actual exact figures on per diems and such are, but you can't just rule that stuff out and say 500 * 325 = x, when in actuality it equals x - quite a bit

 

My comment there was kind of a joke, area matches have staff too. At least around here they do. The Area matches I've been involved in had hotels, shirts  and lunch for staff, plus staff dinner and prizes. All the same s#!t pointed out that makes Nationals a money hole. But at the end of the match they had money left over for the junior camp. 

 

Yes it should take less staff for a area match. But maybe nationals doesn't need 21 stages. If a area match can do 500 shooters on 13-14 stages in one day nationals can too. But reducing costs isn't really on the table is it? At the end of the day it doesn't really matter we've decided as a organization that dues need to increase to cover the extra cost of nationals. 

 

1 hour ago, RJH said:

It would be interesting if USPSA published a spreadsheet or something with income and outgoing at Nationals, id it was justified people could shut up, and if it wasn't well we could figure something out LOL. But it looks like right now we just get to do a lot of the speculation

 

It's kind of strange we don't have that information isn't it? Every other organization I've been involved in has been much more transparent and forth coming with information. 

[BritinUSA]

If there was ever an IRS audit, USPSA would have to provide detailed accounts of income and expenses. Any accountant worth their salary would have that data anyway so they could accurately complete the necessary tax forms. 

 

I can think of no valid reason why that information should be withheld from the members.

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Oh yeah, forgot Area matches don't have staff. 

as I mentioned previously, staff at area matches typically cost alot less. Probably half as much tops. Probably even less at some area matches. They are able to leverage alot of the resources of the host club volunteers who volunteer to help out their local range because they only have to do it once every 5-10 years.

 

It's possible nationals could run with cheaper and less qualified staff, but I think it's probably a good thing to have experienced RM's and even RMI's on most of the stages.

 

Of course that may only be part of the picture. I don't claim to know where all the money goes to at nationals, but I can say with certainty that the staff at nationals cost significantly more, and I bet the prize table at nationals costs significantly more too. It certainly goes quite a bit deeper than any area match I've been to, although A2 also goes pretty deep (and has a similar entry fee).

Edited August 17, 2023 by motosapiens

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

It would be interesting if USPSA published a spreadsheet or something with income and outgoing at Nationals, id it was justified people could shut up, and if it wasn't well we could figure something out LOL. But it looks like right now we just get to do a lot of the speculation

I agree. It would be very interesting. I have had access to that info for A1 the years we hosted it, and some of the numbers are surprising. Speculation is better than working, however.

[Racinready300ex]

3 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

as I mentioned previously, staff at area matches typically cost alot less. Probably half as much tops. Probably even less at some area matches. They are able to leverage alot of the resources of the host club volunteers who volunteer to help out their local range because they only have to do it once every 5-10 years.

 

It's possible nationals could run with cheaper and less qualified staff, but I think it's probably a good thing to have experienced RM's and even RMI's on most of the stages.

 

Of course that may only be part of the picture. I don't claim to know where all the money goes to at nationals, but I can say with certainty that the staff at nationals cost significantly more, and I bet the prize table at nationals costs significantly more too. It certainly goes quite a bit deeper than any area match I've been to, although A2 also goes pretty deep (and has a similar entry fee).

 

I've made no claim that staff wasn't a cost, I was making the point that my quick math didn't include nationals staff they also didn't include area match staff. Both are a thing everyone should know that. Also area matches have to pay the host club too since you keep bringing that up. 

 

I do like the point about we'd have to sacrifice quality of officials though. It's like when government wants to cut spending and the only things that they can think of is let criminals out of jail and reduce police and fire department budgets. Make people know that they will suffer if they want to save money. Solid strategy TBH 

[motosapiens]

Just now, Racinready300ex said:

Also area matches have to pay the host club too since you keep bringing that up. 

 

How much exactly?

 

For a1 at our range it was $10/shooter directly to the host club for the use of the range and all the facilities. Do you suppose talladega is getting more per shooter? or less?

[Racinready300ex]

Just now, motosapiens said:

 

How much exactly?

 

For a1 at our range it was $10/shooter directly to the host club for the use of the range and all the facilities. Do you suppose talladega is getting more per shooter? or less?

 

You'd probably need to get the numbers from your AD or the MD. Your match paid 5k that's not nothing. I think the ones i was in it was more like 10 but I can't really remember. It's been years ago now. How long ago was A1 you were working?

 

I don't doubt Talladega is expensive, HQ should probably negotiate and check out different ranges. That's one way to save money. 

 

I'm not trying to say Nationals is cheap, but I don't think we should loose lots of money on them either. Which above you even said yourself but at the same time you keep trying to make the point it's not possible to cut costs. I really don't get your angle. 

 

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

You'd probably need to get the numbers from your AD or the MD. Your match paid 5k that's not nothing. I think the ones i was in it was more like 10 but I can't really remember. It's been years ago now. How long ago was A1 you were working?

 

 

I have worked 8-9 A1's since 2013.  The matches in 2021 and 2023 were at my home range, where I was on the BOD.

 

$10/shooter is pretty much nothing. It's the same we charge for a member putting on a ccw class for the public.

 

Quote

I'm not trying to say Nationals is cheap, but I don't think we should loose lots of money on them either. Which above you even said yourself but at the same time you keep trying to make the point it's not possible to cut costs. I really don't get your angle. 

You have misunderstood. I have never said it was not possible to cut costs. I simply pointed out some of the differences between a national event and an area event the way they are currently run, based on my experience working many of each in the last few years. I did that to counter the simplistic argument that 'if area matches can break even, nationals should too.'  Certainly that argument is correct *if* you intend to run nationals like an area match. I think most people expect a national match to be better organized, better built, better staffed and a better experience overall than an area match, but I also understand that many people really enjoy more prop-heavy and elaborate stages (like at A3 when I've been). I don't think you'll ever see nats be like A3 because those elaborate prop stages have had some competitive equity issues over the years.

 

 

I don't have an 'angle'. I'm simply participating in a speculative discussion. Most of us in the discussion have almost zero experience or knowledge on the topic. I have a little bit, from the perspective of a frequent RO and competitor, and a former board member at a hosting club. I can share that experience and knowledge, but I don't intend to give the impression that it's more than a fraction of the big picture.

 

Frankly, it seems reasonable to me that nationals should be able to break even, but without looking at the actual line items of a national match budget, it's hard to say where to cut corners and/or economize.

[Racinready300ex]

13 hours ago, motosapiens said:

 

I think most people expect a national match to be better organized, better built, better staffed and a better experience overall than an area match, b

 

I guess that's the kicker, the Nationals I went to wasn't really any better or more organized that our Area match. In fact, it was probably less organized as several squads got moved around where they started on the first day. My squad all went to the wrong bay and had to move, but at least we were still in the same section unlike others. Wasn't the end of the world, but it showed they were really organized too. 

 

The only thing Nationals had was more stages and food at the end. I wasn't' super impressed. 

[Racinready300ex]

Back to LO talk for a second. Upcoming L2 I'm going to has LO as the 2nd biggest division. 

[mrvip27]

LO for upcoming Red Rock is now second biggest division behind carry optics. PCC being third, Open 4th, Limited 5th.

[Fishbreath]

USPSA's cost to have me work CO Nationals was probably in the vicinity of $1000-$1200, and I came from close enough that I didn't max out the travel reimbursement.

 

I worked Battle for the North Coast last weekend, and the cost to that match was probably in the $400-$500 range.

 

Some of that difference is the much longer hotel stay required to shoot and work a Nationals, but the travel reimbursement and per diem make a big difference too. Not counting ammo, I was break-even at Nationals, whereas I'm usually out of pocket a bit to work a Level 2. If you count prizes, I made money shooting/working Nationals. This is probably not a bad thing—if working a Nationals is free, or better than free, you can be choosier about your staff.

[RJH]

 

 

Up to 100 at the newly renamed handgun Nationals

 

[SufferInSilence]

Don’t let that gravy train stop! Full speed ahead to a permanent division.  

[cheby]

It looks to me that LO is cannibalizing CO. Locally I see most of the LO shooters used to be CO shooters. Essentially we are splitting CO in two divisions - CO and LO.  

[MHicks]

I'm sure quite a few LO shooters have been shooting CO. Some to get classified and then it remains to be seen which division they stick with. But with the recent apparent popularity of LO, I  think it would be better to keep them separate rather then combine them into one humongous division.

[RJH]

7 hours ago, cheby said:

It looks to me that LO is cannibalizing CO. Locally I see most of the LO shooters used to be CO shooters. Essentially we are splitting CO in two divisions - CO and LO.  

 

Here LO has pulled shooters from basically every other division. Some of us used to shoot limited or single stack. Some used to shoot carry-ops, and a few used to shoot open. 

 

It would make sense that most came from carry ops in most places though, as that has been the largest division

[VeilAndrew]

At my club, we've seen the LO shooters migrate from a lot of different places. Some shooting 2011s they already owned, some active Open/Minor shooters, some dudes just shooting their CO guns with the magwells that came with the gun that they had to take off for CO (Shadow systems glocks, x5 legions, etc.). Even a couple open guys that are tired of shooting open.

[SufferInSilence]

It’s going to be the next hub thing.  Funny too, when the concept was rolling out, most of the  guys and shops were pumping out commander length-ish size 2011s.  Many of the post I see are fashioning towards the 5” now.  Is that just the “bigger is better” mentality or has there been a change in the whole ‘commander works better for 9mm approach? 
I’m sure we’ll all end up with one of both anyway.