From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Wed Jun 9 18:52:24 1999 Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA05094 for britdisc-outgoing; Wed, 9 Jun 1999 18:51:59 +0100 (BST) Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daffodil [137.205.192.30]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA05087 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 9 Jun 1999 18:51:57 +0100 (BST) Received: from finch-post-12.mail.demon.net (finch-post-12.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.41]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA21024 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Wed, 9 Jun 1999 18:51:48 +0100 (BST) Received: from [158.152.248.177] (helo=phidelta.demon.co.uk) by finch-post-12.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 10rmVn-000EIP-0C for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Wed, 9 Jun 1999 17:51:40 +0000 Message-ID: <n$PLnAAdZaX3Ewb+@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Date: Wed, 9 Jun 1999 00:25:17 +0100 To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk From: Wayne Retter <postmaster@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Reply-To: Postmaster <postmaster@phidelta.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Ultimate growth References: <00bb01beac63$b1454800$28a492c3@pii266> <375D715F.662FBC90@sunderland.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <375D715F.662FBC90@sunderland.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S <pjZRgFWDsQK5ViyP$l4rxVrb6a> Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk Chris Gibbs <chris.gibbs@sunderland.ac.uk> writes >Who is this 'management style' letting down? If, as you say later on, that >university clubs represent the largest division of the BUF, then are you really >expecting to change the way uni societies/clubs are run? >From mutterings I've heard recently (maybe I'm hanging around with the wrong students...), the Athletic Union structure in universities is also heading toward a basic individual membership fee basis, with additional participation fees. >Why is there a connection being made between the way the BUF is structured and >its ability to pay salaries? Surely the ability to pay salaries is dependent >only on income. As I see it: An individual membership basis provides funding in direct proportion to the number of members that exist, and indicate the scope for the number of salaried employees required to provide the required services. The current club registration basis provides a very rough indicator of the number of Ultimate players that exist, and of their needs. As a specific example - a newsletter - for the association, it's very simple to meet the target of one-per-member as the association knows how many members there are. The current system allows say, 6 per club, but how do you spot that an 'old boys' club contains 10 members, in comparison to a healthy student club of 60 to 80 members? >....similarly, is it not possible to keep a database of players and keep in >contact with them without changing to individual membership? Players move, and neglect to tell their bank, let alone the ultimate federation... They figure that word will get around, to the important people at least... It just doesn't work, even just trying to keep tabs on 'official club contacts'! >I actually think that this is similar to a very important question: What do >players actually *want* from the BUF (or whatever it might become)? >Personally, I could happily live without a printed copy of Ultimatum. I have no >need for insurance (famous last words?!), and discs aren't that expensive are >they? >The one thing that I would want from the BUF is information: >Details of tournaments and details of other players (nothing too personal!). >The cost of maintaining the information base and publishing it (using emails and >www to keep it low?) is perhaps where our money should go. Hence the *could*... I suspect that once the players decide what they want, there'll be some plan to provide it! Maybe discount deals with hire car companies, sports shop chains, airlines, hotel chains... Strangely enough: insurance could be handier than you might think (OK, sounds like a sales pitch, but there are times when it takes so long to get an NHS physio appointment that all they can say is "you seem to have recovered quite well"!) and quite a few venues are checking that there's some kind of insurance cover - especially if the public are going to be around too; and discs *could* be quite a lot cheaper... >> ... Clearly the association would have to make sure that players at >> official tournaments were all fully paid members. With the increasing >> requirement for team rosters at tournaments it would be difficult for people >> to slip the net. In any case, we think most players would want to become >> members in order to receive the benefits mentioned above. > >I personally think that this is a little naive. If you fancy playing for a team >at a tournament, would there really be anything stopping you from doing so? 1) Recognition - It's difficult to remember exactly who plays for an opposing team, but new faces stick out in a familiar crowd. 2) Endangering others benefits - hypothetical scenario: all of your team has to be paid up/rostered to receive insurance benefits, etc. If any ONE of your team isn't, the whole team looses the benefits. Then something goes wrong, and the insurance is void because of your ONE... People just don't like to run those sorts of risks. >Are we not at risk of introducing more complication if there is a different >administration style for junior/student teams to that for other teams....and >what if you're a (cliched) 'poor student' and you want to play for an open team? Maybe it'll be more complicated. Maybe it'll become simpler, if/when the student sector grows large enough to become self-supporting and goes it's own way? (what does the future hold?) >Finally, with regard to paying fees, isn't it logical that you pay according to >how much involvement you have. Some players may only play in say two/three >tournaments a year. Would £25 for this (and the newsletter telling them about >tournaments they didn't go to) appeal? Wasn't there the theory of a basic association membership fee, along with smaller tournament fees (?) i.e. changing the membership system rather than the entire payment system. It would still, therefore, be participation dependent. If you decided that a regular mailshot wasn't for you, you'd not sign up next year until you fancied playing, and then you'd get a temporary membership to cover you for the tournament? >Here's a suggestion: the BUF runs the info service, and represents Ultimate to >outsiders. Players wanting to be registered pay a nominal charge. This service >should be well-advertised to students who have played at uni and are moving >on... I think that this would require a charge to be made to people that wanted to obtain information, too, even 'insiders'. How do *you* find out where your local teams/players are if they don't >A newsletter could be published online if popular enough...find a friend with a >printer for hard copies. This part isn't a problem. Finding ten people willing to contribute is near impossible, however - check out www.ultimatum.demon.co.uk and/or Ultimatum over the last 10 years and work out how many different authors/contributors there were (not that the few didn't do well) and then how many of the names don't ring other bells... >If you attend a tournament, you (and your team members) pay the entry fees, and >the organisers cover their costs. If the BUF is partly responsible for a >tournament, then it gets a part of the cash raised. Student/junior teams (with >official school/university recognition) get a reduced rate? So, what's different? In the old days (when Toby Green was the BUF) the BUF actually ran all it's own tournaments (Nationals!). Now it seems that tournaments are only BUF affiliated because they pay a tournament tax to the BUF (OK, all teams that enter the Ultim8 Tour have to be paid up BUF members) >OK, I've gone on for way too long, but if you've read this far, then you're >probably a player who actually gives a toss. As usual, all opinions are my >own...blah, blah etc. Me too, and I do. One of my problems is that I don't think I've got time to do as much about it as I'd like. One last thing, I know that several people agree with my opinions, and quite a few disagree... Wayne Retter ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Retter at home: 0181-663-4856 wayne@phidelta.demon.co.uk mobile: 07970-903420 at work: 01737-273611 wayne_retter@watsonwyatt.co.uk