Today's question was pulled from the mailbag post of Dec 12. I foolishly agreed to respond (in that post's comments) and so now I'm stuck. Unlike the norm, today's answer is not the answer. I'm not sure there is such an answer but it is a valuable topic for conversation and one that competitive paintball will have to answer eventually.
So, do you see any way for the industry to help make tourney play more attractive to field owners, who can then sponsor and give refuge to more teams (who then buy more high end guns and cases of paint)?
Actually, I do. And I'ma throw in an extra answer besides--consider it an early Christmas present from VFTD. First thing the industry needs to do is stop sponsoring paintball teams. And by "sponsoring" I mean offering direct to teams discounted merchandise. (Did I have you going there for a sec?) Selling direct breaks down the relationships between teams/players and the local field. If the local field/pro shop is the conduit between local/regional/national am teams and discounted product it is a small price to pay to encourage fields interested in supporting competition paintball to do so and builds bonds at the local level between teams/players and their local fields/pro shops. As it stands the manufacturers who go the direct "sponsorship" route are cannibalizing their own grassroots markets.
While a good start that's not enough. In this time of economic contraction and internet sales (and even some big box store sales) the local field/pro shop--particularly if it has nearby competitors--has to offer something more, or at least different. Given that I think the bar has been raised too high for simple entry into the competitive paintball world I have some suggestions; offer and schedule times for basic paintball training; combine that with restricted but informal afternoon (or morning) (or both) streetball style "competitions" periodically and encourage or directly promote the development of paintball clubs based around the local field. The idea is to begin by teaching anyone interested the fundamentals of the game and then give them a place and a way to begin to experience their growing skills in an environment of their equals. You want more and future tourney players? Especially now they don't appear ex nihilo. The club can be an element the local field organizes or it can be an arrangement between those interested in building a paintball club and their local competition-oriented field. The club exists to develop tourney players and provide a ladder of teams on which to compete.And if the local field is the source of discounted gear, etc. you now have a reciprocal basis for the relationship. And in the longer term the most successful clubs will attract more and better players and more attention from would be industry supporters and everybody would potentially benefit.
Showing posts with label sponsorship. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sponsorship. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Pushing Paintballs
Is there a new paint war coming? Calm down. I'm not suggesting there is or isn't. I'm just curious. For awhile the big boys played consolidate and gobble up some of the old paint makers; X.O., JT, Archon and Zap and whoever else. [Severe called it quits.] All the while the conventional wisdom plead poverty on behalf of the surviving paint manufacturers--which in Procaps' situation seemed to have some merit but there are/were other issues (Pulse litigation, etc.) beyond simply making and selling paintballs. Regardless, the North American market was whittled down to a couple primary players and all the while we continued to hear paint manufacturing was in dire straits as nobody had two nickels to rub together 'cus the prices were too low. (Price to whom?--but that's another post.) Meanwhile paint is being made in China, India & Europe among other places. Does our market settle down leaving RPS and Draxxus to split the market? Au contraire, despite the apparent failure of numerous other paint manufacturers all of a sudden we have a horse race again. Valken is pushing paint in a big way but not manufacturing. GI Sportz is cranking out paint and is looking to make a big splash and scoop up market share at a record pace. And even HydroTec remains in the game though their recent delays--despite re-tooling explanations--leaves their impact uncertain. Are all these people nuts or are we looking at some sort of paint Renaissance? Or will there be a bloodbath or will everybody be able to get along and survive or even thrive?
One other thing. Look at how it's being done. In recent years paint sponsorships have been sinking faster than fabled Atlantis because we are told the value of high profile teams and players is no longer an effective method of marketing, if it ever was. GI apparently disagrees. They made a strong push to deliver the best paint at last year's World Cup and have built on that success by signing 4 top pro teams along with an aggressive program of league sponsorships. Valken hasn't jumped on the team sponsorship bandwagon but they are all over league sponsorships as well. Meanwhile DXS seems to have opted to back a single horse in the big time sponsorship sweepstakes by supporting Impact but that still reflects a move away from past practices. And the KEE peeps, while retaining a few pro teams with paint deals, have countered with both nationally announced sponsorship options for divisional teams as well as some other, related sponsorship options primarily aimed at divisional teams that were presented to retailers in their network end of last week-ish via email.
It looks to me like the new (old) kids on the block are building their new brands the same way everybody else once did. Are they making a mistake? Is there another way to go? A better way to go? Or were the previous entrenched paint makers figuring they no longer needed to compete and let their sponsorships dwindle as a consequence?
One other thing. Look at how it's being done. In recent years paint sponsorships have been sinking faster than fabled Atlantis because we are told the value of high profile teams and players is no longer an effective method of marketing, if it ever was. GI apparently disagrees. They made a strong push to deliver the best paint at last year's World Cup and have built on that success by signing 4 top pro teams along with an aggressive program of league sponsorships. Valken hasn't jumped on the team sponsorship bandwagon but they are all over league sponsorships as well. Meanwhile DXS seems to have opted to back a single horse in the big time sponsorship sweepstakes by supporting Impact but that still reflects a move away from past practices. And the KEE peeps, while retaining a few pro teams with paint deals, have countered with both nationally announced sponsorship options for divisional teams as well as some other, related sponsorship options primarily aimed at divisional teams that were presented to retailers in their network end of last week-ish via email.
It looks to me like the new (old) kids on the block are building their new brands the same way everybody else once did. Are they making a mistake? Is there another way to go? A better way to go? Or were the previous entrenched paint makers figuring they no longer needed to compete and let their sponsorships dwindle as a consequence?
Friday, December 24, 2010
The Lazy Slacker Re-post of the Week
This week's post was originally posted in November of 2008 and was titled, Pro Ball Blues. (Still is, actually.) It's about the state of paint sponsorship at the pro level and the toll it was taking. I thought it might be of re-newed interest on a couple of counts. Having gotten used to pro team attrition (sorta) I wonder what the numbers and teams look like if you go back to say, 2007 and add it all up. Between then and now who's gone, who is new. What teams have managed to carry on and what is the likelihood of any real continuity among the pro ranks?
Then there's the changed paint manufacturing situation with GI Sportz, Valken & HydroTec in play. Do their arrival on the scene alter anything? GI Sportz is making some moves. Valken is supplied by GI and HydroTec hasn't managed a rollout of product yet despite the hoopla. My prediction is that there may be more paint available this year but if there is it will go to the haves and won't help the have nots at all. (Although it may be GI Sportz relationship with Shock that keeps them a viable team. Just a guess.)
Then there's the changed paint manufacturing situation with GI Sportz, Valken & HydroTec in play. Do their arrival on the scene alter anything? GI Sportz is making some moves. Valken is supplied by GI and HydroTec hasn't managed a rollout of product yet despite the hoopla. My prediction is that there may be more paint available this year but if there is it will go to the haves and won't help the have nots at all. (Although it may be GI Sportz relationship with Shock that keeps them a viable team. Just a guess.)
Sunday, April 25, 2010
The Further Adventures of Small Ball
Or, the Rise or Demise of Joy Division?
You may recall after Phoenix I reported on a conversation I had about small ball and more specifically GI Milsim's future plans. At that time the North American focus looked to be aimed directly at the mil-sim market--which still seems to be the case.
But Euroland looks a bit different. A new French team Boost Air Rennes joined the SPL--bought their way in--were handed an open spot--whatever--sponsored by Paint Distribution, the French distributor of GI Milsim in order, one presumes, to give 50 cal paint and guns a boost. (Yes, I did that on purpose.) They appear to have played one match and I'm quite certain that short of a podium finish, SPL or not, nobody cares. (Although I suppose it's conceivable that French forums are full of Boost Air Rennes watchers--but I doubt it.)
Which is where Joy comes into play. (I am assuming the Nanos in question are of the small ball variety although I have yet to receive official confirmation. Far as I can tell GI Milsim do not produce a 68 cal version of the Nano.) It's a no-brainer that Joy has the profile to make their use of small ball and the Nano marker a story of interest regardless of results--and they have a history of being one of the CPL's top teams as well. That makes Dark Sports interest obvious and standard operating procedure for a new company intent on promoting its products. On the flip side this could be a make or break situation for tournament small ball. If Joy don't continue with their consistently high results won't small ball get the blame, deserved or undeserved?
Of greater interest (to me) is what it says about Joy (and Angel Paintball Sports) and sponsorship in the present environment. Over the years no team has shown greater brand and sponsor loyalty than Joy in their relationship with Angel but the present realities (at both Angel and Joy) are compelling changes. It's swell to say Joy will continue using Angels in non-MS events but the simple fact is the MS is Joy's showcase series and the majority of fans will only follow those results. And how does a team of Joy's rep and longevity start a season without a paint deal? And how is it Angel allowed things to come to this pass? Doesn't this mean that either they simply aren't able to support Joy the way they once did or that they couldn't justify making that level of commitment?
Tourney ball doesn't need anymore cautionary tales. What we need are some new success stories--which leaves me a little torn when it comes to the future of small ball in the competitive paintball arena.
UPDATE: Sems there's some contradictory info out there. For links and the latest check out the comments.
You may recall after Phoenix I reported on a conversation I had about small ball and more specifically GI Milsim's future plans. At that time the North American focus looked to be aimed directly at the mil-sim market--which still seems to be the case.
But Euroland looks a bit different. A new French team Boost Air Rennes joined the SPL--bought their way in--were handed an open spot--whatever--sponsored by Paint Distribution, the French distributor of GI Milsim in order, one presumes, to give 50 cal paint and guns a boost. (Yes, I did that on purpose.) They appear to have played one match and I'm quite certain that short of a podium finish, SPL or not, nobody cares. (Although I suppose it's conceivable that French forums are full of Boost Air Rennes watchers--but I doubt it.)
Which is where Joy comes into play. (I am assuming the Nanos in question are of the small ball variety although I have yet to receive official confirmation. Far as I can tell GI Milsim do not produce a 68 cal version of the Nano.) It's a no-brainer that Joy has the profile to make their use of small ball and the Nano marker a story of interest regardless of results--and they have a history of being one of the CPL's top teams as well. That makes Dark Sports interest obvious and standard operating procedure for a new company intent on promoting its products. On the flip side this could be a make or break situation for tournament small ball. If Joy don't continue with their consistently high results won't small ball get the blame, deserved or undeserved?
Of greater interest (to me) is what it says about Joy (and Angel Paintball Sports) and sponsorship in the present environment. Over the years no team has shown greater brand and sponsor loyalty than Joy in their relationship with Angel but the present realities (at both Angel and Joy) are compelling changes. It's swell to say Joy will continue using Angels in non-MS events but the simple fact is the MS is Joy's showcase series and the majority of fans will only follow those results. And how does a team of Joy's rep and longevity start a season without a paint deal? And how is it Angel allowed things to come to this pass? Doesn't this mean that either they simply aren't able to support Joy the way they once did or that they couldn't justify making that level of commitment?
Tourney ball doesn't need anymore cautionary tales. What we need are some new success stories--which leaves me a little torn when it comes to the future of small ball in the competitive paintball arena.
UPDATE: Sems there's some contradictory info out there. For links and the latest check out the comments.
Monday, March 8, 2010
On Sponsorship
I was asked yesterday what I thought of an opinion piece posted on the website over at Rich Telford's Wide World of Paintball. (Title is the link.) You may know it better as Facefull. The comments were made by, who else, Rich Telford. It is after all his wide world of paintball. And instead of simply answering the question it seemed blog worthy.
If you're hoping for fireworks you're going to have to set off your own or settle for disappointment. I was asked if I'd seen the piece and if so, what did I think? I have now read it. And it's hard to argue with. Most of it sounds like stuff I've been saying. It offers a suggested path. What's to criticize?
What I will do is piggyback on a couple of points. (I'm also assuming you've read Rich's comments so don't be a lazy slacker and take a minute to check them out.) There are 3 items I want to riff off of here. 1--Rich generously passes responsibility for the current state of the game around and while it's certainly true the facts is that some are more responsible than others. 2--Rich suggests the players need to support the members of the industry that support the pro teams and ignore those that don't. Some might read that as advocating a boycott of sorts--which is how I read it--and while I am agnostic on the utility I'm not shocked by the idea. Collective action in the collective interest (where it can be ascertained) is perfectly reasonable. (But is that in the collective interest?) 3--And finally Rich suggests if times are tough for the pros, and they surely are, it's also no picnic for the lower divisions. Which is true too, as far as it goes.
1--the current state of the game is the responsibility of an industry and major league promoters who have, at times, largely been one and the same. Did some high profile players have input at times? Sure, did their vote count for anything at all at crunch time? When the nature and direction of the game were on the line? Not so much. Without some control there isn't any real responsibility. The only responsibility teams and players bear is the result of an unwillingness to become embroiled in the politics of the game, either individually or collectively. In the present that's neither here nor there, I just want to be clear.
2--if the players and teams have proved incapable in the past of acting in concert in their own self-interest--and they have--I doubt much of anything will convince them to act individually for the collective good--even if they buy into the boycott idea. And then there's the disconnect between the pro teams and the not pro teams. Does the average player see a connection? Other than that's where some of them hope to one day be. It's not that I oppose a boycott or something like it, it's more that I've never seen any evidence to suggest it could be organized, formally or informally.
One reason the needed dollars aren't there is because they can't be justified. Budget cuts don't necessarily dictate which parts of the budget the cuts come from. When sponsorship dollars are targeted it means the value received from those sponsorship dollars is less certain than dollars spent elsewhere. Perhaps one thing teams need to do is figure out a better way to make their case. (Ironically, not unlike what Rich and XSV have been working toward for years. So who would know better what is possible in this environment and what isn't?) One good question for teams is how do we go about building value in our team? And an equally good question for sponsors is what do we lose if we fail to support the pro teams?
3--which kinda leads me to a comparo between the pro teams and the divisional teams. There are a couple of relevant differences. What passes for sponsorship in most divisional situations is really differing sorts of discounts. Are the basis for these discounts tied to pro sponsorship, or the lack thereof? Not so much. Any company that has a product line targeting the competitive part of the game probably offers some sort of discount options to teams, either directly or through retail stores and field shops. Are players really going to ignore those options in order to encourage other parts of the industry to give stuff to pros? Again, not so much, it seems to me. One place (among many) where the pros and divisional players share a common cause is in the costs both incur in order to compete. As divisional players move up ranks the costs of being competitive increase as well so for those players with dreams of playing pro must begin to confront the reality of what it takes off the field as well as on it.
Lastly, while decisions made by industry and promoters have brought us here I'm not pointing fingers and insisting on placing blame--the point is to accurately assess what is so we can all hopefully make wiser decisions as we move forward.
If you're hoping for fireworks you're going to have to set off your own or settle for disappointment. I was asked if I'd seen the piece and if so, what did I think? I have now read it. And it's hard to argue with. Most of it sounds like stuff I've been saying. It offers a suggested path. What's to criticize?
What I will do is piggyback on a couple of points. (I'm also assuming you've read Rich's comments so don't be a lazy slacker and take a minute to check them out.) There are 3 items I want to riff off of here. 1--Rich generously passes responsibility for the current state of the game around and while it's certainly true the facts is that some are more responsible than others. 2--Rich suggests the players need to support the members of the industry that support the pro teams and ignore those that don't. Some might read that as advocating a boycott of sorts--which is how I read it--and while I am agnostic on the utility I'm not shocked by the idea. Collective action in the collective interest (where it can be ascertained) is perfectly reasonable. (But is that in the collective interest?) 3--And finally Rich suggests if times are tough for the pros, and they surely are, it's also no picnic for the lower divisions. Which is true too, as far as it goes.
1--the current state of the game is the responsibility of an industry and major league promoters who have, at times, largely been one and the same. Did some high profile players have input at times? Sure, did their vote count for anything at all at crunch time? When the nature and direction of the game were on the line? Not so much. Without some control there isn't any real responsibility. The only responsibility teams and players bear is the result of an unwillingness to become embroiled in the politics of the game, either individually or collectively. In the present that's neither here nor there, I just want to be clear.
2--if the players and teams have proved incapable in the past of acting in concert in their own self-interest--and they have--I doubt much of anything will convince them to act individually for the collective good--even if they buy into the boycott idea. And then there's the disconnect between the pro teams and the not pro teams. Does the average player see a connection? Other than that's where some of them hope to one day be. It's not that I oppose a boycott or something like it, it's more that I've never seen any evidence to suggest it could be organized, formally or informally.
One reason the needed dollars aren't there is because they can't be justified. Budget cuts don't necessarily dictate which parts of the budget the cuts come from. When sponsorship dollars are targeted it means the value received from those sponsorship dollars is less certain than dollars spent elsewhere. Perhaps one thing teams need to do is figure out a better way to make their case. (Ironically, not unlike what Rich and XSV have been working toward for years. So who would know better what is possible in this environment and what isn't?) One good question for teams is how do we go about building value in our team? And an equally good question for sponsors is what do we lose if we fail to support the pro teams?
3--which kinda leads me to a comparo between the pro teams and the divisional teams. There are a couple of relevant differences. What passes for sponsorship in most divisional situations is really differing sorts of discounts. Are the basis for these discounts tied to pro sponsorship, or the lack thereof? Not so much. Any company that has a product line targeting the competitive part of the game probably offers some sort of discount options to teams, either directly or through retail stores and field shops. Are players really going to ignore those options in order to encourage other parts of the industry to give stuff to pros? Again, not so much, it seems to me. One place (among many) where the pros and divisional players share a common cause is in the costs both incur in order to compete. As divisional players move up ranks the costs of being competitive increase as well so for those players with dreams of playing pro must begin to confront the reality of what it takes off the field as well as on it.
Lastly, while decisions made by industry and promoters have brought us here I'm not pointing fingers and insisting on placing blame--the point is to accurately assess what is so we can all hopefully make wiser decisions as we move forward.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Dye picks up Hinman, er, Aftermath
One might read the sponsorship deal Dye has offered to Aftermath as just one in a long line of similar arrangements but I wonder if there's more to it than that. And I'm not talking about the Big Picture implication of cementing ties between the PSP's principle owner and the owner of the west coast's PSP affiliate league--though that can't be discounted and is no doubt an element of the deal.
Traditionally successful teams attracted sponsorship because of their success but the nature of the relationships was (is) fluid. Some teams/sponsors forged longer term relationships while others didn't but it was all rather hit or miss and team formation mostly remained a product of serendipity; friendships, proximity, luck, etc. (Discounting the factory teams which are no longer anchoring the upper echelon of teams.) Except players come and go as does desire and motivation and it has been a rare accomplishment to see the best teams remain amongst the best for any period of time.
That may or may not be all that big a deal but in an environment where industry is re-thinking its priorities and also adjusting to the new media and a shifting marketplace the idea of branding has gained some momentum. Branding can work a couple of ways; by lifting the product du jour up on the back of a successful and popular brand (in the case of a team) or by tying product to an up and comer where the product is seen as essential to the success of the developing brand. It's a longer term strategy but has real advantages if the risks can be minimized. The primary risks are a failure to ultimately succeed or even survive the term of the deal.
Now take a look at Aftermath. Is Dye counting on this latest batch of kids to fulfill their expectations? No way. Dye is counting on Mike Hinman to do what he has consistently demonstrated he's capable of doing--putting a very competitive team together and on the field, over and over, despite (or because of) a lack of roster continuity.
So did Dye sign Aftermath or did they sign Hinman? I say they signed Hinman. And I will further suggest that if the industry is serious about branding, continuity and minimizing risk they should think seriously about emulating this move by Dye to support the organizations and/or individuals who have demonstrated staying power and the ability to build successful teams.
Traditionally successful teams attracted sponsorship because of their success but the nature of the relationships was (is) fluid. Some teams/sponsors forged longer term relationships while others didn't but it was all rather hit or miss and team formation mostly remained a product of serendipity; friendships, proximity, luck, etc. (Discounting the factory teams which are no longer anchoring the upper echelon of teams.) Except players come and go as does desire and motivation and it has been a rare accomplishment to see the best teams remain amongst the best for any period of time.
That may or may not be all that big a deal but in an environment where industry is re-thinking its priorities and also adjusting to the new media and a shifting marketplace the idea of branding has gained some momentum. Branding can work a couple of ways; by lifting the product du jour up on the back of a successful and popular brand (in the case of a team) or by tying product to an up and comer where the product is seen as essential to the success of the developing brand. It's a longer term strategy but has real advantages if the risks can be minimized. The primary risks are a failure to ultimately succeed or even survive the term of the deal.
Now take a look at Aftermath. Is Dye counting on this latest batch of kids to fulfill their expectations? No way. Dye is counting on Mike Hinman to do what he has consistently demonstrated he's capable of doing--putting a very competitive team together and on the field, over and over, despite (or because of) a lack of roster continuity.
So did Dye sign Aftermath or did they sign Hinman? I say they signed Hinman. And I will further suggest that if the industry is serious about branding, continuity and minimizing risk they should think seriously about emulating this move by Dye to support the organizations and/or individuals who have demonstrated staying power and the ability to build successful teams.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The State of Sponsorship
Unlike the upcoming State of the Union soon to be teleprompted by POTUS across the network television spectrum I'ma keep this one short and to the point. Five years ago any team that didn't have their sponsorship in place by the beginning of January was either getting picked up for pennies on the dollar or not getting picked up at all. This year it took Dynasty (DYNASTY!) until just recently to get their principle deal done.
Sunday, November 29, 2009
MS Looking For A Sugar Daddy
The Millennium kids may not know when or where one (or two) events will be most years until the season is underway but they know what they want in sponsorship cheese and we're not talking wedges or sampler packs either--strictly wheels o' cheese and the larger the better.
But first, where are my manners? Here's hoping you all enjoyed a happy thanksgiving with family and friends. I went to visit my Dad for the holiday and came down with a mysterious strain of the turkey flu which is apparently not contagious and can only be caught when consuming excessive amounts of, who woulda guessed, turkey. (The big dumb bird for those who weren't sure.) By now y'all ought to know my middle name is wretched excess--it used to be danger but I had it legally changed--so I was a prime if unwitting candidate. But never again. I have sworn off turkey for the next 364 days.
So during the holiday what should come over the transom than the 2010 Millennium sponsorship kit and its quite an impressive package. VFTD covered the 09 version last year here and here. (These are actually only related posts. I couldn't find the ones I was looking for. Again. And, you know this story all too well, I got bored and quit looking.) Given that this year's pack is chocked full of Millennium goodness I'm going to try and limit my comments to some of the highlights. Up first is a list of Millennium firsts and highlights that bears a resemblance to reality. That's followed by an incomplete schedule for 2010 though it does include dates and countries this year so that's a plus. Next comes the justification for asking for wheels of cheese as the MS proudly announces the massive media blitz that will accompany this season's events and how that translates into buckets full of exposure for prospective sponsors. And just so you're clear on how massive that media blitz will be the MS goes into great detail on 2009's media blitz. And the list is impressive. Except it's unclear to me how some of the numbers correspond to promotion of sponsors and others are highly questionable. For example there's the generic reach numbers of the TV network but no actual viewer numbers from last season. There's a list of magazines MS reporting or ads appeared in for a total number of MS-related pages in print (and discounting the mags no longer printing and the always inflated claims mags make over readership) the question remains how does that translate into a benefit to the sponsor(s)? Same for the list of other media coverage as well as the exclusive list of internet media outlets covering the Millennium. (And apparently one of us--me or the MS--doesn't understand the meaning of "exclusive.") Then there's the MS website claims. 90K hits a day. Every day of the year. 2.7 million a month and approx. 32.5 million a year. Of course a hit isn't a unique visitor or a page view or a click through on a sponsor's link even so even if the claim is legit (and it isn't) what does it really amount to? But everyone expects the MS (or anybody else) to put the happiest possible face on stuff like this so it isn't a big deal even if it isn't clear what real benefit it provides league sponsors.
The fun news though is the new sponsorship options; the title sponsor or the kryptonite sponsor--take that Superman. (No, I have no idea why they called it a kryptonite sponsorship.) For a mere 150K Euros one lucky sponsor can make this year's series the One Lucky Sponsor Millennium Series in all official publicity. In addition the title sponsor gets all the benefits of the kryptonite sponsorship (100K) including prop colors and logos on the central field and lots of assorted banners, logos and links as well as priority placement in the vendor village blah blah blah. (The kryptonite sponsorship is only available if there is no title sponsor.) My logo is bigger than yours. Now this is actually an interesting idea and pretty common in real sports. How it will translate to the MS is something else again.
Another interesting change is a trader's ghetto for the non-sponsor and one time vendor. The catch is that the trader's products for sale must be covered by a seasonal sponsor and also be vetted by that sponsor in order to have permission to pay through the nose for a spot in the ghetto. For example, Bob's Gun Emporium can only sell markers made by a seasonal gun sponsor and only if the sponsor/maker agrees.
And there is a laundry list of other sponsor options as well. Everything from Arena sponsorship (5K) to SPL field sponsor (15K), field sponsor (7.5K), ref sponsor (7.5K plus 100 goggles, lenses, pants and 200 custom jerseys), field tents, VIP, press, scoreboard/scoresheet, gun rack, field drum and trash can sponsors. All of these are predicated on TV coverage that may or may not actually ever appear on a Eurosport broadcast. My favorites are field tents and trash cans. For 5K you are allowed to provide 200 trash cans to the MS for each event. (Probably like the GIMilsim trash cans at Campaign.) When you think garbage think (your logo here.) And for 5K you get to provide the MS with 50 3 meter square tents that become the property of the MS. But best of all "No charge will be incurred for setting up the tent, cleaning and maintenance and no shipping charges between the events of 2010. No hidden charges and no extra charges will be billed to “Your Company.”
The Millennium may not know where their events will be held yet but they know what they want industry to pay to be a part of them. Even more interesting will be how much sponsors will actually end up paying in order to be an MS sponsor. Finally somebody has figured out how to make TV pay real dividends.
But first, where are my manners? Here's hoping you all enjoyed a happy thanksgiving with family and friends. I went to visit my Dad for the holiday and came down with a mysterious strain of the turkey flu which is apparently not contagious and can only be caught when consuming excessive amounts of, who woulda guessed, turkey. (The big dumb bird for those who weren't sure.) By now y'all ought to know my middle name is wretched excess--it used to be danger but I had it legally changed--so I was a prime if unwitting candidate. But never again. I have sworn off turkey for the next 364 days.
So during the holiday what should come over the transom than the 2010 Millennium sponsorship kit and its quite an impressive package. VFTD covered the 09 version last year here and here. (These are actually only related posts. I couldn't find the ones I was looking for. Again. And, you know this story all too well, I got bored and quit looking.) Given that this year's pack is chocked full of Millennium goodness I'm going to try and limit my comments to some of the highlights. Up first is a list of Millennium firsts and highlights that bears a resemblance to reality. That's followed by an incomplete schedule for 2010 though it does include dates and countries this year so that's a plus. Next comes the justification for asking for wheels of cheese as the MS proudly announces the massive media blitz that will accompany this season's events and how that translates into buckets full of exposure for prospective sponsors. And just so you're clear on how massive that media blitz will be the MS goes into great detail on 2009's media blitz. And the list is impressive. Except it's unclear to me how some of the numbers correspond to promotion of sponsors and others are highly questionable. For example there's the generic reach numbers of the TV network but no actual viewer numbers from last season. There's a list of magazines MS reporting or ads appeared in for a total number of MS-related pages in print (and discounting the mags no longer printing and the always inflated claims mags make over readership) the question remains how does that translate into a benefit to the sponsor(s)? Same for the list of other media coverage as well as the exclusive list of internet media outlets covering the Millennium. (And apparently one of us--me or the MS--doesn't understand the meaning of "exclusive.") Then there's the MS website claims. 90K hits a day. Every day of the year. 2.7 million a month and approx. 32.5 million a year. Of course a hit isn't a unique visitor or a page view or a click through on a sponsor's link even so even if the claim is legit (and it isn't) what does it really amount to? But everyone expects the MS (or anybody else) to put the happiest possible face on stuff like this so it isn't a big deal even if it isn't clear what real benefit it provides league sponsors.
The fun news though is the new sponsorship options; the title sponsor or the kryptonite sponsor--take that Superman. (No, I have no idea why they called it a kryptonite sponsorship.) For a mere 150K Euros one lucky sponsor can make this year's series the One Lucky Sponsor Millennium Series in all official publicity. In addition the title sponsor gets all the benefits of the kryptonite sponsorship (100K) including prop colors and logos on the central field and lots of assorted banners, logos and links as well as priority placement in the vendor village blah blah blah. (The kryptonite sponsorship is only available if there is no title sponsor.) My logo is bigger than yours. Now this is actually an interesting idea and pretty common in real sports. How it will translate to the MS is something else again.
Another interesting change is a trader's ghetto for the non-sponsor and one time vendor. The catch is that the trader's products for sale must be covered by a seasonal sponsor and also be vetted by that sponsor in order to have permission to pay through the nose for a spot in the ghetto. For example, Bob's Gun Emporium can only sell markers made by a seasonal gun sponsor and only if the sponsor/maker agrees.
And there is a laundry list of other sponsor options as well. Everything from Arena sponsorship (5K) to SPL field sponsor (15K), field sponsor (7.5K), ref sponsor (7.5K plus 100 goggles, lenses, pants and 200 custom jerseys), field tents, VIP, press, scoreboard/scoresheet, gun rack, field drum and trash can sponsors. All of these are predicated on TV coverage that may or may not actually ever appear on a Eurosport broadcast. My favorites are field tents and trash cans. For 5K you are allowed to provide 200 trash cans to the MS for each event. (Probably like the GIMilsim trash cans at Campaign.) When you think garbage think (your logo here.) And for 5K you get to provide the MS with 50 3 meter square tents that become the property of the MS. But best of all "No charge will be incurred for setting up the tent, cleaning and maintenance and no shipping charges between the events of 2010. No hidden charges and no extra charges will be billed to “Your Company.”
The Millennium may not know where their events will be held yet but they know what they want industry to pay to be a part of them. Even more interesting will be how much sponsors will actually end up paying in order to be an MS sponsor. Finally somebody has figured out how to make TV pay real dividends.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
The Domino Effect
(VFTD introduces short attention span blogging--)
Is nothing like the butterfly effect–you know, the absurdist notion that some random butterfly flaps its wings at a particular place and time and through some cosmically complex chain of cause and effect produces a tsunami on the other side of the world. That’s not where this is going. Although, I do have a simple solution. Kill all the butterflies. Problem solved. Nor am I talkin’ real dominoes. But the concept is named after the action and pattern created by falling dominoes. One falls and knocks the next one down and it falls and knocks the next one down and so on.
The domino effect I have on my mind today is the possible (probable?) absence of Smart Parts from the field of potential sponsors who support competitive paintball. And the specific domino I have in mind is Dynasty.
Is nothing like the butterfly effect–you know, the absurdist notion that some random butterfly flaps its wings at a particular place and time and through some cosmically complex chain of cause and effect produces a tsunami on the other side of the world. That’s not where this is going. Although, I do have a simple solution. Kill all the butterflies. Problem solved. Nor am I talkin’ real dominoes. But the concept is named after the action and pattern created by falling dominoes. One falls and knocks the next one down and it falls and knocks the next one down and so on.
The domino effect I have on my mind today is the possible (probable?) absence of Smart Parts from the field of potential sponsors who support competitive paintball. And the specific domino I have in mind is Dynasty.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Smart Parts & competitive paintball
I realize that Smart Parts is probably the most polarizing name in paintball and I have no intention of trying to sway anyone's opinion one way or the other. I am not going to offer any partisan position, pro or con. I am not going to speculate on a final outcome to this news or deliver some sort of editorial trying to sum up what Smart Parts has meant to paintball. For starters I don't know that the company is done. Any number of options still exist so any eulogizing is premature. And according to a PR released today over at ProPaintball the company is open for business and moving forward and the actions taken, while difficult, were necessary in this tough economy. Nor do I wish to appear callous with respect to the real hardships this action has and will bring some people. But I think it's fair to discuss how this news may affect pro paintball specifically and competitive paintball in general.
But first, I want to say one thing about the Gardner brothers that may offer a different (or fuller) perspective to some. I know Adam and Bill. I wouldn't call us friends, more like paintball acquaintances. I was, for some years, associated with teams sponsored by Smart Parts and in all my dealings with the brothers they were professional, straight-forward and honorable. And beyond that I always thought that when it was within their power they were also generous, maybe not magnanimously so, but generous nonetheless. Make of it what you will. I would be remiss, particularly now, if I didn't take a moment to publicly express my gratitude.
With respect to the PSP I don't think this news or its ramifications will have a direct impact on the operation of the league. (But I did ask Lane about it in the upcoming interview anyway for his take.) While there shouldn't be any immediate effect on the PSP this does drive home the reality that the league must be able to stand of its own accord and the days when Smart Parts or Dye would dump money into the league to stop the bleeding are past. Call the magic number for WC 275 and you might begin to see that none of this is inevitable. The league should be fine for now but what the league will need in the future is not some year-to-year subsistence existence but enough profit to protect it.
Here's a job for Chris Raehl: do a calculation of where scale sees decreasing profits. I'm sure the league has a handle on how big an event needs to be see some profit but I'm guessing nobody has looked too closely at the other end of that spectrum and I'm also pretty sure there is a point where an event is too big.
Regarding the impact on pro paintball start with a list of sponsored teams and put Philly and Dynasty at the top of that list. Nor does it end there but think for a moment how large an impact those two teams alone have had on the history of pro paintball. We are closing in on another off season and the expectation prior to this news was another round of sponsorship reductions. While there is no telling how severe the sponsorship cutbacks might be at Smart Parts it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume there will be changes and not for the better--at least with respect to the needs of the pro teams. Any move that might force Dynasty to seek alternative sponsorship will result almost certainly in pushing some other pro teams aside and likely, out the door. And any serious cuts to the Americans program will necessarily reduce their effectiveness on the field. On a smaller scale variations of the same will reverberate around the competitive paintball landscape in the off season.
And I'm also wondering if this might precipitate some sort of domino effect among potential sponsors with respect to the leagues. I'm not sure I see it but this industry isn't noted for its wisdom or prudential habits. Even if the PSP retains the team numbers could a conceivable shift in pro strength to the other league begin to shore up the NPPL 3.0 and attract renewed industry interest? Hey, what isn't possible in this crazy game? Follow the paint. (Will .50 cal arrive too late?)
But first, I want to say one thing about the Gardner brothers that may offer a different (or fuller) perspective to some. I know Adam and Bill. I wouldn't call us friends, more like paintball acquaintances. I was, for some years, associated with teams sponsored by Smart Parts and in all my dealings with the brothers they were professional, straight-forward and honorable. And beyond that I always thought that when it was within their power they were also generous, maybe not magnanimously so, but generous nonetheless. Make of it what you will. I would be remiss, particularly now, if I didn't take a moment to publicly express my gratitude.
With respect to the PSP I don't think this news or its ramifications will have a direct impact on the operation of the league. (But I did ask Lane about it in the upcoming interview anyway for his take.) While there shouldn't be any immediate effect on the PSP this does drive home the reality that the league must be able to stand of its own accord and the days when Smart Parts or Dye would dump money into the league to stop the bleeding are past. Call the magic number for WC 275 and you might begin to see that none of this is inevitable. The league should be fine for now but what the league will need in the future is not some year-to-year subsistence existence but enough profit to protect it.
Here's a job for Chris Raehl: do a calculation of where scale sees decreasing profits. I'm sure the league has a handle on how big an event needs to be see some profit but I'm guessing nobody has looked too closely at the other end of that spectrum and I'm also pretty sure there is a point where an event is too big.
Regarding the impact on pro paintball start with a list of sponsored teams and put Philly and Dynasty at the top of that list. Nor does it end there but think for a moment how large an impact those two teams alone have had on the history of pro paintball. We are closing in on another off season and the expectation prior to this news was another round of sponsorship reductions. While there is no telling how severe the sponsorship cutbacks might be at Smart Parts it doesn't seem unreasonable to assume there will be changes and not for the better--at least with respect to the needs of the pro teams. Any move that might force Dynasty to seek alternative sponsorship will result almost certainly in pushing some other pro teams aside and likely, out the door. And any serious cuts to the Americans program will necessarily reduce their effectiveness on the field. On a smaller scale variations of the same will reverberate around the competitive paintball landscape in the off season.
And I'm also wondering if this might precipitate some sort of domino effect among potential sponsors with respect to the leagues. I'm not sure I see it but this industry isn't noted for its wisdom or prudential habits. Even if the PSP retains the team numbers could a conceivable shift in pro strength to the other league begin to shore up the NPPL 3.0 and attract renewed industry interest? Hey, what isn't possible in this crazy game? Follow the paint. (Will .50 cal arrive too late?)
Saturday, April 11, 2009
For the Good of the Game
This is a continuation of the Paintball Sucks! post on PBIndustry sponsors of tournaments and the naive notions some ballers have. The original post decried the ignorance or self-absorption of ballers who blame the tournaments for failing to line up enough sponsors/vendors when most of those same ballers have little or no intention of buying anything anyway.
The Big Picture point was that the model of sponsors/vendors paying the league in order to sell their products at an event is a model that is no longer working. (And, in fact, hasn't been working for longer than the current economic malaise.)
In that post's comments I was apparently being mean and dictatorial (see for yourself) for suggesting a more useful dialogue would result if commenters didn't ignore the original position and cherry-pick their objections. Anyway, this post is my effort to try a new tack--and respond to the self-appointed PSP flack, raehl faction, on my terms instead of his.
Around this point in comments the raehl faction jumped in to insist the new PSP policy is intended to protect local stores and fields from the predations of the swarm-of-locusts traditional trade show & camp followers. Does he address, even in passing, the idea that the sponsor/league model is in trouble? Does he think the premise is mistaken? Why or why not? Does he think players are as actively purchasing paintball stuff at events as was once plainly the case? Or soon will again? Does he put the PSP policy into any context other than to make patently absurd claims about it? Well, no, he doesn't. (This is approximately where I began suggesting the comments might be more productive if they actually, you know, had at least something to do with the point of the original post.)
On the subject of sponsor protectionism I've previously posted some thoughts here, here, here and here.
The raehl faction claim: the new restrictive sponsorship policy of the PSP is intended to protect local stores and fields. It's frankly an outrageous claim on its face because it doesn't do anything of the sort except perhaps incidentally at the margins.
Imagine a town with two or three lemonade stands. Once a year when the circus comes to town a few mobile lemonade stands follow along and park beside the circus, by the entry. Most of them offer extra large cups at regular prices while a couple of others sell more expensive premium lemonade. This arrangement worked as long as the circus attracted all sorts of people. All the traveling lemonade stands were happy but after a while it seemed more and more people bought the cheap lemonade and ignored the premium lemonade. The purveyors of premium lemonade were unhappy because it was more expensive for them to provide premium lemonade. Now the circus charged the traveling lemonade vendors for the opportunity to use the circus's popularity to sell lemonade and the premium vendors had bigger trucks and paid the circus more so when the premium vendors became unhappy the circus told all the small vendors of cheap lemonade they were no longer welcome.
The raehl faction version insists the circus did it to spare the local lemonade stands when the circus came to town--but aren't the premium lemonade vendors still trying to sell their lemonade? And if the locals suffer less harm is it because the circus gave a rodent's posterior about the locals' lemonade sales or is it because they were trying to satisfy the premium lemonade vendors who pay the big money to follow the circus?
Odd too that this new policy was only conceived after the big industry players started complaining about losing sales to the smaller retailers. I'm just saying the timing is oddly coincidental.
The reality is it's a policy intended to protect manufacturers from themselves and prop up an operating model that is no longer working--and keep some of that sponsor money coming in. (There is, of course, a rational explanation to be made for following this course of action but the raehl faction fantasy sounds so much more altruistic and nobody seems to believe you, the tournament consumer, can handle the truth. Except me. And I'm an oppressive hatemonger. Go figure.)
The Big Picture point was that the model of sponsors/vendors paying the league in order to sell their products at an event is a model that is no longer working. (And, in fact, hasn't been working for longer than the current economic malaise.)
In that post's comments I was apparently being mean and dictatorial (see for yourself) for suggesting a more useful dialogue would result if commenters didn't ignore the original position and cherry-pick their objections. Anyway, this post is my effort to try a new tack--and respond to the self-appointed PSP flack, raehl faction, on my terms instead of his.
Around this point in comments the raehl faction jumped in to insist the new PSP policy is intended to protect local stores and fields from the predations of the swarm-of-locusts traditional trade show & camp followers. Does he address, even in passing, the idea that the sponsor/league model is in trouble? Does he think the premise is mistaken? Why or why not? Does he think players are as actively purchasing paintball stuff at events as was once plainly the case? Or soon will again? Does he put the PSP policy into any context other than to make patently absurd claims about it? Well, no, he doesn't. (This is approximately where I began suggesting the comments might be more productive if they actually, you know, had at least something to do with the point of the original post.)
On the subject of sponsor protectionism I've previously posted some thoughts here, here, here and here.
The raehl faction claim: the new restrictive sponsorship policy of the PSP is intended to protect local stores and fields. It's frankly an outrageous claim on its face because it doesn't do anything of the sort except perhaps incidentally at the margins.
Imagine a town with two or three lemonade stands. Once a year when the circus comes to town a few mobile lemonade stands follow along and park beside the circus, by the entry. Most of them offer extra large cups at regular prices while a couple of others sell more expensive premium lemonade. This arrangement worked as long as the circus attracted all sorts of people. All the traveling lemonade stands were happy but after a while it seemed more and more people bought the cheap lemonade and ignored the premium lemonade. The purveyors of premium lemonade were unhappy because it was more expensive for them to provide premium lemonade. Now the circus charged the traveling lemonade vendors for the opportunity to use the circus's popularity to sell lemonade and the premium vendors had bigger trucks and paid the circus more so when the premium vendors became unhappy the circus told all the small vendors of cheap lemonade they were no longer welcome.
The raehl faction version insists the circus did it to spare the local lemonade stands when the circus came to town--but aren't the premium lemonade vendors still trying to sell their lemonade? And if the locals suffer less harm is it because the circus gave a rodent's posterior about the locals' lemonade sales or is it because they were trying to satisfy the premium lemonade vendors who pay the big money to follow the circus?
Odd too that this new policy was only conceived after the big industry players started complaining about losing sales to the smaller retailers. I'm just saying the timing is oddly coincidental.
The reality is it's a policy intended to protect manufacturers from themselves and prop up an operating model that is no longer working--and keep some of that sponsor money coming in. (There is, of course, a rational explanation to be made for following this course of action but the raehl faction fantasy sounds so much more altruistic and nobody seems to believe you, the tournament consumer, can handle the truth. Except me. And I'm an oppressive hatemonger. Go figure.)
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Major League Paintball Held Hostage, Day 28
"The PSP is pleased to announce that for the 2009 Season all of our events will host an exclusive manufacturers' tradeshow. In an effort to respond to the overwhelming request of our industry's manufacturers and sponsors, companies will now only be able to represent their own brands within the tradeshow."
The above is a partial quote from a PSP press release sent out this morning. I'm sure some of you received it, too. It appears to be a more moderate version of what the Millennium is doing this year. (If you missed those posts and are interested look here and here for some background.) It is also a form of protectionism. In the last couple of seasons vendor sales have been soft. So soft almost nobody has made any profits in the process. (And more than a few have struggled to break even.) Soft sales encouraged a few vendors to offer mainstream products at cut rate prices well below msrp and map pricing and that in turn further eroded an already weak sales environment. Given that situation this move appears (there's that word again) to make some sense. However --
There's more to it than that. The PSP is changing the model of what sponsorship is and what it receives in return. What was a vendors village of diverse retailers is to be a manufacturers tradeshow with the proviso the manufacturers are selling retail. The result is that manufacturers prices are protected and they become the only game in town. Which means potentially higher prices to the customer--assuming there are any. Customers, that is.
Is this really a good idea? Probably not. Will it work? Depends on what you (or I) mean by work. Will it protect the manufacturers and their appointed reps? Yes, but that only means at the event site for the duration of the event. Will it garner sufficient sales to be worthwhile? Guess we will see. Will it, by the end of the year, turn World Cup into a legit tradeshow (with direct sales on the side)? If it does will the PSTA still need Paintball Extravaganza? (And what about Mary?)
Other problems remain but aren't really the PSP's problem. One of them is manufacturers competing against retailers for retail business. Another is manufacturers selling to retailers who don't uphold manufacturers guidelines.
The above is a partial quote from a PSP press release sent out this morning. I'm sure some of you received it, too. It appears to be a more moderate version of what the Millennium is doing this year. (If you missed those posts and are interested look here and here for some background.) It is also a form of protectionism. In the last couple of seasons vendor sales have been soft. So soft almost nobody has made any profits in the process. (And more than a few have struggled to break even.) Soft sales encouraged a few vendors to offer mainstream products at cut rate prices well below msrp and map pricing and that in turn further eroded an already weak sales environment. Given that situation this move appears (there's that word again) to make some sense. However --
There's more to it than that. The PSP is changing the model of what sponsorship is and what it receives in return. What was a vendors village of diverse retailers is to be a manufacturers tradeshow with the proviso the manufacturers are selling retail. The result is that manufacturers prices are protected and they become the only game in town. Which means potentially higher prices to the customer--assuming there are any. Customers, that is.
Is this really a good idea? Probably not. Will it work? Depends on what you (or I) mean by work. Will it protect the manufacturers and their appointed reps? Yes, but that only means at the event site for the duration of the event. Will it garner sufficient sales to be worthwhile? Guess we will see. Will it, by the end of the year, turn World Cup into a legit tradeshow (with direct sales on the side)? If it does will the PSTA still need Paintball Extravaganza? (And what about Mary?)
Other problems remain but aren't really the PSP's problem. One of them is manufacturers competing against retailers for retail business. Another is manufacturers selling to retailers who don't uphold manufacturers guidelines.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Comic Stylings from the MS
Hit the title link to check out the official statement. It's a bit thin on content but makes up for it by being long and boring.
The following is my translation from Milspeak into English. (The first two paragraphs nearly had me weeping with gratitude but I got over it.)
1: We can't keep delivering quality events without more sponsor cash and if we're gonna bring in some big money outside sponsors we have to maintain our current level of professionalism. And, oh yeah, this is gonna be good for everybody. We'll tell you how later.
2: The purpose of the MS has always been to attract new players and promote the success of the industry. No, really.
3: Look, either we soak the sponsors for more or we're gonna raise prices on you players. But less money means we can't get those outside sponsors. Uh, for you. Yeah.
4: Our sponsors have been paying all along while others have taken advantage by using the MS to promote their stuff. (VFTD: I'd really like to know how that worked. And just how the new sponsorship demands will change that.) Times are tough and we need the money.
5: The info out there is basically correct.
6: We are working the carrot and the stick to make this happen. Hey, it's a bargain. We wave the TV show under your nose hoping you don't remember how successful past TV efforts have been while threatening to lock out your sponsored teams if you don't play ball. And all we really need is for a couple of big players to go for it and the rest of you will follow like sheep terrified of being left behind.
7: we'd like to thank the sponsors that pay up and encourage you to buy from them.
8: we're not going after other items of gear right now so it's all good.
9: when we said everyone was on board we meant that not very many sponsors are openly refusing--yet.
10: Don't worry, be happy.
No need to thank me. I'm always happy to help out.
UPDATE: MS website has been down for a few hours on the 15th and carrying into the 16th. No idea why but if anything changes from the original Mil posting I'll let you know as soon as the site is accessible again.
The following is my translation from Milspeak into English. (The first two paragraphs nearly had me weeping with gratitude but I got over it.)
1: We can't keep delivering quality events without more sponsor cash and if we're gonna bring in some big money outside sponsors we have to maintain our current level of professionalism. And, oh yeah, this is gonna be good for everybody. We'll tell you how later.
2: The purpose of the MS has always been to attract new players and promote the success of the industry. No, really.
3: Look, either we soak the sponsors for more or we're gonna raise prices on you players. But less money means we can't get those outside sponsors. Uh, for you. Yeah.
4: Our sponsors have been paying all along while others have taken advantage by using the MS to promote their stuff. (VFTD: I'd really like to know how that worked. And just how the new sponsorship demands will change that.) Times are tough and we need the money.
5: The info out there is basically correct.
6: We are working the carrot and the stick to make this happen. Hey, it's a bargain. We wave the TV show under your nose hoping you don't remember how successful past TV efforts have been while threatening to lock out your sponsored teams if you don't play ball. And all we really need is for a couple of big players to go for it and the rest of you will follow like sheep terrified of being left behind.
7: we'd like to thank the sponsors that pay up and encourage you to buy from them.
8: we're not going after other items of gear right now so it's all good.
9: when we said everyone was on board we meant that not very many sponsors are openly refusing--yet.
10: Don't worry, be happy.
No need to thank me. I'm always happy to help out.
UPDATE: MS website has been down for a few hours on the 15th and carrying into the 16th. No idea why but if anything changes from the original Mil posting I'll let you know as soon as the site is accessible again.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
MS Gun Sponsorship Update
Despite the Laurent Hamet presser referred to in the last post Planet owner Ledz categorically denies they have agreed to this deal over at P8ntballer. You may also review an English language translation of the press release in question in the same thread.
So let me see if I understand what's going on. Last year the Mil pushed gun sponsors to upgrade their sponsorship in order to provide sanctioned tech support meanwhile the Mil was unable to police their own events for peeps violating those rules so now they want more money from sponsors to continue NOT doing what they've promised to provide. Next the MS will be sending out emails warning potential sponsors their booths could catch fire or be robbed during an event unless they fork over an extra insurance premium. That's the way a protection racket works, right?
So let me see if I understand what's going on. Last year the Mil pushed gun sponsors to upgrade their sponsorship in order to provide sanctioned tech support meanwhile the Mil was unable to police their own events for peeps violating those rules so now they want more money from sponsors to continue NOT doing what they've promised to provide. Next the MS will be sending out emails warning potential sponsors their booths could catch fire or be robbed during an event unless they fork over an extra insurance premium. That's the way a protection racket works, right?
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Millennium Takes a Big Bite--
--but will they be able to swallow it?
Despite a notice sent out by Laurent Hamet (of the MS) claiming to have a raft of gun makers already on board word on the street is everyone is waiting for somebody else--preferably a major player--to refuse so they can follow suit. Nobody wants to be first or worse, end up being the only one but in the meantime they are all being held up by a gangsta with a cap gun.
Looks like I'll have to hold off on breaking down what PBIndustry acceptance would mean. Too bad 'cus it's already written. In part, it would be a Faustian bargain for the Big Guns who might be tempted to use the "protection" to remove some competition as they, in turn, would then be on the hook for whatever the MS decided to charge having already agreed to the principle.
In the meantime I thought y'all might like to know just what exactly the MS is asking for. (Extortion is kinda like asking, isn't it?)
There are 3 versions of gun sponsorship; Diamond (50K), Platinum (30K) & Display (10K). The difference between Diamond and Plat is allotted space for setup. Only diamond and plat sponsors are allowed gun techs. A Display Gun "sponsorship" allows for 1 (one) brand, sales, display & on field use. It is unclear just what brand means--a single manufacturer or a single gun line?
And then there is the Sponsor Other (5K) category which reads, "Only products belonging to sponsors can be sold or exhibited at 2009 Millennium events. The product can be sold at the event. Only products that have a sponsor can be exhibited or sold at 2009 Millennium Series events." The same one brand restriction, whatever that is, applies here too.
Amusingly it is being promoted by the MS as "maximum product protection for all sponsors."
Despite a notice sent out by Laurent Hamet (of the MS) claiming to have a raft of gun makers already on board word on the street is everyone is waiting for somebody else--preferably a major player--to refuse so they can follow suit. Nobody wants to be first or worse, end up being the only one but in the meantime they are all being held up by a gangsta with a cap gun.
Looks like I'll have to hold off on breaking down what PBIndustry acceptance would mean. Too bad 'cus it's already written. In part, it would be a Faustian bargain for the Big Guns who might be tempted to use the "protection" to remove some competition as they, in turn, would then be on the hook for whatever the MS decided to charge having already agreed to the principle.
In the meantime I thought y'all might like to know just what exactly the MS is asking for. (Extortion is kinda like asking, isn't it?)
There are 3 versions of gun sponsorship; Diamond (50K), Platinum (30K) & Display (10K). The difference between Diamond and Plat is allotted space for setup. Only diamond and plat sponsors are allowed gun techs. A Display Gun "sponsorship" allows for 1 (one) brand, sales, display & on field use. It is unclear just what brand means--a single manufacturer or a single gun line?
And then there is the Sponsor Other (5K) category which reads, "Only products belonging to sponsors can be sold or exhibited at 2009 Millennium events. The product can be sold at the event. Only products that have a sponsor can be exhibited or sold at 2009 Millennium Series events." The same one brand restriction, whatever that is, applies here too.
Amusingly it is being promoted by the MS as "maximum product protection for all sponsors."
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Limbo & the Minefield
This post was intended to be 'New Look Pro'--stop me if you've heard this excuse before. Problem is when I started writing the issues broke down essentially in two ways; the on the field game play and tourney environment with all its attendant political and economic complications so this post will address the tourney environment and the follow-up will be--finally and at last--New Look Pro--and discuss on the field game play.
While the rumormill churns I find all the talk of kick-starting a new national league less than credible. I could see a replacement for the XPSL--maybe--but all the chatter is just talk, talk, talk and enormous phone bills. For the foreseeable future competitive paintball will be dominated by the PSP.
This raises some, let me phrase this diplomatically, interesting questions. The situation has all the intrigue of a Faulknerian snoozer. Owners of the PSP are also leading members of PBIndustry and owners of pro teams. This ain't breaking news but it remains an inherently unhealthy complication because of the conflicting interests involved in making league related decisions. Every calculation is what's good for business; what's good for the league; what's good for my team and (hopefully) what's good for competitive paintball.
Now consider that the norm has always forced the teams and league(s) into competition with each other over sponsors. (Nobody ever seemed to take this seriously until the money started to dry up.) At the same time the league calls all the shots on what it takes to compete. (Remember the built in conflicts above?) And all of a sudden everyone is concerned about the survival of the pro teams? I will gladly grant there was concern before and efforts were made last off season but how much were those decisions influenced by factors other than the good of the teams and the league and competitive paintball? More importantly, what's coming this time around–and why?
This off season will present some unique challenges. There are seven "homeless" pro teams that competed only in the NPPL (not including Avalanche & Aftermath which are in the precarious position of having bailed on the NXL.) There are 10 NXL teams. Prior to the Pacific bankruptcy there was widespread speculation that not all of those pro teams would survive into the '09 season. In a continuation of the team losses from '07 a significant percentage of the current pro teams are in free fall.
In this environment every team is waiting to hear what will happen next season. The answers will go a long way towards determining the immediate future of pro paintball--and incidentally let the teams and players know just what the league really thinks of them. Will the decisions made simply maintain a version of the status quo--and will that be enough?
Is your head spinning yet? If not toss in the (apparent) decision of the MS to deny players and teams the use of guns made by non-sponsors of their league and to charge those sponsors twice, for use rights and vendors space. With this sort of impeccable timing it's a miracle they are still in business.
Here's a thought: What happens if 2 of the 3 largest gun manufacturers simply refuse to go along? (Of course they also happen to be the guys who just spent the week in Vegas negotiating a new world standard and who knows what else?) What are the chances all the little guys are just waiting for a signal to line up in opposition? Or, if you don't like that how 'bout this? What if the leading sponsors pooled their fees and invested in a new European league? There are peeps pursuing the possibility as well as alternative resources available. (Of course, that would put a crimp in the old new world standard, wouldn't it?)
Next time–New Look Pro (yeah, yeah, I know)
While the rumormill churns I find all the talk of kick-starting a new national league less than credible. I could see a replacement for the XPSL--maybe--but all the chatter is just talk, talk, talk and enormous phone bills. For the foreseeable future competitive paintball will be dominated by the PSP.
This raises some, let me phrase this diplomatically, interesting questions. The situation has all the intrigue of a Faulknerian snoozer. Owners of the PSP are also leading members of PBIndustry and owners of pro teams. This ain't breaking news but it remains an inherently unhealthy complication because of the conflicting interests involved in making league related decisions. Every calculation is what's good for business; what's good for the league; what's good for my team and (hopefully) what's good for competitive paintball.
Now consider that the norm has always forced the teams and league(s) into competition with each other over sponsors. (Nobody ever seemed to take this seriously until the money started to dry up.) At the same time the league calls all the shots on what it takes to compete. (Remember the built in conflicts above?) And all of a sudden everyone is concerned about the survival of the pro teams? I will gladly grant there was concern before and efforts were made last off season but how much were those decisions influenced by factors other than the good of the teams and the league and competitive paintball? More importantly, what's coming this time around–and why?
This off season will present some unique challenges. There are seven "homeless" pro teams that competed only in the NPPL (not including Avalanche & Aftermath which are in the precarious position of having bailed on the NXL.) There are 10 NXL teams. Prior to the Pacific bankruptcy there was widespread speculation that not all of those pro teams would survive into the '09 season. In a continuation of the team losses from '07 a significant percentage of the current pro teams are in free fall.
In this environment every team is waiting to hear what will happen next season. The answers will go a long way towards determining the immediate future of pro paintball--and incidentally let the teams and players know just what the league really thinks of them. Will the decisions made simply maintain a version of the status quo--and will that be enough?
Is your head spinning yet? If not toss in the (apparent) decision of the MS to deny players and teams the use of guns made by non-sponsors of their league and to charge those sponsors twice, for use rights and vendors space. With this sort of impeccable timing it's a miracle they are still in business.
Here's a thought: What happens if 2 of the 3 largest gun manufacturers simply refuse to go along? (Of course they also happen to be the guys who just spent the week in Vegas negotiating a new world standard and who knows what else?) What are the chances all the little guys are just waiting for a signal to line up in opposition? Or, if you don't like that how 'bout this? What if the leading sponsors pooled their fees and invested in a new European league? There are peeps pursuing the possibility as well as alternative resources available. (Of course, that would put a crimp in the old new world standard, wouldn't it?)
Next time–New Look Pro (yeah, yeah, I know)
Saturday, November 22, 2008
Last Word on Relegation
However the final decision from the NPPL shakes out it may not matter much in the larger scheme of things. Be it relegation and promotion or just promotion with no relegation or some one time only expansion to an even number of teams ('cus 18 + 3 = 21) or perhaps the NPPL might say that Philly abandoned their spot and consider them out while choosing not to relegate Dogs and Rage which would put the division at an even 20. And since nobody actually "owns" their spot (and the NPPL can, as a practical matter, do whatever they want) that would leave only one guy unhappy and solve a host of other problems. Admittedly that option would also leave a bunch of team owners more nervous than they already are (or ought to be.) Or who knows, they could opt for some absurd variant involving a clown car, a bunch of rubber noses and calliope music.
I find myself in substantial agreement with be smart's comments from the previous relegation post with regards what's coming. I doubt there will be any relegation though if they are gonna promote I think the pro division is better off also relegating and not being diluted with the addition of more teams (with the greater likelihood of drop-outs.) And for those who like predictions I'm predicting a pro division of 24 teams that never has 24 teams competing in any single event and ends the season around the old 18 teams mark, plus or minus 1 or 2.
The sponsorship issues are even worse in some respects than portrayed--there is little doubt with no direct league involvement in deals--that paint will be a critical issue next season for virtually all the pro teams. Beyond that a lot of the sponsors will delay committing themselves to new deals. The old window of time these things used to happen in no longer applies and teams will occasionally find themselves lowballed at the last minute with few, if any, alternatives but to accept. Beyond that some pro teams are gonna find themselves out in the cold.
In a related prediction: At Commander's Cup (Did the NPPL downplay the whole Cup thing compared to the Pure Promotions days?) there were 8 teams competing pro that are also NXL teams. (At the start of the year it was eleven.) I'm not seeing all eight in both leagues to start next year. Something between 3 and 6 teams competing in both is about right and if you want to pin me down I'm gonna be optimistic and say 5.
As for other decisions that will be made I expect four events but I have doubts about no entry, no prize package [in the pro division] (though it's been talked around) and I see some real problems trying to integrate Semi & D1 mostly related to classifying eligible players and dealing with relegated pros. It might however provide a rationale for restricting (or eliminating) future relegation. Not saying either one won't happen but the teams are ambivalent about aspects of the former and the later will be a problem. Largely because there's already resistance to moving up on the part of a fair number of teams for whatever reasons and top loading a *new* D1 with relegated pros won't be encouraging to most. Of course participation in the lower divisions is already soft.
*Here's a slightly o/t question: How many relegated pro teams competed the following season in semi-pro while maintaining a core roster?*
On the plus side that's not really the worst of it. One of these days I'll screw up my courage, put on my big boy pants and tell you what the NPPL is really all about. I won't be needing my Magic 8-ball (Try again later) nor will I be staring deeply into Mama Lambini's crystal ball. Call it a prediction. Call it a prognostication. Call it an outrage. Call it unbelievable.
I find myself in substantial agreement with be smart's comments from the previous relegation post with regards what's coming. I doubt there will be any relegation though if they are gonna promote I think the pro division is better off also relegating and not being diluted with the addition of more teams (with the greater likelihood of drop-outs.) And for those who like predictions I'm predicting a pro division of 24 teams that never has 24 teams competing in any single event and ends the season around the old 18 teams mark, plus or minus 1 or 2.
The sponsorship issues are even worse in some respects than portrayed--there is little doubt with no direct league involvement in deals--that paint will be a critical issue next season for virtually all the pro teams. Beyond that a lot of the sponsors will delay committing themselves to new deals. The old window of time these things used to happen in no longer applies and teams will occasionally find themselves lowballed at the last minute with few, if any, alternatives but to accept. Beyond that some pro teams are gonna find themselves out in the cold.
In a related prediction: At Commander's Cup (Did the NPPL downplay the whole Cup thing compared to the Pure Promotions days?) there were 8 teams competing pro that are also NXL teams. (At the start of the year it was eleven.) I'm not seeing all eight in both leagues to start next year. Something between 3 and 6 teams competing in both is about right and if you want to pin me down I'm gonna be optimistic and say 5.
As for other decisions that will be made I expect four events but I have doubts about no entry, no prize package [in the pro division] (though it's been talked around) and I see some real problems trying to integrate Semi & D1 mostly related to classifying eligible players and dealing with relegated pros. It might however provide a rationale for restricting (or eliminating) future relegation. Not saying either one won't happen but the teams are ambivalent about aspects of the former and the later will be a problem. Largely because there's already resistance to moving up on the part of a fair number of teams for whatever reasons and top loading a *new* D1 with relegated pros won't be encouraging to most. Of course participation in the lower divisions is already soft.
*Here's a slightly o/t question: How many relegated pro teams competed the following season in semi-pro while maintaining a core roster?*
On the plus side that's not really the worst of it. One of these days I'll screw up my courage, put on my big boy pants and tell you what the NPPL is really all about. I won't be needing my Magic 8-ball (Try again later) nor will I be staring deeply into Mama Lambini's crystal ball. Call it a prediction. Call it a prognostication. Call it an outrage. Call it unbelievable.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Pro Ball Blues
This is in response to a comment in the earlier post, Paradigm Shift? (posted below). For some helpful context read Paradigm Shift? before reading this.
The comment that inspired this post asked if it was possible pro players might have to start paying for things, like paint. I'm going to use the NXL situation but it's not just an NXL problem. PBReserve has reported on related factors in recent months like Procaps getting tough regarding overages, the Procaps / Archon (Zap) merge--which effectively took the Zap brand off the market--and the rumor GAP may consider closing up shop. (While other unsubstantiated rumors suggest at least one paint maker is currently on the block.)
The NXL began the season with 12 teams and finished with 10. Is it coincidence that the two that dropped out were Procaps teams? Maybe. I don't know but I do know a little something about pro teams and paint usage.
This past season the NXL had 3 factory teams and 9 independents. You could argue that either Infamous and Aftershock were both factory or neither were so I split the difference. You could also argue a better distinction is franchise / non-franchise--in which case you'd be wrong. End of the day what matters here is money and the motivation to spend it.
Two indies crashed and burned before season's end. Of the remaining independents 2 are shoestring operations that survived last year's team losses getting by on the minimum and 3 others have a single principle benefactor. None of them, including Dynasty, got the level of sponsorship you think they got--although Dynasty, as the only legit brand among the indies, was head and shoulders above the rest.
So how much paint do they use? I'm gonna keep the numbers simple and the totals low. Each event every team plays a minimum of 5 matches. Figure 20 cases a match. Since the prelims got screwed up the last two events let's skip Sunday usage altogether and call it even. The result is 200K per team per event or 1 million for the season. For practice let's say 2 a month at 50 cases per (and that's low paint usage for a typical two day practice.) The result is another 2 million balls. There's 3 million balls used in one league based on very modest numbers and MOST of the NXL teams didn't get 3 mil or more freebies this past year. Now start your calculations for those teams playing both leagues and it isn't hard to see that something is going to give.
Does this mean pro players are gonna have to start paying for stuff? In some cases it probably will but there are still a couple of problems with that scenario. One, it simply transfers the cost from team to players and Two, the majority of pro players are chosen on their ability to play, not pay. As it stands now if the pro game is too expensive for the current teams it's going to be too expensive for the players and simply shifting the burden likely means pro ranks populated by wealthier, not better, players. Alternatively some mix of costs might work for some teams and players but doesn't do anything to address the larger issues.
(Incidentally, this is why I recommended last year in the off season that field layouts NOT be released prior to events. The reasoning was it would force teams to find alternative, less paint intensive ways to prepare, among other virtues.)
What it is going to boil down to is what value does PBIndustry and the Big Leagues place on the pro game--as it exists now--and can they afford to keep it alive as the pinnacle of competitive paintball? My view is the current system will not sustain the current teams and the current environment does not promote the creation of new pro caliber teams to take their place. Which is why I'm advocating looking for creative ways to change the system.
Of course it could be we'll all just have to take our lumps. Long term the game isn't going anywhere even if some of us lose out in the short term.
Happy happy joy joy
The comment that inspired this post asked if it was possible pro players might have to start paying for things, like paint. I'm going to use the NXL situation but it's not just an NXL problem. PBReserve has reported on related factors in recent months like Procaps getting tough regarding overages, the Procaps / Archon (Zap) merge--which effectively took the Zap brand off the market--and the rumor GAP may consider closing up shop. (While other unsubstantiated rumors suggest at least one paint maker is currently on the block.)
The NXL began the season with 12 teams and finished with 10. Is it coincidence that the two that dropped out were Procaps teams? Maybe. I don't know but I do know a little something about pro teams and paint usage.
This past season the NXL had 3 factory teams and 9 independents. You could argue that either Infamous and Aftershock were both factory or neither were so I split the difference. You could also argue a better distinction is franchise / non-franchise--in which case you'd be wrong. End of the day what matters here is money and the motivation to spend it.
Two indies crashed and burned before season's end. Of the remaining independents 2 are shoestring operations that survived last year's team losses getting by on the minimum and 3 others have a single principle benefactor. None of them, including Dynasty, got the level of sponsorship you think they got--although Dynasty, as the only legit brand among the indies, was head and shoulders above the rest.
So how much paint do they use? I'm gonna keep the numbers simple and the totals low. Each event every team plays a minimum of 5 matches. Figure 20 cases a match. Since the prelims got screwed up the last two events let's skip Sunday usage altogether and call it even. The result is 200K per team per event or 1 million for the season. For practice let's say 2 a month at 50 cases per (and that's low paint usage for a typical two day practice.) The result is another 2 million balls. There's 3 million balls used in one league based on very modest numbers and MOST of the NXL teams didn't get 3 mil or more freebies this past year. Now start your calculations for those teams playing both leagues and it isn't hard to see that something is going to give.
Does this mean pro players are gonna have to start paying for stuff? In some cases it probably will but there are still a couple of problems with that scenario. One, it simply transfers the cost from team to players and Two, the majority of pro players are chosen on their ability to play, not pay. As it stands now if the pro game is too expensive for the current teams it's going to be too expensive for the players and simply shifting the burden likely means pro ranks populated by wealthier, not better, players. Alternatively some mix of costs might work for some teams and players but doesn't do anything to address the larger issues.
(Incidentally, this is why I recommended last year in the off season that field layouts NOT be released prior to events. The reasoning was it would force teams to find alternative, less paint intensive ways to prepare, among other virtues.)
What it is going to boil down to is what value does PBIndustry and the Big Leagues place on the pro game--as it exists now--and can they afford to keep it alive as the pinnacle of competitive paintball? My view is the current system will not sustain the current teams and the current environment does not promote the creation of new pro caliber teams to take their place. Which is why I'm advocating looking for creative ways to change the system.
Of course it could be we'll all just have to take our lumps. Long term the game isn't going anywhere even if some of us lose out in the short term.
Happy happy joy joy
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Reality Seldom Takes a Holiday
Our pals over at pbreserve recently reported the retirement of Kenny Rosenberg but Kenny let them know that, no, he wasn't retiring, just taking some personal time and he'd be back in '09 playing for a team that would financially compensate him, er, pay him. My initial response was, okay, so pbreserve got the story right the first time.
No disrespect to Kenny who is a fine player but if he thinks the credit market is tight now he ought to take a close look at the opportunities available at the pro level in paintball. Especially those that offer compensation above and beyond playing ball. I could list around 50 pro players who lost their spots in the last year or so and most of them aren't playing today, for compensation or otherwise.
I hope Kenny gets what he wants but the point I want to make is aimed at all the ballers out there dreaming of playing pro ball one day. Whatever you've read on the internet or seen in the magazines or heard from a friend of a cousin of the girlfriend of one of the Dynarats if you're playing this game for any reason other than you love it you will be disappointed. Don't give up on the dream but understand that the opportunities are shrinking because the money to support teams and players is shrinking and isn't likely to get better any time soon. Play for the right reasons and you'll seldom be disappointed and everything else will be gravy.
No disrespect to Kenny who is a fine player but if he thinks the credit market is tight now he ought to take a close look at the opportunities available at the pro level in paintball. Especially those that offer compensation above and beyond playing ball. I could list around 50 pro players who lost their spots in the last year or so and most of them aren't playing today, for compensation or otherwise.
I hope Kenny gets what he wants but the point I want to make is aimed at all the ballers out there dreaming of playing pro ball one day. Whatever you've read on the internet or seen in the magazines or heard from a friend of a cousin of the girlfriend of one of the Dynarats if you're playing this game for any reason other than you love it you will be disappointed. Don't give up on the dream but understand that the opportunities are shrinking because the money to support teams and players is shrinking and isn't likely to get better any time soon. Play for the right reasons and you'll seldom be disappointed and everything else will be gravy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
