We still don't have a definition except in the broadest terms and even those terms aren't agreeable to everyone. But maybe that isn't necessary. (Maybe it is. Who knows?)
Anyway I want to offer y'all an analogy by history. The history of American football to be precise. Played irregularly, often as an annual event, at a handful of eastern universities beginning in the 1830s it developed into a club sport (in a few places) as a game that was either mostly soccer or mostly rugby and the rules didn't begin to form the unique game of football until the 1880s. The impetus for those changes was a university football conference organized by 8 schools including Harvard and Yale. By 1900 there were 43 universities playing organized football. The forward pass came into vogue around the era of the first world war but the forward pass as we know it today wasn't part of the game until the 1930s. From its origins to the present rules and equipment have changed but the form of the core game hasn't changed much in the last 75 years. Of course it took, at a minimum, 50+ years to reach that point.
Which perhaps begs a certain chicken and the egg type question: Which came first, the game or the organization?
Meanwhile alternatives to the current loose association of mostly industry types and influential leagues (which are mostly owned by or tied to) more industry types are split between player organizations and federations (of some sort). The principle virtue of either one appears to be they aren't what we presently have. (Here's where I play Devil's Advocate for a moment.) What exactly makes a player's union--on any scale--a better choice? What is the collective wisdom of the players? And does simple participation in the game validate their view of where the game should go in the future? The same of course applies to any federations. Which are not democratic but representative at best. Where do the candidates come from? And who is permitted to vote? If the pool is sufficiently exclusive aren't you just exchanging one elite for another?
Now if the real purpose is some divesting of power and control from industry--over their dead bodies and/or corporate bankruptcies--into other hands I understand the motivation. And I'd probably agree in principle that was a good idea, but--
A) It's one thing to suggest an alternative, it's another to demonstrate why it's a better choice, and
B) A different idea is swell but the nuts & bolts of how it can actually be accomplished is the important part.
While I an not opposed to any of the "comments" suggestions or similar ideas that have made the rounds in the past neither am I convinced any of them necessarily lead to a better future than the track the game is presently on.
As a former card-carrying anarchist--nobody carries the card anymore--if I thought blowing stuff up and starting over was a viable option I'd light the fuse. (And it isn't like I haven't tossed a bomb or two in my day.) The thing is though I'm not convinced there's enough structure erected yet to bother tearing it down. I'm also beginning to think the process inevitably will take the time it takes no matter how many attempts are made to fast track this or invoke TV for that. Or any of a number of other means of making "progress." Does that mean that people who are interested in the development (dare I say growth?) of the game should just sit quietly on the sidelines? No but maybe it means investing more thought and less emotion and accepting the fact this is likely going to prove a much slower process than most of us want.
More next time. (Oh yes there will be a next time. Bounce this post all you like. There's nothing you can do to stop me. [cue evil laugh])
Showing posts with label paintball. Show all posts
Showing posts with label paintball. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Sport or Not Sport
VFTD first addressed this idea in Paintball Games International magazine back in the days when the printed word still existed. [If you're curious look here (circa 2003 for serious Baca) & here (circa 2005 for not-so-serious Baca) in the Dead Tree Archive.] Today there's not really a debate over the status of competitive paintball as sport so much as there is over just what paintball as sport is or ought to be (and become.) But even as most of us will agree that competitive paintball is sport there remain a lot of different ideas as to just what that really means. Are scenario leagues and the UWL, for example, on equal footing with the WCPPL or the CXBL? But deciding how elastic our definition of competitive paintball is is only an aspect of one of the current roadblocks. The bigger issue is that we all have a general idea of what paintball as sport means but not an agreed upon concrete definition or shared abstract vision and in even the most basic conversations there is a tendency to conflate "sport" with all the other bits & pieces that form the game as we see it today. Let me explain.
Here's an easy one for you. Making a buck off paintball isn't paintball the sport. (I said it was easy.) Satisfying the customer isn't paintball the sport either. (Think about that one for a second and you may see where this is leading.) The local recreational field isn't paintball the sport. Neither is PBIndustry. Players of competitive paintball aren't paintball the sport. Even competitive paintball leagues aren't paintball the sport.
Here's a different take. Is LeBron James basketball the sport? Or the Chicago Bears the sport of football? Does the MLB have a monopoly on the sport of baseball? In each instance the answer is no. (Despite the best efforts of the United States Congress.) In each preceding instance there is a connection but an association or relationship does not confer sports status on everything and everyone involved.
At this point you're either confused or going, yeah, so what? Here's the thing. There has been a lot of conversation lately in the comments about what is good for the sport of paintball and what isn't. And who ought to do what to make things better. Or who ought to be involved and who shouldn't and on and on. But it seems to me that most of that sort of talk is both premature and not particularly productive and one of the reasons is because we don't really know what competitive paintball the sport is yet. And until there is some sort of consensus a large portion of the ongoing dialogue is simply us talking past each other much of the time.
More on this subject next time but in the meantime here's a question or two to consider. How would you define paintball as sport? And once you've got that figured out: Whose in charge of protecting/preserving/promoting competitive paintball as sport? And who ought to be?
Here's an easy one for you. Making a buck off paintball isn't paintball the sport. (I said it was easy.) Satisfying the customer isn't paintball the sport either. (Think about that one for a second and you may see where this is leading.) The local recreational field isn't paintball the sport. Neither is PBIndustry. Players of competitive paintball aren't paintball the sport. Even competitive paintball leagues aren't paintball the sport.
Here's a different take. Is LeBron James basketball the sport? Or the Chicago Bears the sport of football? Does the MLB have a monopoly on the sport of baseball? In each instance the answer is no. (Despite the best efforts of the United States Congress.) In each preceding instance there is a connection but an association or relationship does not confer sports status on everything and everyone involved.
At this point you're either confused or going, yeah, so what? Here's the thing. There has been a lot of conversation lately in the comments about what is good for the sport of paintball and what isn't. And who ought to do what to make things better. Or who ought to be involved and who shouldn't and on and on. But it seems to me that most of that sort of talk is both premature and not particularly productive and one of the reasons is because we don't really know what competitive paintball the sport is yet. And until there is some sort of consensus a large portion of the ongoing dialogue is simply us talking past each other much of the time.
More on this subject next time but in the meantime here's a question or two to consider. How would you define paintball as sport? And once you've got that figured out: Whose in charge of protecting/preserving/promoting competitive paintball as sport? And who ought to be?
Friday, July 29, 2011
The Economy & the Fate of Paintball
There's been almost endless talk about the economic state of the paintball industry for a number of years now and it's impact on everything from the local field to the tournament player and the decline in new playership. And I'm here to tell you it isn't even close to as bad as it could--almost certainly--will be in the not too distant future. Given the list of changes made to the game on the basis of economic reality I don't even want to think what could happen. But somebody has to give you the head's up so it might as well be me; Mr. Popularity. It's gonna get worse before it gets better. Get ready & get smart. It won't be the end of the world but it ain't gonna be pretty.
Okay. About the economy. Here's some basic numbers. Current (acknowledged) U.S. government debt is over 14 trillion dollars. To try and put that number into some perspective annual government revenues the last couple of years were about 2.1 trillion. So we owe about 7 times what we take in on an annual basis. Over the last two years we've also borrowed about 43 cents of every dollar spent. Which amounts to around 1.7 trillion for an annual expenditure of around 3.8 trillion despite the fact Congress has failed to pass an actual budget. If that doesn't sound too bad maybe breaking it down will help. Divide 1.7 trillion by 365 days and divide again by 24 (hours in a day) and that works out to the U.S. government borrowing over 190 million dollars an hour. Yep. An hour. Still not convinced of the magnitude of the insanity? Imagine you started a business the day Jesus was born and immediately began losing a million dollars a day. Your loses won't reach a trillion dollars until the year 2732.
Okay, this is gonna be real long if I keep going at this rate. Time to shorthand it. Don't worry about default if the debt ceiling isn't raised. (It will be.) Technically it ain't gonna happen--at least in the near term. Yes, the government will run out of money to pay for things it has chosen to take on as obligations but the only way it meets those obligations is by continuing massive borrowing. This year, depending on which government office's numbers you believe (no, they don't all agree) debt repayment will eat anywhere from approximately 17-20% of all revenues. That is with historic low interest rates. All the current blather over an extension of the debt ceiling is utterly irrelevant in the longer term--which may be as little as next week to a year or two, if that, because continued borrowing only digs the hole deeper. What matters is getting a handle on spending and addressing the need to cut deficit spending. (Sure, a failure to borrow more today would precipitate a crisis but it would be the sort of crisis that forced the government to spend less and make big, immediate cuts. More on that in a second.) (For those of you who insist the government can print money forever, well, yeah, they can but there are inevitable repercussions from doing so. Yes, the government could pay off almost any debt but it comes at a cost too. A brutal one at that for the average citizen. Wiki 'hyperinflation' or 'Wiemar Republic' or any of a number of financial collapses in Argentina in the last 60 years or so to see what happens.)
Here's the thing. We are already caught between a rock and a very hard place. GDP (gross domestic product) includes government spending. But 43% of all government spending isn't spending--it's the disbursement of IOUs. Last quarter's growth was first announced to be 1.8%. Yesterday that was revised to 0.4%. That means that there has been effectively no growth but it's worse than that. Remember 43% of government spending is debt disbursement and that amounts to around 12% of the calculated GDP. If deficit spending stopped tomorrow we would see that real GDP was well into negative numbers--and has been since 2008.
So if we stop the deficit spending cold turkey the economy takes a big hit that will drive further contraction (a shrinking tax base too) and produce considerable suffering likely for a few years. If we keep on the current course we will, sooner rather than later, reach the place where default is inevitable, the dollar will be virtually worthless and we will suffer the same pain, only worse and for longer--but we might be able to stretch the inevitable out a few years--max.
A middle course would be to make real and serious cuts in spending immediately--not the illusion of promising to do it 5 or 10 years down the road or halting the automatic increases and calling that cuts. And even that would create hardships but it might save the nation's credit rating, reassure international markets and help preserve what's left of the dollar.
What both parties are currently debating is a waste of time and breath. It's unserious and will see our rating downgraded almost immediately and the follow on from that could precipitate its own crisis--with, you guessed it, a similar outcome to the other scenarios. At some point the house of cards collapses. The only question is whether or not it's a controlled demolition or complete structural failure.
And it isn't just us. Euroland is in the boat next to ours and busy making their own mistakes. And conditions either here or there could send the cards tumbling for everyone. The window is open now and I would be very surprised if we got past 2013 before it all falls down. Happy happy joy joy
UPDATE: Sounds a lot what I suggested. From Moody's today--"Reductions of the magnitude now being proposed, if adopted, would likely lead Moody's to adopt a negative outlook on the AAA rating," the credit rating agency said in a new report. "The chances of a significant improvement in the long-term credit profile of the government coming from deficit reductions of the magnitude proposed in either plan are not high."
Okay. About the economy. Here's some basic numbers. Current (acknowledged) U.S. government debt is over 14 trillion dollars. To try and put that number into some perspective annual government revenues the last couple of years were about 2.1 trillion. So we owe about 7 times what we take in on an annual basis. Over the last two years we've also borrowed about 43 cents of every dollar spent. Which amounts to around 1.7 trillion for an annual expenditure of around 3.8 trillion despite the fact Congress has failed to pass an actual budget. If that doesn't sound too bad maybe breaking it down will help. Divide 1.7 trillion by 365 days and divide again by 24 (hours in a day) and that works out to the U.S. government borrowing over 190 million dollars an hour. Yep. An hour. Still not convinced of the magnitude of the insanity? Imagine you started a business the day Jesus was born and immediately began losing a million dollars a day. Your loses won't reach a trillion dollars until the year 2732.
Okay, this is gonna be real long if I keep going at this rate. Time to shorthand it. Don't worry about default if the debt ceiling isn't raised. (It will be.) Technically it ain't gonna happen--at least in the near term. Yes, the government will run out of money to pay for things it has chosen to take on as obligations but the only way it meets those obligations is by continuing massive borrowing. This year, depending on which government office's numbers you believe (no, they don't all agree) debt repayment will eat anywhere from approximately 17-20% of all revenues. That is with historic low interest rates. All the current blather over an extension of the debt ceiling is utterly irrelevant in the longer term--which may be as little as next week to a year or two, if that, because continued borrowing only digs the hole deeper. What matters is getting a handle on spending and addressing the need to cut deficit spending. (Sure, a failure to borrow more today would precipitate a crisis but it would be the sort of crisis that forced the government to spend less and make big, immediate cuts. More on that in a second.) (For those of you who insist the government can print money forever, well, yeah, they can but there are inevitable repercussions from doing so. Yes, the government could pay off almost any debt but it comes at a cost too. A brutal one at that for the average citizen. Wiki 'hyperinflation' or 'Wiemar Republic' or any of a number of financial collapses in Argentina in the last 60 years or so to see what happens.)
Here's the thing. We are already caught between a rock and a very hard place. GDP (gross domestic product) includes government spending. But 43% of all government spending isn't spending--it's the disbursement of IOUs. Last quarter's growth was first announced to be 1.8%. Yesterday that was revised to 0.4%. That means that there has been effectively no growth but it's worse than that. Remember 43% of government spending is debt disbursement and that amounts to around 12% of the calculated GDP. If deficit spending stopped tomorrow we would see that real GDP was well into negative numbers--and has been since 2008.
So if we stop the deficit spending cold turkey the economy takes a big hit that will drive further contraction (a shrinking tax base too) and produce considerable suffering likely for a few years. If we keep on the current course we will, sooner rather than later, reach the place where default is inevitable, the dollar will be virtually worthless and we will suffer the same pain, only worse and for longer--but we might be able to stretch the inevitable out a few years--max.
A middle course would be to make real and serious cuts in spending immediately--not the illusion of promising to do it 5 or 10 years down the road or halting the automatic increases and calling that cuts. And even that would create hardships but it might save the nation's credit rating, reassure international markets and help preserve what's left of the dollar.
What both parties are currently debating is a waste of time and breath. It's unserious and will see our rating downgraded almost immediately and the follow on from that could precipitate its own crisis--with, you guessed it, a similar outcome to the other scenarios. At some point the house of cards collapses. The only question is whether or not it's a controlled demolition or complete structural failure.
And it isn't just us. Euroland is in the boat next to ours and busy making their own mistakes. And conditions either here or there could send the cards tumbling for everyone. The window is open now and I would be very surprised if we got past 2013 before it all falls down. Happy happy joy joy
UPDATE: Sounds a lot what I suggested. From Moody's today--"Reductions of the magnitude now being proposed, if adopted, would likely lead Moody's to adopt a negative outlook on the AAA rating," the credit rating agency said in a new report. "The chances of a significant improvement in the long-term credit profile of the government coming from deficit reductions of the magnitude proposed in either plan are not high."
Monday, August 2, 2010
Some More Talking Paintball
We's Talking Paintball some more, picking up on the excellent comments posted in response to the first post a couple days ago. It's more accurate to say that a generally accepted and understood paintball vocabulary doesn't yet exist. This runs the gamut from ways to communicate conceptual elements of the game and play as well as a paintball specific slang--which in paintball's case seems mostly to have been appropriated from other fringe activities. I'm beginning to wonder how much of a factor this limitation is when it comes to converting new players and helping to build a fan base. Perhaps counterintuitively I've always assumed while some understanding of the game is necessary it isn't critically important. Players play and fans enjoy--for whatever reason. My mom was a huge basketball fan at one time--she's more into baseball these days--but her enjoyment and appreciation of the sport wasn't predicated on a complex understanding of the game mechanics. Far from it. Over time she learned a reasonable amount about how the game was played and what was really going on when it sometimes looked like chaos but something about the game drew her in before she really understood the game. Does competitive paintball have a "natural" fan base or do paintball fans need to be educated? And if past efforts at educating a potential fanbase through prior televised programming haven't quite succeeded what's it gonna take?
Okay, so talkin' paintball is kinda tough but we still have the teams and the players. Sort of. Without continuity teams struggle to build a fan base and the players, most of them anyway, are virtually anonymous to much of the competitive paintball world. That was slightly less true when there were a fistful of printed mags but even then the mags tended to be starmakers or star-perpetuators and paid only scant attention to the rank & file pro.
Which is where traditional and new media have an opportunity to step up. (And have always played a role.) Although as was also pointed out in the comments it's difficult if not impossible for paintball media to act as disseminater of information, watchdog, friend of the game, etc. all at the same time when it's industry money footing most of their bills. (You might be surprised that cash paying advertisers don't like bad reviews or lots of pictures of the other guy's gear.) Of course if paintball specific media can't pull it off then maybe it's time sports media got involved. Oh, I know, easy to say but how to make it happen? (Coming later this week in the long promised league promotion post. Promise.) In the meantime part of the future is direct outreach. (Which we're seeing.) By the industry. Direct advertising & promotions. By the teams with videos and Facebook. Even by players with personal websites and social networking and other venues. By folks like Social Paintball and Traumahead. (What's the chance of the Traumahead TV shows being made available in alternative formats?) And MWAG & Derder do awesome work but part of their appeal as documenters of the sport trades on already established teams and players.
No wonder this talkin' paintball thing is hard.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
The Latest on the MS Goodwill Tour of Asia
If you missed it first time around the posts here & here should set the table. In a nutshell the MS had a pre-existing relationship with the PALS organization that hit a rocky patch when it appeared a couple months ago or so that elements within the MS were dealing with a separate Asian group to set-up a counter Pan-Asian series--both "sponsored" by the MS. Apparently that announcement was premature (or ill-timed) and within hours public statements were being denied & pulled, websites were disappearing and the PALS people were calling it a figment of the collective imagination. Here we are, post Campaign Cup--the whole brouhaha largely forgotten everywhere but Asia (apparently)--and the MS board in the person of Barry Fuggle sees fit to bring it back to the public eye with the official statement available by clicking on the title link.
The gift that keeps on giving.
The following is a paragraph by paragraph VFTD interpretation of the latest Millennium statement. The MS statement appears in italics with the VFTD interpretation following in the standard type face.
The Millennium Series is dedicated to the growth and promotion of the sport of paintball since 1999. Since that time the Millennium Series (www.millennium-series.com) runs the biggest tournaments in Europe and offers a platform for competition to the best teams of the world.
We only want to help you.
Apart from running our own series, we support other tournaments, series and leagues, in Europe and worldwide on a global scale by various means. This includes, but is not limited to providing knowledge, equipment and various other assets.
Whose your Daddy?
In the Far East, the Millennium Series has been endorsing the PALS tournaments, which use our rules. The PALS (www.palseries.org) has grown over the years amazingly fast, featuring their flagship event, the World Cup Asia in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and having successfully hosted events in other countries, like Thailand, Taiwan and Philippines.
With our support PALS has been a big success.
In the last months the Millennium Series has been approached by a consortium of individuals and companies, who want to develop paintball in Asia as well. During our recent London event the Board of the Millennium Series invited all parties involved to several rounds of meetings to learn more about their exact intentions and to explain our own vision for the development of the sport in Asia. What was clear was there was a lot common themes and aspirations by all and we sincerely hope that all concerned will see the benefits of collaboration rather than competition which will only help to slow down the growth of the sport in the region.
Look, PALS has a good thing going but we have additional business opportunities to explore. Asia is big enough for everybody so let's figure out how to work together.
Basically the Millennium Series is asking all parties involved to find a way together towards our common goals. In a time, where support from within the paintball industry is getting less and less, it does not make sense to build parallel structures and organizations, which would lead divide and fighting each other. Instead, existing structures should be used to accommodate the ambitions and totally justified strategic interests of other individuals, which have already shown commitment and constructive passion for the game, both in Malaysia and in other Asian countries.
It doesn't matter who did what. The past is the past. We need to make the best of things and find ways to profit together.
If these parties manage to focus on common goals and strategies in a constructive manner, exciting times lay ahead for Asia, which is already the fastest growing region in paintball!
Capiche?
Barry Fuggle
Board of the Millennium Series
Don't get me wrong. I've no issues whatsoever with the MS making moves in Asia. (I do have general concerns about industry players potentially having too much power and influence through control of things like leagues but that's another post.) I am only amused at the routinely ham-fisted way they go about it. Particularly amusing is the word that the whole alternative league business got started because Mr. Fuggle was looking to sell greater volumes of Hovid paint in Asia--among other things. On a slightly more serious note if anyone thinks the eurokids of PBIndustry are going to get their own Asian playground without a fight, think again. As the U.S. market stagnates PBIndustry is looking to open new frontiers and Asia, including China is the target.
UPDATE: There is conflicting info as to how directly involved Mr. Fuggle is/was in Hovid or in the "interests" of the new group, for purposes of brevity, the aborted Millennium Series Asia although those connections are clearer--at least at the moment.
The gift that keeps on giving.
The following is a paragraph by paragraph VFTD interpretation of the latest Millennium statement. The MS statement appears in italics with the VFTD interpretation following in the standard type face.
The Millennium Series is dedicated to the growth and promotion of the sport of paintball since 1999. Since that time the Millennium Series (www.millennium-series.com) runs the biggest tournaments in Europe and offers a platform for competition to the best teams of the world.
We only want to help you.
Apart from running our own series, we support other tournaments, series and leagues, in Europe and worldwide on a global scale by various means. This includes, but is not limited to providing knowledge, equipment and various other assets.
Whose your Daddy?
In the Far East, the Millennium Series has been endorsing the PALS tournaments, which use our rules. The PALS (www.palseries.org) has grown over the years amazingly fast, featuring their flagship event, the World Cup Asia in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia and having successfully hosted events in other countries, like Thailand, Taiwan and Philippines.
With our support PALS has been a big success.
In the last months the Millennium Series has been approached by a consortium of individuals and companies, who want to develop paintball in Asia as well. During our recent London event the Board of the Millennium Series invited all parties involved to several rounds of meetings to learn more about their exact intentions and to explain our own vision for the development of the sport in Asia. What was clear was there was a lot common themes and aspirations by all and we sincerely hope that all concerned will see the benefits of collaboration rather than competition which will only help to slow down the growth of the sport in the region.
Look, PALS has a good thing going but we have additional business opportunities to explore. Asia is big enough for everybody so let's figure out how to work together.
Basically the Millennium Series is asking all parties involved to find a way together towards our common goals. In a time, where support from within the paintball industry is getting less and less, it does not make sense to build parallel structures and organizations, which would lead divide and fighting each other. Instead, existing structures should be used to accommodate the ambitions and totally justified strategic interests of other individuals, which have already shown commitment and constructive passion for the game, both in Malaysia and in other Asian countries.
It doesn't matter who did what. The past is the past. We need to make the best of things and find ways to profit together.
If these parties manage to focus on common goals and strategies in a constructive manner, exciting times lay ahead for Asia, which is already the fastest growing region in paintball!
Capiche?
Barry Fuggle
Board of the Millennium Series
Don't get me wrong. I've no issues whatsoever with the MS making moves in Asia. (I do have general concerns about industry players potentially having too much power and influence through control of things like leagues but that's another post.) I am only amused at the routinely ham-fisted way they go about it. Particularly amusing is the word that the whole alternative league business got started because Mr. Fuggle was looking to sell greater volumes of Hovid paint in Asia--among other things. On a slightly more serious note if anyone thinks the eurokids of PBIndustry are going to get their own Asian playground without a fight, think again. As the U.S. market stagnates PBIndustry is looking to open new frontiers and Asia, including China is the target.
UPDATE: There is conflicting info as to how directly involved Mr. Fuggle is/was in Hovid or in the "interests" of the new group, for purposes of brevity, the aborted Millennium Series Asia although those connections are clearer--at least at the moment.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Women & Paintball
And of course, girls. Chicks. Babes. You name 'em, it's cool. I was tempted to call this post 'Paintball & the Irrational Sex' but this is supposed to be a serious post (more or less) and while the comments would'a been fantastic--the more frothing the better--I decided to forgo a purely personal pleasure for the good of the paintball community. (Did you believe one word of that last bit? Me either. Obviously I need a marketing guy, or gal.)
I was perusing the paintball web checking out the latest news, rumors & gossip and ran into a couple of (quasi-) related items. One was a thread in the field/store owners forum at PBN and the other was a press release post at the Big Bullet. The former was about why girls are less interested in paintball than guys are and the later was soliciting nominations for PBWoman.com's PB Woman of the Year for 2011. (You may have noticed they announced their 2010 award at Living Legends 3 last month.) Anyway it's a standard ploy for self-promotion. Everybody does it and all you really need to know is that the next award recipient will be chosen by the website's sponsors (?) and a panel of 9 judges--and that the PBWoman website couldn't come up with enough women in paintball to fill their own panel of judges. Which leads me to the (slightly) more interesting and general topic of women & paintball.
Women & paintball is a recurring topic of discussion. At least in certain quarters. One that always seems to get hung up on how to "fix" the "problem" of too few female participants with (mostly) the same old same old. For example a few years ago Pete 'Robbo' Robinson excoriated the then Jerry Braun run World Cup for not providing female friendly facilities even though the event was being held in an acknowledged cow pasture--and it seems to have set a tone because most of the "answers" revolve around changing things to better suit the female temperament. Ideas run from the commonplace of bars and clubs (ladies nights) to special discounts, indoor plumbing, etc. At this rate fresh ideas will be reduced to cleaning up the place a bit; tidier bunkers, maybe vacuum once in a while, dial down the competition perhaps and do we really need winners & losers? Before long somebody is gonna notice girls don't like guns very much and then where are we?
I once wrote a VFTD column for PGi magazine entitled, The Shocking Exploitation of Girls in Paintball, that deals with girls playing tourney paintball but never got around to addressing the supposed dearth of women in paintball generally. Until now. It's really quite simple. It may not be PC but geez, it ain't rocket science or brain surgery either. I hate to break it to you like this but girls are different. And being different the vast majority aren't attracted to paintball. That's it. It's not that they can't play, they can. They just don't want to. The things about paintball that appeal to guys don't appeal to girls in anything like equal measure. If they did the whole idea of trying to get more girls playing would be moot--they'd already be playing. Imagine you are an ice cream salesman and half the people in the world love ice cream and half don't. How productive is it to spend your time trying to sell ice cream to the half that don't like it? Instead of wasting time, energy and resources trying to increase the percentage of female players do something productive. Like figure out how to get (and keep) more guys playing the game.
I was perusing the paintball web checking out the latest news, rumors & gossip and ran into a couple of (quasi-) related items. One was a thread in the field/store owners forum at PBN and the other was a press release post at the Big Bullet. The former was about why girls are less interested in paintball than guys are and the later was soliciting nominations for PBWoman.com's PB Woman of the Year for 2011. (You may have noticed they announced their 2010 award at Living Legends 3 last month.) Anyway it's a standard ploy for self-promotion. Everybody does it and all you really need to know is that the next award recipient will be chosen by the website's sponsors (?) and a panel of 9 judges--and that the PBWoman website couldn't come up with enough women in paintball to fill their own panel of judges. Which leads me to the (slightly) more interesting and general topic of women & paintball.
Women & paintball is a recurring topic of discussion. At least in certain quarters. One that always seems to get hung up on how to "fix" the "problem" of too few female participants with (mostly) the same old same old. For example a few years ago Pete 'Robbo' Robinson excoriated the then Jerry Braun run World Cup for not providing female friendly facilities even though the event was being held in an acknowledged cow pasture--and it seems to have set a tone because most of the "answers" revolve around changing things to better suit the female temperament. Ideas run from the commonplace of bars and clubs (ladies nights) to special discounts, indoor plumbing, etc. At this rate fresh ideas will be reduced to cleaning up the place a bit; tidier bunkers, maybe vacuum once in a while, dial down the competition perhaps and do we really need winners & losers? Before long somebody is gonna notice girls don't like guns very much and then where are we?
I once wrote a VFTD column for PGi magazine entitled, The Shocking Exploitation of Girls in Paintball, that deals with girls playing tourney paintball but never got around to addressing the supposed dearth of women in paintball generally. Until now. It's really quite simple. It may not be PC but geez, it ain't rocket science or brain surgery either. I hate to break it to you like this but girls are different. And being different the vast majority aren't attracted to paintball. That's it. It's not that they can't play, they can. They just don't want to. The things about paintball that appeal to guys don't appeal to girls in anything like equal measure. If they did the whole idea of trying to get more girls playing would be moot--they'd already be playing. Imagine you are an ice cream salesman and half the people in the world love ice cream and half don't. How productive is it to spend your time trying to sell ice cream to the half that don't like it? Instead of wasting time, energy and resources trying to increase the percentage of female players do something productive. Like figure out how to get (and keep) more guys playing the game.
Friday, July 9, 2010
A Simple Solution to Player Retention & Growing the Grassroots?
I received a great email today from Steve Grundy of Annandale Paintball and all the credit for the contents of this post belong to him. (Thanks, Steve.)
Remember the tactics the small ball crowd used to promote the idea of switching from 68 cal? More efficient, less energy required so less painful, breaks better, cheaper etc.Whatever one thought of the merits of the arguments everyone agreed, by and large, that all those things were positive steps forward, if true. And more than a few touted the potential breakthrough benefits of better breaking less painful paint. While small ball has yet to prove itself and peeps still debate most of the claims on its behalf there already exists paint that fits the breaks better less painful bill. Generically its usually called tournament grade paint.
Yes, I know it's more expensive than field grade paint. And yes, I am aware of the usual arguments in favor of field grade paints. They're cheaper and plenty of players want cheaper--because nobody bothers to remind them they are also on the receiving end of those marbles. Rental equipment isn't suited to thin-shelled tourney paints. There needs to be a balance between getting it out of the field rental and breech and/or barrel breaks. And others. But are they legit reasons given current technology or excuses to be lazy and do things the way they've always been done?
Recently at Steve's field a logistical mishap forced them to purchase a highly recommended but different skid of paint from their usual order. (Their usual paint is a good quality field paint that also frequently passes muster as a cheap tourney paint.) As Steve also plays he noticed the paint wasn't up to their usual standard (it broke less often and stung more in the process) and with a little investigating it also appeared they weren't selling as much paint per customer as usual either. Then last week they had a group of first time 11 year olds. Concerned Steve switched out their paint for a higher grade paint and reported they had a great time and no issues with stinging hits or painful welts. Of course no paint guarantees painless breaks all the time but a reduced incidence along with a reduction in stinging hits is one way to optimize the playing experience that virtually everyone agrees on.
What's it worth to a field to send their first timers home happy, especially the kids? How many fields are selling an experience rather than trying to hold the line on costs while calculating profits piecemeal in game play essentials? Does anybody advertise or promote fun, safe game play? Or make an effort to educate the occasional rec player about the potential benefits of spending a bit more for paint? How many additional players per weekend would be needed to make up the difference if a field operator clipped their own margins by providing better paint at a perhaps higher but still competitive price? Or does a field operator need to reconsider their whole operation, top to bottom, to implement this sort of change? Or perhaps simply experiment in limited ways with changes around the edges?
Somewhere in this calculus the field operator needs to make money but ironically in too many instances we are seeing what happens when a field opts for lowest possible cost and high volume--and most of the time it isn't pretty.
Remember the tactics the small ball crowd used to promote the idea of switching from 68 cal? More efficient, less energy required so less painful, breaks better, cheaper etc.Whatever one thought of the merits of the arguments everyone agreed, by and large, that all those things were positive steps forward, if true. And more than a few touted the potential breakthrough benefits of better breaking less painful paint. While small ball has yet to prove itself and peeps still debate most of the claims on its behalf there already exists paint that fits the breaks better less painful bill. Generically its usually called tournament grade paint.
Yes, I know it's more expensive than field grade paint. And yes, I am aware of the usual arguments in favor of field grade paints. They're cheaper and plenty of players want cheaper--because nobody bothers to remind them they are also on the receiving end of those marbles. Rental equipment isn't suited to thin-shelled tourney paints. There needs to be a balance between getting it out of the field rental and breech and/or barrel breaks. And others. But are they legit reasons given current technology or excuses to be lazy and do things the way they've always been done?
Recently at Steve's field a logistical mishap forced them to purchase a highly recommended but different skid of paint from their usual order. (Their usual paint is a good quality field paint that also frequently passes muster as a cheap tourney paint.) As Steve also plays he noticed the paint wasn't up to their usual standard (it broke less often and stung more in the process) and with a little investigating it also appeared they weren't selling as much paint per customer as usual either. Then last week they had a group of first time 11 year olds. Concerned Steve switched out their paint for a higher grade paint and reported they had a great time and no issues with stinging hits or painful welts. Of course no paint guarantees painless breaks all the time but a reduced incidence along with a reduction in stinging hits is one way to optimize the playing experience that virtually everyone agrees on.
What's it worth to a field to send their first timers home happy, especially the kids? How many fields are selling an experience rather than trying to hold the line on costs while calculating profits piecemeal in game play essentials? Does anybody advertise or promote fun, safe game play? Or make an effort to educate the occasional rec player about the potential benefits of spending a bit more for paint? How many additional players per weekend would be needed to make up the difference if a field operator clipped their own margins by providing better paint at a perhaps higher but still competitive price? Or does a field operator need to reconsider their whole operation, top to bottom, to implement this sort of change? Or perhaps simply experiment in limited ways with changes around the edges?
Somewhere in this calculus the field operator needs to make money but ironically in too many instances we are seeing what happens when a field opts for lowest possible cost and high volume--and most of the time it isn't pretty.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
No Easy Answers
Is not an excuse for failing to look for answers. It's a recognition of reality. In comments to The Monday Poll post this week raehl suggested uncapped semi-auto hopperball and Don (tongue in cheek, if not firmly) suggested no batteries equals true semi-auto. My purpose here isn't to dissect the merits of either suggestion but rather to point out two or three factors in play when we try to "solve" various of the presumed "problems" with competitive paintball using their suggestions as a springboard.
Arc of Development
James Naismith invented basketball but nobody sets up peach baskets at either end of the floor anymore. In fact the dimensions of the modern competitive game aren't always uniform depending on the level of play. And nobody playing football eschews the forward pass today because it wasn't part of the original game or utilizes the wing T formation much anymore beyond a few high schools--and even they may have moved on. My point is simple; the game is constantly evolving and it's difficult, if not impossible, to resist. MLB has held a line with wooden bats and NASCAR uses restrictor plates on some circuits but even well-established sports aren't immune.
Arc of Technology
Much of the driving force behind changes in competitive paintball has been technology. (And behind the technology is the ever present desire to make a buck. D'oh!) While technology itself is neutral it easily and often outpaces our ability to consider the end result. Producers are looking to profit. Ultimately the players, collectively, decide if it's something they want or not. Sorta. In the long term. In the short term the balance can be tipped to favor the producers. And thru much of competitive paintball's short history that has occurred because producers also controlled the competitive game. Including the rules. And as technology has bumped up against the rules it is the rules that have changed to accommodate technology with, as far as I can tell, virtually no concern for the outcome. However, (for whatever consolation it might be) regardless of how some might choose to apportion blame within this process changing technologies are an unavoidable factor and will eventually find a balance between the producers and the users
The Will of the Players
Despite the fact most of you are sheep y'all eventually get around to only buying and playing the brand of paintball you really want to. Mostly. For purposes of this post that means the 13 year old who kinda sorta wants to play tourney ball doesn't want to play hopperball or some variant of low ROF. And it doesn't matter if he only thinks that's what he wants. And it's not some PBIndustry conspiracy that there are high ROF Spyders & Tippmanns or tons of DMs and Egos out in the woods. Players are buying and shooting the guns (goggles, packs, hoppers, etc.) they want to. Sure the choices have limitations but as long as there are choices players will do what they want--including quitting playing paintball.
Nothing Happens in Isolation
Decisions are like dominoes, one leads to the next--whether it was the intended next or not. So what about raehl's uncapped semi-auto hopperball? If it's an answer what's the question? How many players per side? What size field? Is there an age component? Is it a beginner's format? Have you ever tried shooting a high ROF electro with a real gravity fed hopper? It's like owning a Ferrari and being unable to leave Manhattan. My point isn't to nit-pick the examples, it's to demonstrate there are no simple solutions. Why aren't Young Guns divisions with age restrictions more popular if ROF is the problem? Are there really too few players interested in competitive paintball or too few mentors and captains to lead and organize?
All the pieces of the puzzle must be accounted for. If you do it right there aren't any leftover pieces. Here's another example. Not a great one because I don't know enough of the details but I am intrigued by the CFOA's efforts to promote 3-man. Once upon a time 3-man was a staple local tourney option. It seems like a no-brainer for entry level play but what happened to it? Will the CFOA's efforts be rewarded? Is it being played with any restrictions? On Race 2 field layouts? Is it working or isn't it? Why or why not? The uncertainty surrounding competitive paintball these days can be a frustrating struggle--but it is also an opportunity. Just not one subject to easy answers.
Arc of Development
James Naismith invented basketball but nobody sets up peach baskets at either end of the floor anymore. In fact the dimensions of the modern competitive game aren't always uniform depending on the level of play. And nobody playing football eschews the forward pass today because it wasn't part of the original game or utilizes the wing T formation much anymore beyond a few high schools--and even they may have moved on. My point is simple; the game is constantly evolving and it's difficult, if not impossible, to resist. MLB has held a line with wooden bats and NASCAR uses restrictor plates on some circuits but even well-established sports aren't immune.
Arc of Technology
Much of the driving force behind changes in competitive paintball has been technology. (And behind the technology is the ever present desire to make a buck. D'oh!) While technology itself is neutral it easily and often outpaces our ability to consider the end result. Producers are looking to profit. Ultimately the players, collectively, decide if it's something they want or not. Sorta. In the long term. In the short term the balance can be tipped to favor the producers. And thru much of competitive paintball's short history that has occurred because producers also controlled the competitive game. Including the rules. And as technology has bumped up against the rules it is the rules that have changed to accommodate technology with, as far as I can tell, virtually no concern for the outcome. However, (for whatever consolation it might be) regardless of how some might choose to apportion blame within this process changing technologies are an unavoidable factor and will eventually find a balance between the producers and the users
The Will of the Players
Despite the fact most of you are sheep y'all eventually get around to only buying and playing the brand of paintball you really want to. Mostly. For purposes of this post that means the 13 year old who kinda sorta wants to play tourney ball doesn't want to play hopperball or some variant of low ROF. And it doesn't matter if he only thinks that's what he wants. And it's not some PBIndustry conspiracy that there are high ROF Spyders & Tippmanns or tons of DMs and Egos out in the woods. Players are buying and shooting the guns (goggles, packs, hoppers, etc.) they want to. Sure the choices have limitations but as long as there are choices players will do what they want--including quitting playing paintball.
Nothing Happens in Isolation
Decisions are like dominoes, one leads to the next--whether it was the intended next or not. So what about raehl's uncapped semi-auto hopperball? If it's an answer what's the question? How many players per side? What size field? Is there an age component? Is it a beginner's format? Have you ever tried shooting a high ROF electro with a real gravity fed hopper? It's like owning a Ferrari and being unable to leave Manhattan. My point isn't to nit-pick the examples, it's to demonstrate there are no simple solutions. Why aren't Young Guns divisions with age restrictions more popular if ROF is the problem? Are there really too few players interested in competitive paintball or too few mentors and captains to lead and organize?
All the pieces of the puzzle must be accounted for. If you do it right there aren't any leftover pieces. Here's another example. Not a great one because I don't know enough of the details but I am intrigued by the CFOA's efforts to promote 3-man. Once upon a time 3-man was a staple local tourney option. It seems like a no-brainer for entry level play but what happened to it? Will the CFOA's efforts be rewarded? Is it being played with any restrictions? On Race 2 field layouts? Is it working or isn't it? Why or why not? The uncertainty surrounding competitive paintball these days can be a frustrating struggle--but it is also an opportunity. Just not one subject to easy answers.
Monday, March 1, 2010
Brothers in Paint
Post title is the link to the 4 part video: Brothers in Paint. Produced by one of the players for Cyclone the piece won awards at the North American Association for Consumer Research 2009. Its now recut and subtitled so its more suitable for public viewing. The ideas presented may not be new to the thinking paintballer--all six of you--but the context is unique and offers some good insights into the world of competitive paintball. Check it out. (Thanks, Sam)
Friday, January 15, 2010
Paintball Unity Proclaimed
Not, uh, actual unity. This particular unity is limited to competitive paintball in the United States for the time being. And in fact it isn't exactly unity at all 'cus there's a few folks out there running events and series who aren't part of the unity announced today by the PSP. For available details (and a bitchin' map) go here. But, all the same, it is a unity of the participating leagues which includes 6 regional leagues (kinda) and the PSP. And that's a very good start.
First, while I am admittedly poking a little fun I am foursquare in favor of this move as a potentially significant step in the right direction. (Remember what I didn't talk about here?)
The basics announced today establishes the Race To format as the dominate format for competitive paintball in the U.S. and lays the foundation for the vertical integration of the format from the local grassroots all the way up to the pro division. The key to that integration will be the use of APPA and as yet unannounced modified classification system to rank players around the country to assure, as closely as possible, that everyone is playing the same game and ranked in a consistent manner from region to region as well as within the ranks of the PSP.
However, the devil--as they say--is in the details and we don't know those yet so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. (No easy task given they are short & thick and about as flexible as a kendo shinai.)
Anyway, the critical issues are how effective--without being coercive--the new classification system proves to be in delivering on the announcement's promise and how the relationship between the regions and the PSP is understood by the participating parties and what the intent is in taking this step. I think the classification issue is pretty straightforward and we should see within a reasonable window of time how it's working. And it's also the sort of thing that can be "fixed" if needed--as long as the leagues and players remain convinced it's the way to go. The issue of the relationship between the leagues and the PSP is a dicier proposition because, like it or not, today, tomorrow and into the near future the PSP is in competition with the leagues for participating teams. It's unavoidable and the prospect for ultimate success may ride on whatever the plan is for some sort of transition or shift in priorities on the part of the PSP.
First, while I am admittedly poking a little fun I am foursquare in favor of this move as a potentially significant step in the right direction. (Remember what I didn't talk about here?)
The basics announced today establishes the Race To format as the dominate format for competitive paintball in the U.S. and lays the foundation for the vertical integration of the format from the local grassroots all the way up to the pro division. The key to that integration will be the use of APPA and as yet unannounced modified classification system to rank players around the country to assure, as closely as possible, that everyone is playing the same game and ranked in a consistent manner from region to region as well as within the ranks of the PSP.
However, the devil--as they say--is in the details and we don't know those yet so I'm keeping my fingers crossed. (No easy task given they are short & thick and about as flexible as a kendo shinai.)
Anyway, the critical issues are how effective--without being coercive--the new classification system proves to be in delivering on the announcement's promise and how the relationship between the regions and the PSP is understood by the participating parties and what the intent is in taking this step. I think the classification issue is pretty straightforward and we should see within a reasonable window of time how it's working. And it's also the sort of thing that can be "fixed" if needed--as long as the leagues and players remain convinced it's the way to go. The issue of the relationship between the leagues and the PSP is a dicier proposition because, like it or not, today, tomorrow and into the near future the PSP is in competition with the leagues for participating teams. It's unavoidable and the prospect for ultimate success may ride on whatever the plan is for some sort of transition or shift in priorities on the part of the PSP.
Friday, November 20, 2009
Back To The Future?
The Big Bullet has been running a series of teases / announcements regarding a new pump woodsball league that is in the works. While I begrudge no man (or woman) the brand of paintball they want to play--with the exception of the wackiest of the wacko fringe Rambo wannabes. (Oh, how I miss the days when the magazine would get those big bold misspelled letters written in crayon.) I'm wondering if there is a real market for tourney woodsball and from which branches of paintball they will come. Will they be mostly Old Skoolers? Or dissatisfied scenario guys or disenchanted competition ballers?
I'm also curious what this conception of tourney woodsball is gonna look like. There's already the SPPL out there which is more of a scenario lite hybrid and UWL which (at least sounds like) tends more toward the tourney end of the spectrum but I don't really know how it plays out. And now the National Pump League wants to go further back into the past. Kinda.
Another thing I wonder is if the lessons learned in the tourney game in recent years can be undone in a woodsball environment, particularly in a pump game. How will the skill set priorities change? Will they change? And then there are some of the "problems" that were endemic in the woods. Chief among them unbalanced (unfair) fields and the virtual impossibility of reffing as it's come to be understood and largely accepted in the competition realm.
What about current technology? Sure, they can return the game to low tech, low paint but there's lots of peripheral technology out there that could influence games. Stuff like walkie-talkie phones, companies that can provide yours or others GPS coordinates via your phone, tiny radios, Bluetooth, text messaging and who knows what all else.
Aight, enough with the pessimistic vibe. I guess my point is that you can't really go back again. That tourney paintball in the woods was always something less than the Golden Age of paintball, maybe. Or that cherished memories seldom, if ever, recall the refs or the price of paint or that lousy hole-riddled pallet nobody could live behind. Most of the best memories of paintballin' past revolve around moments and friends. Some of elation and others of frustration. If the NPL can recreate a few of those memories all of Paintball will be the better for it.
I'm also curious what this conception of tourney woodsball is gonna look like. There's already the SPPL out there which is more of a scenario lite hybrid and UWL which (at least sounds like) tends more toward the tourney end of the spectrum but I don't really know how it plays out. And now the National Pump League wants to go further back into the past. Kinda.
Another thing I wonder is if the lessons learned in the tourney game in recent years can be undone in a woodsball environment, particularly in a pump game. How will the skill set priorities change? Will they change? And then there are some of the "problems" that were endemic in the woods. Chief among them unbalanced (unfair) fields and the virtual impossibility of reffing as it's come to be understood and largely accepted in the competition realm.
What about current technology? Sure, they can return the game to low tech, low paint but there's lots of peripheral technology out there that could influence games. Stuff like walkie-talkie phones, companies that can provide yours or others GPS coordinates via your phone, tiny radios, Bluetooth, text messaging and who knows what all else.
Aight, enough with the pessimistic vibe. I guess my point is that you can't really go back again. That tourney paintball in the woods was always something less than the Golden Age of paintball, maybe. Or that cherished memories seldom, if ever, recall the refs or the price of paint or that lousy hole-riddled pallet nobody could live behind. Most of the best memories of paintballin' past revolve around moments and friends. Some of elation and others of frustration. If the NPL can recreate a few of those memories all of Paintball will be the better for it.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Update from Germany
Last weekend news of a police raid on a German tournament hit the web. Initially there were on scene reports that video was shot during the raid and would be edited and posted online. Since then the only posted video has been removed and no additional videos have been posted. A VFTD correspondent reports that almost all mention of the raid have been removed from German paintball sites and it appears a decision was made not to disseminate information about the raid. The basis for this decision is unclear although there seems to be single thread aimed at connecting with the persons involved.
Is the German paintball community being intimidated or acting on advice of legal counsel?
In other related news it is beginning to appear that the raid was retaliation of a sort. VFTD is told the field owner who was raided had previously tipped off the police to the unlicensed operation of a local competitor who was subsequently shut down. Coincidentally the shut down field had strong ties to the new GI Milsim.
Is the German paintball community being intimidated or acting on advice of legal counsel?
In other related news it is beginning to appear that the raid was retaliation of a sort. VFTD is told the field owner who was raided had previously tipped off the police to the unlicensed operation of a local competitor who was subsequently shut down. Coincidentally the shut down field had strong ties to the new GI Milsim.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Paintball Media: When More Is Less
Confused? If not I'm losing my touch but all will come clear quickly. (Alliteration rocks!) This is, by the way, Part 2, of a paintball media series begun with 'Paintball & Media, part 1'. If you're wondering about the title switcheroo just thinking about typing Paintball & Media, part 2 bored me blind--so I didn't. Sure, it might've been easier for you but since when did that matter? That's right, never. Good to see we're on the same page.
The first part concluded with the observation that with the demise of the paintball magazine (mostly) that no other media had really taken their place as a portal into the game for those who don't already play. [Okay, of the surviving mags we all know APG has the greatest reach and has always been a significant first point of contact--and probably still is--even if that knowledge makes us cringe just a little bit. Or is that just me?]
A magazine was (is) an easy access, all things paintball to all people that offered, often unintentionally and even passively, an invitation to join the fun. Maybe it's me but I don't get that from most paintball media today. Modern media outlets and sites are fragmented and their products are targeted--mostly to existing players. Each one designed to serve a narrow purpose. There are stores, forums, blogs, team sites, video sites, dedicated business & team & player sites on places like Facebook, more stores, local field information sites, gossip sites, tournament series sites, industry sites, online magazines and a few general interest and/or paintball information sites ( that often go long stretches without being updated or only provide generic content.) Most of these are niche elements focused on serving a specific function and, as a practical matter, are aimed at existing players. Sure, there is some overlap and any one of these sorts of sites might grab the attention of a non-player but that isn't what the sites are about. Hundreds and hundreds of different paintball-related sites and almost none of them are dedicated to communicating the thrill of the game to those who haven't played it already. And that goes for other media as well. Stuff like DVDs and free webcasts and, despite their best intentions, much of what has made it onto TV was, at best, a display of paintball but seldom a celebration of the game or the sport. A reason to want to participate.
Today, right now, more (and more diverse) media is less because the paintball-related outlets that exist tend to specialize and focus on attracting and serving elements of the existing player base. But there isn't any blame to be assigned here. Many of the media outlets were never intended to be paintball outreach and for the few that are it's difficult to find ways to make it feasible if not profitable. It's a new and developing world and we're still learning. Things can (and will) change. Right now the challenge is to find ways to exploit the opportunity that exists, to find new and creative ways to attract non-ballers to try paintball. For example, could a new broad-based outreach campaign be a part of what the PSTA becomes? And there are already some websites looking to act as clearing houses for news and information. How many steps beyond that is it to becoming something more, an enticement, an open invitation to the non-baller to get into the game?
Paintball needs, maybe now more than ever, to inform, educate and excite non-ballers to the thrill of the game.
The first part concluded with the observation that with the demise of the paintball magazine (mostly) that no other media had really taken their place as a portal into the game for those who don't already play. [Okay, of the surviving mags we all know APG has the greatest reach and has always been a significant first point of contact--and probably still is--even if that knowledge makes us cringe just a little bit. Or is that just me?]
A magazine was (is) an easy access, all things paintball to all people that offered, often unintentionally and even passively, an invitation to join the fun. Maybe it's me but I don't get that from most paintball media today. Modern media outlets and sites are fragmented and their products are targeted--mostly to existing players. Each one designed to serve a narrow purpose. There are stores, forums, blogs, team sites, video sites, dedicated business & team & player sites on places like Facebook, more stores, local field information sites, gossip sites, tournament series sites, industry sites, online magazines and a few general interest and/or paintball information sites ( that often go long stretches without being updated or only provide generic content.) Most of these are niche elements focused on serving a specific function and, as a practical matter, are aimed at existing players. Sure, there is some overlap and any one of these sorts of sites might grab the attention of a non-player but that isn't what the sites are about. Hundreds and hundreds of different paintball-related sites and almost none of them are dedicated to communicating the thrill of the game to those who haven't played it already. And that goes for other media as well. Stuff like DVDs and free webcasts and, despite their best intentions, much of what has made it onto TV was, at best, a display of paintball but seldom a celebration of the game or the sport. A reason to want to participate.
Today, right now, more (and more diverse) media is less because the paintball-related outlets that exist tend to specialize and focus on attracting and serving elements of the existing player base. But there isn't any blame to be assigned here. Many of the media outlets were never intended to be paintball outreach and for the few that are it's difficult to find ways to make it feasible if not profitable. It's a new and developing world and we're still learning. Things can (and will) change. Right now the challenge is to find ways to exploit the opportunity that exists, to find new and creative ways to attract non-ballers to try paintball. For example, could a new broad-based outreach campaign be a part of what the PSTA becomes? And there are already some websites looking to act as clearing houses for news and information. How many steps beyond that is it to becoming something more, an enticement, an open invitation to the non-baller to get into the game?
Paintball needs, maybe now more than ever, to inform, educate and excite non-ballers to the thrill of the game.
Sunday, July 19, 2009
It's Those Pesky World Games Again
It seems after falling off the radar over here some invites were sent out to a few countries outside Asia and low and behold some of those teams showed up for what was purportedly an event serving, in part, as a demonstration sport to the World Games in Taiwan recently. (Think of the World Games as the Olympics ugly step-sister.)
The first time around I tried to get excited but the more I looked the less I saw. To this day I can't find anything about paintball or demonstration sports etc. on the official World Games website and without contacts from friends of VFTD around the world I doubt anyone over here would have ever heard about it--until after the fact. All of which makes it hard for me to take any of it overly seriously. Maybe that makes me the Ugly American but even the peeps running the show apparently couldn't be bothered to try and promote it so what else am I supposed to think?
Anyway, last week the kids at pbhub in Germany reported a German team was gonna represent and as it turned out they won. And one of the hub kids (guessing here) --UPDATE: Florian of PBHub and Instinct would like y'all to know he isn't a kid--posted the good news with some photos over at the Nation. He also reported that the Ironmen and Damage were invited to rep the U.S. --UPDATE: that's now been edited--which I imagine somebody told somebody but at least in the case of Damage it isn't correct. Beyond that I remain skeptical but otherwise maybe the World Games is where we belong.
On the plus side, who knows, in four years paintball might be up to speed and a match for the Frisbee which already has an international sanctioning body; the World Flying Disc Federation. The truth is out there.
UPDATE: Here's the link to the original post and comments on this World Games "demonstration sport" gimmick. If you are interested in knowing a little more check it out.
The first time around I tried to get excited but the more I looked the less I saw. To this day I can't find anything about paintball or demonstration sports etc. on the official World Games website and without contacts from friends of VFTD around the world I doubt anyone over here would have ever heard about it--until after the fact. All of which makes it hard for me to take any of it overly seriously. Maybe that makes me the Ugly American but even the peeps running the show apparently couldn't be bothered to try and promote it so what else am I supposed to think?
Anyway, last week the kids at pbhub in Germany reported a German team was gonna represent and as it turned out they won. And one of the hub kids (guessing here) --UPDATE: Florian of PBHub and Instinct would like y'all to know he isn't a kid--posted the good news with some photos over at the Nation. He also reported that the Ironmen and Damage were invited to rep the U.S. --UPDATE: that's now been edited--which I imagine somebody told somebody but at least in the case of Damage it isn't correct. Beyond that I remain skeptical but otherwise maybe the World Games is where we belong.
On the plus side, who knows, in four years paintball might be up to speed and a match for the Frisbee which already has an international sanctioning body; the World Flying Disc Federation. The truth is out there.
UPDATE: Here's the link to the original post and comments on this World Games "demonstration sport" gimmick. If you are interested in knowing a little more check it out.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Paintball By The Numbers
Why is tournament paintball in decline? Is it really in decline? Is rec play down? In raw numbers? Dollars spent? Or both? Is the impact uniform across the country or does it have any regional variations? Are scenarios and Big Games as strong as ever? If so, why? Are they playing with restricted ROF or paint limitations? Is tourney ball seeing a decline because the game is too expensive? Or because fewer new players are entering paintball of any sort? (Meaning we're losing the raw material of future tourney ballers.) Or because high volumes of paint are scaring away those same new players and perhaps keeping some number of would be players away as well?
There sure are a lot of questions. And not a lot of answers. Or so it seems. Wouldn't it be nice to know what's really going on? Other than the fact tournament paintball is at the mercy of an industry that seems incapable of finding its backside with both hands. What the hell is industry doing other than trying to find more efficient ways for the haves to sell to the remaining retail outlets while trying to marginalize the have nots? Here's an idea. How about a model field program that all the Big Boys participate in. If you want to know what's happening at the grass roots try getting down there and see. The basic idea is to operate say, three, fields in diverse markets and see what's working and/or experiment with different ideas and try to find ways to make things work better--for everybody. (I know, I know.) Find answers to some of the questions currently plaguing the game. If everyone in industry participates nobody gets an advantage and everyone gets the benefits of any advances while sharing the cost of making the effort. Make it a PSTA project. If the PSTA could develop a package based on real life experience with proven methods to help make the local field(s) a success it would have actually accomplished something.
Not too keen on that idea? I didn't think so.
Fortuitously Jeff Perlmutter of PMI fame is looking into a variation of the concept. He wants to acquire and then operate as model parks a number of local paintball fields around the country. (See the interview over at the Big Bullet.) His idea is to find a system that produces a positive paintball experience and reproduce it at all his parks. (And perhaps spin if off as a franchise or something similar?) Jeff and his folks could do the work for the industry. Who knows, a little industry support now might reap real dividends in relatively short order.
Still not too keen on the idea? Here's a simpler version that might be worthwhile.
A field owners questionnaire aimed at discovering what's working in different places around the country (or even the world.) I hesitate to even suggest this on the basis that somebody must already be doing something similar, mustn't they? If for no other reason than marketing and sales need some sense of what's happening on the retail front in order to do their job effectively. Right? (For those of you who are field owners [Reiner, Mick] have any of your suppliers ever done anything similar?) Combine the answers from the questionnaire with a sales history and there may be enough data there, when combined with potentially hundreds of others, to begin to understand some of the the things happening in the paintball market, and why.
Of course it isn't as easy as suggesting it ought to be done--even generating a truly effective questionnaire would be a challenge--but maybe it's a place to start thinking about the challenges in a different way. Or not.
There sure are a lot of questions. And not a lot of answers. Or so it seems. Wouldn't it be nice to know what's really going on? Other than the fact tournament paintball is at the mercy of an industry that seems incapable of finding its backside with both hands. What the hell is industry doing other than trying to find more efficient ways for the haves to sell to the remaining retail outlets while trying to marginalize the have nots? Here's an idea. How about a model field program that all the Big Boys participate in. If you want to know what's happening at the grass roots try getting down there and see. The basic idea is to operate say, three, fields in diverse markets and see what's working and/or experiment with different ideas and try to find ways to make things work better--for everybody. (I know, I know.) Find answers to some of the questions currently plaguing the game. If everyone in industry participates nobody gets an advantage and everyone gets the benefits of any advances while sharing the cost of making the effort. Make it a PSTA project. If the PSTA could develop a package based on real life experience with proven methods to help make the local field(s) a success it would have actually accomplished something.
Not too keen on that idea? I didn't think so.
Fortuitously Jeff Perlmutter of PMI fame is looking into a variation of the concept. He wants to acquire and then operate as model parks a number of local paintball fields around the country. (See the interview over at the Big Bullet.) His idea is to find a system that produces a positive paintball experience and reproduce it at all his parks. (And perhaps spin if off as a franchise or something similar?) Jeff and his folks could do the work for the industry. Who knows, a little industry support now might reap real dividends in relatively short order.
Still not too keen on the idea? Here's a simpler version that might be worthwhile.
A field owners questionnaire aimed at discovering what's working in different places around the country (or even the world.) I hesitate to even suggest this on the basis that somebody must already be doing something similar, mustn't they? If for no other reason than marketing and sales need some sense of what's happening on the retail front in order to do their job effectively. Right? (For those of you who are field owners [Reiner, Mick] have any of your suppliers ever done anything similar?) Combine the answers from the questionnaire with a sales history and there may be enough data there, when combined with potentially hundreds of others, to begin to understand some of the the things happening in the paintball market, and why.
Of course it isn't as easy as suggesting it ought to be done--even generating a truly effective questionnaire would be a challenge--but maybe it's a place to start thinking about the challenges in a different way. Or not.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
More Notes On The 50 Caliber Solution
My Paint Guy, who has yet to be mistaken, has an interesting take on the 50 cal rollout that I figured I’d pass along, not because I’m buying it 100% but because he has yet to take a wrong step. Hard to argue with getting it right.
Anyway, he’s all for the 50 cal small ball because he is convinced it will work with the current level of technology and that all the potential pitfalls can (or have been) overcome. And the resulting cost reductions at the manufacturing end will make paintball much more affordable across the board. This, it seems to me, remains an open question but we’ll see.
Of more interest (to me) he also thinks the Pro teams will be outfitted to compete using the small ball next season as a high profile way of introducing the new gear and paintball to the tourney marketplace. It makes enough sense that it could happen and given that the latest rumors keep projecting a small ball introduction at World Cup it fits the logistics as well. Again, we’ll see.
I still have a few questions about small ball, mostly related to performance; marking consistency, breaking consistency and, in particular, velocity. I don’t doubt the first two can be accomplished but I’m reserving judgment until I see the small ball in action. Velocity is another issue entirely however. In the background there has been speculation about some of the performance claims (more accurate, longer range, etc.) and just how that can be accomplished–or even if it can. The keys seem to be the weight of the small ball and velocity. If the small ball requires greater velocity in order for its dynamic characteristics to match the 68 cal ball or to exceed the 68 cal ball that could have a significant effect on the tourney game. Right now we are competing on a field where the dimensions, bunkers and equipment create a balance between the valued core elements of the game. A velocity change could (and if sufficiently different, would) alter the current game dynamics. Think movement and what will happen if the paintball is moving, say, 350 fps instead of 295 fps. (This isn’t a game breaker of course but if the potential impact of things like higher velocity aren’t considered in advance and accounted for the result could be unintended harm just when everything looked to be turning around.)
I also have some questions about how the ‘09 off season is going to change the Pro landscape, again, and small ball could have a big impact on that, too. Last off season saw another reduction in paint sponsorships and a scramble amongst the teams for the limited resources. Until the small ball rumor hit there was every reason to expect more of the same but a move to small ball might keep more teams in the game. (If there is a commensurate retail price reduction resulting from the projected manufacturing savings.) Or maybe not. More on this angle in the future.
Anyway, he’s all for the 50 cal small ball because he is convinced it will work with the current level of technology and that all the potential pitfalls can (or have been) overcome. And the resulting cost reductions at the manufacturing end will make paintball much more affordable across the board. This, it seems to me, remains an open question but we’ll see.
Of more interest (to me) he also thinks the Pro teams will be outfitted to compete using the small ball next season as a high profile way of introducing the new gear and paintball to the tourney marketplace. It makes enough sense that it could happen and given that the latest rumors keep projecting a small ball introduction at World Cup it fits the logistics as well. Again, we’ll see.
I still have a few questions about small ball, mostly related to performance; marking consistency, breaking consistency and, in particular, velocity. I don’t doubt the first two can be accomplished but I’m reserving judgment until I see the small ball in action. Velocity is another issue entirely however. In the background there has been speculation about some of the performance claims (more accurate, longer range, etc.) and just how that can be accomplished–or even if it can. The keys seem to be the weight of the small ball and velocity. If the small ball requires greater velocity in order for its dynamic characteristics to match the 68 cal ball or to exceed the 68 cal ball that could have a significant effect on the tourney game. Right now we are competing on a field where the dimensions, bunkers and equipment create a balance between the valued core elements of the game. A velocity change could (and if sufficiently different, would) alter the current game dynamics. Think movement and what will happen if the paintball is moving, say, 350 fps instead of 295 fps. (This isn’t a game breaker of course but if the potential impact of things like higher velocity aren’t considered in advance and accounted for the result could be unintended harm just when everything looked to be turning around.)
I also have some questions about how the ‘09 off season is going to change the Pro landscape, again, and small ball could have a big impact on that, too. Last off season saw another reduction in paint sponsorships and a scramble amongst the teams for the limited resources. Until the small ball rumor hit there was every reason to expect more of the same but a move to small ball might keep more teams in the game. (If there is a commensurate retail price reduction resulting from the projected manufacturing savings.) Or maybe not. More on this angle in the future.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
World Games & Paintball
The word is beginning to spread that competitive paintball will be a demonstration sport at this year's World Games in July. The games are being held this time around in Taiwan in conjunction with the APIT (Asian Paintball Invitational Tournament.) 16 teams--apparently all Asian--will represent competitive paintball and will run side-by-side with the APIT.
Info is hard to come by as I couldn't find any mention of demonstration sports or paintball on the World Games website--but you might have better luck or be more patient than I was. And I couldn't find anything on APIT other than some mentions about last year's event and bit of YouTube footage. VFTD's Malaysian correspondent only knows the Malaysian teams that will be participating in the games demo and APIT event. It all seems rather odd that so little information is available about what might be a significant step toward legitimizing competitive paintball within the sports world. (And, frankly, if you take a look at some of the "real" sports that are already part of the World Games you gotta wonder what paintball has being doing wrong.) Even odder in that DYE Asia is supposed to be heavily involved.
UPDATE: Couple of things I forgot. The Kaohsiung Paintball Association is supposed to be the organizer but far as Google can tell they don't have a website either. For the latest check out Villian Paintball--in the paintblog list on the sidebar.
UP UPDATED: Er, the Kaohsiung Paintball Association does (sorta) have a website at rocpaintball.org which looks mostly like a field site and all the links seem to go to their forum which Google will translate into English but still isn't very informative.
Info is hard to come by as I couldn't find any mention of demonstration sports or paintball on the World Games website--but you might have better luck or be more patient than I was. And I couldn't find anything on APIT other than some mentions about last year's event and bit of YouTube footage. VFTD's Malaysian correspondent only knows the Malaysian teams that will be participating in the games demo and APIT event. It all seems rather odd that so little information is available about what might be a significant step toward legitimizing competitive paintball within the sports world. (And, frankly, if you take a look at some of the "real" sports that are already part of the World Games you gotta wonder what paintball has being doing wrong.) Even odder in that DYE Asia is supposed to be heavily involved.
UPDATE: Couple of things I forgot. The Kaohsiung Paintball Association is supposed to be the organizer but far as Google can tell they don't have a website either. For the latest check out Villian Paintball--in the paintblog list on the sidebar.
UP UPDATED: Er, the Kaohsiung Paintball Association does (sorta) have a website at rocpaintball.org which looks mostly like a field site and all the links seem to go to their forum which Google will translate into English but still isn't very informative.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Burning Question
This edition of Burning Question is a two-parter. If you are so far outta the loop it leaves you confizzled look here.
What is a roller? (Hint: within the paintball industry.)
What could it mean if a number of paint manufacturers all bought enough new rollers to service all their paint-making machines? (My apologies for the technical lingo.)
What is a roller? (Hint: within the paintball industry.)
What could it mean if a number of paint manufacturers all bought enough new rollers to service all their paint-making machines? (My apologies for the technical lingo.)
Friday, May 15, 2009
The Ultimate Paintball Conspiracy
Ever wonder how PBIndustry plans to change their current economic struggle? Did you expect they would simply tighten their belts, hold on and hope to ride out the hard times? Rumor is starting to coalesce and whispers are escaping from windowless smoke-filled rooms. Personally I don't think even the paintball industry has the brass cojones necessary to pull this one off but the best conspiracy is the one nobody believes could possibly be true, right? Interestingly, this isn't anything new. The idea has been around for some time but has lately become a front burner topic and there are some big players in the loop.
Some of you will object to the term, conspiracy. After all, corporations in other fields aren't in the habit of doing business in the public square either. Just so, but if the course under discussion is adopted it will demand a nearly unified front and prearranged agreements. At a minimum that could be called collusion and when you discover the target of this plan I suspect most of you will agree that "conspiracy" just scratches the surface. Do I have your attention yet? Funny thing is the word has already leaked onto the paintball internet (and beyond) but the few who have commented don't seem to understand all the ramifications.
One simple move, if accepted industry-wide, could lay the groundwork overnight for an enormous change that could reinvigorate a massive chunk of the industry. (Of course, somebody will have to pay a price.)
Let's call the plan the .50 Caliber Solution.
That's it. That's all there is to it. A brand, spanking new paintball as the accepted industry-wide standard. (It may not actually be .50 caliber but that is number bandied about most of the time.) Doesn't sound like much at first, does it?
Focus first on the necessities if there were a new paintball and then on the possibilities.
No, VFTD has not morphed into a fringe whacko black helicopter NWO site. (I do that one over at Bombthrowinganarchist.com) And it may be the idea doesn't get any further than some quiet conversation or a trial balloon or two before it disappears. Who knows? But Dale over at The Ford Report references the rumor along with a not-exactly-a-denial denial "...There's another rumor flying about that ProCaps is leading the charge to force a changeover to .50 caliber paintballs. Romanian Terminator Sorin Voinea of ProCaps thinks this is hysterical ..." in yesterday's latest edition of The Ford Report. Hey, he said it, not me.
Let's What If? starting with paint. A smaller paintball is materially cheaper to produce, package, and most importantly, to ship. The margins that are killing paint manufacturers saddled with debt suddenly provide more profit at the same prices. In a market with a flat player base and glutted with perfectly good used guns capable of new gun performance how do you turn sales around? A .68 caliber breach and bore gun and barrel won't be much use shooting a dramatically different sized paintball, will it? Perhaps hoppers wouldn't need to be changed but who can doubt retrofit internals to maximize performance wouldn't be a part of the change over? Would every pair of goggles need a new lense manufactured to a different standard because of the decreased impact area? I don't know but I can easily see it happening. How's that for a start? New paint, new guns, new barrels--lots of new stuff. Beginning to see the brave new paintball world that features a new universal paintball standard?
Sure, there are obstacles but desperate times call for desperate measures and if you do not believe these are desperate times for some of the manufacturers you're head has been buried in the sand. Most of the complication--assuming all the major players end up in agreement--is in how to work the transition period and how to sell it to you, Joe Paintballer. My guess is cheaper and safer with a 'for the good of the game' thrown in for good measure.
Impossible? Overblown? Just plain crazy? Probably, but the talk inside the industry is for real. At this point I guess the next big question is--will they actually pull the trigger on the .50 caliber solution?
Some of you will object to the term, conspiracy. After all, corporations in other fields aren't in the habit of doing business in the public square either. Just so, but if the course under discussion is adopted it will demand a nearly unified front and prearranged agreements. At a minimum that could be called collusion and when you discover the target of this plan I suspect most of you will agree that "conspiracy" just scratches the surface. Do I have your attention yet? Funny thing is the word has already leaked onto the paintball internet (and beyond) but the few who have commented don't seem to understand all the ramifications.
One simple move, if accepted industry-wide, could lay the groundwork overnight for an enormous change that could reinvigorate a massive chunk of the industry. (Of course, somebody will have to pay a price.)
Let's call the plan the .50 Caliber Solution.
That's it. That's all there is to it. A brand, spanking new paintball as the accepted industry-wide standard. (It may not actually be .50 caliber but that is number bandied about most of the time.) Doesn't sound like much at first, does it?
Focus first on the necessities if there were a new paintball and then on the possibilities.
No, VFTD has not morphed into a fringe whacko black helicopter NWO site. (I do that one over at Bombthrowinganarchist.com) And it may be the idea doesn't get any further than some quiet conversation or a trial balloon or two before it disappears. Who knows? But Dale over at The Ford Report references the rumor along with a not-exactly-a-denial denial "...There's another rumor flying about that ProCaps is leading the charge to force a changeover to .50 caliber paintballs. Romanian Terminator Sorin Voinea of ProCaps thinks this is hysterical ..." in yesterday's latest edition of The Ford Report. Hey, he said it, not me.
Let's What If? starting with paint. A smaller paintball is materially cheaper to produce, package, and most importantly, to ship. The margins that are killing paint manufacturers saddled with debt suddenly provide more profit at the same prices. In a market with a flat player base and glutted with perfectly good used guns capable of new gun performance how do you turn sales around? A .68 caliber breach and bore gun and barrel won't be much use shooting a dramatically different sized paintball, will it? Perhaps hoppers wouldn't need to be changed but who can doubt retrofit internals to maximize performance wouldn't be a part of the change over? Would every pair of goggles need a new lense manufactured to a different standard because of the decreased impact area? I don't know but I can easily see it happening. How's that for a start? New paint, new guns, new barrels--lots of new stuff. Beginning to see the brave new paintball world that features a new universal paintball standard?
Sure, there are obstacles but desperate times call for desperate measures and if you do not believe these are desperate times for some of the manufacturers you're head has been buried in the sand. Most of the complication--assuming all the major players end up in agreement--is in how to work the transition period and how to sell it to you, Joe Paintballer. My guess is cheaper and safer with a 'for the good of the game' thrown in for good measure.
Impossible? Overblown? Just plain crazy? Probably, but the talk inside the industry is for real. At this point I guess the next big question is--will they actually pull the trigger on the .50 caliber solution?
Thursday, May 14, 2009
The German Tsunami
By now you've all heard about the German legislation aimed at, among other things, banning paintball. But did you know rumor has it that privately most of the European paintball peeps consider the effort to fight a lost cause? Which may be a realistic take on the industry's lack of any political influence--unlike, say, the real gun lobby. So either the ban is a fait accompli or else only a sufficient public outcry might deter the politicians and cause them to modify the final legislation. Fortunately, there are a lot ballers in Germany and around the world trying to make their voices heard.
That's not the tsunami though. Not by a long shot. Take a minute to think about the ramifications of a German ban on paintball. (Purely the practical apart from a future trend politically.) What does Paintball lose immediately? A lot of players, teams and a still developing market. But the German market isn't just the German market. How big a hit do the MS and Grand Tour take if German teams disappear or are drastically reduced? Two of Europe's largest distributors are based in Germany. I'm told one of the smaller paint makers ships hundreds of skids of paint annually to Germany. And that Germany, when considered separately from Europe as a whole, is a top five market worldwide all on its own. Are you beginning to see the tsunami yet? In a time of general economic weakness within PBIndustry the loss of the German market could easily be the straw that broke more than a few camels' backs. It will, if it happens, cause a significant contraction in the European branches of the big U.S. players they can't afford right now. The potential ramifications really do reach every corner of the globe.
So, if you were thinking that's really tough for the Germans but it won't affect me--we all might need to reevaluate.
Which leads me to the biggest VFTD tease ever. You will not want to miss tomorrow's post; The Ultimate Paintball Conspiracy. I confess to being a conspiracy buff but that doesn't mean they don't exist. And a German ban could push the conspirators further down the path they are already considering. Fortunately nobody in Paintball can keep a secret and the word has gotten out. It could be the biggest story of the last decade.
UPDATE: sources in Euroland called to tell me to get it right so here I am, getting it right. My only excuse is that thing's been changin' mighty fast over there lately as this latest information has developed in the last 48 hours. Seems paintball folks have organized and using the services of a PR firm may have made some inroads in the last day with the help of a lot of players rousing public opinion. No deal is done and the ban could still pass but what seemed two days ago to be a lost cause might yet carry the day.
FOLLOW-UP: Please check out the comments as Missy (who knows her stuff) disputes the scale of the German market's importance and consequently the scale of the impact should a German ban ultimately happen. While I aim to have fun here at VFTD it is never my intention to steer you wrong so I appreciate Missy taking the time to correct a possible error. The latest news looks more positive so hopefully we won't have to find out what the real impact of a paintball ban in Germany might be.
That's not the tsunami though. Not by a long shot. Take a minute to think about the ramifications of a German ban on paintball. (Purely the practical apart from a future trend politically.) What does Paintball lose immediately? A lot of players, teams and a still developing market. But the German market isn't just the German market. How big a hit do the MS and Grand Tour take if German teams disappear or are drastically reduced? Two of Europe's largest distributors are based in Germany. I'm told one of the smaller paint makers ships hundreds of skids of paint annually to Germany. And that Germany, when considered separately from Europe as a whole, is a top five market worldwide all on its own. Are you beginning to see the tsunami yet? In a time of general economic weakness within PBIndustry the loss of the German market could easily be the straw that broke more than a few camels' backs. It will, if it happens, cause a significant contraction in the European branches of the big U.S. players they can't afford right now. The potential ramifications really do reach every corner of the globe.
So, if you were thinking that's really tough for the Germans but it won't affect me--we all might need to reevaluate.
Which leads me to the biggest VFTD tease ever. You will not want to miss tomorrow's post; The Ultimate Paintball Conspiracy. I confess to being a conspiracy buff but that doesn't mean they don't exist. And a German ban could push the conspirators further down the path they are already considering. Fortunately nobody in Paintball can keep a secret and the word has gotten out. It could be the biggest story of the last decade.
UPDATE: sources in Euroland called to tell me to get it right so here I am, getting it right. My only excuse is that thing's been changin' mighty fast over there lately as this latest information has developed in the last 48 hours. Seems paintball folks have organized and using the services of a PR firm may have made some inroads in the last day with the help of a lot of players rousing public opinion. No deal is done and the ban could still pass but what seemed two days ago to be a lost cause might yet carry the day.
FOLLOW-UP: Please check out the comments as Missy (who knows her stuff) disputes the scale of the German market's importance and consequently the scale of the impact should a German ban ultimately happen. While I aim to have fun here at VFTD it is never my intention to steer you wrong so I appreciate Missy taking the time to correct a possible error. The latest news looks more positive so hopefully we won't have to find out what the real impact of a paintball ban in Germany might be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
