My thoughts on this ...
1) I'll start with the easiest topic: Olympics. I became an ABC league member in 1990 and Olympic bowling was being talked about then. It's now 2022. While pursuing Olympic status is admirable, the USBC's first responsibility is to take care of its donor members. That's what we all are; the USBC is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit and we are donors. We've been strung along by the IOC for at least the 32 years I've held a card, so I want the USBC to take care of more immediate concerns. Yes, Bowlero getting involved here complicates this greatly, especially if/when the USBC folds. But the Olympics are not in my personal top 10 concerns for bowling at the moment.
2) I've talked with a couple of people today directly, one of which is mentioned in one of the many articles/blog posts/videos. The USBC has about 800,000 members now, if that. In 2006, the number was more than 2 million. If you push that curve out, we're within 10 years maximum of seeing sanctioning dip below the 500k mark. From the people in the industry I've talked to, that's about the number where Bowlero and other recreation-first centers just quit listening to league bowlers, because we won't represent enough of the business anymore. Hence why I've been banging the drum for years that the USBC needed to have a growth strategy in adult leagues, and it really doesn't. It sees itself as an advocate for current card-carriers, not as a way to attract new bowlers. It has historically expected the BPAA to do that but they're both under the same roof now -- and Bowlero isn't a BPAA member anymore. I don't have to say "do the math" but I will anyway.
3) Bowlero is a publicly traded company, meaning its directors have a fiduciary, legal duty to act in the best interest of its investors. This is the point that makes me the most optimistic. Today's announcement obviously didn't just get thrown together over a weekend at the local lake. Someone at Bowlero has made the call that investing in league bowling is going to be a priority. And if they're going to go that route, they can't half-a** it and be in compliance with shareholder regs. This announcement is the gauntlet being thrown down at USBC's feet. So let's take a look at that ...
4) The current USBC leadership is ill-equipped for this kind of fight. It's just not that savvy at the very top. There is reason to think that if the Storm fiasco doesn't happen at the Masters, we're not even talking about this today. Essentially, for-profit companies have been regulated by a non-profit players' "union" for decades and meddling in the Motiv Jackal Carnage deal, certainly the Storm deal and maybe even the Purple Hammer thing, without clarity or openness, probably had a lot to do with the for-profit groups finally saying "no more." Someone has already noted that Bowlero is going to be getting into the ball certification process -- they hired a really talented guy (and former USBC tech guy at that) to oversee that and paid him to jump from a job he just took earlier this year. I think that speaks clearly to what's up here.
5) Jeff Richgels has an article on 11thFrame right now quoting Tom Clark, and openness and clarity comes up multiple times. Clark never comes right out and says "we're coming for you, USBC" but he quotes several specific issues that have been raised with the Open Championships format. Again, the gauntlet is down.
6) USBC can't keep up with Bowlero if this gets to be a money fight. And we don't yet know which side Storm, B7, Motiv, etc., to say nothing of lane bed manufacturers and the like, are going to support -- but I know which one I'd bet the money on. If Bowlero breaks off a third to half of the Open Championships player base, and about the same percentage of weekly league bowlers, all Bowlero has to do then is wait until the USBC pulls back. The primary goal of any nonprofit is self-survival in a period of changing mission. But if Bowlero plays its cards right, it will box the USBC in. The USBC is not the most cash-fluid entity in the world as is and has debts in Arlington.
7) Finally, I liken this whole thing to the CART-IRL split in open-wheel racing in the mid-90s. It took about a decade for it all to sort out, but it finally got there. The sport probably isn't big enough for both entities to survive. To answer the question of revenue from league bowler support services (pro shops, etc.) and youth bowling is that today's announcement reads like a sea change inside the Bowlero company. The USBC was never going to survive long-term on its current course; the only question was how long was it going to take to completely lose the limited relevance it has left. I choose to be optimistic that Bowlero -- at least at this point -- seems to have developed a coherent business plan to move heavy into the league business. The USBC will either have to step up its game significantly, or it will perish. I'd like to think league bowlers have a brighter future as the result of this competition for our dollars and time.
Jess