In August our league is most likely going to vote to dump the USBC. The USBC has done nothing for us. Our secretary has put in for some awards and we never get them. We have called the local chapter and still no resolutions. The secretary and other officers are on board with leaving the USBC and we'll still get our awards, even if you already have a rings.

 The league would act on it's own. The money that we would pay to the USBC will be placed in an awards fund and anyone that shoots an honor score will get a ring. We have about 100 bowlers so at $20 a head, we will have around 2 G's for awards. We can buy a lot of rings for 2 G's. Whatever monies that don't get used will be placed back into the general prize fund. It a win, win for our league.

 Leagues used to sanction in order to get awards. Basically now there are no more awards so why keep the USBC. It's time to dump the USBC. I hope more leagues start thinking about leaving them too. Hit 'em where it hurts. Their wallets. Maybe they will get the hint.

We pay $1260 a year to bowl in each league. 36 weeks at $35 a week. Bowling is not a cheap sport.

 Dang dude, what kind of league costs $35 a week?

Its a bit misleading to include the prize fund portion of your league fees in the cost of bowling when pointing out how expensive bowling is.   

Both of my leagues are dumping them next year and the one summer league I'm in is non sanctioned...F the usbc.

my bowling league expenditure is still an order of magnitude higher than my softball expenditure, even after taking into consideration the return from the prize funds.

Extrapolate a 12 week softball league at say $60 for all 12 weeks to keep the math simple and that is still only $180 to get an equivalent # of softball weeks versus the cost of bowling.   Bowling costs me close to 3 times that for my sport league, after accounting for prize fund return.


my local proprietor is building his business and our sport, he isn't waiting for USBC or anyone else to do it for him.  if we want to build bowling back, we have to do it our selves.  it isn't USBC's job to recruit bowlers, just give us the structure to bowl in level and fair playing field.

I don't necessarily feel comparing softball to bowling is completely fair.  Operating a bowling center is significantly more expensive than softball fields.

But I do agree with the length of league preventing some new bowlers from joining a league.  36 weeks is a very long time.

Bowling will have to change some to meet the demands of the newer crop of bowlers.  You can't use the league model from the 70s today and expect the same success.

And at the same time, it isn't USBC's responsibility to get new bowlers joining leagues.  USBC will try to provide exposure for bowling.  But the proprietors should be approaching open play bowlers to see what it takes to get them in to bowl more often.  Hopefully it turns into league participation.

Whether you agree with the original poster or not, this is business 101. If customers (bowlers) do not see value in the services provided by the business (USBC), then they vote with their wallet and find other alternatives (unsanctioned leagues). The USBC's business model very closely resembles franchising in which the franchisor (USBC) doesn't directly sell the product to consumers but makes money from each sale. I think the argument that the USBC has no responsibility here is wrong because they have a vested interest in membership revenue and should be in the business of making our local associations better at promoting the game at the local level. The USBC can't have it both ways taking credit for improving youth, high school, and college bowling but taking no responsibility for overall membership. The board of directors and USBC leadership are completely out of touch with membership and are giving us what they think we need instead of listening to their customers. I mean thanks for bringing back the PWBA but don't we have more urgent needs than creating a 14 week tour that benefits and extremely low percentage of membership?

So morpheus, does the PWBA bring attention to women's bowling?  Does it show a competitive avenue for women bowlers that didn't exist?  And doesn't the success of high school and college bowling show the youth a competitive sport that doesn't rely on genetics to be successful in? 

How can you say on one hand USBC cannot get praise for those things simply because middle aged bowlers don't get awards or whatever the current reason for failure is? 

USBC has limited funds.  Everyone has to agree with that.  With these limited funds, they have decided to promote the youth and the women's side of the game.  Whether or not this will be the most successful use of funds is to be seen.  But promoting the game is intended to increase participation and interest.

And again, each center/association will have differing levels of success with a particular program intended to increase membership.  I personally feel proprietors are needed to increase the league participation at the local level.  You don't.  That is fine, but I have personally seen the difference between several centers, some with active participation in league development and some with none so my views are based on that.

Quote from: morpheus on May 23, 2016, 09:11:22 AM

Whether you agree with the original poster or not, this is business 101. If customers (bowlers) do not see value in the services provided by the business (USBC), then they vote with their wallet and find other alternatives (unsanctioned leagues). The USBC's business model very closely resembles franchising in which the franchisor (USBC) doesn't directly sell the product to consumers but makes money from each sale. I think the argument that the USBC has no responsibility here is wrong because they have a vested interest in membership revenue and should be in the business of making our local associations better at promoting the game at the local level. The USBC can't have it both ways taking credit for improving youth, high school, and college bowling but taking no responsibility for overall membership. The board of directors and USBC leadership are completely out of touch with membership and are giving us what they think we need instead of listening to their customers. I mean thanks for bringing back the PWBA but don't we have more urgent needs than creating a 14 week tour that benefits and extremely low percentage of membership?

So morpheus, does the PWBA bring attention to women's bowling?  Does it show a competitive avenue for women bowlers that didn't exist?  And doesn't the success of high school and college bowling show the youth a competitive sport that doesn't rely on genetics to be successful in? 

How can you say on one hand USBC cannot get praise for those things simply because middle aged bowlers don't get awards or whatever the current reason for failure is? 

USBC has limited funds.  Everyone has to agree with that.  With these limited funds, they have decided to promote the youth and the women's side of the game.  Whether or not this will be the most successful use of funds is to be seen.  But promoting the game is intended to increase participation and interest.

And again, each center/association will have differing levels of success with a particular program intended to increase membership.  I personally feel proprietors are needed to increase the league participation at the local level.  You don't.  That is fine, but I have personally seen the difference between several centers, some with active participation in league development and some with none so my views are based on that.

Sorry in advance for the long reply...

First and foremost, I don't know why you keep coming back to awards, I'm merely saying listen to your customers. You continue to talk around the issue, but do they bear responsibility for membership increase/decline or not but you cannot have it both ways and that has nothing whatsoever to do with awards.

As for the PWBA, I'm sure it does garner some attention, but other than the board of directors and the USBC, I don't think membership was asking for their return. Professional bowling was healthy when membership numbers were healthy, not the other way around so focus on membership growth and professional sports will follow.

As for youth, I'm all for promoting youth programs, but stop telling me how great junior gold is doing with the only reason entries increased was they removed the minimum average requirement and added new divisions. Youth membership is still declining regardless of the propaganda coming out of the USBC.

As for the dysfunctional nature of our governing body, I think bowlers form their opinion about the USBC based on perceived value of their products/services and many are obviously not finding much or they wouldn't be choosing to stay in the game while finding alternatives like unsanctioned leagues.

From a customer acquisition/retention perspective, both are important but given where membership is currently we should be focused on acquisition, specifically previous members and youth who are active (unsanctioned leagues) or have been recently. Think seriously about the marketing strategy of promoting the highest levels of the game when the vast majority of membership does not care about the "sport of bowling". That type of strategy is generally employed when you can charge a premium for you product/service and bowling isn't a luxury brand so you have to appeal to the masses if you want  to get membership growing again. The market is telling us we're doing it wrong and the response from the USBC is just give us more money for the same level of services you currently enjoy.

Finally, proprietors are a key piece to the puzzle, but let's all agree the USBC is run by the BPAA. If they're both in it for a healthy future there are no excuses for a lack of coordinated programs targeted at increasing membership and ultimately league bowlers. When was the last time you saw an employee ask an open play customer if they would like to join a league as they're using a coupon from some marketing campaign?

The amount of youth league members may be down, but the overall tournament participation is definitely up.  Regardless of tournament structure, there are more competitive youth bowlers than 10 years ago.  The growth of high school bowling alone is an indication of this.  I assume USBC is hoping these youth bowlers will want to compete into adulthood.

As for awards, I only bring that up since that is a common thread in a lot of these USBC discussions.  Maybe not from you so I am sorry if it came across like that is what you wanted.  It should be apparent USBC cannot support an awards program anywhere near what it was in the past. 

And on the subject of asking open bowlers to join leagues, it is done.  I have seen it first hand and also did the same when I managed centers.  USBC membership as it is marketed to the beginner bowler cannot compete with what a proprietor can offer a league bowler.  Does this mean all leagues should be non-sanctioned?  I wouldn't say that.  USBC offers tournaments for all levels of ability.  USBC provides a structure for which the game is competed on.  I don't know what type of benefits USBC can offer the new bowler that makes them want to go and join a league.  Many centers offer discounted rates for bowling outside of leagues.  New bowler can get better.  Discounts on in-house food, good for all if your center has decent food.  I just don't know what USBC can offer other than their video library which I despise the fact members have to pay for. 

I understand some don't feel they are getting value for their dollars.  Fine, don't sanction or don't bowl at all then.  Many feel what USBC offers is valuable for the amount of many they get ($10 per member).  I just don't see what USBC can offer that will make those upset feel better.

The story of Blockbuster video rental is fairly well known. The market changed and Blockbuster fundamentally kept providing the same services until it could no longer sustain itself. In the real world, companies that fail to evolve go out of business and are replaced by another business model. My point is that the core strategy being employed by the USBC is flawed and if membership continues to decline, this will become an unsustainable business model. Past performance is a pretty good indicator of future success and since the USBC keeps doing the same things they've always done, I suspect we're in for more of the same.

By the way, keeping an attitude of if you don't find value just don't sanction is not going to have a happy ending because we've seen when that road leads. The correct attitude is to listen to your customer and evolve rather than insist you're right until you have no customers.