A possible way to increase membership..

[PDX_Stu]

A buddy of mine was up from California last week. He tried to sign up for a very popular tourney occurring down there in the near future (108 spots). Of course, the tourney filled up the first day of sign-ups. There are about 65 players signed up for ADV and ADV Masters. About 25% do not have a PDGA number. I think it would be fair to give PDGA members priority to the sign up list. This might give the others incentive to become members. People down there were complaining that certain non-members were given preferential treatment (friends of the TD, more experienced players etc). Anyway, my friend was miffed for not getting in and I would be too.. Todd??

Cheers :chug::chug:

[Scott]

A buddy of mine was up from California last week. He tried to sign up for a very popular tourney occurring down there in the near future (108 spots). Of course, the tourney filled up the first day of sign-ups. There are about 65 players signed up for ADV and ADV Masters. About 25% do not have a PDGA number. I think it would be fair to give PDGA members priority to the sign up list. This might give the others incentive to become members. People down there were complaining that certain non-members were given preferential treatment (friends of the TD, more experienced players etc). Anyway, my friend was miffed for not getting in and I would be too.. Todd??

Cheers :chug::chug:

PDGA members receive priority when signing up for PDGA tournaments? On the surface this makes a lot of sense.

I'd be interested in hearing from some of our resident PDGA insiders. Has anything like this been discussed before?

[Pizzel]

Great idea!!!

[Chuck Kennedy]

There's no PDGA policy preventing TDs from allowing only PDGA members to enter an event for some time period to give them a chance. But that would be up to the TD. Several PDGA events are invitationals or qualifiers as it is.

[TreeLove]

As a 10-year member who has never lapsed: I think it's a great idea.

[Sam]

I have lapsed. I also think that this is a great idea.

[LegoRules]

Ditto I agree. :yay:

Cindy :)

["Over the Hill" Bob]

I'm all about FAIR, and this sounds like a very FAIR idea. Hmmmmm! If you are a paid PDGA member you get a shot at the BSF before non members? Yep, sounds fair to me! :rockon:

Bob

[Sausage Fingers]

I'm all about FAIR, and this sounds like a very FAIR idea. Hmmmmm! If you are a paid PDGA member you get a shot at the BSF before non members? Yep, sounds fair to me! :rockon:

Bob

I don't think that this applies to the BSF as it is already required to be a PDGA member to play in that tourney...:chinscratch:
:pirate:

["Over the Hill" Bob]

I don't think that this applies to the BSF as it is already required to be a PDGA member to play in that tourney...:chinscratch:
:pirate:

Dang it! Ok, the GNO!:cop:

Bob

[snap7times]

up to the td.... but PDGA could make an official announcement "encouraging" td's to give priority to PDGA members?

[Chuck Kennedy]

It's a balancing act for TDs and the PDGA. The assumption is that PDGA sanctioning helps fill tournaments. But TDs also do events as a courtesy to the PDGA and should still have the option to fill them with whatever players they can encourage to enter. Many times, they are local promoters and they may see it as beneficial to get new non-PDGA members involved in competition. But it might be worthwhile to indicate in the PDGA docs for TDs that they have the option to restrict entry to only PDGA members for some time period.

[Todd Andrews]

I like the idea. However, the problem with requiring something like that for all PDGA events is that in some parts of the country they don't have as high a percentage of PDGA members as we do here. The TD's in those areas would be put at a disadvantage and it wouldn't be advantageous for them to do this. So, to that end, I would agree that it is up to the individual TD to determine whether they should institute a policy like this or not.

[Sam]

Not a requirement. A suggestion. Offer early (read priority) registration rights to PDGA members for PDGA sanctioned events. If not all of them, at a certain level and above. I am surprised that this is not already suggested in the TD packet, actually.

[LJ Jubner]

It use to be. It was called the bump rule!

but with the invention of the $10 non fee it kills both ideas. Potential New members won't play at all or more then once for the extra $10. Why because they only play at certain courses so If the event is not at one of them they won't play and most certainly won't join.

[Chuck Kennedy]

Old news Jub. The PDGA non-member fee started in the late 90s ($5 then but membership was also lower). Most non-members have not stopped entering and pay the fee. Some surprisingly pay it more than five times per year.

[Sean Phillips]

Sounds a bit too elitist to me. :chinscratch:

However, I agree that there needs to be some sort of qualification process added to the fast filling tournaments out there. And it'll be hard to add such a process without it appearing a little elitist.

[LJ Jubner]

Old news Jub. The PDGA non-member fee started in the late 90s ($5 then but membership was also lower). Most non-members have not stopped entering and pay the fee. Some surprisingly pay it more than five times per year.

Like I said it use to be. $5/ lower membership still the same rational

I would like to see the stats of

How many nons vs reg play?
The percentage of the nons who play more than 5 times/year?*


I bet the stats are only kept as total number and the dollar amount.

Todd's excuse of" regional differences" and the pDGA not pursuing national policy once again leaves it up to the TD "The boots on the ground" person.


* That's easy money for the pDGA then, No stats, no mag just "clear blue sky"

[Chuck Kennedy]

I would like to see the stats of
How many nons vs reg play?
The percentage of the nons who play more than 5 times/year?*
Contact PDGA HQ
I bet the stats are only kept as total number and the dollar amount.
Details are tracked.
Todd's excuse of" regional differences" and the pDGA not pursuing national policy once again leaves it up to the TD "The boots on the ground" person.
Balance between forcing TDs to do certain things versus providing flexibility for TDs to deal with regional and other situational conditions.
* That's easy money for the pDGA then, No stats, no mag just "clear blue sky"
Absolutely. Why shouldn't non-member fees subsidize costs for members?

[LJ Jubner]

Contact PDGA HQ

Details are tracked.


My question is then
How does the pDGA convince these people to play sanctioned events but not ACTUALLY join the organization?



Balance between forcing TDs to do certain things versus providing flexibility for TDs to deal with regional and other situational conditions.


It's funny how forced/flexibility is used and how each is applied Like the 0 tolerance (forced) but the bagger (flexibility) policies. Lets call it what it really is C.Y.A.


Absolutely. Why shouldn't non-member fees subsidize costs for members?

If that's right Chuck then why has my membership fee's kept going up then?
To the sacred cow that is The IDGC! In Georgia?


How does the pDGA reconcile itself by purchasing fundraising discs from one of the manufactures it's supposed to be regulating? Is that contract up for bids? How often?
The speculation on the wholesale costs of producing the USDGC and Worlds Videos?
Jeez i went to the "little red box" and could not find one of them anywhere
How about the insurance policy scam. How does that work? We all now insurance companies are so magnanimous in the service they provide. I can't imagine the policy costs anywhere near the revenue generated.

[Chuck Kennedy]

The reality is that more services that volunteers have been doing for years are now gradually being paid for, but still mostly below market rates. If all volunteer efforts on the members' behalf were paid for, dues might be $200 annually, maybe more. Members have had many services provided free by volunteers to the org for a long time. I think Todd can tell you that the IDGC facility costs are actually cheaper than equivalent commercial space in the area and we get the three courses there as a bonus. Those courses were mostly paid for by manufacturer and member donations, not out of operating funds. The pro shop is doing really well with many locals driving out to the IDGC just to buy stuff at the pro shop and not even play that visit.

You have likely started seeing more services paid for at the local level with more TDs not paying out of their pockets to run events and maybe breaking even or making sub-minimum wages for their efforts. Once Park Depts start running events sometime down the road, the true costs of running an event will be seen in lower payouts. That won't happen until TDs start taking what they deserve for running events, which the PDGA allows them to do, but many have been reluctant to do so. That's starting to change slowly.

All manufacturers have access to provide the discs purchased for fundraising. PDGA takes the better deal offered or sometimes spreads it around. USDGC video isn't done or even funded by the PDGA other than maybe an ad. The Worlds DVD cost is eventually recovered in about 3 years or less. This year is likely to be even better with a lower bid than we've had and the quality appears to be as good or better based on early clips during Worlds. The PDGA insurance provider apparently provides very competitive rates if TDs are using the service. If other providers are out there, TDs are free to use them.

[Todd Andrews]

Just to add to Chuck's rebuttal, PDGA dues have not increased in at lease four years and we don't see a need to increase them anytime soon. Also, the Oregon Series looked into a separate insurance policy for our events and the quotes we received for that service were double and triple what we could get from the PDGA.

If I didn't know better JUb, one would think you worked for Fox News with your inattention to detail and lack of fact gathering. But hey, thanks again for your support.

[Magilla]

.

If I didn't know better JUb, one would think you worked for Fox News with your inattention to detail and lack of fact gathering. But hey, thanks again for your support.

:laughing: :cheerleader:

Just another day in Jubs brain.............:explode:

:whistler:

[LJ Jubner]

Just to add to Chuck's rebuttal, PDGA dues have not increased in at lease four years and we don't see a need to increase them anytime soon.

Plain and simple That's cause you have the cash cow of non members fees from dumb asses who pay the $10 and play more then 5 times per year. Still all "Clear Blue Sky"


. Also, the Oregon Series looked into a separate insurance policy for our events and the quotes we received for that service were double and triple what we could get from the PDGA.

Funny the quotes I have seen are really quite reasonable for 24/7 365. Todd you just don't see the bigger picture is all.

If I didn't know better JUb, one would think you worked for Fox News with your inattention to detail and lack of fact gathering. But hey, thanks again for your support.

Nice jab Todd. Maybe the fact that info coming from the pDGA is like pulling hens teeth. I find it interesting that as a national organization the 501.3c info we all have paid for is not available for any of us to use locally.

Want to know away to really increase membership.

Offer only two divisions Am and Pro. Oh! wait the money comes from Am's

Another short coming of DG is the coziness in which the manufactures perpetuate their own interests by allowing not only Legit wholesaler's to carry inventory but then every todd dick and harry can buy CFR's for any specific event.

[Flatroc]

Another short coming of DG is the coziness in which the manufactures perpetuate their own interests by allowing not only Legit wholesaler's to carry inventory but then every todd dick and harry can buy CFR's for any specific event.

This I don't get.
Our club has used the CFR program with great success.
For example.... some of the baskets at Whistlers Bend were purchased thru CFR gigs. (thank you INNOVA!!!!!!!!)

What's this got to do about the PDGA?
Jub, grab Kilmer and head to Whistlers. :wink2:
Breathe in the air, (hold it in for a few seconds), then jump in the North Umpqua and cool off. :rockon:
Were you trying to be funny with your todd,dick and harry?
I chuckled.
FWIW... I'd love to see two major disc golf associations.
ProDGA & AmDGA

[LJ Jubner]

This I don't get.
Our club has used the CFR program with great success.
For example.... some of the baskets at Whistlers Bend were purchased thru CFR gigs. (thank you INNOVA!!!!!!!!)

That's the point It's a conflict of interest
If you assume there are only so many discs that will sell in a year in any specific area
If a business carries a manufactures line year round
then is undercut by the same manufacturer with CFR's (not only by price but but with only certain molds are available in this or that type of plastic)

Asks the question
Why would any wholesale stock year round when he can just run events and skim off the top?*

* set aside the ethical points of taxes at Fed, State, B/O and Sales. Which I bet no TD's even claim on the personal taxes.

This sport will only become legit when all parties involved declare there gains to the tax man.

[LJ Jubner]

If I didn't know better JUb, one would think you worked for Fox News with your inattention to detail and lack of fact gathering. But hey, thanks again for your support.

The funny thing is about Faux news is there is just enough truth in their biased coverage for them to hide behind.

Here is a good one.

Oil Spill in Gulf Terrorist attack!
Foreign entity causes explosion on Oil Rig
Pollutes US waters and wastes Tax dollars

[Todd Andrews]

Plain and simple That's cause you have the cash cow of non members fees from dumb asses who pay the $10 and play more then 5 times per year. Still all "Clear Blue Sky"

Why do you have a problem with non-members helping to keep membership fees where they are? Incidentally, those fees are accounted for under Tour Events in the financial summary found here: http://www.pdga.com/files/documents/09-10_PDGA_Financial_Summary_Public.pdf . They comprise less than one fifth of the income received in that category and has remained relatively static for the last few years. It has also proven to be a reliable method for attracting new members. Recently we have been focusing on new marketing initiatives, sponsorship and other things that offset our need to raise fees. BTW, raising those fees from $5 to $10 was one of the main requests that people I talked to wanted to see happen when I joined the BoD.


Funny the quotes I have seen are really quite reasonable for 24/7 365. Todd you just don't see the bigger picture is all.

Well, then your insurance agent is more adept at manipulating the figures than the underwriter I talked to. And the bigger picture that we were looking at was trying to make the Oregon Series tournaments better for everyone involved. BTW, the PDGA makes about $2000 from the insurance that we provide.

Nice jab Todd. Maybe the fact that info coming from the pDGA is like pulling hens teeth. I find it interesting that as a national organization the 501.3c info we all have paid for is not available for any of us to use locally.

If you want more information than what is available on the website, (Like what I posted the link to above.) it is freely available to any member. All you have to do is contact the office and request the specific information you are interested in.

Want to know away to really increase membership.

Offer only two divisions Am and Pro. Oh! wait the money comes from Am's.

Actually, the reason that the Pro's have a higher membership fee is to pay for the things that directly benefit them and I have worked diligently to make sure that it stays that way. This is exactly the way we did it for the ORS. TD's were not allowed to take money from the Ams and redirect it to the Pro purse. Incidentally, I have been working for the last few years on a restructuring plan for the PDGA that does just what you are proposing. We have switched over to new accounting programs and I have been pushing to get the exact numbers for what everything costs including the differences between Am and Pro memberships.

As always, you are making assumptions about accounting and policies which you know nothing about. All you have to do is talk to a BoD member and ask some simple questions and you may be able to get the information you so desire. But no, you have to come on here and regurgitate hearsay and innuendo in public and act like and ass. Keep up the good work.

[Bullseye]

As always, you are making assumptions about accounting and policies which you know nothing about. All you have to do is talk to a BoD member and ask some simple questions and you may be able to get the information you so desire. But no, you have to come on here and regurgitate hearsay and innuendo in public and act like and ass. Keep up the good work.

http://www.tweak3d.net/forums/imagehosting/12254a885fadccc3b.gif

[snap7times]

and i thought getting an answer straight from the PDGA was so hard? ;) great stuff...

[Fancher_503]

good idea!!!

[LJ Jubner]

If the non's are really 20% of the total

So I guess the real question is

How does the pDGA retain the members who become disenfranchised?

[Todd Andrews]

How does the pDGA retain the members who become disenfranchised?

Our membership numbers have been analyzed on many occasions and our organization retains it's members on par or better than most other similar organizations. We have continued to see a growth rate in new memberships of 5 to 10% year after year. The problem is not with retaining members, but in getting members that don't play competitive disc golf. With the reorganization that I and others have proposed, we would have one umbrella organization that governs the sport in general and then smaller, separate, affiliated organizations that govern the competition side for the ams, pros, and the different international regions.

[Bob Horning]

Our membership numbers have been analyzed on many occasions and our organization retains it's members on par or better than most other similar organizations. We have continued to see a growth rate in new memberships of 5 to 10% year after year. The problem is not with retaining members, but in getting members that don't play competitive disc golf. With the reorganization that I and others have proposed, we would have one umbrella organization that governs the sport in general and then smaller, separate, affiliated organizations that govern the competition side for the ams, pros, and the different international regions.

Quick question for you Todd. It seems that the rules that limit the number of PDGA sanctioned tournaments that happen in a given number of miles from each other are rules that were made years ago to make sure that there were enough players to fill said events. Now that we are growing so much, will these rules change? Reason I ask is that there were several events that people would have liked to have here, but because of the distance rules we could not hold them, or list them as sanctioned events. Now that Disc Golf is getting so popular, it seems that these rules should reflect the growth.
Thanks

[Sam]

Excellent question, Bob. I have been wondering about this, myself. I believe that it is the State Coordinator's responsibility to enforce this so if you just slip Dion a few bucks now and again, I am betting you'll get priority scheduling.

Wait... that might not be kosher. Scrap that last part. :whistler:

[Chuck Kennedy]

The distance guidelines have been reduced steadily over the past several years. Events can be closer if the TD who sanctioned first agrees to allow the other event to happen. It's only 25 miles minimum now between C-tiers or closer if the TDs agree.

[Todd Andrews]

The distance guidelines have been reduced steadily over the past several years. Events can be closer if the TD who sanctioned first agrees to allow the other event to happen. It's only 25 miles minimum now between C-tiers or closer if the TDs agree.

Yah, what he said.

[tomw]

With 145 events listed on the tour page for the month of Sept, 2010, I think that the TD's and volenteers that help these events happen are growing the sport just fine.
IMHO, I still feel that $75 for an acational playing pro master ,PDGA dues, are to high. There should be a "touring" pro price(8 or more anticipated events played $75) and a "playing pro" price (1-7 events played $50 )

[Tim]

I wouldn't mind a TD rate either, like $25 a year or something. That's pretty much the only reason I renewed this year, and the magazine hasn't made it worth it.

[Ol' Bob]

I wouldn't join any club that would have me as a member.

http://needle-exchange.ca/images/moustache_groucho_marx.jpg

[Wes Hansen]

Oh no, there may be a God and he finally did something I can be thankful for.
I will now be renewing yearly.