In reading thru the 168.3 opne avg 10 page post and several others where dues and money discussing about USBC have occurred, there are several views posted.

Here's the problem USBC faces:

Members might be willing to increase dues if you tell them where the money will go.

Here's the problem:  Bowlers are selfish.  They (not 100%) have a what about me mentality.  If they do not approve of what USBC will use the money for, then they do not approve the dues increase.

The average common USBC member is a mixed league under 185 average bowler.

They don't care one bit about the following:  (with rare exception)
     1) Sport bowling
     2) Support the PBA
     3) The Sport of Bowling
     4) The Open Championships
     5) The Women's pro bowling tour
     6) Youth bowling


They care about:
     1) what do I get for my $5 + the increase you are asking for?
     2) Why are you taking away MY awards
   
Most of the time when I read about what USBC plans to do with any extra money they may have, it involves some aspect of the 6 items on the list that the "AVERAGE" member doesn't care about. 

Therefore, dues increases never pass.

If you ever want the average USBC member to pass a due increase, USBC has entice the member with something that benefits the "AVERAGE LEAGUE BOWLER"

Quote from: mainzer on March 23, 2014, 05:36:01 PM

I am ok with the dues being increased. 5$ once a year shouldn't be that big of a deal guys anything to keep the BPAA from running bowling

Dear mainzer:

What makes you think that BPAA isn't already running bowling?

I know the BPAA has a fair amount of control already imo not as much as the USBC does the.

If the BPAA has their way their will be no challenge left in the sport at all...

Dear mainzer:

A likely BPAA "takeover" will be as easy (and substantially unchallenged) as Putin's "takeover" of Crimea. A few may object to it, but nothing will (or can) be done to prevent such a happenstance.

Maybe this is why i don't mind paying more. Better the devil i know

So all these non sanctioned leagues have long enough league meetings to address all the rules they need?

If you have to justify getting $20 worth of value to be sanctioned by the governing body of your activity to the participants you will never convince them it is worth it.   

I have been a delegate many times and have seen a lot of proposals for dues increase. It has always been tough to get them to pass. Have only been to one convention in recent years since I resigned from our local association a few years back but the one I attended as an athlete, well not much had changed. They spend more time arguing about dues than any other subject. A lot as Txbowler eluded was where is the money going, what is in it for the average bowler, how are we going to explain this when they don't want to pay the $XXX they pay now. I was there when the $20 was approved and it was a rough vote from what I recall.

I think a lot of the blame in regards to sanctioned vs. non-sanctioned leagues falls back on the center. They can say, all league in my business will be sanctioned. The bonding alone can be worth making that statement. To my knowledge all leagues in my center are sanctioned, only exception would be a 9-pin no tap that is a morning league. It is just part of our deal. I personally would not bowl any league that isn't sanctioned. I don't really like tournaments that are not either. That opinion is from being a long time league secretary and seeing leagues in our area have money ripped off by bad secretaries or presidents, if not for USBC and bonding the bowlers would have lost everything and this was a money league.

I don't like the award changes, but if they would provide finances for local associations to purchase these awards then it might be an improvement. Will be interesting as to how we put these awards in the different software packages, but I am sure it won't be that big a deal. Those awards however was one of the only things I used to point to for the average bowler on where their money went. Averages in the book, awards and the bonding, that was about all I could show them.  In our case, the only real change will be the honor score change for this year, but not sure about 2015-2016 when they run out of stock from the current list of awards.

Side note on the comment about the Taj-Mahal in Texas. Txbowler and I frequent the ITRC each spring multiple times. The training and research center is nice, but its not any nicer than a lot of bowling centers. It provides a great service both for research, coaching and for those of us lucky enough to live in DFW or willing to go there a great place to practice on conditions you can't get in bowling centers. The Hall of Fame, is small and very interesting but its not huge or anything compared to what other sports spend for this type of facility, and is just part of the ground floor of the USBC / BPAA office building.  The office building is a square glass box, that sits just behind 6 Flags over Texas and is an older office building and nothing fancy for sure. I design the products used on office buildings and this is just off the shelf standard stuff from back 20 years ago if I guessed. My guess is that other than the training center, probably no big improvement over what they had. Just a better location for travel and can share expenses with the other organization. Arlington where it is located really goes out of their way to get sport business to locate there..Cowboys Stadium, Texas Rangers...they love sports venues.

Personal opinion on the dues. I wouldn't have an issue with another $5 per year. I would welcome tiered memberships (pushed for them the first time they tried). I like the idea of recreational, mid-level of some sort and sport memberships. Just wish my center could do sport, but if you can't afford a $50,000 lane machine you can't do sport or PBA. The key for the increase to me is still where will the money go, if you aren't going to do awards and locals are, then I think the extra $5 should all go to the local or at least $3 of the $5.

What has caused a decline in ABC/USBC memberships? I started bowling in the 60's and started working in the bowling business in 1978. The sponsors that the PBA had back 50 years ago was amazing compared to today. How much of a decline did they see after ABC became USBC? Not all members care about tournament bowling and I think as the bowling population gets older they just do it more for recreation and a form of exercise. Some tournaments that I bowl in aren't USBC sanctioned because of the calcutta they have and USBC is against even though they have brackets at Nationals! They want the locals to change handicap percentages to make it fair for all the bowlers, but they create another problem. They want handicap, but their National tournament is scratch, only they have two divisions to separate the higher average from the lower. Bowling membership has been on a decline for years and think more leagues with opt for the non-sanction type in the future. A lot of youth bowlers are in the sport because their parents make them bowl for the little bit of scholarship money they can get. We can have a debate on the fees for USBC membership till the end of time and we still won't have a solution that will make everybody happy. Maybe they could have sanctioned tournaments have a fee they send to USBC instead of making every member pay more? I don't know what the answer is or should be, but I heard our local bowlers complain about increases, but they don't bowl anywhere but our leagues!