USPA's "Championship" Demo Team?

[Ron 7]

My letter to Ed Scott


I have been following the announcement of the USPA funding another organization designed to create a Demo team...
So far I have just been trying to gather information about this program. I talked to Jim Hayhurst at the end of the ceremony at the Nationals and I was very disturbed by the information that he gave me.

Let me just state that I am for trying to get corporate sponsorship... It is a shame that our would class athletes are living at a wage less than the average American and are forced to pay out of pocket to represent the United States at the World meets.

That being said, the proposed solution by Hayhurst and the actions taken by the USPA have me more than a bit worried. A bad solution to a problem is often worse than the problem.

1. Was there any collateral for this 10,000 dollar loan? If not, then what are we going to do if this new organization folds?

2. Who is going to run this new organization? Who will they answer to?

3. Why is a member funded organization supporting another organization that will take jobs from current members in good standing AND have passed the organizations own demo certification? I'll admit, this is a major sticking point for me. Hayhurst told me that someone called the USPA and asked who could perform a demo on 9/11 and that the USPA recommended his new organization (with absolutely no track record) .... In essence the USPA was used exactly like skyride but with only ONE participating demo program. Hayhurst said he was glad that this happened and that he hopes that that would become the standard. I feel that this is an inappropriate action by the USPA.

Hayhurst used the example of how civilian demo teams have to compete against the Golden Knights.... Yes, but I do not support the Golden Knights with my membership dollars, and the Golden Knights did not certify me to be able to perform demos either.

4. Hayhurst being on the competition committee and (if I am correct) also a member of this new organization is a gigantic conflict of interest. His participation on the team is also a conflict of interest.

When asked these questions, Hayhurst became upset and aggressive. I had to ask him to clam down three times or we would have to stop the discussion. He finally insulted me as being "afraid and short sighted". This kind of attitude from a member of the USPA to one of its members who wanted to hear about the official actions of the USPA is troubling.

It became clear to me during my conversation with Hayhurst that his goal is to create a demo team made up of a close group of people (including himself) that is either the "official" USPA demo team or that at the very least creates the illusion of being the official USPA demo team. And that his team is the only one that would be recommended by the USPA, and that this team will openly compete against the membership. I feel this is a clear conflict of interest and that it goes against the very core of ethical behavior.

Ways to increase sponsorship is a very good idea, creating a demo team to compete against the general membership is not a good idea to me.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[airtwardo 6]

+1


...I'm curious if a letter stating the facts so consicely would get PUBLISHED in the Parachutist magazine?

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

[chuckakers 370]

Quote

***Hayhurst wants money for the team? Solicit donations from manufacturers and DZs, and raffle the shit off.

Not donations, sponsorships.

As I said in an earlier post (http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_threaded;post=4206636;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;) , I don't get why USPA doesn't just fish where the fish ALREADY bite. Gear makers already gladly slap their gear on the backs of competitors, most of whom will never even be National Champions. Something tells me they would be equally excited about outfitting the folks that go to the World Meet. After all, gear makers stand to gain the most from placing claim to champion sponsorships.

The US Team represents the US, not their home DZ or pre-nationals sponsors. USPA should simply tell potential US team picks that upon accepting a spot on the team, they will be sponsored by specific entities and will fly their stuff while actively on the team (swoop and CReW canopies not included for safety and performance).

Team members would be welcome to sell the gear after the world meet as a means of funding their trips, or USPA could collect it and sell it for the same purpose.

Jumpers would gladly snap up that gear, and everyone wins.

It is beyond me how Jim Hayhurst and the board believe that having jumpers - champions or not - jump into airshows will somehow magically attract big-dollar sponsors. If that was true, those sponsorships would already be happening.

Chuck Akers
D-10855
Houston, TX

[grimmie 173]

There are many, many talented skydivers in the media/TV/movie industry. Money would be better spent on putting together a total video/print package to present to corporate sponsors for donations to the US team. Most of the jumpers would probably donate their time to the cause. Most of the cool video is already shot.

And what is the membership's liablity in a "USPA" demo team having a mishap at an event?

[airtwardo 6]

And what is the membership's liability in a "USPA" demo team having a mishap at an event?

...the million dollar third party liability insurance is about $10,000 a year.

Since it's set up as a stand alone corporation the USPA would probably be okay, but then again since they funded the demo team, and they are employing the person over seeing it's operation as well as directing clients TO the USPA team...who knows.

Better question might be are all the 'team members' prepared to be sued for their net worth should something happen...even if they weren't the one involved in the incident?

If you're 'on the team' your assets are quite possibly the teams assets. . .at minimum you likely will be named in any civil action that would be brought.

Most of the actual PRO demonstration jumpers I know, carry their own liability insurance in addition to the performer policy...as one ole salt told me 20 years ago...

"I'm not losing MY house because YOU fucked up"




Hopefully the limits of the 'demo' insurance policy and how it really works will be covered in depth during the 'Demo Training Camp' ~

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

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

It is a shame that our would class athletes are living at a wage less than the average American and are forced to pay out of pocket to represent the United States at the World meets.

I was told, not verified, that members of some of the top team make up to $85,000 a year coaching. Considering this may be an exaggeration and they only make $50,000 a year, which is still a far cry from living hand to mouth.

Most of the top teams are heavily sponsored, if not totally, by various DZ’s and gear companies I suspect their savings during a year of training would be far more than the cost of attending a world meet.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Ron 7]

Quote

I was told, not verified, that members of some of the top team make up to $85,000 a year coaching

Saturday night I was chatting with some current and former members of the US team and over the last year they often only had 5 dollars in their pocket. They might have been lying to me, but I doubt it. They also might just be REALLY bad with money.

I know I had to loan some money to one US team member to buy a plane ticket to go compete. I also know that I had to help some others with some discounts.

So, maybe I am wrong.... But maybe not.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[mjosparky 3]

Quote

Quote

I was told, not verified, that members of some of the top team make up to $85,000 a year coaching

Saturday night I was chatting with some current and former members of the US team and over the last year they often only had 5 dollars in their pocket. They might have been lying to me, but I doubt it. They also might just be REALLY bad with money.

I know I had to loan some money to one US team member to buy a plane ticket to go compete. I also know that I had to help some others with some discounts.

So, maybe I am wrong.... But maybe not.

Hey Ron,

I think we could both be wrong and the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Your attitude of helping other jumpers is something I just posted about in another thread.

Sparky

My idea of a fair fight is clubbing baby seals

[Ron 7]

Email and call the BOD.

I have been in discussions with a few members of the BOD and email exchanges with Ed Scott.

If you have any question about this idea... Let your voice be heard. Without your input, they will do what they and they alone think best.

Let me be 100% clear on a few points.

1. I have no issue with the U.S. Demo team idea. In concept the idea has merit. My issue is that this team already has been put at the head of the line for a demo job in front of the general membership. I see this as a conflict of interest of a member supported organization.

2. I have no issue with Jim Hayhurst. Some of his ideas for the actual demo program were flat out fantastic. I respect his accomplishments and do not question his intentions at all. I do have issue with the potential unintended consequences of creating a team that is viewed as "Official" by the general population. I know that if I were looking for a demo team and you gave me the option of some random person or the team that was backed by the USPA... I'd pick the USPA team. I'll bet others would make the same choice. I see this as a conflict of interest.

If this team were created with donations from individuals instead of the USPA membership money, if the leader was someone unconnected to the USPA, and the USPA did not act like a booking agent for this team... I would have zero issues at all with the idea. But as it stands now the illusion of this team being the "official" USPA team and the fact that you can get this team by calling the USPA.... Seems like a gigantic conflict of interest to me and many others.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[airtwardo 6]

I agree with the 'conflict of interest' but it's a bad idea from all kinds of angles.

~Taking dues money to start the team to compete with dues paying members.

~The USPA having anything to do with booking demos, either for 'their' team or anyone else's.

~ Capitalizing on the 'Official USPA' sanctioning of their own demonstration parachute team in NOT an 'unintended consequence' it's a premeditated ploy!
Mr. Hayhurt himself has stated so...

~The entire approach is flawed, show me another corporation that would fund business competition against itself, against it shareholders.
I do understand that yes the goal is worthy...the way of trying to reach it by doing this makes no sense what-so-ever, there was no research into the viability of this process.
There IS NO business plan, no over-sight, no repayment schedule...nothing to even hint logical analytical thought went into the successful execution of this 'plan'.

* I have an idea, how about the USPA get some tandem rigs and set up shop right next to every established DZ using volunteer TM's from the US Team...directing any and all calls regarding training jumps to their own operation, it IS a 'free market' after all.

The profits would be higher and the 'goal' reached in no time at all!
And I'm sure none of the DZO's would mind given the 'goal' and the good intentions!



But on a more serious note, I may be one of the more vocal against this but I'm far from the most fanatical.
I'm actively discouraging discussion about ad's in ICAS magazine, negative editorial submissions to publications such as 'World Air Show News'...'serving papers' to a booth at ICAS is ludicrous and a horrible idea.
I'm 100% against anything that would in the long run bring negative attention to the USPA organization AND/OR the demonstration jumping business.

I think negative publicity would be as much of a conflict of interest to the demo business, as what the USPA is doing...but I guarantee not everyone feels the way I do.

The USPA is a regulatory organization NOT a profiteering venture...if they take money from members they absolutely should NOT actively work in competition to take business away from those members...PERIOD!

Be it demos, tandems, leasing aircraft, running boogies, etc.

I believe the Board hadn't considered all the ramifications this measure would include when it was voted on, and that they should resend the vote until such time more thorough examination of what the actual costs might be...and I'm not just speaking financially. They should NEVER put the organization into any light even hinting of 'conflict of interest' or ethical disregard for profit or personal gain.

I'm with you Ron, I too strongly urge members to contact the USPA with their thoughts and concerns.
If you already have then do it again, suggest others not aware of this issue become informed, and voice their opinions as well.


~ And to be clear, I too have nothing but respect for Jim Hayhurst has a competitor and a person.
I also believe that however noble his intentions, if he wants to get into the demonstration business he needs to disconnect himself entirely from the USPA, to end what is obviously a conflict of interest.

He has stated his history of, and future intention to utilize the USPA and his position there as a tool to direct demo client$ toward a team he will jump on...that's inappropriate, unethical and just plain wrong ~ what else is there to say?

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

[stratostar 5]

Quote

what else is there to say?

It's our money and WE should have the vote on this idea, Not the BOD!

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Quote

Quote

what else is there to say?

It's our money and WE should have the vote on this idea, Not the BOD!

+1 on that. This is an issue that should have membership input. I plan on speaking to my Bod rep.

Instead of a demo team, how about the USPA Sponsor a reality show? Call it "As the Dropzone Turns".

It could feature a DZ and all the crazy characters related to most DZ's I've ever visited. Like.....
-Limpy, the DZ owner who's always looking to cut costs and find new sources of revenue.
- Brett, a TM who likes to “fondle the equipment”.
- Skillz, that 100 jump wonder that will not hear what is said.
- Candy, the video production assistant who just broke another nail.
- Wrongway, the pilot…. nuff said?
- Crash, the cool, hotshot, ladies man swooper.
- Jillian, the pretty manifester who drinks too much and is always falling in love with a camera guy.
- Shutter, the camera guy that just broke up with Jillian.
- Land Mine, the DZ dog that was appropriately named.
- The Twins, … not two people, just a name we use for Suzzie the TI.
Then, every week you bring in new “talent” as this weeks Students.
I’m serious here people!! This is a way better idea than a Demo Team.

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[airtwardo 6]

-Pig Pen, the 'token' Rigger!

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

[grimmie 173]

What about the dz porn star, TI, that would up ratings!

[skyjumpenfool 2]

Brad Pitt as the S&TA? Gotta get the girls to watch.

Sorry Twardo, I didn't mean to hijack your thread. I just wanted to make the point that with a little thought and reflection, a better plan could emerge. One that does not cause problems and has a chance to raise needed revenue.

Birdshit & Fools Productions

"Son, only two things fall from the sky."

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Brad Pitt as the S&TA? Gotta get the girls to watch.

Sorry Twardo, I didn't mean to hijack your thread. I just wanted to make the point that with a little thought and reflection, a better plan could emerge. One that does not cause problems and has a chance to raise needed revenue.

No worries, and I agree there are lots of creative ways that the goal could be approached that would carry a much higher chance of actual success...and NOT create an obvious conflict of interest.

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

[JCW1966 0]

Quote

He has stated his history of, and future intention to utilize the USPA and his position there as a tool to direct demo client$ toward a team he will jump on...that's inappropriate, unethical and just plain wrong ~ what else is there to say?

Don't forget the $10,000 loan made by the USPA using our dues so he can go to ICAS and promote his, uh I mean the USPA team.

To be honest I think it's time for some attorneys to get involved. The USPA won't listen and they just used 10k of our dues to put this ball of mess in motion. 10k that will be repaid, yeah right and I'm Santa Claus.

The USPA is no longer an organization for the masses. It no longer represents the individual skydiver. Matter of fact it hasn't in a very long time.

DZOs and / or their representatives should not be allowed on the BOD. It's a conflict of interest that we have lived with long enough.

It's time for a major re working of the USPA as a whole. First needs to go is Hayhurst, then the DZOs and anyone else who is involved in or supports this demo team idea.

[Krip 2]

NO LAWYERS!!!!!

Just have USPA raise the GMDZ dues to reflect what the USPA brand is worth.

One Jump Wonder

[JCW1966 0]

Quote

NO LAWYERS!!!!!

Just have USPA raise the GMDZ dues to reflect what the USPA brand is worth.

Well that would work if you could trust them. And the way it's going right now the brand isn't worth as much as their inflated egos would like to believe. You might have to lower GMDZ dues if you want it to reflect what the "brand" is worth.

Lets take a look at their track record.

A BOD that has DZO's on it who are going to do what is best for their business and not necessarily for skydiving in general. This is a conflict of interest that has been going on for a very long time and one that I think definitely subtracts from the "brand" worth of the USPA.

A BOD that got sued by Cary Q. And attorneys got paid with our dues to fight a legal battle they couldn't win. How much did that snafu cost? That "brand" worth just went down a little bit more.

And now a BOD that not only approves lame brained ideas without consenting it's membership. But a BOD that has made a 10k loan to someone who is basically starting a business that will compete with the business of some of the USPA members whose dues helped make the loan to begin with. And let's not forget that the offices and personnel of the USPA will be used to promote this business as well as handle it's reservations. The "brand" worth just lost some more value with this move.

If you haven't read it yet here is what James Hayhurst has to say about this brilliant plan of his:
http://skydiveuspa.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/team-sponsor-dev-program/

10k of membership dues is gone, been used to pay for this trip to ICAS, booth resrvations, etc... And we are to trust this person who using the USPA for his own personal business venture to make sure the 10k gets paid back? The USPA "brand" worth is looking about as bad as stock in Lehman Brothers right now.

The time for talk was over the minute they started spending 10k on this ICAS deal without anyone's approval but their own.

I for one do not appreciate an organization that I pay dues to using that money for a business venture that will compete with other due paying members, some of who happen to be good friends of mine as well.

Conflict of interest is an understatement here and attorneys may be the only way to get the BODs attention.

They're not going to listen to you, me, or thousands of others are they? And if they don't listen to the membership then their "brand" worth isn't worth squat.

I for one am all for canning their butts right now. Voting them out will take too long. We just had elections what last fall? And elections will come up again in about a year. The 2011 - 2012 BOD hasn't even made it through 2011 and they have already wasted 10k of the membership dues that may or may not get paid back. Depends on whether or not this business venture, and that's what is, fails or not.

If they wanted to loan James Hayhurst money to do this they should have taken it out of their own pockets or he should have went and got himself a business loan. Even then it still would be a conflict of interest to use USPA offices and personnel to be handling reservations and the such when some of the paying membership makes money doing demos.

The USPA has done nothing but give themselves a black eye with this and it's time to let a lawyer or two dot the other for them so they will have a matching set.

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Quote

He has stated his history of, and future intention to utilize the USPA and his position there as a tool to direct demo client$ toward a team he will jump on...that's inappropriate, unethical and just plain wrong ~ what else is there to say?

Don't forget the $10,000 loan made by the USPA using our dues so he can go to ICAS and promote his, uh I mean the USPA team.

To be honest I think it's time for some attorneys to get involved. The USPA won't listen and they just used 10k of our dues to put this ball of mess in motion. 10k that will be repaid, yeah right and I'm Santa Claus.

The USPA is no longer an organization for the masses. It no longer represents the individual skydiver. Matter of fact it hasn't in a very long time.

DZOs and / or their representatives should not be allowed on the BOD. It's a conflict of interest that we have lived with long enough.

It's time for a major re working of the USPA as a whole. First needs to go is Hayhurst, then the DZOs and anyone else who is involved in or supports this demo team idea.

I can't argue with any of that...other than to say I really don't like the idea of getting lawyers involved.

There is a contingent from what I understand that is looking that direction, misappropriation of funds, unfair business practice, on & on.

I rather hope the USPA would take a step back and look at the thing from a view that encompasses more than just an eye toward the goal...I think it's important that they do that.

I think involving the law dogs just works to saw away at the branch we're ALL sitting on...that being said, being served a cease & desist order while manning a booth at ICAS would probably go a long way toward waking the BOD to the busine$$ concerns they seem so blind to.

MY fear is a move like that might also serve to put us all as 'demo jumpers' in a negative light to prospective clients.

I can see a show organizer thinking~If that's the way they treat each other, how are they going to handle any problems with us?

It's totally beyond my understand how the USPA can possibly NOT see the conflict of interest this whole program is...and I don't doubt that the 1st time the USPA recommends it 'own' demo team over another this WILL reach critical mass.

There are 10 times more ways for this to turn ugly and fail than there are ways it will meet the 'goal' of gaining sponsorship for the US comp Team...


All that being said, you make a VERY good argument toward taking this to the next logical level.

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

[JCW1966 0]

Quote

There are 10 times more ways for this to turn ugly and fail than there are ways it will meet the 'goal' of gaining sponsorship for the US comp Team...

I agree with you 100% on everything. And 110% on your quote above.

That 10k loan is gone. We can chalk that up to the BODs leadership. And that is where the problem really begins. The BOD can't back down now. They have to make sure this demo team succeeds just to make sure the loan gets paid back.

They've dug themselves into a hole that there is no way out but to proceed with their plans. And then they can only get out of that hole if their plans succeed.

I've ground crewed demos for 5 years +. Only a few pay the big bucks. A certain Major League Baseball team which you would think would be a big paying demo won't even pay for fuel much less plane rental, jumpers, or special effects. They want you to do it for free. It's a privilege that they are letting you jump into their stadium. I can think of a lot better ways to make a living or a business to have than a demo team. Demos are fun, they're great for the sport, but most of them stink when it comes to the money. Now I know there are some big demos that pay well. But those demos are done by the same teams already. What is the USPA going to do, steal their business?

And here's what is really sad. It takes years and years of practice and doing demos to get routines down, to make things better, to be the best. The USPA team is going to be that good in 6 months? This whole mess will end up doing more bad than it will good for the image of the sport. And this is where the BOD has led us with it's leadership skills.

[airtwardo 6]

Quote

Quote

There are 10 times more ways for this to turn ugly and fail than there are ways it will meet the 'goal' of gaining sponsorship for the US comp Team...

I agree with you 100% on everything. And 110% on your quote above.

That 10k loan is gone. We can chalk that up to the BODs leadership. And that is where the problem really begins. The BOD can't back down now. They have to make sure this demo team succeeds just to make sure the loan gets paid back.

They've dug themselves into a hole that there is no way out but to proceed with their plans. And then they can only get out of that hole if their plans succeed.

I've ground crewed demos for 5 years +. Only a few pay the big bucks. A certain Major League Baseball team which you would think would be a big paying demo won't even pay for fuel much less plane rental, jumpers, or special effects. They want you to do it for free. It's a privilege that they are letting you jump into their stadium. I can think of a lot better ways to make a living or a business to have than a demo team. Demos are fun, they're great for the sport, but most of them stink when it comes to the money. Now I know there are some big demos that pay well. But those demos are done by the same teams already. What is the USPA going to do, steal their business?

And here's what is really sad. It takes years and years of practice and doing demos to get routines down, to make things better, to be the best. The USPA team is going to be that good in 6 months? This whole mess will end up doing more bad than it will good for the image of the sport. And this is where the BOD has led us with it's leadership skills.

And that goes back to the lack of any business plan or any kind of actual research into the viability of the program.

I know Ed Scott is at least now aware of what teams charge and the profit margins...a very active demo businessman recently told him, had anyone on the BOD been aware of that fact or even had the foresight to ask I doubt the vote would have gone as it did.

A recent memo went out regarding how the USPA was attempting to 'placate' existing demo jumpers by offering that the USPA team would be hiring 'local' jumpers to...bla bla bla...the arrogance amazes me.

Comments have been made by BOD members to the effect that if nothing else maybe the USPA demo team will force the existing teams to have better acts...WTF??, ~the USPA team doesn't even HAVE an act!

The current teams that are IN the business, understand what the customer wants and have been trying to give it to them and make a profit for quite a while now.

I would never presume to make a comment regarding how the comp teams are run, I have no experience or expertise in that area...the arrogance amazes me.

Some on the board think that since there are 'only' so many letters, emails, calls etc. that have come in that it's no big deal...well guess what, there have been quite a few MORE complaints than there are US Team members. Which tells even the most casual observer that it's hurting more people than it's helping...the arrogance just amazes me.

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

[stratostar 5]

Quote

There is a contingent from what I understand that is looking that direction, misappropriation of funds, unfair business practice, on & on.

Good! It's way past time to take back OUR org. I like a number of the BOD, but it's a conflict of interest for DZO's to be sitting on the bod for so long as they have. You don't see any of them in here posting do you? No not a one, what dose that tell ya.

I would support legal action to force the need changes to the org as a whole. It's also past time for term limits for serving as a BOD, there should be no DZO's sitting there as ND's, I could see a case for a DZO being a RD, but again term limits 3 yrs & your done maybe 6 max or two terms.

With the newly used online voting, you mean to tell me 'they' could be bothered to ask US what we think about this and take a vote of the membership? They don't take the time because we don't matter... it's all about who is sucking who's dick to get their way.

I would send a letter, but it would be point less to do so they have made it clear there is no concern for member input on this kind of spending.

My respect for a number of BOD has dropped a great deal, again.

you can't pay for kids schoolin' with love of skydiving! ~ Airtwardo

[JCW1966 0]

Quote

Comments have been made by BOD members to the effect that if nothing else maybe the USPA demo team will force the existing teams to have better acts...WTF??, ~the USPA team doesn't even HAVE an act!

Do they even have a team yet? Gear & accessories needed? No, but they'll loan 10k to go to ICAS to promote something that isn't even in existence as a whole yet.

Ignorance, arrogance, or both? I dunno but it amazes me too.

[PhreeZone 14]

I have heard that the USPA has already written the script for a 20 minute show that is very similar to one that is used by a government sponsored demo team They are shaping the show to highlight things like Hi/Low jumps with smoke, FS jumps, CRW passes, Swooping and basically a bit out of each discipline that the US team is made up of. The intent is even to allow airshows to do multiple skydiving acts since this will be "fresh" and "have things no other act has" so that if an airshow wanted to they could have the Knights come and do all the flags and smoke and then this team can do all the other activities.

I don't see too many airshows wanting to do this since performance time is limited and they get higher attendance (and therefore $) with bigger acts like jet teams, historical planes, etc than they get by advertising skydiving. If given the chance to add an additional plane performance or a second skydiving show I am pretty sure most will go with the plane.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com