BallReviews
General Category => PBA => Topic started by: roaddogg on March 10, 2010, 12:52:56 PM
-
Wouldn''t it be nice if the PBA would lower the fees to register products with them. I think more companies would sign up and that would even out the money brought in. The reason I say that is I would love to see how other companies would do on tour not just Storm or Ebonite. Like Visionary, Lane 1, Elite, Motiv or Lane Master.
Edited on 3/10/2010 9:53 PM
-
I don't understand why any USBC approved bowling ball isn't allowed to be used in PBA competition. I understand the PBA needs money thing, but still, if it's USBC approved equipment then isn't it just right for it to be allowed. Seems like overlap there that doesn't make logical sense in a technical way, just a band aid to the real issue of PBA needing more funding. Not sure the true behind the scenes issues, but to an outsider it just looks weird to say a person can't compete with a ball that is approved by the USBC and doesn't break any rules.
-
money money money, and the PBA doesn't have much so they need to get as much as they can to survive.
-
Maybe PBA should sell the players beer a la USBC.
-
Seems a side effect of the registration fees (especially since they are so high, from what I hear at least), is blocking out newer or smaller ball companies from getting seen and then have more chance of being able to pay high registration fees. They should have some sort of method to allow ball companies in that aren't the huge ones with plenty of money to give the PBA. At least till they are above a certain size/profit making amount. Would seem like otherwise it's a catch 22 situation, where companies aren't able to afford the fee and then aren't able to get publicity or usage on the PBA (AKA TV coverage), aren't able to attract bigger pro PBA bowlers. So right now they are very unlikely to grow to a larger size and ever be able and give the PBA a large registration fee. Would think they are hurting bowling in general and themselves in the long-run instead of helping it, if you look at the deeper effects of locking out newer ball companies and/or smaller ball companies from being involved.
-
Its just that hard fact of business, it is very hard for people to think in terms of the long run. They greedily look at the short run. IE, they raised all sponsor fees and then cut prize funds. I remember when an average tournament winner took home $50K which you could actually live off. Now it is only $25K and they wonder why tournaments aren't flooded with bowlers like in the old days. Seems like the "pinnacle" of our sport is what is hindering and/or slowing its progress...
--------------------
HAMMERDOWN!!!
-
It is all about money and in the PBA there is none. That ship is sinking and sinking fast.
So you can charge a lot and get a little, or charge a little and get a lot. In the end it won't matter because no one is watching. Sad but true.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
-
quote:
money money money, and the PBA doesn't have much so they need to get as much as they can to survive.
But by lowering the rates they will have more companies able to play and probably make just as much or more..
The added money they get from small companies would certainly compensate for the lost revenue of the bigger companies fees being lowered. Everyone wins!!
Beans
--------------------
www.beansproshop.com
--------------------
Thomas "Beans" Biniek Jr.
PBA Member and Pro Shop Owner/Operator
Check out current eBay auctions at:
http://cgi6.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewSellersOtherItems&userid=bowling_with_leah Official Pro Shop of "ALL" F.O.S. Members!!!
-
quote:
I don't understand why any USBC approved bowling ball isn't allowed to be used in PBA competition.
Because the PBA is supposed to be a marketing platform - they are trying to get money out of everything. I just have the feeling that things got a bit out of focus, because this platform's attractiveness is waning. IMHO, many smaller companies righteously do not spend the money, because their benefit is marginal. I'd also like to see more/different brands, but the marketing system is leading itself ad absurdum these days, making watchingt the "show" less and less attractive - at least from my personal point of view.
--------------------
DizzyFugu - Reporting from Germany
Confused by bowling? Check out BR.com's vault of wisdom: the unofficial FAQ section (http://"http://www.ballreviews.com/Forum/Replies.asp?TopicID=74110&ForumID=16&CategoryID=5")
-
I think some of the ball companies are also to blame for this.
With the new rules they have set-up, the Pros can throw any ball from the same "family" of companies. Such as Wes Malott can throw Storm Invasion all through the week, Pete Weber can through a Rouge Cell, Tommy Jones can throw a Teack 715A, etc. But when they get to the show, they have to throw the main company that sponsors them. So Wes throws RotoGrip, Pete throws Storm, Tommy throws Ebonite, etc. So why would a Visionairy or Lane#1 spend the money when people might only throw their equipment on TV, and might struggle doing so after not having bowled with it all week. Or another way to look at it, a staffer on Visionairy can only throw a handful of balls during the week, while Tommy Jones can throw a ball from 4 different companies catalogs (Ebonite, Hammer, Track, Columbia). How hard will it be for the single company bowler to compete when others have that much to choose from? Again not worth the price of admission. Even if you did lower the costs a little, it doesn't help overcome this obstacle.
--------------------
Jorge300
-
I don't think it would hurt the bowler or the single/smaller company. Just because some allow their staffers to use a family of products doesn't give them a huge advantage.
Most companies have a great line up of products and most bowlers are good enough they will be able to score and do just fine with whatever is available. It is in no way cost effective to spend that kind of money on something that is watched by so few.
If I were a company I would put that money into other outlets to get my product into the hands of more people in the actual bowling alleys. Your money is probably better spent running commercials during the PBA telecast then trying to get it on tour. As an example, how often do you see Track being used on tv?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
-
quote:
I don''t think it would hurt the bowler or the single/smaller company. Just because some allow their staffers to use a family of products doesn''t give them a huge advantage.
Most companies have a great line up of products and most bowlers are good enough they will be able to score and do just fine with whatever is available. It is in no way cost effective to spend that kind of money on something that is watched by so few.
If I were a company I would put that money into other outlets to get my product into the hands of more people in the actual bowling alleys. Your money is probably better spent running commercials during the PBA telecast then trying to get it on tour. As an example, how often do you see Track being used on tv?
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don''t "
While I agree with your logic, what sounds good doesn''t actually pan out in reality. Think of it this way: being successful on the PBA tour is all about carry and who does the most of it. If you had the option to match up with the pattern/surface for that week with a selection of 24 balls versus 6 there is a significant chance that those with fewer options will be able to contend in much fewer tournaments as those that have more options available because statistically they will match up perfectly more often than those with fewer options who are forced to make something "work." Obviously, there are style exceptions like WRW were the ball seems to be negligble, but for the most part equipment is a major factor in contending week in and week out.
--------------------
Videos at:
http://youtube.com/user/Gsnap21
"The framers of our Constitution believed that if the people were to be sovereign and belong to different religions at the same time then our official religion would have to be no religion at all. It was a bold experiment then as it is now. It wasn''t meant to make us comfortable, it was meant to make us free."
Edited on 3/17/2010 12:30 PM
-
I agree if you bowl with Ebonite, you obviously need Track, Columbia, and Hammer to give you a chance to get to the tv finals.
Most companies have more then enough product line to use with different drill patterns and different ball surfaces to make it on tour week to week. If you throw enough different equipment you have a general idea of how similar a lot of bowling balls are and their reaction on the lanes.
Besides the Ebonite family all others are limited and since we don't see a ton of Columbia, Ebonite and Track on TV this year you can kinda eliminate the idea you need 50 balls to choose from week to week as an advantage.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
-
quote:
I agree if you bowl with Ebonite, you obviously need Track, Columbia, and Hammer to give you a chance to get to the tv finals.
Most companies have more then enough product line to use with different drill patterns and different ball surfaces to make it on tour week to week. If you throw enough different equipment you have a general idea of how similar a lot of bowling balls are and their reaction on the lanes.
Besides the Ebonite family all others are limited and since we don't see a ton of Columbia, Ebonite and Track on TV this year you can kinda eliminate the idea you need 50 balls to choose from week to week as an advantage.
--------------------
" men lie, women lie, numbers don't "
What are you talking about? Each show has been an Ebonite/Columbia/Hammer or Roto/Storm fest. Outside of a few shows you haven't seen anything from the BigB this year, and the only other manufacturer you see is 900Global due to them having WRW.
--------------------
Videos at:
http://youtube.com/user/Gsnap21
"The framers of our Constitution believed that if the people were to be sovereign and belong to different religions at the same time then our official religion would have to be no religion at all. It was a bold experiment then as it is now. It wasn't meant to make us comfortable, it was meant to make us free."