USPSA/SCSA New Membership Fees

[Hoops]

15 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

Missing from that breakdown is a count of how many members shoot either USPSA or SC. So combined participation could be anywhere between 17,237 and 23,829... which is well shy of the total membership, there are a lot of members who don't shoot at all.

It probably is a merged number of USPSA/SCSA members shooting one or both (or none) types of matches. About the only firm figure would be non-members shooting.  Whether that is influenced by the new fees only time will tell.  There will be new members join and current members lapse….the net gain (or loss) will show up next year.  I personally hope it’s a net gain.  

[Joe4d]

Does USPSA and SC have seperate memberships ? I thought it was combined

[Squirrel45]

Combine

 

[bigdawgbeav]

It's my understanding that the Lifetime Membership is still $500 and won't increase to $1000 until Oct 1.  If you plan to continue with USPSA/SCSA then this is the path I recommend.  At the current rate of $65 a year that's only 7.6 years you would need to keep going.  On the plus side you no longer have to remember to renew

[BritinUSA]

For anyone considering Life Membership, I would suggest you look first at the latest financials. If things continue the way things are going the org might be out of money in 2-3 years.

[Racinready300ex]

On 8/28/2023 at 1:22 PM, bigdawgbeav said:

the last local match I attended there were 98 guns registered and only 8 shooters total that didn't have a USPSA number.  Match before that there were 47 guns and 15 shooters without memberships (although that match typically gets more new shooters than other local matches)

 

When you quote numbers like that and say 47 guns, how many unique shooters where those 47 guns? Then you said 15 shooters, not guns that weren't members. How many guns did those shooters represent?

 

It really muddies the water when counting shooters that shoot several divisions. If there were 30 unique shooters and 15 were non-members that looks different than 15 out of 47. 

[Joe4d]

7 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

For anyone considering Life Membership, I would suggest you look first at the latest financials. If things continue the way things are going the org might be out of money in 2-3 years.

That or look where nearly half of the budget goes and ask if you want to be a contributor to that, in a sport run for the most part by unpaid volunteers.

[Racinready300ex]

On 8/26/2023 at 8:18 PM, truespode said:

No incentive to be a member of you aren't doing majors. But if activity fees were higher for non members then clubs could help incentivize getting members because they would charge higher fees to compensate so there is a financial pay back by being a member and paying less match fees. 

 

I think this is the wrong approach. Match directors already have a lot on there plates. You proposal you'd hope would incentivize....we'll really it would punish them if they can't get people to join. So you're proposal is to punish MD's by making them pay higher activity fee's if they can't get their shooters to join. 

 

Now the MD has a choice, they can track who's a member and who isn't and charge two different prices while explaining to the non-members why they need to pay more than the gun in front of them. Or they can eliminate all that hassle and just raise the price on everyone to offset the increase.(probably the way to go) Of course now he has to explain to everyone why he's increasing the prices. 

 

Another option for the MD, is drop affiliation and lower prices. Then stop reporting scores to HQ and just shoot for the fun of it. Or they could become a IDPA or PCSL club that don't have activity fee's. We need to keep in mind USPSA isn't the only game in town, just raising prices wont always work. 

[Boomstick303]

3 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

Another option for the MD, is drop affiliation and lower prices. Then stop reporting scores to HQ and just shoot for the fun of it. Or they could become a IDPA or PCSL club that don't have activity fee's. We need to keep in mind USPSA isn't the only game in town, just raising prices wont always work.

 

This is the world that USPSA has created.  Some clubs do not have to lower prices but they can create incentives that rewards shooters at the match they put on.  Maybe create prizes, points series for guns, reward the volunteers that are always there helping putting on the match versus paying useless fees to USPSA. 

 

MDs are starting to ask, what exactly does USPSA give the local club for all of the fees they pay into USPSA.  The answer would be a rule set and classification for shooters, that really has zero benefit for the club.  For a new club I can see the utility of that.  For established clubs, not so much.  

 

I started a 2 Gun match I run a couple times a year at a local range.  I had zero desire to attach USPSA to that match.  It was about the time that PCSL was starting, and the answer was clear which rule set to use.  

 

I will be curious what the revenue will be next year from established clubs versus years past paid into USPSA.

 

[bigdawgbeav]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

When you quote numbers like that and say 47 guns, how many unique shooters where those 47 guns? Then you said 15 shooters, not guns that weren't members. How many guns did those shooters represent?

 

It really muddies the water when counting shooters that shoot several divisions. If there were 30 unique shooters and 15 were non-members that looks different than 15 out of 47. 

 

 

98 guns = 55 shooters

47 guns = 38 shooters

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, bigdawgbeav said:

 

 

98 guns = 55 shooters

47 guns = 38 shooters

 

So

55 shooters, 47 members 9 non-members  19%

38 shooters, 23 members, 15 non-members. 39%

[Hoops]

This is a copy of USPSA financial report for 2022 and 2021

 

https://uspsa.org/documents/minutes/20230828%202022%20Financial%20Statements.pdf

 

[zzt]

On 9/6/2023 at 2:36 PM, Racinready300ex said:

 

So

55 shooters, 47 members 9 non-members  19%

38 shooters, 23 members, 15 non-members. 39%

 

Not really.  You don't know how many non-members shot two guns.

[Racinready300ex]

4 hours ago, zzt said:

 

Not really.  You don't know how many non-members shot two guns.

 

Read back, he broke it down into shooters vs guns to account for guys shooting multiple. 

[Sigarmsp226]

I will not be renewing my membership when mine expires in May based on the new price.

[old558]

I will be renewing my membership again! I'm not sure what this years fee was and $65 dollars for next year sounds like a lot. For comparison I think IDPA is $50 per year

I shot 15 Steel Challenge matches this year, so if dues had been $65. it would have cost $4.33 per match. Fuel and ammo cost have had a far greater impact on me.

I like to be able to go to the SCSA site and look up my info, compare myself to others and use the tools they offer. Uniformity of stages lets me know that whatever % I am is consistent everywhere else.

If you want to join a club and enjoy the benefits its probably going to cost something and I enjoy Steel Challenge! $65. is not a deal breaker.

Final thought. Lots of clubs charge extra for non members so why not in Steel Challenge. No reason members should have to pay for someone else. Also no reason that people only shooting a few matches should pay $65a year.

Edited November 21, 2023 by old558