Monday, January 18, 2010

Burning Question

Is KEE really going to sponsor (provide paint for) the Pro Division of the NPPL? Why? For the exclusive rights to sell paint to 50 other teams?


Good ol PBR said...

$hort answer, they will sell to anyone that will pay retail.

DXS is now out of the (tournament) picture and most regional paint companies have either been bought up or run out.

If kee is selling paint exclusively than chuck's run to Malaysia must have been a good trip. har-har

Missy Q said...

LOL - way to stir it up Chuck! You have to admit that's a killer move.

anonachris said...

Figure 400 case of free paint to the pros - $8000, valued at $20 cost per case.
Budget to show up at the event with staff, etc.
$18k in the hole.

Crazy shot in the dark numbers by the way...

Sell another 360 cases at $50 to break even. That's only 7+ cases per team at 50 teams. So it's a money maker for the paint company.
The league can even tack on a $3 royalty on the paint and make some cash on each case.


Anonymous said...

Or, don't sponsor anyone, sell 800 cases at $50 and make $24000 straight-up.

And no risk of ending up in the hole when less than 50 teams show.

Anonymous said...

If it costs $50/case to play NPPL events, NPPL is already screwed. If it costs $35, like it did last season, then KEE needs to sell 14 cases a team at $35/case to make up the $18k in the hole.

J-Bird said...

what do you guys think of something like this:

stop selling individual boxes of paint and charge for paint in the entry fee, allot X amount per team for the entire tournament.

it'll allow the paint guys to know exactly how much to bring, make a profit because only XYZ number of teams are going to use their entire allotment, and puts everybody on a "level field" so that one team cant complain that their monsterball isint as good as the evil ultra that the other team was using, thus costing them the game.

you can even do it by division: semi pro is probably going to use more than d5, so set the price accordingly.

even gets rid of the "sponsorship" problem (every local kid at the field being sponsored by xyz, and adds some value to it again -- if you are sponsored your ammount goes up X numbers of balls).

just thinking out loud.

Stark said...

Teams have different amount of games depending on at what point they drop out. Teams that fly in for the event cant either take the extra paint with them. The whole issue with how much paint to bring with you is prettymuch solved if you are the onlyone selling paint.

Anonymous said...

I know that DXS will not be at NPPL but they will be at PSP or I am wrong?

J-Bird said...

that's where the profit comes from :P
you pay a flat rate for all the paint you need, if you advance, you get to use it. if not, oh well.

anonachris said...

I didn't realize paint at events was so cheap. I hadn't paid for paint since it was in the $50 neighborhood. If paint is $35 and under at events (for the high end stuff, not practice quality), no wonder why these paint companies are suffering. Call me crazy, but the paint companies should be actually making money at the events while not undercutting dealers.

Where's that pump-shooting-antitournament-I own-a-field-and-charge-a-lot-for-my-paint commenter when you need him?

anonachris said...

Flat rate is actually a pretty interesting model. No idea if it would work with paint, but there are plenty of suckers throwing away a couple hundred bucks a year on their cell phone planes. The "higher-up" I know inside a cell phone company told me 80% of their customers would actually save money by switching to prepaid or pay as you go plans.

And if a team knew they just had to budget X and they didn't have to worry about the rest of the event that has some nice value. Although, unlike cell phone plans where you can't stuff your pockets, harness, gearbag, and rental car with minutes, you can do that with paint. The deal would have to have some good terms. Maybe an odd-ball company like Severe, etc. (if there are any left) could try something like this.

Reiner Schafer said...

Anonachris, where is this antitournament moniker coming from? I was one of the more vocal supporters when the BCPPL was trying to get a foothold here in BC (even dusted off some of my old tournament duds to play the first event to show support). I started and currently run the biggest annual pump speedball tournament in the country. I constantly send new players that are customers at MY field to other fields that have tournament type fields and recommend they try tournment ball.

As far as the topic goes, I have very little insight on the subject. I have no idea why KEE would make that decision. Tournament paintball is very difficult to build a good business model around. Those that invest in it must see some value in it. Either that or they are doing it because they enjoy it (as I do with the West Coast Pump Weeked tournament).

In my opinion, there are two main fundamental reasons that tournament paintball is hurting. The first and most influential is the cost, of which paintballs play the biggest part. A game, where to be competitive, there is an open ended expense, is going to severely limit who can and wants to take part.

The second reason is that those fledgling players that were drawn into tournament ball years ago to get their adrenaline fix, now don't need to. You can go to most rec fields and shoot high volumes of paintballs and have high volumes shot at you. Only the most extreme of players are drawn to the tournament side these days.

Couple the two together, the pool to draw players from is relatively small.

The conversation in this thread is trying to deal with reason #1. That's great. But I see no way to make the game cheaper without majorly changing the game. Since those that are now still playing have no interest in major format changes and sponsorship money for tournament type play is ever shrinking, unless someone finds a way to make 1 + 1 = 3, things aren't going to change a whole lot.

J-Bird said...

anonchris, im sure that something could be worked out for everybody to "be happy." One of the things would be that players would complain about is the quality of the ball, but if companies quit producing high-quality stuff for individual sell they could:

1. start producing more "field" paints. are fields really making money selling xball gold to their rec players? probably not. Add a little low quality fill, and market it as being "less damaging to the environment" (less tree stains), and because it's "eco-friendly" JoBlow and Little Johny's mom will be willing to shell out a little more. They just dont know that the paint is "bad paint." Move 35$ paint up to $50.

2. create a standard "tournament paint" that has a flat rate, and everybody uses it. from the pro's to divisional players. best thing is, it doesnt have to be evil ultra grade

3. this brings back the value of sponsorship. If your team is sponsored then your allotment of paint at tournaments goes up, or your price is lowered, or you get X amount of free paint that if you dont use at the tourney, you can have sent to your homefield/take home. This also makes sure that nobody is just sitting on these sponsorships and not competing. I think that that's somewhat of a problem with the current model: kids get a "sponsorship" from XYZ company and then dont play; they just want a good deal.

Another thing: as you move up in divisions, do well in X tourney, help with a promotion day, etc... your allotment of paint/price can be adjusted for that. Actually work for stuff? Woah.

I know that the professional players, semi-pro, d1, and even some d2 players would hate this, and it seems like you would be putting other paint companies in a hole, but for the higher divisions you could open up for more manufactures, so long as they meet the "standard tourney paint" specs. That gets the name of the company out, and even saves them some money.

just some more thoughts. i think the best way to try this would be to do it with franchised teams (a/cxbl?), simply because they would be contracted to do it.

baca? im sure there are some holes, your thoughts?

Janek said...


In manufacturing of paint fill, in order to make it cheaper most manufacturers add vegetable oil to lower the cost...That's definitely not eco or friendly. Oil doesn't mix with water, doesn't wash away and stains more than if PEG is used.

Baca Loco said...

For a real repsonse I'ma have to think about it first--but I think you are confusing sponsorship and sponsorship to some degree as all "sponsorship" isn't created equal. As I almost always default to the idea there has to be a better way, well, there has to be a better way, doesn't there? :)

J-Bird said...

in my view of "sponsorship" im looking at the very basic, run of the mill that 90% of teams have. im sure you guys know who im takling about ;)

Anonymous said...

i challenge you guys to find one anti-tournement post by reiner... why would he be reading this column if he didn't see SOME value? he may be a bit outspoken, but the guy doesnt hate tourneyball

And as an outspoken proponent of the limited paint model, I HATE the flat rate just adds to the problem. Its like saying the best place to get a nice meal is at a buffet.

Finally, I was going to forgoe the comment section of this post, since the post itself didn't hit any chords with me (you know, on the field stuff), but that titanic line was absolute gold. Bravo baca.


anonachris said...

Sheesh, I'm not against the guy, I find his posts educated and informative. I was a little tongue in cheek, but I guess you can't see that over typing.

But when someone says over and over again they don't want tournament players at their field and they actively try to get them to go somewhere else and they thing the Russian legion style of play sounds really boring, etc.

It doesn't sound like a tournament kinda guy. Not saying he wishes all tourney players would die and has sworn a pact with the devil to rid the world of tournaments.... he's just the resident disadent when it comes to modern mainstream tournaments, or so it seems.

Anonymous said...

Anonachris...reading comprehension. I don't have a problem with tournament players at my field. I have tournament players there virtually every weekend. However, they are not playing tournament style paintball while there.

As far as Russian Legion is concerned, I've never seen them play. I have no idea if their style of play is boring. I believe I indicated that the technique Baca described that the Russian Legion seem to do very well, sounds like it would be boring from a spectator's point of view. I assume they do more than just that technique. If not, than yes, it would most likely be boring.

Am I a dissident when it comes to current tournament play? You might be on to something. Tournament play doesn't seem to be working very well currently (at least it's not attracting enough participants). There seem to be some fundamental problems that are keeping players from picking up and sticking with tournament play. I would like to see it improve, grow, and prosper. Do I have ulterior motives for that? Sure, if you consider wanting players that shoot high volumes of paintballs to have somewhere to play other than rec fields designed for casual play.

As someone in the paintball industry, tournament paintball interests me from a business point of view. It's a very interesting business to try to be in. Not one that I would choose to be in, as I've always said tournament ball makes for a poor business model. Your customers need to make a major commitment of both time and, for all intensive purposes, poverty. How do you convince enough people to do that? Obviously there has to be something these people find extremely valuable in that experience? The community, the comaraderie, the fun, the drive for excellence...that's all part of it. But in the end, there are reltively few people who are going to basically give up most everything else in their life for...well for what really? There is certainly no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. So we have people who should give up most everything else in life for the paintball lifestyle for a good chunk of their lives? That's a major fundamental problem.

Paintball Industry was easing some of that burden for many that stuck with it a while, but that is disappearing very quickly, so now it's an even bigger problem. Will it be resolved? Can it be resolved? It's an interesting thing to watch from the sidelines. It's like watching a good chess game. You see people make moves and you have to wonder why they are making them. Sometimes the reasoning is very clear, other times it's not. All the time you are hoping your side wins. In this case, I'm on side with tournament paintball succeeding. But the game is far from over.


Anonymous said...

Where is JT at? I know they are on the block to be sold but whats up? They put some money into the NPPL back in the day


Not all companies use veg. oil to make it cheaper. Do a "kool-aid" test. You can clearly see who uses oil and who doesn't. You'll be surprised at the results.

Janek said...

I did...and I wasn't surprised :)