No Added Money At Sparta

From ATA minutes:

It was the unanimous decision of the Executive Committee to accept Executive Director
Gipson’s recommendation that no added money be provided

 

It didn't seem to affect the attendance.

It's a damned if they do and damned if they don't situation.

 

Seems reasonable.

You see, FG, in marketing spend analysis there are two key variables:

Return-on-Investment (how much any single measure returns on a dollar-for-dollar basis; it is a tool primarily for establishing your marketing mix) and Point-of-Diminishing-Returns (the tipping point at which marketing investment ceases or becomes less profitable to the bottom line).

In this case, the 2014 Grand was the most profitable they have had in Sparta, so the recommendation to continue spending at current levels is just good business (and common) sense.

Based on the terrific financials in the report, it seems we should be congratulating the ATA EC on running a very successful and professional organization.

 

Being a non profit, where will this money go? Maybe all the EC can have a gun and more travel expenses!

 

Or maybe (mabee) they could kneel between their Corvette and some flowers and post small minded comments on ATS.com.

 

Michael -the ATA's official designation is a not-for-profit public charitable corporation.

I'd suggest you brush up on your business law and remove the above post.

 

Jo2
Robert, you couldn't have a personal interest in this money could you? Maybe a gun or travel expenses to come from north of the border being a state delegate and all. Sorry to have bumped a sore spot. Thanks for the spelling correction.

 

Michael, I have absolutely no personal interest in the ATA's money. I, like all delegates, am not compensated for any expenses that I incur, by the ATA, for shooting costs, gun costs, or meeting costs. My interest in the ATA's money is solely for financial security of the organization.

You are correct in your assumption about bumping a sore spot. The spot that you bumped is the pain in my ass that is caused by people who insist on making false accusations, inflammatory statements, and outright lies about those who actually put an effort into running the organization.

 

It was the Martin's money., not the ATA's money, and the rumor is it was not spent per their directions,

 

The ATA and The Grand are both being running profitably, a key mark of proper management. DLS just needs to try to kick up dust as all his rantings keep getting dismissed.

 

FYI: The shoot in Sparta had fewer shooters last year than any time since the Korean War. The whored name hardly fits. Keep up the good work!

The above post from a delegate that is happy with the status quo.

 

As I understand it the CC was down too? About 3%?

Guess GW22's post about all the reasons the sport is down (which have nothing to do with the ATA) was right after all, wouldn't you say?

Maybe send him an apology note? Wait, I think he left this site a month ago. I wouldn't bother.

 

The CC and the folks that shoot there are making Sparta affordable. They have even added 2 more dates.

The shoot at Sparta lowest since the Korean War and we have a delegate thumping his chest about his successes.

You are a management Guru.

 

GW left the forum when he lost the NW bet. Hmmm where is that $100?

 

Some people can see the forest, some people can only ever see a tree. It sounds like the bark is peeling and in real bad shape from your vantage point.

 

Last year was the first year I can remember no added money at all. Even removed AA points from C of C. Why even shoot C of C if your state does not reimburse you?

 

I found it a bit odd that the ATA minutes list the total number of CLASSIFIED shooters per year w/added money but point out that the year with the most added money had the lowest ATTENDANCE. Anyone check the actual attendance per year? It is listed the Grand program each year. The numbers in the Grand program do not seem to match up with the statement made in the official minutes regarding lowest attendance being the year with most added money.

 

Can't you be classified without shooting. I had pals that would send their cards with their buddies to get pins from Vandalia.

 

Yes, you can get classified without shooting and it happens often at major shoots. So my question is why would the official ATA minutes list the total number of classified shooters then call it attendance? Attendance, according to the Grand program, refers to the number of entrants in each event. The Grand program does not list the number of classified shooters per year.

 

Looking back I've never been ask if I'm classifying for a pin or to shoot so how would they know?

If you have the answer please be specific and not speculating.

 

Be specific, okay here goes. These numbers are from the ShootATA.com website and the minutes of the Dec. 2014 ATA meeting. The numbers refer to the Grand American Trapshoot.


Year 2008, attendance 27,973, classified 3447, no added money
Year 2009, attendance 27,859, classified 3444, no added money
Year 2010, attendance 29,159, classified 3473, $100K added
Year 2011, attendance 30,599, classified 3483, $300K added
Year 2012, attendance 32,763, classified 3260, $450K added
Year 2013, attendance 29,337, classified 3426, $100K added
Year 2014, attendance 29,179, classified 3490, no added money


The quote from the official ATA minutes is: "(Note: the year of lowest attendance in the 7 years above was the year of most added money)"

It is clear to me that the year with the most added money was the year with the HIGHEST attendance, not the lowest attendance.

As for how I know that shooters get classified at some shoots without actually shooting, that comes from classifying 1,000's of shooters over the last 7 years at three of the largest ATA shoots in the country. The Ohio State Shoot, The Cardinal Classic and The Buckeye.

 

Where did the post go from the forum member with the avatar of a cardinal with a slash through it? I am sorry but I don't remember his sign on name. He asked me to be specific about what I was writing so I laid out the numbers only to find he removed his post!

-------------------------------------------------------
Mod response:
Usually if someone removes their post quickly we permit the removal but since you responded to the post we have put it back up.

 

I think there was a -don't ban me bro- there may have been another, not sure. added... There was cardinal one had a line through it I think.

Just a guess, classified is the number of shooters that were classified. Attendance is the number of shoot participants in all registered events. So 12 events, or whatever it is, would be 1 classified and 12 in attendance if the contestant participated in all events.

So if you look at the 2012 number there were 3260 classified participants that competed on an average of 10 events (32673).

I could be wrong, I think if you look at the competed events the average is higher per participant when added money involved but the actual number of people were down. There could be an explanation for it, maybe multiple with one underlying it all, or more.

2008 - 8.12 events per participant. no added money 3447 classified
2009 - 8.09 events per participant. no added money - 3444
2010 - 8.40 events per participant. 100K added - 3473
2011 - 8.79 events per participant. 300K added - 3483
2012 - 10.05 events per participant 450K added - 3260
2013 - 8.56 events per participant. 100K added - 3426
2014 - 8.36 events per participant. no added money 3490

That is my take. I could be wrong.

Shoot well.

John

 

Don,

jhunts post above explains the same thing I was thinking of when I posted.

 

Leonidas and jhunts,

Thanks for your replies. It is clear from the numbers that added money does in fact have a positive influence on attendance numbers. Whether more shooters were there shooting fewer events or fewer shooters came and shot more events each, the attendance was higher with added money.


Lines 464 - 466 of the ATA minutes says "Exectutive Director Gipson thinks there is convincing evidence now that added money does not influence attendance. He recommends that the ATA not add any money again in 2015." Ex. Dir. Gipson's conclusion and recommendation do not ring true when looking the numbers.

 

It may have not been the money per se, it was the requirement of shooting all of the certain events. So the same number of people (actually less) shot more events than normal.

So the cost of the added money, 100k was offset by an additional amount off daily fees and purse money, etc...if it was a requirement of the added money. The offset was a loser, and less actual people participated, which I guess was the goal.

If given the chance you may have had a huge turn out for the money if only the championship event was required. That however was not the case and we may never know.

Of course that is if I remember correctly. Maybe I will try to find what the requirements were, later.

Shoot well

John

 

Looks like to me the 450k jumped attendance close to 10%

 

I read that the 450k got shooters to shoot more events but did not get more shooters to the event.

Attendance to me is number of shooters that made the trip. Stuarts site handles it the same way under the demographics section. I can think of a venue or 2 that would have far better results with the added money. Using it in such a manner would hurt some feelings.

Maybe for once the ATA sees the futility of enticing more shooters to Sparta with cash but rather ATA points.

 

In every Grand program I have ever received there is a page titled GRAND AMERICAN ATTENDANCE. That page lists the entries per event for as many years back as will fit on the page, or in the case of recent Grands, the entries since 2006. Using John's figure of 10.05 events per shooter in 2012 (year of highest added money) and applying that to the 3490 that were classified in 2014 (no added money) would yield 35,074 entries. The highest number of entries we have had since moving to Sparta is 36,663 in 2007, a year in which 2 whole days of shooting were added to the shoot! If we would have had those 35,074 entries in 2014 it would have been 20.2% higher than what we actually had in 2014. I would consider a 20.2% increase in attendance as extremely significant.

 

When the Martins added the Lewis money, less shooters shot more targets hoping to get in on that action in 2012.

SO, added money does create more participation (even if by less shooters) than no added money.

HAP

 

What the do you think would be the result if $100K in added money were added to a shoot at the Cardinal Center?

 

LOL!

 

that is a good one flyer, I hope the sparta lovers dont see it.

Zimmie

 

Oh, they see it.

Flyersarebest

 

Let's not make this a I hate Sparta thread but it can be a I love CC thread.

Larry, Mo, Curly and Shemp? Just under assumed names and always lurking in the shadows. They are here more than the mods.

 

The ATA figures putting money into the shoot is not in the best interest of it's membership. No argument if it isn't bringing in more.

 

But where did that money come from?

 

Dividends, if it don't at least break even it becomes an added expense ... The donations made by the Martins were not intended to get them a return on their money, I feel the intention was to chum the waters and bring out more shooters ... The ATA is not in a position to donate like the Martins did, being as the ATA is dealing with member money (Fees and dues ) ... If the ATA made an option where everyone could (option) pay an extra dollar when they sign up and make it a progressive" added money jack pot" in time it could be quite substancial and be an added option in the programs ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Is that why the generous Martins stopped the donations?

 

The Martins donations did exactly what they intended, to a degree. It caused more targets to be shot even if the shooter numbers wasn't what was hoped for. Less shooters shot more targets to be eligible for the pay-outs.

No added money will see less events shot/target totals if my guess is right.

HAP

 

The only ones who know for sure why the Martins stopped donateing after ($550,000 in donations) would be them ... WPT ... (YAC) ...

 

Pretty much the bottom line HAP. Doesn't really matter how many people show up as long as they spend enough money.

What did Winston, as in Churchill , say?

Nevaaaaar, have so few, given so much?

Flyersarebest

 

No added money at Sparta? Saved their money this year to help buy a building they will never own.

Now we will see if it affects attendance a little.

 

Might be the best decision they made this year. The big money is the shoot at the CC the weekend before the Cardinal Classic.

 

I would think if you donate money to an organization you want to help then some people within the organization discuss you in a derogatory way you might be inclined to back away and use your financial ability to help a couple clubs who appreciate your generosity.

 

I read the announcement but still thought this would be changed.