IFPA Charging Fees for Tournaments in 2018

(Topic ID: 185444)

IFPA Charging Fees for Tournaments in 2018


By Eric_S

1 year ago



Topic Stats

  • 1,607 posts
  • 166 Pinsiders participating
  • Latest reply 1 year ago by TheLaw
  • Topic is favorited by 19 Pinsiders

You

Linked Games

Topic Gallery

There have been 36 images uploaded to this topic. (View topic image gallery).

f5f.gif
homer simpson brain xray (resized).png
taytay.gif
pasted_image (resized).png
20171223_203010 (resized).jpg
IFPA (resized).png
ifpa (resized).jpg
wpprizer_build (resized).PNG
IMG_2821 (resized).JPG
IMG_2805 (resized).JPG
DonationJar (resized).png
IMG_2797 (resized).PNG
IMG_4030 (resized).JPG
towelie_tough_guy (resized).jpg
towelie-no_you_are (resized).png
IMG_5752 (resized).PNG

There are 1606 posts in this topic. You are on page 1 of 33.
#1 1 year ago

Did anyone else see this post on IFPA in regard to charging a fee of $1/person per tournament to "boost prestige of state and national events"?

https://www.ifpapinball.com/2018-19-state-championship-series-endorsement-fee-and-prize-pool-adjustment/#comments

This seems like a huge cash grab for the top players at the expense of everyone else. I'm not sure how this encourages competitive pinball as it just is a tax for everyone else. I thought this was a April Fools Day joke, the follow-up post seems to indicate it is serious.

While I'm normally a pretty diplomatic guy, to quote the goat, this plan "stinks worse than my nuts".

#2 1 year ago

And of all days to announce such a radical change, April 1! Have they no decency?

Also nobody cares about ifpa stuff here this is a "mod" forum.

#3 1 year ago

April fools joke

-6
#4 1 year ago
Quoted from Eric_S:

This seems like a huge cash grab for the top players at the expense of everyone else.

It ultimately depends on how the $1 is charged.

If the location sponsors the endorsement fee, there's no expense to the players.

If the 'winners' of the event fund the endorsement fee out of the pot, then it's the top players that end up deferring some of their winnings for a chance to win it later on. Again, casual players see no impact.

If the TD charges an EXTRA $1 per participant for the event, then yes it becomes the masses funding the top players.

If a TD allows players to opt out that aren't interested then that player won't be impacted.

Plenty of options and flexibility designed into this process. Ultimately we will see how it goes and repeal/replace from there if necessary.

13
#5 1 year ago
Quoted from ifpapinball:

It ultimately depends on how the $1 is charged.
If the location sponsors the endorsement fee, there's no expense to the players.
If the 'winners' of the event fund the endorsement fee out of the pot, then it's the top players that end up deferring some of their winnings for a chance to win it later on. Again, casual players see no impact.
If the TD charges an EXTRA $1 per participant for the event, then yes it becomes the masses funding the top players.
If a TD allows players to opt out that aren't interested then that player won't be impacted.
Plenty of options and flexibility designed into this process. Ultimately we will see how it goes and repeal/replace from there if necessary.

How does this fee encourage more competitive pinball?

#6 1 year ago
Quoted from Eric_S:

How does this fee encourage more competitive pinball?

My opinions: I guess it depends on your idea of more. If you measure more as pure number of events, then it will not. However, if having a few thousand dollars to play for will encourage top players more actively chasing the title, then it will encourage higher level of competition. Right now SCS is fun, but I think for most it is not a must play event. Heck most of the top players qualify in multiple states just by accident. They don't have the prestige of PAPA world championships, Pinburgh or even most circuit majors. Maybe this will change that.

#7 1 year ago
Quoted from CrazyLevi:

Also nobody cares about ifpa stuff here this is a "mod" forum.

Have you got those mirror blades on your Stars yet?

Quoted from Eric_S:

How does this fee encourage more competitive pinball?

Personally, I don't see $1 as the end of pinball as we know it.

Most tournaments I have entered in the USA have some form of entry fee (unlike NZ where we just do everything for nothing lol)

It's easy enough for the TD to take $1 of the $5 entry fee, with minimal impact on the prize money paid out at the end of the night.

rd

#8 1 year ago
Quoted from Eric_S:

How does this fee encourage more competitive pinball?

We don't look at it as encouraging/discouraging. If our 3500 events per year changes to 2000 non-endorsed events and 1500 endorsed events, the same amount of competitive pinball is being played. We're basically separately out a group of those events that wish to be endorsed and award WPPRs.

#9 1 year ago

WTF?

GREED!

Shame on your sharpe brothers!

I seriously thought this was an April Fools joke! Amazed that this is just another way for you and your buddies to line their pockets.

Please explain how this is good for competitive pinball.

I can do the simple math that we run ~48 events this year in Madison with an average attendance of 20 people. That would be a 960 fee required from the player base this year in order to have these events sponsored? Where is that money going exactly?

720 to the WI SCS champ? Screw that. I'm not paying in $50 prize pool for playing each year just so 4 possible winners can get a $720 pay check. I can assure you the player base of the majority wont pay this either. Also can assure you that a few TDs running private events will no longer host if you force them to pay in.

25% then to nationals pool.

Curious, how much money would this have netted you and Zach from this year if it was in place?

#10 1 year ago

Seems very reasonable to me. As long as I've known about ifpa, I've been amazed that it's free. It takes a of time, effort, and passion to hold something like that together.

#11 1 year ago
Quoted from EvanDickson:

Seems very reasonable to me. As long as I've known about ifpa, I've been amazed that it's free. It takes a of time, effort, and passion to hold something like that together.

yup, and the effort all builds off the dedication of the player base and TDs that put it all on.

Seems rather simple to just charge a one time annual player fee for anyone that wants to be ranked. With over 40k ranked people they could line their pockets with 200k each year from a $5 annual fee. At least then it would allow players to choose on an individual basis what to do.

#12 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

WTF?
GREED!
Shame on your sharpe brothers!
I seriously thought this was an April Fools joke! Amazed that this is just another way for you and your buddies to line their pockets.
Please explain how this is good for competitive pinball.
I can do the simple math that we run ~48 events this year in Madison with an average attendance of 20 people. That would be a 960 fee required from the player base this year in order to have these events sponsored? Where is that money going exactly?
720 to the WI SCS champ? Screw that. I m not paying in $50 prize pool for playing each year just so 4 possible winners can get a $720 pay check.
25% then to nationals pool.
Curious, how much money would this have netted you and Zach from this year if is was in place?

It's only a buck per player. Most of them are buying multiple $5-8 beers during the tournaments anyway. It will help make the SCS more interesting, and make nationals a bigger event. I'm in favor of it, though I agree that April 1 was very poor timing for the announcement. imho, Josh and Zach are beyond reproach. They spend a lot of volunteer time supporting our hobby.

#13 1 year ago

Who is gonna pony up the $1 per player fee for ghost players at modern?!

-8
#14 1 year ago
Quoted from ifpapinball:

We don't look at it as encouraging/discouraging. If our 3500 events per year changes to 2000 non-endorsed events and 1500 endorsed events, the same amount of competitive pinball is being played. We're basically separately out a group of those events that wish to be endorsed and award WPPRs.

BS. You are pulling a greed move after a hadnful of dedicated people have worked hard to HELP you build the sport. You have done so without any contact to many of your most prominent TDs and supporters in the past years. This change is an obvious and direct ploy to help add to you and your brothers wallet.

Make a player or a location pay for IFPA sanctioning, LOL. the logistics of this are not even close to thought out.

You want TDs to collect $1 from each person playing in an event but still work to build the sport and bring in new people?
or you expect the location to pay for the fee?? again WTF?

I can give the example that a typical tournament brings a location $3-5 in play per person. take off taxes, split, game maintenance, insurance, and you are looking at a typical tournament making an operator $1-2 per player. now you want 50% of that and for what work exactly?

You maintain a website and run the nationals event at a crap location with poorly setup games and all based on your travel schedule, lol.

Good luck with this lead ballon.

Looks like it is time for the core group of state TDs in WI to talk about a new system to track players for free. I can damn well say if I am paying in any sort of participation fee, I am going to make sure it stays in state rather than funneling out to you and your national buddies.

#15 1 year ago
Quoted from CrazyLevi:

Who is gonna pony up the $1 per player fee for ghost players at modern?!

This is actually a really good question. Does this kill Superleagues?

#16 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

Where is that money going exactly?

Read the link. 100% to the winners of the SCS and nationals.

Serious question:
Do top players care about the prize money? Clearly no one minds winning money but is the prize pool really the motivating factor for participation?

The $1 fee seems reasonable but the logistics of collecting it are going to be a PITA. Around here most tournaments are free, in private homes, and many people like myself don't carry much if any cash.

#17 1 year ago
Quoted from Russell:

It's only a buck per player. Most of them are buying multiple $5-8 beers during the tournaments anyway. It will help make the SCS more interesting, and make nationals a bigger event. I'm in favor of it, though I agree that April 1 was very poor timing for the announcement. imho, Josh and Zach are beyond reproach. They spend a lot of volunteer time supporting our hobby.

so how many event have you run and what effort have you vested in helping build the sport the past years? Just curious as to where to couch this opinion?

As one of the most prolific TDs in the past 5 years in the entire midwest, I can tell you that you dont understand the dynamics of operating or running events.
If you think an operator can go to a bar owner and say "hey man, I am going to need $20 in order to run a tournament here you need to pay for it since you make so much off the beer" you are not experienced in this world.

#18 1 year ago
Quoted from oohlou:

Serious question:
Do top players care about the prize money? Clearly no one minds winning money but is the prize pool really the motivating factor for participation?

more important quesiton:
Will casual players pay an extra $1 to play in a tournament just to fund the prize pool for a handful of people that are the best in the state and fund an even larger prize pool for the best in the nation?

#19 1 year ago

I've never run an event. Obviously, that doesn't mean I can't voice a valid opinion. I have attended my fair share of tournaments. I appreciate all the hard work the TDs do. You all deserve lots of credit. $1 is a minimal fee. Just take it from the prize pool if you don't want to ask the venue. Most of our tournaments are $5 entry anyway. Nobody's really showing up because of the prize money. I think the WPPRs are a bigger draw than the prize money, at least for most players.

#20 1 year ago

My thoughts on how to circumvent this, is that the main state players in each state can just organize together and decide they wont be paying in any fees for any events.

A few of us can work together to build our own state rankings and then if players want to determine whom goes to nationals, we run 1 end of year event where we pay in $16 to IFPA and the winner goes to nationals.

30
#21 1 year ago

Growing up, my grandpa told me that the quickest way to ruin a good thing is to get money involved.

#22 1 year ago
Quoted from Russell:

I've never run an event. Obviously, that doesn't mean I can't voice a valid opinion. I have attended my fair share of tournaments. I appreciate all the hard work the TDs do. You all deserve lots of credit. $1 is a minimal fee. Just take it from the prize pool if you don't want to ask the venue. Most of our tournaments are $5 entry anyway. Nobody's really showing up because of the prize money. I think the WPPRs are a bigger draw than the prize money, at least for most players.

In WI, there are 4 events each year that have an entry fee and pay out prizes.

Over 90% are free to play besides coin drop. Prize pools are not what people play for and what has built the sport up to be such a fun thing is the LACK of cash involved.

#23 1 year ago
Quoted from Eric_S:

Growing up, my grandpa told me that the quickest way to ruin a good thing is to get money involved.

Good thing pinball was always a sleazy money grab from the beginning

#24 1 year ago
Quoted from Eric_S:

Growing up, my grandpa told me that the quickest way to ruin a good thing is to get money involved.

Dont worry Eric.

You, Tom, Tully, Paul, DD, etc need to all get together at MGC next weekend and discuss a plan forward. I think we can come to a consensus on our path forward for WI competitive pinball and still keep things plenty of fun and growing on our own level.

We have 7 months to reverse engineer the algorithm. If things work out well then maybe we can help a few other states and show them what we have.

#25 1 year ago

Keep in mind that this also puts a bias against states that run more events with more players.

the more prolific competitive states are by default paying more to play and send a player to Nationals, than a state with only 1 event.

#26 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

In WI, there are 4 events each year that have an entry fee and pay out prizes.
Over 90% are free to play besides coin drop. Prize pools are not what people play for and what has built the sport up to be such a fun thing is the LACK of cash involved.

This is a good point. I did not realize there were so many "free" WPPR eligible tournaments in WI. I've never seen one in CO. We always have a $5 entry fee for the monthly tournaments. I guess it's not a big deal if everyone is already used to paying to play. I can see your point on this. Could be tough to ask people to pay if they're used to playing for free.

#27 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

take off taxes,

That's a good one.

Quoted from Whysnow:

based on your travel schedule

Someone has to pay for those flights, Hotels, meals, incidentals/accutrements etc.

#28 1 year ago
Quoted from ifpapinball:

If the location sponsors the endorsement fee, there's no expense to the players.

not going to happen, but since you dont own games in public, dont operate, and actually dont even run many public events... I would not expect you to know that. Shame that you did not reach out to talk with some poepl with more experience in this arena..

Quoted from ifpapinball:

If the 'winners' of the event fund the endorsement fee out of the pot, then it's the top players that end up deferring some of their winnings for a chance to win it later on. Again, casual players see no impact.

20 average players per event in WI and no prize pool for 95% of them. Again not gonna happen. "Hey buddy congrats. you just won the event, but if you want this to get IFPA sanctioning then you have to pay them $20" Another lead ballon there Josh.

Quoted from ifpapinball:

If the TD charges an EXTRA $1 per participant for the event, then yes it becomes the masses funding the top players.

Again, not going to happen. Aside from being a real slap in the face to all the new comers we have tried to welcome in, this is a logistical nightmare. TDs expected to collect an extra buck form each player and then send it to you to collect interest and furthe pad your bank account for the year? Nope. What happens when someone decides not to pay? Winner have to cover it? Location? TD?
I am beginning to see you really did not think this out very well.

Quoted from ifpapinball:

If a TD allows players to opt out that aren't interested then that player won't be impacted.

so if everyone opts out, whom pays for the event to be sanctioned? If only the winner pays $1 does that mean they get .5 points for winning and all good?

27
#29 1 year ago

Step 1 - try and see what happens

Step 2 - we see if Hilton is right or wrong

Step 3 - repeal/replace WPPRcare the following year back to the old way

I earned nothing from Nationals in 4 years because I've never made it. We plan on paying out all 16 star finalists (not just the top 3) under this program.

The one thing I know about this program ... it won't be padding my pockets in any way.

#30 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

so if everyone opts out, whom pays for the event to be sanctioned? If only the winner pays $1 does that mean they get .5 points for winning and all good?

Correct. The TD would submit the results into us a 1 player tournament, owe the IFPA $1.

That one player would be crowned the WI SCS champ, win $.75 and get to attend nationals to compete for more prize money.

#exploited

(Actually you need at least two events to qualify for SCS, so that would be $2, but you're on the right path. We then only have two results that need reviewing and approval on our side. WIN-WIN!)

#31 1 year ago
Quoted from ifpapinball:

Correct. The TD would submit the results into us a 1 player tournament, owe the IFPA $1.
That one player would be crowned the WI SCS champ, win $.75 and get to attend nationals to compete for more prize money.
#exploited
(Actually you need at least two events to qualify for SCS, so that would be $2, but you're on the right path. We then only have two results that need reviewing and approval on our side. WIN-WIN!)

I need to talk with a few other WI based TDs, but sounds like if you move forward as currently written, WI is off the map for 2018 events.
I am sure you may get a few TDs that opt to pay to play with your new game, but the majority wont.

I have gotten messages from the 3 most prolific already this morning and sounds like they all want to go a new direction. This is not just "see if Hilton was right" I am just the vocal prick that has not troubles calling this as what it is, a money grab.

If you want to help convince us other wise, please share some data:

1. In 2016, what would have been the total amount paid in to IFPA fro WI based events if you assume ALL events paid to play?
2. What does that make the SCS prize pool? What does that make the amount funneled to Nationals for your brother to win (or in this case 2nd place; yes we already established you are not good enough to beat him)
3. What is the amount that would have been paid in by the top 10 players in WI in 2016?
4. What is the run down of total amount provided to nationals from each state in 2016 if this had been in effect and 100% participation?
5. What happens to all the interest from this IFPA account that would be quite large and growing throughout the year?
6. Any amount used for administrative costs?
7. Will states now get representation in IFPA decisions since there is taxation?

13
#32 1 year ago

I understand why the fee is being instituted. As cool as nationals were; lots of players didn't show up for financial or other reasons. A bigger prize pool is one way to increase the incentive of the state winners to attend. The Sharpes are not getting rich off pinball. The WPPR system and IFPA are a huge asset to pinball. Whenever someone new shows up to our pinball league or a tournament and they learn they will be internationally ranked their eyes light up.

#33 1 year ago

I'm not a competitive pinball guy. But I do open my home for a travelling charity pinball tournament once or twice a year--100% of the proceeds are donated to the charity. No payouts at the end of the night. It seems that the promise of IFPA points paired with a good selection of games is a good enough draw to get people to play without a prize pool. Maybe it is more of a PITA to collect an extra buck from people who walk through the door...because it wouldn't be fair to dig the dollar out of the entrance fee, thus taking money out of the charity's hands.

Thank god this isn't my problem...the tournament organizer has to deal with all the gripes and groans and headaches of this new fee.

#34 1 year ago

As I read the information, this is my understanding.
If you have an event with 100 people.
$100 goes to IFPA which sends $75 dollars to SCS for the state and $25 goes to Nationals.

Will there still be a fee for SCS State Championship also?

14
#35 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

I need to talk with a few other WI based TDs, but sounds like if you move forward as currently written, WI is off the map for 2018 events.
I am sure you may get a few TDs that opt to pay to play with your new game, but the majority wont.
I have gotten messages from the 3 most prolific already this morning and sounds like they all want to go a new direction. This is not just "see if Hilton was right" I am just the vocal prick that has not troubles calling this as what it is, a money grab.
If you want to help convince us other wise, please share some data:
1. In 2016, what would have been the total amount paid in to IFPA fro WI based events if you assume ALL events paid to play?
2. What does that make the SCS prize pool? What does that make the amount funneled to Nationals for your brother to win (or in this case 2nd place; yes we already established you are not good enough to beat him)
3. What is the amount that would have been paid in by the top 10 players in WI in 2016?
4. What is the run down of total amount provided to nationals from each state in 2016 if this had been in effect and 100% participation?
5. What happens to all the interest from this IFPA account that would be quite large and growing throughout the year?
6. Any amount used for administrative costs?
7. Will states now get representation in IFPA decisions since there is taxation?

So are you like...mayor of Wisconsin or something?

#36 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

so how many event have you run and what effort have you vested in helping build the sport the past years? Just curious as to where to couch this opinion?
As one of the most prolific TDs in the past 5 years in the entire midwest, I can tell you that you dont understand the dynamics of operating or running events.
If you think an operator can go to a bar owner and say "hey man, I am going to need $20 in order to run a tournament here you need to pay for it since you make so much off the beer" you are not experienced in this world.

I have run PLENTY of tournaments in CO, and operated games over 10 years, and am pretty much vested in the sport. (so I guess my opinion can count, and you won't try to diss me like you did Russell)
I also played in Nationals and won CO state this year, so you can try to tear down my opinion on that.
Nearly every bar that is played at in Colorado adds $50 to the prize pool, and the bar owners have never complained.
Perhaps if you had a reasonable conversation with one, you would have better luck.
The cash prizes at State have been crap, I look forward to seeing that increase and add to the prestige of the event.
Also, this will weed out the bullshit buddy tourneys that are "just for fun", and I think that's a good thing.
Play for some cash, make it interesting, and encourage actual location play. Not an insider boys club in Bob's garage.
Keep your WI tourneys all to yourself, have them non-sanctioned, they should be anyway.
Someone will prolly put one on and collect that $1 , and people will play and pay, and be ranked.
Plus side! Now you might not have other states playing in your SCS and winning it.

29
#37 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

... the amount funneled to Nationals for your brother to win (or in this case 2nd place; yes we already established you are not good enough to beat him)

To be fair, that's a bit douchetastic.

If you take 5 seconds, take a deep breath, maybe do it again ... read what the guy said. 75% of the money goes back to Winsconsin to the state champs.

Over to Wisconsin to decide how they want to distribute it. If you want to give some to all 16 qualifying players, go for it. If you want to give most of it to the winner to help with expenses of travelling to represent you, go for it.

I can only imagine what you'd say if Josh did what I told him to do two years ago ... levy every event $5 and quit his day job and run IFPA full time. It's a full time job, in every sense of the word.

rd

#38 1 year ago
Quoted from Whysnow:

7. Will states now get representation in IFPA decisions since there is taxation?

This is not taxation. Taxation is a government term. This is a fee. Bowling leagues and others remit portions to similar governing bodies. Take a deep breath.

28
#39 1 year ago

Suggesting that Zach and Josh are going to line their pockets with this money is ridiculous.

#40 1 year ago
Quoted from CrazyLevi:

So are you like...mayor of Wisconsin or something?

For a state I think you mean Governor of Wisconsin. Mayor would be for the town or city of Madison WI.

#41 1 year ago
Quoted from Taxman:

For a state I think you mean Governor of Wisconsin. Mayor would be for the town or city of Madison WI.

Thanks for the civics lesson but I'm sticking with mayor.

I can picture him with a sash. And the populist message seems more becoming of a mayor than a governor.

All this douchiness over a buck. I think he should accept the suggestion made previously and just dispense with the ifpa sanctioning for the bullshit tournaments nobody cares about anyway. Isn't that part of the point?

#42 1 year ago
Quoted from DNO:

I have run PLENTY of tournaments in CO, and operated games over 10 years, and am pretty much vested in the sport. (so I guess my opinion can count, and you won't try to diss me like you did Russell)
I also played in Nationals and won CO state this year, so you can try to tear down my opinion on that.
Nearly every bar that is played at in Colorado adds $50 to the prize pool, and the bar owners have never complained.
Perhaps if you had a reasonable conversation with one, you would have better luck.
The cash prizes at State have been crap, I look forward to seeing that increase and add to the prestige of the event.
Also, this will weed out the bullshit buddy tourneys that are "just for fun", and I think that's a good thing.
Play for some cash, make it interesting, and encourage actual location play. Not an insider boys club in Bob's garage.
Keep your WI tourneys all to yourself, have them non-sanctioned, they should be anyway.
Someone will prolly put one on and collect that $1 , and people will play and pay, and be ranked.
Plus side! Now you might not have other states playing in your SCS and winning it.

Wow. Even Josh runs tournaments out of his basement.

I agree with one thing you said. The SCS does deserve a bigger prize pool.

#43 1 year ago

Well, there goes the entire upstate NY community...

I'm sure all the casual players who drop by a bar once a week for some pinball fun will love sending a dollar to NYC.

Not that I hate the idea, but you need some sort of limit on small tournaments. Say, under 25 people or under a certain total point value.
Or, even better, only charge the fee if the entry fee to the tournament is >$10. Maybe even switch it to be 10% of the entry fee, with a $1 minimum.

Unless your goal is just to filter out all the 'non serious' tournaments, in which case this'll work great for 75% of them. Good riddance in that case, as the restrictive ifpa concept of what a tournament should be is really killing a lot of creativity

#44 1 year ago

I'm not sure I get the over reaction. The money goes to the winners in the state and nationals. So play more, get better and go after the cash. That's kind of the point isn't it? To make the whole thing more desirable to actually want to chase?

If you're more casual and don't expect you'd do well at a state/national level just carry on with free events and it won't be ranked on the imaginary scale - whoopie.

#45 1 year ago

I dont think a $1 per player is unreasonable for those that take the game and its rankings seriously. At the end of the year it would be a good thing. Hopefully it can help them find a venue for nationals that has more than 6 chairs for the 60+ people in attendance, has more than a single bathroom that has been cleaned in the past decade for those 60 people and just maybe have games that have actually been properly maintained and play halfway decent during the tourney.

#46 1 year ago
Quoted from Eric_S:

How does this fee encourage more competitive pinball?

It's my opinion that if you award money to every person who qualifies for state, that will create a reason to play more events. In my state, there are likely 6 guys who will be in no matter what, and that creates 10 spots up for grabs. This year has already seen an increase in participation overall here locally, and given that there are multiple ways to fund this, I don't have a problem with it.

For example, we just had a series of Wednesday night tournaments (giving way for at least the next 10 weeks to league) and the buy in was $5. Honestly I wouldn't care if it went to $6 or if the dollar was taken out of the $5. It is, after all, a *dollar*.

#47 1 year ago

I am waiting to hear the actual numbers from Josh.

Let's use 2016 and assume 100% participation form all events.

How much money would WI have brought in and then donates to WI SCS and Nationals?
Heck, give us the run down of money that would have been donated by every state to Nationals.

Right now, my biggest issue is that this is a logistical nightmare and also goes against the building of the community around competitive pinball. Second issue is that a state with 1 event still gets to send 1 player to nationals that could win the whole pot which is funded largely by other states that run hundreds of events. Makes more sense to set a set fee to participate in nationals. If a state sends a player, they pay the set fee rather than a percentage of total money brought in. This current manner incentivizes TDs to run fewer sanctioned events, not more.

Seems like a much easier and fair way is to charge each player an annual IFPA membership fee. $5 tracks your rankings for the year and your rankings only count after you have paid the fee; due on Jan 1st (or within 10 days of your first tournament being played).

Hell, if you are smart you will provide added features for profiles for more funds.

I totally get the desire to make more money for the elite that win these events, but this is the wrong way to do it.

Do it right and you can even get enough funds to invest and grow a steady bolus to start off each year.

#48 1 year ago

There was no resistance at all when I discussed this $1/player fee with my location owner. He is fine with it. As the operator, I told him that he and I could trade off and pay every other tournament/league so my players won't even see this fee. The games I have on location can certainly absorb the $1 fee per player per tournament/league.

Different areas have different challenges, but I must admit that I am surprised that for some such a small nominal fee is a seemingly insurmountable thing to overcome.

15
#49 1 year ago

Thanks to those that run the IFPA for free. If you need to charge $1 for cost or administration fees im ok that. To collect money to give to the elite players in each state or national event I'm against that. Each year its the same 10 people dominating most events with a no name player sneaking in from time to time. I have invested a half million dollars in my facility and i can tell you i do it for the hobby and i run tournaments and leagues for the sport. Any TAX charged per event is like paying professionals more money to show up for something they were already coming to.anyhow

#50 1 year ago

I've solved it !

Get the Pinball Pussies (and their undeserved income) to sponsor it!

They have more mods than any pinball machine i've ever seen.

Promoted items from the Pinside Marketplace
From: $ 40.00
Cabinet - Other
Rock Custom Pinball
2,400 (Firm)
Machine - For Sale
Battle Creek, MI
From: $ 13.00
Electronics
Third Coast Pinball
12,000 (Firm)
Machine - For Sale
Traverse City, MI
From: $ 20.00
Cabinet - Other
Rock Custom Pinball
$ 32.00
Electronics
Yorktown Parts and Equip
From: $ 149.95
$ 149.00
From: $ 45.00
Displays
PinballSolutions.eu
From: $ 16.95
€ 3.95
Flipper Parts
Multigame
$ 269.00
2,950
Machine - For Sale
Lisle, IL
From: $ 369.95
Boards
PinSound
3,200 (OBO)
Machine - For Sale
Luling, LA
From: $ 155.00
$ 50.00
From: $ 40.00
Cabinet - Other
Rock Custom Pinball
€ 15.00
Boards
FLIPPROJETS
€ 8.40
From: $ 10.00
Electronics
Third Coast Pinball
$ 10.00
Electronics
Third Coast Pinball
$ 7.65
Cabinet Parts
Third Coast Pinball
Great pinball charity
Pinball Edu
There are 1606 posts in this topic. You are on page 1 of 33.

Hey there! Got a moment?

Great to see you're enjoying Pinside! Did you know Pinside is able to run thanks to donations from our visitors? Please donate to Pinside, support the site and get anext to your username to show for it! Donate to Pinside