0
airtwardo

USPA's "Championship" Demo Team?

Recommended Posts

Since one person's retelling of another person's words is one step removed, I'd very much like to see Mr Hayhurst's response to each of the statements posted by 'Ron'. If no response, then one may assume his statemets were not exaggerated or mischaracterized. If all quotes are true in that post, then we can proceed from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By all means... Call him and ask him yourself. (540)604-9730 His extension # is 308.

Ask him if:
1. Being on the demo team AND the person who created it is a conflict of interest.

2. What collateral was put up by his new organization.

3. If he thinks the national organization funding a demo team that will compete AGAINST the organizations members is a conflict of interest.

4. If he can name another MEMBER organization that funds another organization that competes against it's own members for jobs.

And just to make some things perfectly clear... He mentioned that the USPA has *already* answered a call to the HQ and gave this new organization a demo. Then ask him if he would like that to be the normal procedure.

Don't get me wrong... He has some great ideas, but I object to his use of USPA funds to seed his own new organization that will compete against USPA members.

But hey, please call him and talk to him yourself.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is the kind of bullshit that makes me think term limits for serving on the BOD to two terms max of 3 yrs. then your out on your ass and not allowed to run for 10 yrs if allowed to serve again, is questionable.

There is no way in hell USPA should be funding this fucktards demo team!

WHY the fuck are WE members not allowed to vote on this!



Hi SS

I'm a little confused so help me out. I don't think the fucktard's on the BOD[:/]

I checked the USPA org chart, Jim Hayhurst is employed by USPA:o

Director of Competition
Extension: 308
[email protected]
Department: Competition

Hayhurst is only a advisor to the BOD competition committee.

IMO the term limits for BOD won't work. Hayhurst will still be the "Advisor" to the committee as long as he's the head of the competition dept.

Anyone know how long Hayhurst has been employed by USPA and his salary.

BTW I'm no longer a member of USPA.B|

K-RIP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The fucktards are the ones who voted to spend OUR membership money on this USPA employee asshats pet project!



Guys: don't be part of the problem spreading inaccurate info...

I think this is a miserably awfully bad idea, but it is mot membership money. It's money coming from the competition fund that members donated to fund the US team.
Remster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

The fucktards are the ones who voted to spend OUR membership money on this USPA employee asshats pet project!



Guys: don't be part of the problem spreading inaccurate info...

I think this is a miserably awfully bad idea, but it is mot membership money. It's money coming from the competition fund that members donated to fund the US team.


Go back to Post #20 (or dig out your Parachutist). The loan is coming from dues money precisely because of the limitations on the use of the team trust fund.[:/]
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

The fucktards are the ones who voted to spend OUR membership money on this USPA employee asshats pet project!



Guys: don't be part of the problem spreading inaccurate info...

I think this is a miserably awfully bad idea, but it is mot membership money. It's money coming from the competition fund that members donated to fund the US team.


Go back to Post #20 (or dig out your Parachutist). The loan is coming from dues money precisely because of the limitations on the use of the team trust fund.[:/]


I take it back then. What a fucking travesty.
Remster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I think this is a miserably awfully bad idea, but it is mot membership money. It's money coming from the competition fund that members donated to fund the US team.



Let me clarify this.

It is money from the MEMBERSHIP fund LOANED (unsecured AFAIK) to this new venture, since the funds from the COMPETITION TRUST fund are not allowed to be retasked according to the bylaws of the trust.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Remster:"it is not membership money. It's money coming from the competition fund that members donated to fund the US team. "
That is not what the Ed Scott editorial stated: Oct Issue. The editorial stated, "Because there are restrictions on how tax-deductible donations to the US Parachute Team Trust Fund may be used, USPA loaned $10,000 to the effort...". If USPA loaned $10,000 it is not from any source other than USPA dues money. Donated money cannot be loaned. Not from the competition fund or any other fund which exists because of donations or gifts. As stated in the editorial, it is from the USPA General fund. That's dues money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion... He is trying to create a demo team filled only with the people he approves of and that will not only compete against any demo jumper, but that his team will be the only one to carry the official approval of the USPA... He was unapologetic about this and aggressive in his position.

Quote



Gee, that's kind of like SKYRIDE...:S











~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake here...so what's happening is, the USPA BOD saw fit to make an unsecured 'loan' of 10,000 dollars in membership dues to an 'advisor' who presented a pet project with no business plan, no facts or figures supporting it's viability, no oversight, no real experience in the field of the project, that by the way is in direct competition with business interests OF many members paying for those dues/loan?

...and WE the membership, are the ones who are confused?! :D:D:D











~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Talked to hayhurst tonight about this program. He flat out stated his goal was to get major sponsorship



For the US team, right? Based on what, doing demos?

So the idea is to find a sponsor so rich that they'll sponsor the demo team create awareness and advertise their business, AND sponsor the US Team 'just for fun' at the same time. From my point of view, I'm not sure the US Team is sponsorable outside of jumping.

The US Team competes internationally, but they provide very little exposure relative to what an international corp would be looking for. Case in point - the Red Bull air races. These guys also compete globally, but at the same time they get massive exposure through the televised, youtube'd, and Red Bull efforts to promote the events. As such, those racers have garnered some good sponsors, but if you notice, they're all international corps with global brands to promote.

The US Team also competes in a different international setting each time, but the events lack the exposure to attract a big money sponsor with an international brand. How many Rolex customers follow international skydiving competition? Cmopare that to the number of Rolex customers who are pilots or aircraft owners and follow the Red Bull series.

It's simple, there are no sponsors who fit the bill they're selling. The ROI on sponsorship dollars for a skydivign team, let alone an international skydiving team, is slim to none. The old Coors team, that was an idea. They jumped at airshows, promotional events, and sports event all acorss the US, the same US where Coors sells 99% of it's product.

The whoel idea that the USPA, or anynoe, should be coughing up $300k to $500k a year to pay people to complete is absurd. This is not 1976 with a 6 man US Team. This is 2011, and there are 60-some jumpers looking for a free ride to where ever to complete. It's just not in the cards anymore.

Hayhurst wants money for the team? Solicit donations from manufacturers and DZs, and raffle the shit off. Come up with an effective advertising campaign, and run ads in Parachutist convincing jumpers to donate (I'd even be up for giving him the ad space for free. Out of 33,000 members, $10 a head would pay for most of the US teams needs. Figure out a way to make it worth $10 to every jumper, and your problem is solved). Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, all free to utilize and create a following of some sort (if there's anything interesting, compelling or worthwhile about the US Team, it should be a snap).

The whole idea that the USPA is funding (with dues money) an unlikely scheme to attract sponsors for the US Team is bad enough, even if you leave out the part about competing with USPA members for demo work. Of course, you can't leave that out because that's really happening, so the whole deal just sucks that much more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I received my renewal notice from USPA last week and will mailing it back in the morning. I printed VOID across it in bold red letters. I enclosed a letter outlining what I see as USPA’s transition from a member organization to a Trade Organization representing DZO’s. (Around one third of the BOD is DZO’s or their representative) Their decisions and actions are geared toward the interest of the “Group Members” and not the average jumper. USPA has made available to ”Group Members” a data base where they can go on line and check the status of any individual member. They can check to see what if any ratings you hold or if your membership is in good standing. But as an individual member you have no way of checking on the status of a “Group Member.” They are required to complete and submit an Aircraft Form on each plane they operated. http://www.uspa.org/Portals/0/Downloads/GM_MailingAircraftStatusForm.pdf
Why is this information not available to the individual member?

Now they come up with this latest plan to form a Demo team to compete against other demo teams who are USPA members. This convinced me that the USPA BOD has become what people have called them for years.

Why are their areas of the USPA web site that can only be accessed by “Group Member”? How many of you believe the action taken by USPA against USPA members involved with Sky Ride was in the interest of the individual member or to protect the “Group Members”? When the BOD actions got our ass suited why did the BOD have the settlement sealed? Again was this in the interest of the individual members or to protect the “Group Members”?

This is the mission statement from USPA web site. No where does it mention businesses, LLC or DZO’s.


The United States Parachute Association (USPA) is a voluntary membership organization of individuals who enjoy and support the sport of skydiving. The association is incorporated in New York and follows the constitution and by-laws contained in the USPA Governance Manual. The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs.


After almost 36 years I am done. I can no longer support an organization the does not support me. I know my action will have no affect on the BOD attitude but it will make feel better and save me $55 a year.

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

After almost 36 years I am done. I can no longer support an organization the does not support me. I know my action will have no affect on the BOD attitude but it will make feel better and save me $55 a year.



I feel the same way, however I'm stuck by the fact the ratings are the only game in town. I'd like to change things, but having seen it from the inside, I fear there is little we can do with the apathy of most of the membership.

I'd be for starting an alternate organization more aligned with the goals of airport defense, FAA representation, and instructor ratings, leaving all the nonsensical stuff behind.
----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

After almost 36 years I am done. I can no longer support an organization the does not support me. I know my action will have no affect on the BOD attitude but it will make feel better and save me $55 a year.



I feel the same way, however I'm stuck by the fact the ratings are the only game in town. I'd like to change things, but having seen it from the inside, I fear there is little we can do with the apathy of most of the membership.

I'd be for starting an alternate organization more aligned with the goals of airport defense, FAA representation, and instructor ratings, leaving all the nonsensical stuff behind.



We had our run and I am ashamed to say that my generation didn’t do shit to put a stop to what is happening now. We were too self absorbed to bother. We allowed the tail to way the dog for too long. Any change will have to come from you young guys.

Sparky
My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just read the blog -The United States Parachute Team Sponsor Developmental Program By James Hayhurst

http://skydiveuspa.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/team-sponsor-dev-program/

Here are some excerpts from that blog and my thoughts.

Some members expressed concern about the $10,000 loan USPA authorized to jumpstart this program. Keep in mind that USPA routinely invests in new ideas and seeds special projects that show promise of enhancing the sport. The loan was made in order to market the team at the International Council of Air Shows (ICAS) Convention this December to solicit air show interest. The first $10,000 earned (after show expenses) by the team in 2012 will go back to repay the loan.

The USPA routinely invests and seeds? Thought this was a loan, how often does the USPA do that?

So the loan is to go to ICAS to promote this team. So where is all the gear that will be needed come from? Who's paying for that?

And 2 paragraphs above that remark is this:

If the U.S. Team is invited to do a show, we will reach out and ask local demo teams and jumpers to perform with the U.S. Team. If it’s a paid show, they will earn their standard fees (members of the U.S. Team will only be reimbursed travel and per diem). If all we do is break even, we’ve met our primary goal—presenting the U.S. Team to the public in order to attract sponsorship.

If all you do is break even how is the loan going to be repaid?

One concern the board had when considering this program was that it might be perceived as a move to take demos away from PRO-rated members. On that issue, it’s important to know there are hundreds of airshows and events each year and we don’t foresee the U.S. Parachute Team doing more than a dozen—so chances are unlikely. However, we can’t guarantee an airshow or event organizer might invite the U.S. Team to do a show that some other skydiving team has done before. No show team ever “owns” rights to an event; the desire for “fresh acts” is part of the airshow business, whether the U.S. Team is involved or not.

So you're only going to do a dozen or so. How long will it take to pay the 10 grand at that rate. Longer than you think.

And if you do get a show that was normally done by another USPA due paying member and it ends up that they lose out, then the cost of their membership just went up the price of dues plus the money they just lost out on to this Demo team because of the USPA.

As Executive Director Ed Scott pointed out to the board, no one knows if this will work.

Of course it's not going to work, enjoy the 10,000 dollar trip to ICAS. I hope you're going Ed, I'd hate for James to have all the fun just because he came up with a lame brained way to go to ICAS and spend 10k that's not his.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I feel the same way, however I'm stuck by the fact the ratings are the only game in town. I'd like to change things, but having seen it from the inside, I fear there is little we can do with the apathy of most of the membership.



I threw my name in the hat for the open SE RD position. I agree, the USPA does not seem very interested in the average jumper but instead has become a DZO organization.

It does suck that there is not another organization. The USPA has created this situation by supporting the group members and requiring the GM to only allow USPA members to jump there.

So if you dislike what the USPA is doing.... there seems to be very little you can do about it as an average jumper. So I am going to try and make the board. If I can't do anything there, then I at least tried.

But the USPA knows that it will not lose a bunch of members since most people need to be members to jump at their local DZ, and since the USPA is the only rating agency in town.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Hayhurst wants money for the team? Solicit donations from manufacturers and DZs, and raffle the shit off. Come up with an effective advertising campaign, and run ads in Parachutist convincing jumpers to donate (I'd even be up for giving him the ad space for free.



All better than the solution of the USPA creating a demo team to compete against the USPA members.

I guess the next thing is the USPA creating an official 4way/8way team run by them.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

No show team ever “owns” rights to an event; the desire for “fresh acts” is part of the airshow business, whether the U.S. Team is involved or not.



He's playing the 'free market' card? After taking membership dollars to compete with members, he's playing the 'free market' card?

Let him establish the team and the act on his own dime, or at least money he didn't take directly from the membership, and then he can leave the show selection process up to the 'free market'. In this case, the market wasn't exactly 'free', as the other teams didn't have access to an easy $10k to jump start their operation.

There's big money in Lasik surgery, and I could make a mint opening a clinic, but I don't have a million bucks to buy the laser. It's easy to make money if you have the laser, but getting that money together is often times the hardest part and the thing that stops people from going into business.

The more I think about this whole thing, the more upset I get with the USPA. We have elected these people to be the stewards of our sport, and yes, our money. What other projects are the USPA footing the bill for? Why don't we have more transperecy, as a member funded organization, as to where the money is going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

And if you do get a show that was normally done by another USPA due paying member and it ends up that they lose out, then the cost of their membership just went up the price of dues plus the money they just lost out on to this Demo team because of the USPA.



And Hayhurst was completely unapologetic about that when we talked. He kept saying how I support the GK team.... Yes, but I do not VOLUNTARILY join an organization to have my dues money used to support a team to compete against me.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Let him establish the team and the act on his own dime, or at least money he didn't take directly from the membership, and then he can leave the show selection process up to the 'free market'. In this case, the market wasn't exactly 'free', as the other teams didn't have access to an easy $10k to jump start their operation.



While this is bad.... The USPA should NEVER help start an organization that will hurt its existing members.

The WORST part is how Hayhurst admitted that he wanted the USPA to direct ALL calls to the USPA requesting infromation on who can do a demo to HIS TEAM AND HIS TEAM ALONE. He has said this has ALREADY happened. In effect make the USPA his booking agent.

So if someone calls the USPA and asks who to contact to get a demo done and it is in your backyard... He wants the USPA to not give them your info, but instead send them to his team. And again, this has ALREADY happened and he wants it to become the standard.

So, if are the USPA and you just loaned 10k to an organization that is going to help you support your goals.... Who are you going to recommend?

A. The local member with a PRO rating.
B. An organization that you loaned money to and whos end goal is to help you support your charter?

Hell, I'd select "B" as well.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He's playing the 'free market' card? After taking membership dollars to compete with members, he's playing the 'free market' card?

Let him establish the team and the act on his own dime, or at least money he didn't take directly from the membership, and then he can leave the show selection process up to the 'free market'. In this case, the market wasn't exactly 'free', as the other teams didn't have access to an easy $10k to jump start their operation.

Quote



...and make no mistake, $10,000 is a nice seed to jump-start a demo team but to stage an act comparable to what's available in the marketplace now it will take a lot more money.

IF the ICAS convention is coming out of that, between booth rental, travel, rooms, food, advertising & marketing materials...easily 25-50% of that seed money is spent.

Still needing funding is gear, the 'demo training camp' they spoke of on & on...

Now IF they do as they say and pay travel & expenses for their team as well as 'local teams' usual amounts...there not only isn't any money left to repay this 'loan', they will end up being upside-down and owe money for doing a show!

The more one looks at what's been coming out of the USPA on this, the more it seems no one did any homework regarding the business aspects of this plan.

Then of course there is the bigger ethical question of using membership funds to go into competition against the very members paying into that, as well as using the resources of the organization to direct work away from established teams.

Ed Scott says it's a 'free market', that's a rather broad self-serving statement. One might wonder just how well received a 'fresh new act' might be in that 'free market' if the clients were aware of the shortcuts and ethical fouls, if they knew an act that doesn't yet exist is trying to be sold to them, with performers that have yet to be trained or successfully demonstrate their abilities?











~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

This is the mission statement from USPA web site. No where does it mention businesses, LLC or DZO’s.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The United States Parachute Association (USPA) is a voluntary membership organization of individuals who enjoy and support the sport of skydiving. The association is incorporated in New York and follows the constitution and by-laws contained in the USPA Governance Manual. The purpose of USPA is three-fold: to promote safe skydiving through training, licensing, and instructor qualification programs; to ensure skydiving’s rightful place on airports and in the airspace system, and to promote competition and record-setting programs



Is it just me, or is there a difference between 'promoting' competition, and 'funding' competition?

What about the record attempts? When was the last time the USPA donated money toward a record attempt? Or even donated money toward a plan to raise money for a record attempt?

I would agrue 'never' to the latter, and I would also argue that the lack of financial support for record attempts indicates that funding competition is not appropriate or part of the USPAs purpose.

Want to promote competition? I know how to do that, it's called advertising and oversight. Get the word out there to skydivers and the general public that competitions exist, and where/when they are taking place. Then oversee those competitions with judges and establishing/enforcing rules so the competitors know what to expect, and that things are on 'the level'. That's promotion, what they're doing now, I don't know what to call it.

I'll quote myself here, just because I was surprised how stupid this sounded whan I typed it -
Quote

Or even donated money toward a plan to raise money for a record attempt?


-now I was making the comparison to how the USPA was treating record attempt vs competition, even though they are lumped together in the mission statement, but what I wrote sounds absurd. What the USPA is doing is not donating money toward competition, they're donating (loaning) money toward a plan designed to raise money for the US Team.

What this tells me is that the plan is so shitty that the team themselves can't seed it. If there's such promise of repayment and eventually bearing fruit, why isn't the team behind this venture? By my math, with 60 people on the US Team, all it takes is $160 each to raise the $10k they need to seed this program. That's one day of jumping they have to invest to get a 'free ride' to compete internationally AND get the money paid back.

Quick poll - who out there would loan me $160 if you would get your money back next year, and then get the bulk of your trip to a world meet covered? I'm guessing most of you would go for that, so why isn't the US Team funding the establishment of the US Team fundraising machine (aka the demo team)?

Spoiler alert - the answer is twofold, first off, the US Team is looking for handouts, not to pay to play. The other half is that this plan is bullshit, and nobody in their right mind would spend their own money on this, hence the reason for the USPA to fund it, it's not their money that's being spent. If the person who gave this 'loan' the nod was taking the money out of their own pocket, this thread wouldn't exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me, or is there a difference between 'promoting' competition, and 'funding' competition?

Quote



An old US Team competitor broke it down to me this way...

Years ago the majority of U.S.Team participants were Golden Knights, they were the best. They had the best training, and the funding to travel and compete. Everything was paid for.

Then the USPA started accumulating retired Golden Knights on mahogany row and they decided that the whole getting everything paid for was a sweet deal.

However membership support for a 1/2 dozen competitors is one thing, payin' the way for FIVE dozen is a whole other ballgame.

Some where along the line I think some convoluted thinking allowed priorities to get misaligned and perhaps too much emphasis is being put on something that quite arguably isn't 'really' part of the organization's charter.

Years ago Bill Ottley became involved with a group that was setting up global air-races, the competitors were from all over the world and would race their airplanes from London to Australia for example.

I remember discussing with him how the economics of such a thing would work.

He wisely said to the effect~
'It's aviation my friend, there IS no mass pubic interest or appeal so publicity is next to nill, and sponsorship even less.
Anything dealing with private avataion is a hobby not a necessity, so if you want to play YOU have to pay'.

Has tunnel vision caused loss of sight for the overall picture...Skydiving IS private avataion and serious thought should maybe given as to how much play the organization can pay for. Does that amount really need to include starting a business venture that back-stabs dues paying members?

Furthermore using SKYRIDE tactics to funnel business away from those members that have devoted considerable time and personal resources to the business of professional demonstration skydiving???

Now I understand the international competition is something we should be involved in, but to what end?
Especially if as you say (and I agree) an inordinate amount of resources are being put forth toward a very broad interpretation of the charter regarding 'promotion' of said.

How did funding the competition team become such a priority that a salaried advisor position is required, and procuring funds from the membership to go into business against dues paying members became apart of the USPA charter?

If there are any logical arguments in support of this direction I for one am all ears, but considering what's come from the home office so far it looks to be another case of 'this is what we're doing, if ya don't like it tough shit'. That's not the kind of representation I'm particularly comfortable with...:|











~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0