Limited optics strong early showing

[abbafandr]

Sorry, but optic equipped guns do not belong in an iron sight match.  What were they thinking ( or not thinking)?

[Racinready300ex]

I'm sure they were thinking money. The org is loosing money and nationals is one of the biggest places we loose it. They certainly don't want to reduce salaries of staff or expense accounts so trying to increase the income at nat's is probably a good move.

 

The org loosing $14k less in one match is a win even if it's a dumb situation. 

 

9 minutes ago, abbafandr said:

Sorry, but optic equipped guns do not belong in an iron sight match.  What were they thinking ( or not thinking)?

 

[RJH]

11 minutes ago, abbafandr said:

Sorry, but optic equipped guns do not belong in an iron sight match.  What were they thinking ( or not thinking)?

 

I think the main thing they were thinking was letting limited optics in was going to bring the income up over $14,000. And that was just with the original 45 slots. If Nationals operates at a loss as is often claimed, that $14,000 plus dollar deficit has to be made up through membership dues and activity fees. As a member I would much rather them open up limited optics then have to pay 14 grand out of other coffers

[Boomstick303]

Says who?  Because it is named Iron Sights Nationals?  In recent years there seems to be no defined definition for how exactly USPSA matches divisions when it comes to what is included for each Nationals match. Yes they tend to create a name that encompasses the divisions being shot in that particular Nationals, but that is about it.  

 

If people want to gripe that a provisional should not have a Nationals I could on board with that more than people griping about USPSA trying to fill out a poorly attended Nationals.  One should really be asking why is USPSA holding an "Iron Sights Nationals", when that venture is most likely NOT going to fill up which it looked like is exactly was going to happen. 

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by Boomstick303

[Racinready300ex]

15 minutes ago, Boomstick303 said:

Says who?  Because it is named Iron Sights Nationals?  In recent years there seems to be no defined definition for how exactly USPSA matches divisions when it comes to what is included for each Nationals match. Yes they tend to create a name that encompasses the divisions being shot in that particular Nationals, but that is about it.  

 

If people want to gripe that a provisional should not have a Nationals I could on board with that more than people griping about USPSA trying to fill out a poorly attended Nationals.  One should really be asking why is USPSA holding an "Iron Sights Nationals", when that venture is most likely NOT going to fill up which it looked like is exactly was going to happen. 

 

 

For me I think it was probably a good move for $$ reasons.

 

But, it does look bad doesn't it? I mean there is the obvious it's called "iron sight nationals". Plus the BOD said there wouldn't be a LO nationals. It's likely that people weren't really prepared as it wasn't expected. Then it was added last minute with only 45 spots. Not much of a nationals with such short notice and such a limited number of slots. Vary half assed IMO and clearly a money grab. It's also my understanding the BOD didn't do this, this was all DME's idea. Should he do that? Shouldn't the President be running nationals? Oh wait we keep kicking out our presidents. 

 

HQ is pretty much trash when it comes to optics. Everything they do looks terrible. 

[Joe4d]

Like losing money on Nationals.. absolute incompetence.
Prestigious national match that can draw 500 people and lots of sponsors and you cant figure out how to turn a profit ? 

 

[Boomstick303]

18 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

HQ is pretty much trash when it comes to optics. Everything they do looks terrible. 

 

For this reason alone it makes complete sense the board took the action of adding LO to Iron Sights Nationals.  

 

This thread will not be open much longer.

 

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, abbafandr said:

Sorry, but optic equipped guns do not belong in an iron sight match.  What were they thinking ( or not thinking)?

that doesn't even make sense. what is an 'iron sight match'? except for nationals the last few years, all divisions shoot in every match. To me it makes total sense to include the limited optics division in this match because there wasn't any other national match with limited optics, and because there is apparently still room.

[motosapiens]

22 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

Like losing money on Nationals.. absolute incompetence.
Prestigious national match that can draw 500 people and lots of sponsors and you cant figure out how to turn a profit ? 

 

sounds like you are volunteering to be an MD. I would advise starting with a section match and let us know how it goes.

[RJH]

I'm pretty sure when iron sight Nationals was announced limited optics was not a thing.

 

I would also assume that they said there would not be a limited optics Nationals, because all the Nationals were already set and the expectation was that they would all fill up and have a waiting list. But it turned out iron sights couldn't fill up on its own

 

I don't think the optics of this are bad at all, the optics of losing $14,000 when there was apparently a very easy way to keep that from happening seems to be great optics. And probably something that the board should be applauded for 

 

As far as a provisional division having Nationals, USPSA just allowed modified in the three gun Nationals, so there is precedent. I don't recall if any of the handgun divisions had a Nationals when they were provisional though. It's been awhile and I slept since then. 

 

 

Edited August 16, 2023 by RJH

[rowdyb]

Or do something to make all the iron sight divisions a more attractive choice for competitors, locally and nationally.

[RJH]

2 minutes ago, rowdyb said:

Or do something to make all the iron sight divisions a more attractive choice for competitors, locally and nationally.

 

Like make a division that you can't even say on Brian Enos forum lol. I think that's about the only thing that will help iron sight shooters fill Nationals. 

 

Or probably better overall, kill major power factor. But anytime something like that is brought up there's a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth, so you get limited optics at Ironsight Nationals

 

 

And in the end I'm not sure any of that helps either. The vast majority seem to want to shoot optics, so there's probably always going to be optics at Ironsight Nationals from now on

[BritinUSA]

1 hour ago, Joe4d said:

Like losing money on Nationals.. absolute incompetence.
Prestigious national match that can draw 500 people and lots of sponsors and you cant figure out how to turn a profit ? 

If the sponsorship is paid in product it does not provide any financial benefit to the match.

 

If every sponsor provides product and not cash then the full cost of the competition must be met by entry fees or subsidy.

[Racinready300ex]

8 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

If the sponsorship is paid in product it does not provide any financial benefit to the match.

 

If every sponsor provides product and not cash then the full cost of the competition must be met by entry fees or subsidy.

 

Area matches manage to break even with out requiring cash from sponsors, so Nationals should be able to pull it off if there was a desire too.

[motosapiens]

12 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

Like make a division that you can't even say on Brian Enos forum lol. I think that's about the only thing that will help iron sight shooters fill Nationals. 

 

Or probably better overall, kill major power factor. But anytime something like that is brought up there's a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth, so you get limited optics at Ironsight Nationals

 

 

And in the end I'm not sure any of that helps either. The vast majority seem to want to shoot optics, so there's probably always going to be optics at Ironsight Nationals from now on

 

if power factor was the problem, then people would shoot production. but they don't. I think iron sights are just too hard. Young people don't want to do hard stuff, and old people don't want to do hard stuff and can't see the sights even if they did. We may have just reached the tipping point where dots take over. Even my luddite agency (which still issues .40 to all officers, even the girls and sissies) is looking at moving to dots.

[Racinready300ex]

51 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

sounds like you are volunteering to be an MD. I would advise starting with a section match and let us know how it goes.

 

You know you're making a good point when people defend the status quo with the you don't do enough of your point is invalid argument. Clearly he doesn't have the experience to expect nationals to not loose so much money his dues need to increase. 

 

1 minute ago, motosapiens said:

 

if power factor was the problem, then people would shoot production. but they don't. 

 

it's been hashed out a million times and you already know the issue here. 

[motosapiens]

2 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Area matches manage to break even with out requiring cash from sponsors, so Nationals should be able to pull it off if there was a desire too.

That seems reasonable, but examining it exposes deeper issues. One is that area matches are typically hosted by a volunteer club, which doesn't have to pay to access the range. My club got $10 per shooter, just like they do for other events like section matches or concealed carry training. I don't know how much USPSA pays the ranges they use, but I suspect it's a bunch. 

 

Second, you have to pay for all the national office staff to show up to nationals for weeks to be in charge, instead of having the local MD who lives there running it.

 

Last, and another big-ticket item, is that nationals typically has more RO's than most area matches I've worked, and it costs more to get those RO's to the match because the travel/meal stipend for nationals is more generous than for area matches. A really generous area match might offer free hotel for the 5-ish days or $400 for people who camp, stay with friends, make their own arrangements, or already live there. Nationals is paying a hotel for 5-7 nights, plus $25/day for meals, plus $360 or so reimbursable towards travel. That's almost twice the cost per RO. On the plus side, that allows them to be much more selective, but it isn't cheap.

[motosapiens]

4 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

You know you're making a good point when people defend the status quo with the you don't do enough of your point is invalid argument.

Or perhaps one is not making a good point, but has admitted that one doesn't even shoot USPSA anymore, and has never been involved in any aspect of putting on matches, and is therefore probably not knowledgeable enough to be taken seriously.

 

I am definitely not defending the status quo. Nationals should break even or at worst not cost very much. It shouldn't lose large amounts of money, but just pointing fingers and calling names when one doesn't even go to nationals is not constructive.

[Racinready300ex]

46 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

That seems reasonable, but examining it exposes deeper issues. One is that area matches are typically hosted by a volunteer club, which doesn't have to pay to access the range. My club got $10 per shooter, just like they do for other events like section matches or concealed carry training. I don't know how much USPSA pays the ranges they use, but I suspect it's a bunch. 

 

Second, you have to pay for all the national office staff to show up to nationals for weeks to be in charge, instead of having the local MD who lives there running it.

 

Last, and another big-ticket item, is that nationals typically has more RO's than most area matches I've worked, and it costs more to get those RO's to the match because the travel/meal stipend for nationals is more generous than for area matches. A really generous area match might offer free hotel for the 5-ish days or $400 for people who camp, stay with friends, make their own arrangements, or already live there. Nationals is paying a hotel for 5-7 nights, plus $25/day for meals, plus $360 or so reimbursable towards travel. That's almost twice the cost per RO. On the plus side, that allows them to be much more selective, but it isn't cheap.

 

Certainly nationals is bigger and costs more. It also typically has more shooters who are also paying a much higher entry fee. 

 

I think this is kind of my point.

 

47 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 Nationals should break even or at worst not cost very much. It shouldn't lose large amounts of money

 

[Racinready300ex]

2 hours ago, Joe4d said:

Like losing money on Nationals.. absolute incompetence.
Prestigious national match that can draw 500 people and lots of sponsors and you cant figure out how to turn a profit ? 

 

 

Let's recap this, So Joe said the above. 

 

@motosapiens replied with 

 

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

sounds like you are volunteering to be an MD. I would advise starting with a section match and let us know how it goes.

 

I pointed out you're picking at his experience isn't' a good argument. Of course you then replied with the below statement. 

 

50 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Or perhaps one is not making a good point,

 

 

But now you're last statement was 

 

52 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Nationals should break even or at worst not cost very much. It shouldn't lose large amounts of money,

 

I seems like you're kind of saying the same thing he did, you get that right?

[Joe4d]

1 hour ago, motosapiens said:

Second, you have to pay for all the national office staff to show up to nationals for weeks to be in charge, instead of having the local MD who lives there running it.

 

Last, and another big-ticket item, is that nationals typically has more RO's than most area matches I've worked, and it costs more to get those RO's to the match because the travel/meal stipend for nationals is more generous than for area matches. A really generous area match might offer free hotel for the 5-ish days or $400 for people who camp, stay with friends, make their own arrangements, or already live there. Nationals is paying a hotel for 5-7 nights, plus $25/day for meals, plus $360 or so reimbursable towards travel. That's almost twice the cost per RO. On the plus side, that allows them to be much more selective, but it isn't cheap.

you run an event,,,, ANY event with a Budget and how much money it will bring in. THEN you plan your event.
Unless you are USPSA you dont spend a bunch of money on an event and THEN figure out how to recoup it.

You dont have to pay for national office to be there for weeks. Sounds like some folks are getting free vacation on the orgs dime.  There are also better ways to handle RO,, then spending that much money.   

[motosapiens]

5 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Certainly nationals is bigger and costs more. It also typically has more shooters who are also paying a much higher entry fee. 

 

I think this is kind of my point.

 

 

how many more shooters? how much higher is the entry fee? in my experience, many area matches have about the same number of shooters and about the same entry fee, but I only have experience with areas 1-3. Back east may be different.

[motosapiens]

4 hours ago, Joe4d said:

you run an event,,,, ANY event with a Budget and how much money it will bring in. THEN you plan your event.
Unless you are USPSA you dont spend a bunch of money on an event and THEN figure out how to recoup it.

You dont have to pay for national office to be there for weeks. Sounds like some folks are getting free vacation on the orgs dime.  There are also better ways to handle RO,, then spending that much money.   

What has been your experience at the nationals you have attended? How many of them have you worked? asking for a friend.....

[Joe4d]

My experince was it was a shooting match, nothing spectacular.. 18 stages, many of which wernt scored IAW the rule book. Nice match but nothing I wouldnt see at Fredericksburg VA sectional or Area 8.  Just double the stages.
I have run sporting events,, and as I am not a bonehead, I looked at how many people to expect, what expected entry fees could be,,, and planned my event around that.

[Racinready300ex]

16 hours ago, motosapiens said:

how many more shooters? how much higher is the entry fee? in my experience, many area matches have about the same number of shooters and about the same entry fee, but I only have experience with areas 1-3. Back east may be different.

 

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.