"Partner protection" @ '09 USPA Nationals

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Same as everyone else here has repeated themselves. I have still not seen where this has harmed any competitors. There is an argument that this may effect sponsorships,it might. It also just might,maybe change the way our manufacturers support our events, not to mention bring in outside money for our events.The only way that any outside major sponsors will ever buy into or sport is for our venues not to be a free for all for anyone who wants to hang a sign and pass out junk.

I can't figure out what the real complaint here is. Is it because you people are that pissed about not getting a free t-shirt or is it just needing to complain about The Man?

Remember when 'sponsorship' at the Nationals meant GETTING a free tee-shirt...not having to give them out?!

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

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

I can't figure out what the real complaint here is. Is it bacause you people are that pissed about not getting a free t-shirt or is it just needing to complain about The Man?

Yep, you've figured us out; it must be one or the other - certainly nothing else. Thanks for the cavalier dismissal.

You cut out the real part of my reply. Why am I not surprised?

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

Same as everyone else here has repeated themselves. I have still not seen where this has harmed any competitors. There is an argument that this may effect sponsorships,it might. It also just might,maybe change the way our manufacturers support our events, not to mention bring in outside money for our events.The only way that any outside major sponsors will ever buy into or sport is for our venues not to be a free for all for anyone who wants to hang a sign and pass out junk.

I can't figure out what the real complaint here is. Is it because you people are that pissed about not getting a free t-shirt or is it just needing to complain about The Man?

Remember when 'sponsorship' at the Nationals meant GETTING a free tee-shirt...not having to give them out?!

Nope,before my time.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I can't figure out what the real complaint here is. Is it bacause you people are that pissed about not getting a free t-shirt or is it just needing to complain about The Man?

Yep, you've figured us out; it must be one or the other - certainly nothing else. Thanks for the cavalier dismissal.

You cut out the real part of my reply. Why am I not surprised?

That's because the first part of your reply was just another re-barf. I'm not playing that game.

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Same as everyone else here has repeated themselves. I have still not seen where this has harmed any competitors. There is an arguement that this may effect sponsorships,it might. It also just might,maybe change the way our manufacturers support our events, not to mention bring in outside money for our events.The only way that any outside major sponsors will ever buy into or sport is for our venues not to be a free for all for anyone who wants to hang a sign and pass out junk.

I can't figure out what the real complaint here is. Is it bacause you people are that pissed about not getting a free t-shirt or is it just needing to complain about The Man?

Until now, Coke, Budweiser, GM, Ford, AT&T, etc. could basically come to anyone of our events for free and hand out stuff to "test the waters". I haven't seen any of them really at any.

If they aren't coming when it's free, why do people think they'll come when they now have to pay?

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[CSpenceFLY 1]

1. No one has sold it to them
2. most of our events are not big enough to get their attention

Sold right it could be done but then you will run into stuff like this. When you bring in outside money they will demand exclusive rights to some extent.I can only imagine the shit storm considering this came from protecting sponsors that are part of our sport.

[Nomad 0]

Quote

Quote

Same as everyone else here has repeated themselves. I have still not seen where this has harmed any competitors. There is an arguement that this may effect sponsorships,it might. It also just might,maybe change the way our manufacturers support our events, not to mention bring in outside money for our events.The only way that any outside major sponsors will ever buy into or sport is for our venues not to be a free for all for anyone who wants to hang a sign and pass out junk.

I can't figure out what the real complaint here is. Is it bacause you people are that pissed about not getting a free t-shirt or is it just needing to complain about The Man?

The real complaint is that competitors are being restricted in their own time and space. I for one have never asked for a free for all, that will never work. Official sponsors receive the signs, print, bags, all over the DZ etc etc. Sponsors of the teams receive a much smaller return(i.e. packing tent logos, pull up cords in said tent, vendor reps with the athletes) for a much smaller output(team fees).

Major sponsors would NEVER pay the outrageous official sponsors fees from this year, because the cost per head is far to high. And major dollar will never come into the sport via team sponsorship if team are only allowed small logos on their person.

You seems to be skipping over reading my posts when you say you haven't heard of anyone being harmed. Cause from where I'm sitting nationals directly caused a skydiver to loss a sponsorship deal.

All that is gold does not glitter, Not all who wander are lost.

[billvon 2,918]

>And yet no one has yet to step up and claim to be harmed.

No one has claimed to be harmed from Skyride or that annoying ad, either.

[MakeItHappen 15]

Quote

>And yet no one has yet to step up and claim to be harmed.

No one has claimed to be harmed from Skyride or that annoying ad, either.

Bill,

You are so misinformed.
Don't know if you know this but Skydive Arizona recently won $6.6M in a lawsuit where they (SDA) claimed to be hurt by SR.
The State of Georgia lists 363 consumers that were hurt by SR and required $128,519.87 in refunds.

.

.
Make It Happen
Parachute History
DiveMaker

[Krip 2]

Quote

Actually here is the thing about the UPSA Nationals... the rules can and usually do change year to year as each host DZ wants the rules for their event. Perris, Eloy, Spaceland, Chicago... they can change the rules from year to year so athletes better start asking questions now if they don't want to run into surprises at Chicago next year.

Hi PZ

Thanks for your response

I think this thread may be finally headed in the right direction. Assumeing that what you say is correct

If the selection for hosting the USPA Nationals for 2010 and 2011 and maybe 2012 and maybe 2013 has already been made Does this mean that the contracts have already been signed so the athletes can ask all the questions they want but they really only have 2 options.

Accept the surpises as they occur & CompeteStay home.

It is what it is.

One Jump Wonder

[CSpenceFLY 1]

Quote

Quote

>And yet no one has yet to step up and claim to be harmed.

No one has claimed to be harmed from Skyride or that annoying ad, either.

Bill,

You are so misinformed.
Don't know if you know this but Skydive Arizona recently won $6.6M in a lawsuit where they (SDA) claimed to be hurt by SR.
The State of Georgia lists 363 consumers that were hurt by SR and required $128,519.87 in refunds.

.

What she said. Bill, you are smarter then that.

[BikerBabe 0]

Quote

You seems to be skipping over reading my posts when you say you haven't heard of anyone being harmed. Cause from where I'm sitting nationals directly caused a skydiver to loss a sponsorship deal.

Nomad, welcome to arguing on DZ.com. this happens to me all the time, because when you actually put forth an answer that disproves their point, they ignore it and keep shouting.

My guess is your post had too many long paragraphs and/or big words in it.

You need to write it like this.

One sentence per line.

Maybe bold the part where you said a skydiver lost a sponsorship deal because of this.

It may or may not work. People HATE to admit they're wrong, they'd rather keep yelling.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[gemini 0]

Quote

It may or may not work. People HATE to admit they're wrong, they'd rather keep yelling.

Yep that it! It's simply a right or wrong issue. Not complicated at all. My way is 100% right and your's is 100% wrong. So when you don't agree, you start yelling.....lol

Blue skies,

Jim

[Bolas 5]

Quote

1. No one has sold it to them
2. most of our events are not big enough to get their attention

Sold right it could be done but then you will run into stuff like this. When you bring in outside money they will demand exclusive rights to some extent.I can only imagine the shit storm considering this came from protecting sponsors that are part of our sport.

I think offered would be a better way to put it. Don't charge the big nonskydiving sponsors anything to come out the first time but also don't provide them anything other than some space to setup.

This way both get to decide if they think it's worth entering money/exclusivity deals.

IMO air sports are one of the few sports venues where your average person can't at least emulate or try to do what we do relatively inexpensively.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

If the selection for hosting the USPA Nationals for 2010 and 2011 and maybe 2012 and maybe 2013 has already been made Does this mean that the contracts have already been signed so the athletes can ask all the questions they want but they really only have 2 options.

Accept the surpises as they occur & Compete
Stay home.

That's only ethical/reasonable if ALL the ground rules - including what can and cannot be done by sponsored teams - is disclosed FAR in advance so potential sponsors can make an INFORMED decision about whether or not to sponsor a team. But if the sponsor already commits, has has spent a lot of loot on a team, and only much LATER is SURPRISED!! by a new, sponsor-relevant ground rule, then that's bullshit. More than just bullshit - it's a fantasy: no prudent business investment is made on an "accept the surprises as they occur" basis.

[champu 1]

Quote

I'm sure someone will blame them for the weather holds

Well... they did put their dropzone near the gulf coast in Texas and then host nationals in October.

In all seriousness, it's a really nice facility. My only complaints (rain, mud, humidity, and bugs) have everything to do with the gulf coast and nothing to do with Spaceland.

As far as sponsors goes, as long as at least one (usually PD, in this case Vigil) advertises using bright orange wind blades so I can tell which way to land, I don't really care.

[legalize1966 0]

Is there any subject you argue that you do not drag Skyride into? Skyride has nothing to do with this and these two things do not even compare.

[pilotdave 0]

Well, that last one was just a counter argument. I'm not comparing spaceland to skyride anyway... I'm comparing the responses in this thread from "partner protection" supporters to typical posts made by skyride supporters in other threads.

"how does this affect you personally?"
"the dropzone is really nice..."
"they're just trying to make a profit..."

I find it especially funny to hear that first one from people vocally opposed to skyride.

Dave

[airtwardo 7]

If the selection for hosting the USPA Nationals for 2010 and 2011 and maybe 2012 and maybe 2013 has already been made Does this mean that the contracts have already been signed so the athletes can ask all the questions they want but they really only have 2 options.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

I heard yesterday the Nationals will be @ Spaceland for the next 2 years.

Sort of.

Canopy Piloting Nationals will be at Spaceland.

See other DZ's have decided to snub an entire group of competitors, 65 in total this year, and host every other event EXCEPT Canopy Piloting. So SD Spaceland has stepped up to the plate and said that they would pull the slack, so we would have a venue to compete at.

I think its piss-poor that the USPA would award a DZ nationals if they decided they didn't want to host an event. If I had a DZ and decided that I didn't have the facilities to host RW, there would be a HUGE uproar! However, its ok to snub Canopy Piloting for some reason.

I believe that the next two locations for SOME of the national events is SD Arizona and Chicago. Swooping is at Spaceland for at least two more years.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

Quote

I heard yesterday the Nationals will be @ Spaceland for the next 2 years.

Sort of.

Canopy Piloting Nationals will be at Spaceland.

See other DZ's have decided to snub an entire group of competitors, 65 in total this year, and host every other event EXCEPT Canopy Piloting. So SD Spaceland has stepped up to the plate and said that they would pull the slack, so we would have a venue to compete at.

I think its piss-poor that the USPA would award a DZ nationals if they decided they didn't want to host an event. If I had a DZ and decided that I didn't have the facilities to host RW, there would be a HUGE uproar! However, its ok to snub Canopy Piloting for some reason.

I believe that the next two locations for SOME of the national events is SD Arizona and Chicago. Swooping is at Spaceland for at least two more years.

So what you're saying is, these other DZ's can't host the entire competition for the nationals because they DON'T have the facilities that Spaceland does??

Gee...look at the bright side, at least there will be free pull up cords for everybody.

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

[LouDiamond 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I heard yesterday the Nationals will be @ Spaceland for the next 2 years.

Sort of.

Canopy Piloting Nationals will be at Spaceland.

See other DZ's have decided to snub an entire group of competitors, 65 in total this year, and host every other event EXCEPT Canopy Piloting. So SD Spaceland has stepped up to the plate and said that they would pull the slack, so we would have a venue to compete at.

I think its piss-poor that the USPA would award a DZ nationals if they decided they didn't want to host an event. If I had a DZ and decided that I didn't have the facilities to host RW, there would be a HUGE uproar! However, its ok to snub Canopy Piloting for some reason.

I believe that the next two locations for SOME of the national events is SD Arizona and Chicago. Swooping is at Spaceland for at least two more years.

So what you're saying is, these other DZ's can't host the entire competition for the nationals because they DON'T have the facilities that Spaceland does??

Gee...look at the bright side, at least there will be free pull up cords for everybody.

Perhaps it's because it barely makes up 1% of the total people who compete and building a competition swoop pond is crazy expensive? Or could it also be that one of the locals is in a DESERT?! NAH, couldn't be that, that would make too much sense both common and economical.

Dave, you want some cheese with that whine? Suck it up cupcake.

"It's just skydiving..additional drama is not required"
Some people dream about flying, I live my dream
SKYMONKEY PUBLISHING

[airtwardo 7]

cheese with that whine?




Beer & pork rinds...this IS Texas after all!

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

[billvon 2,918]

>I think its piss-poor that the USPA would award a DZ nationals if they
>decided they didn't want to host an event.

So you think a DZ shouldn't take steps to break even or make a profit while holding nationals? You seem to have changed your tune once your event got involved.

>Swooping is at Spaceland for at least two more years.

It makes more sense from a logistics perspective. You need less ceiling, and Spaceland has more weather issues than Arizona.

> If I had a DZ and decided that I didn't have the facilities to host RW,
>there would be a HUGE uproar!

If you held 4-way and 8-way at separate local DZ's (consecutively) I don't think many people would care. If you held CRW in Chicago and RW in Eloy, fine. Heck, I'd be totally happy if they ran 4way on Fri-Sat-Sun of one weekend at Elsinore, and 8 way Fri-Sat-Sun of the next week at Perris. Would give them 4 days to break down/set up and more people with jobs could participate.

[airtwardo 7]

Quote

>I think its piss-poor that the USPA would award a DZ nationals if they
>decided they didn't want to host an event.

So you think a DZ shouldn't take steps to break even or make a profit while holding nationals? You seem to have changed your tune once your event got involved.

>Swooping is at Spaceland for at least two more years.

It makes more sense from a logistics perspective. You need less ceiling, and Spaceland has more weather issues than Arizona.

> If I had a DZ and decided that I didn't have the facilities to host RW,
>there would be a HUGE uproar!

If you held 4-way and 8-way at separate local DZ's (consecutively) I don't think many people would care. If you held CRW in Chicago and RW in Eloy, fine. Heck, I'd be totally happy if they ran 4way on Fri-Sat-Sun of one weekend at Elsinore, and 8 way Fri-Sat-Sun of the next week at Perris. Would give them 4 days to break down/set up and more people with jobs could participate.

Which, when ya think about it...really ISN'T a bad idea!

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