Author Topic: USBC would like to censor this column (Read 8380 times)

Mighty Fish · « **on:** May 10, 2010, 06:06:39 AM »

This could never appear in the bowl.com forums, and USBC would also have it censored in the pba.com forums ...

http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20100509/COLUMNIST/5091021/2050/SPORTS?p=1&tc=pg

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #46 on:** May 13, 2010, 08:36:29 AM »

quote:
The recreational bowlers don't care what the locals or national association is doing for the sport. They go there cuz the kids have fun, or it's fun to "cosmic" bowl under the black lights and with the Top 40 blasting on the speakers. They have b'day parties there where half the kids only want to play the video games. They bowl moonlight doubles where scores are doubled. THEY DON'T CARE. A bowling alley could take all the house balls off the racks, replace them with croquet balls, tell them this is the new ball to use, and they'll say "Great, this is much lighter and easier to throw".

If USBC tries to cater to them, they are doomed to fail in moving the sport forward. Sounds terribly snobbish to say it, but it's true.

And the catch goes back to another point you made, at least I think it was yours, that competitive bowling is a niche sport now. Looking at the 2.1 million number of sanctioned bowlers, shooting high and assuming 25% are truly what could be titled as a competitive bowler, that leaves what, 500,000 bowlers that care about and benefit from a sanctioning body? USBC will be hard pressed to stay in business for that few bowlers nationwide.

The trend, as has been pointed out, is recreational bowling. These people do not take the game seriously, and thus, most do not bowl tournaments either. Therefore, they see this $20 a year and wonder what's in it for them. They do not receive awards from it (99% will not shoot an honor score), the bonding thing is unknown to most, if not all, recreational bowlers. Rule enforcement? They don't see any of that. All the recreational bowlers see is $20 disappearing somewhere for something every year. I think this is why we see the outcry over disappearing awards. For the recreational bowler, this was the only thing they ever saw, and could grasp, that they were getting in return for their sanctioning dues.

If the USBC is going to survive, for one they have to get their finances in line, and two, they need to ditch the "old way" of thinking and find a way to reach out to the recreational bowler and show VALUE to their product (sanctioning dues) to these people. Bonding and rule books aren't enough. Admittedly, I don't know what might appeal to these bowlers, but I do know that what is currently being done does not appeal to them. The hard part is catering to the recreational bowlers without alienating the competitive bowlers...

--------------------
9~

Internet Tough Guy

Cyberspace Sheep Lover

Jorge300 · « **Reply #47 on:** May 13, 2010, 08:46:56 AM »

quote:

And the catch goes back to another point you made, at least I think it was yours, that competitive bowling is a niche sport now. Looking at the 2.1 million number of sanctioned bowlers, shooting high and assuming 25% are truly what could be titled as a competitive bowler, that leaves what, 500,000 bowlers that care about and benefit from a sanctioning body? USBC will be hard pressed to stay in business for that few bowlers nationwide.

The trend, as has been pointed out, is recreational bowling. These people do not take the game seriously, and thus, most do not bowl tournaments either. Therefore, they see this $20 a year and wonder what's in it for them. They do not receive awards from it (99% will not shoot an honor score), the bonding thing is unknown to most, if not all, recreational bowlers. Rule enforcement? They don't see any of that. All the recreational bowlers see is $20 disappearing somewhere for something every year. I think this is why we see the outcry over disappearing awards. For the recreational bowler, this was the only thing they ever saw, and could grasp, that they were getting in return for their sanctioning dues.

If the USBC is going to survive, for one they have to get their finances in line, and two, they need to ditch the "old way" of thinking and find a way to reach out to the recreational bowler and show VALUE to their product (sanctioning dues) to these people. Bonding and rule books aren't enough. Admittedly, I don't know what might appeal to these bowlers, but I do know that what is currently being done does not appeal to them. The hard part is catering to the recreational bowlers without alienating the competitive bowlers...

9~, I think you are 100% correct. And I think, this is just me though, that they have made a gain in this area with the proposed Red, White and Blue patterns. This allows the truly competitive bowlers to go off and bowl Sport Pattern/PBAX leagues, while giving the recreational bowlers a choice of 3 levels of difficulty. It will allow the better recreational bowlers to bowl on a slightly tougher condition, without having to bowl on a Sports shot, where they will probably not be competitive. Plus, an even bigger outcome, is if they get everyone to adopt this, then the bowling centers won't have to worry about bowlers leaving their center to go to one across town, if they don't put out super easy shots. Everything will be equal, for each pattern, for all centers.

The biggest area for improvement still is in two areas, which are tied together in my mind. One is the finances. The USBC has got to get a handle on those. Cut out the uneeded, and focus on the core things they need to be doing. The second is advertising/bringing in new bowlers. They do a smal bit of advertising on the bowling shows, but they need to figure out a way to get it more mainstream. They have some star power in Chris Paul, and some of the celebrities that attend his charity tournament every year. Part of the deal in attending that should be they have to donate some time to film a commercial aimed at bringing in new bowlers. Then play those commercials on Network TV, during other sporting events (NFL, NBA, NASCAR, etc) and during some prime time shows in order to get the message out. Will it work, IDK, but it would be a new attempt at trying to reverse the trend of declining memebership we have seen.
--------------------
Jorge300

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #48 on:** May 13, 2010, 10:40:50 AM »

I see your point, and I kind of agree with it. However, I'm not sure any sanctioning body could survive on the competition bowlers alone. I think somehow you need to come up with a marketing campaign to get the extra dollars out of the rec. bowlers. Unless the competition bowlers are OK with paying (I'm guessing, based on my 25% estimate in the earlier thread) $80-$100 a year for membership.

The only other thing I can think of that might be tough if focusing on competitive bowlers would be recruiting new bowlers without plucking them from recreational bowling at some point. The increased fee might then become more of an issue for up and comers. The guys who have been bowling for years would probably be OK with it, but a new guy trying get in might scoff at going from rec league no fees to plopping down a Benjamin for a competition league - in which he would have little experience.

I dunno, just thoughts in my head... certainly not meant to be a dissertation on the right or wrong way to go about it.

--------------------
9~

Internet Tough Guy

Cyberspace Sheep Lover

9andaWiggle · « **Reply #49 on:** May 13, 2010, 10:56:50 AM »

Interesting concept, plus you could go a step further and add the fee to the glow bowlers too... Basically a fee of $X.XX per line bowled regardless of league/open lineage.
--------------------
9~

Internet Tough Guy

Cyberspace Sheep Lover

Mighty Fish · « **Reply #50 on:** May 13, 2010, 11:33:59 AM »

quote:
The local associations need to communicate to the recreational bowlers just what the heck they are doing for the sport.

Dear Bowlin For Beer:

Indeed, COMMUNICATION is a major thing that USBC needs improvement in. And it certainly wouldn't hurt to have better communication between all segments of the bowling community.

Mighty Fish · « **Reply #51 on:** May 13, 2010, 11:39:56 AM »

quote:
All the recreational bowlers see is $20 disappearing somewhere for something every year. I think this is why we see the outcry over disappearing awards. For the recreational bowler, this was the only thing they ever saw, and could grasp, that they were getting in return for their sanctioning dues.

Dear 9andaWiggle:

That's part (but not all) of the reason why, in my area (of west central Florida), MORE THAN HALF of all leagues (spanning five centers) are no longer USBC-certified.

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #52 on:** May 13, 2010, 11:52:39 AM »

"USBC will be hard pressed to stay in business for that few bowlers nationwide"

Shouldn't USBC have already compensated for they loss in bowlers over the years by cutting back on expenses?

My main concern is when it became USBC it was to cut cost on all the separate organizations. Make them one, have fewer positions ect.

Excellent idea.

They didn't do that. They joined and kept everyone with some job title or another. So at what point wouldn't it not makes sense to start trimming the fat, not building a crazy new facility, and not continue to spend money on something that can't fund itself.(PWBA)

You are not going to be able to make up the difference with out help from the people over spending.

That is the problem with the USBC, it's idea of trimming the fat is to cut awards, make them cheaper and ect. That may have saved them some money, but obviously it was very little compared to what they have spent elsewhere.

No we don't need more awards CRD, just saying that they are desperate to save money with cuts in benefits for bowlers not to their lifestyles and office space.

I would like to know what it cost to build the new facility in Texas as a time when construction cost is so high.

--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #53 on:** May 13, 2010, 02:07:23 PM »

Yes, I mentioned awards again. As an example of cuts made to us, not to them.

No, I don't really care about patches, but some do. So having the local association cover them is fine/a great idea. 7-10, triplicate ect if the bowler wanted it.

What cuts have they made to their budgets and spending and job titles to make things better?

It isn't our faults they can't manage what they have.

Anybody have actual membership numbers for ABC/WIBC/YABA in say 1970, 1980, 1990, and current?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #54 on:** May 13, 2010, 04:16:24 PM »

The stats is out of curiosity for the amount of members then and now.

Maybe they could not build a new office building in another state at the worst possible time in construction cost history.

Maybe not move the HOF from St. Louis to Texas as well since it already has a place.

Maybe not continue to spend money on things not needed.

What does the USBC need to do besides bonding leagues, processing some paper work, manage the national tournament, try and grow the sport to gain more members, inspect/certify bowling centers, and not go out of business???

Surly that can be done. They shouldn't waste time researching bowling balls and equipment because they are way behind the bowling companies on that. They spent money to discover things that bowling ball companies already knew. Yeah, heres a cookie.

If they raised the rates of USBC membership they would still over spend and still be in trouble.

--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "

Doctor Doom · « **Reply #55 on:** May 13, 2010, 06:09:35 PM »

Facts ok here's some

1. certified bowling peaked in the mid 70's at 9,000,000+ members. One interesting fact, until the early 80's, multiple memberships counted. If you bowled 4 leagues you were counted 4 times.

2. Certified bowling has been losing members at the rate of 5-6% per year for the last 20 years or so.

3. The State of Texas, and the BPAA, provided considerable monetary incentive to the USBC to move to Texas. Somewhere in the range of $8,000,000. The PBA, was also offered a spot in Arlington, but declined. USBC did not build a new office in Arlington, they moved into existing facilities. They did however, build the Tech. Center, no argument here, IMO, a waste.

4.The HOF was losing it's spot at Bush Stadium, due to a redevelopment plan. It could have moved to the new location in St. Louis, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Why not put all your eggs in one basket??

5. USBC recently laid off a group of people. Some big buck salaries, were included in that group. Also a large portion of the former staff in Greendale did not move to Texas.

6. Last note. Jorge300, will you behave yourself, LOL. They will send you as one poster here stated, back to Mexico. Wait a minute, I didn't know they had Nittany Lions in Mexico. One more shout out, Hey JessN16, how are thinks in Prattville!!!!!!!!!!

mj79 · « **Reply #56 on:** May 13, 2010, 09:06:34 PM »

havent been following the USBC thing since im new back to the game.. Can I get some cliffs
--------------------
Brunswick Diamondback
Brunswick T-Zone
Brunswick Black Ice Zone
Columbia 300 Freeze

17 mph ball speed
360 Rev

Work in progress

kidlost2000 · « **Reply #57 on:** May 13, 2010, 09:38:57 PM »

Worst time in cost to build. Cheap land is dependent on location, construction cost based on materials is high.

Yes, contractors are bidding jobs at little to no profit, but materials aren't free.

5. USBC recently laid off a group of people. Some big buck salaries, were included in that group. Also a large portion of the former staff in Greendale did not move to Texas.

To bad they didn't start that sooner. Probably too little too late.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "

mj79 · « **Reply #58 on:** May 13, 2010, 09:46:53 PM »

quote:
Cliff notes: A small vocal minority thin the USBC is responsible for less and less people bowling. They don't understand what they get for their sanction fees. They can't understand how awards are being taken away.

Gotcha.. A few of the threads on the board make more sense now with people questioning the sanction fees, where they go, and Wondering what we receive out of it..

I guess it costs alot of money for them USBC plastic member cards

Only thing I can see is maybe giving the ppl who are bowling sanctioned leagues, discounts, or maybe some kind of promotion..
--------------------
Brunswick Diamondback
Brunswick T-Zone
Brunswick Black Ice Zone
Columbia 300 Freeze

17 mph ball speed
360 Rev

Work in progress

On Further Review · « **Reply #59 on:** May 14, 2010, 02:08:16 PM »

How long do some of you think the USBC will remain alive?
--------------------
"Don't worry about voting to ram this bill down their throats. The stupid, idiotic American voters will forget by the time November comes around."

On Further Review · « **Reply #60 on:** May 14, 2010, 02:13:58 PM »

quote:
quote:
jorge300, why do you feel you have to insult people so often?

Why do you feel the need to demean the President of the United States so often?

Probably for the same reason that so many people demeaned the previous president. Isn't it everyone's right to comment freely about their president and government?
--------------------
"Don't worry about voting to ram this bill down their throats. The stupid, idiotic American voters will forget by the time November comes around."

Author Topic: USBC would like to censor this column (Read 8380 times)

Mighty Fish

USBC would like to censor this column

9andaWiggle

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

Jorge300

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

9andaWiggle

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

9andaWiggle

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

Mighty Fish

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

Mighty Fish

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

kidlost2000

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

kidlost2000

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

kidlost2000

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

Doctor Doom

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

mj79

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

kidlost2000

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

mj79

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

On Further Review

Re: USBC would like to censor this column

On Further Review

Re: USBC would like to censor this column