The No. 1 source for bowling news, analysis and opinion is my blog, The 11th Frame, which is here: http://host.madison.com/sports/recreation/bowling/
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: Pinbuster on November 01, 2011, 06:31:36 PM
So as I read it.
Reno will have Open National tournament 2 out of 3 years?
If so entries will continue to go down.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: icefiction on November 01, 2011, 08:21:04 PM
Why is the USBC negotiating into 2032? That is ridiculous and affects way too many people for some executives to have a final say in.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: Hoselrockets on November 01, 2011, 10:23:05 PM
I agree why 2032? I was kind of excited about Orlando...Kind of wish it would of been a rotation of Reno, Orlando and __________. I guess that was just wishful thinking...
THB
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: billdozer on November 01, 2011, 11:18:28 PM
Only been to nationals twice and I saw pros and cons with Vegas and Reno
Vegas: awesome vacation spot with too much to do!, shot was tougher & didn't cash...it wasn't as fun for me because I never got lined up etc etc.. (not that I'm asking for a cake walk at nationals but never finding SOMETHING to work is not anything but frustrating)
Reno: lame city with absolutely nothing really entertaining to do, shot wasn't a cakewalk...but easy enough to work something into the shot...had a blast bowling...averaged quite a bit higher eventhough scores were inflated across the board....extremely happy I cashed in everything but doubles..I was very proud of myself to cash on my second trip!
Everywhere is going to have its pros and cons, I was REALLY hoping for Orlando...its a shame..
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: completebowler on November 02, 2011, 07:37:03 AM
We had 2 teams drop last year because everyone is bored with Reno. I don't see long term success in Reno for our Tournament.
ALL STAR BOWLING & TROPHY LANGAN'S ALL STAR LANES IBPSIA MEMBER WALLED LAKE MI
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: riggs on November 02, 2011, 09:54:02 AM
Yes, Reno already is set for 2013, 2014 and 2016 for Open Championships.
I wouldn't get too worked up about 2032 ... Reno may want that but does not mean USBC will agree ... and any kind of deal that long will have tons of contingencies I would imagine. I mean who even knows if there will be 2 USBC tournaments and what their format might be years from now?
The No. 1 source for bowling news, analysis and opinion is my blog, The 11th Frame, which is here: http://host.madison.com/sports/recreation/bowling/
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: jaydee on November 02, 2011, 10:06:20 AM
The three-year cycles seems like a great compromise that offers something for both sides...
Three year cycle referred to is:
Year 1: Men's Open
Year 2: Women's Open
Year 3: Men's & Women's Open
repeat for 20 years
This is a compromise?! What was Reno asking for initially? Both events every year for 20 years?
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: HAMBONE on November 02, 2011, 10:15:24 AM
Just bowled in my 20th tournament. 5 more years and im done. Yes, I want the plaque.
Drop and give me 10
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: riggs on November 02, 2011, 10:37:30 AM
Reno would LOVE to have both tournaments every year -- it's about all they've got to keep them going these days -- and likely would pay USBC a heckuva premium for that.
Orlando or any other place that might build a stadium would like that, too -- you want something filled with business as much as possible WHATEVER business you are in.
USBC knows bowlers don't want to go to Reno or any other place every single year ... with the possible exception of Vegas.
Give Reno at least one of the two tourneys every year and USBC probably gets a lot of desperately needed $$ and such a deal as being contemplated (according to the councilman) also gives the folks who want to see different cities a different city once every three years.
That's what I mean by compromise.
The No. 1 source for bowling news, analysis and opinion is my blog, The 11th Frame, which is here: http://host.madison.com/sports/recreation/bowling/
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: jaydee on November 02, 2011, 11:36:45 AM
This whole thing is ludicrous. Reno needs the USBC way more than the USBC needs Reno. USBC needs to keep people interested in coming. So what does Reno do? Increase tourism taxes to renovate already the best (only?) bowling stadium in the country build a bowling hall of fame? A "Hall of Fame" might attract people for the first time. Do they really think that it's going to keep people coming 13 times in 20 years? "I was thinking of not going this year, but they do have the hall of fame, that I've only seen 12 times." Oh and they're going to add 10 more lanes. They can't fill the 80 they already have, so they're going to build 10 more. Fantastic.
If they really want a long range committment between USBC Nationals and Reno work, they need to make people want to go. There's only so much you can invest in the bowling aspect of Nationals to keep people coming. Pouring more money into this bowling mecca while allowing the city around it crumble to pieces is not going to keep most people interested. One would think this is common sense, but appearantly Reno politicians don't get it.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: icefiction on November 02, 2011, 09:23:07 PM
I think the USBC has completely lost touch with those that they are supposed to be representing. I say we all just not sanction for a year so they go under and we can start over again.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: Jorge300 on November 03, 2011, 09:57:01 AM
Jaydee,
I think you have this wrong. The USBC needs Reno too. This tournament is used ot bring money into the USBC to help fill in the gap left by declining membership. That declining membership means it is inevitable that the number of teams coming to the USBC open will decline as well. The deal Reno can offer, plus the fact that the USBC saves on construction costs when in Reno, is huge to the USBC. It could mean the difference between having a USBC Open for 20 years or longer, or having it for 5-10 more years and having it fold.
In order to increase entries, maybe the USBC should look at allowing bowlers to bowl a second team event, as long as at least 3 members are different then the original team. It would allow the better teams, like Riggs' group, a chance to bowl with their second team members, allow more bracket money to be taken in by the USBC and allow the average Joe Bowler a chance to redeem himself if they had some issues during their first team event. Now only the first team event will count towards all-events(individual and team) in this scenario. This could, potentially, increase entries and help fill extra lanes and days. But the downside is potentially diminishing the grandeur of winning the team event Eagle. A difficult decision on either side of the coin.
Jorge300
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: jaydee on November 03, 2011, 11:25:55 AM
You're missing the bigger point I was trying to make. In the short-term, it may be better to give Reno the tourney 2/3's of the time, because they save on immediate overhead costs and team entries are still relatively good. But I am not going to Reno that often unless the event becomes a money maker for me personally, or it's a better place to visit. I have interest in going to that part of the country, maybe once every 5-6 years. I have limited vacation time, and I'm just not going across the country to the same place every year, especially Reno as it is now. I would go to alternating sites probably close to every year, regardless. IMO, I feel like more bowlers are coming from my viewpoint, than those that would go to Nationals every year no matter where it is. Is saving on overhead construction costs going to offset decline entries? Hard to tell, I have no idea what the profit is per bowler after all expenses are paid and I don't know what it costs to construct lanes and I don't know what kind of money the city bids bring in.
So what if we are stuck with Reno, what can they do to make it more attractive location? Point blank, what could they do, to make me more interested in coming every year. Investing in more bowling infrastructure is about the last thing they can do to keep me interested (well, maybe 2nd last, building another casino would be lower). How about make the city a better place. Make it more family friendly, maybe build an amusement park? Seasonal incentives to airlines from Feb-July so the entire east coast doesn't have to make 2 connections and blow a whole day of travel to get there and back. Better public transportation, specifically from hotels to the stadium. But no, they want to build 10 more lanes and a bowling HOF. You've got to be kidding me.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: TWOHAND834 on November 03, 2011, 11:26:33 AM
Lets be honest here. Unless there is a turnaround in the overall economy, people wont be able to afford to go to Reno. Give it a couple years and you may see the tournament go to an opening weekend in April. At some point, I could see plane tickets from the East Coast approaching $700. I believe tickets were in the neighborhood of $500+ this year. It will get to a point where, even without getting into brackets/side pots, you have dropped $1000 before you even toss your first ball.
The USBC has to get more tournies on the eastern side of the US. If not, entries will continue to slide.
Peace doesnt always have to be silent.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: storm making it rain on November 03, 2011, 11:41:39 AM
Lets' face it guy/gals only about 3% of the total bowlers go to Nationals looking to make money. I agree with Jaydee that Reno wouldn't be horrible if they spent some money to make it a nicer or even family oriented city. Most people use this as a vacation and bowling just happens to be involved in it. Me personally I go to win money be it at brackets, tournament winnings, side events. Our companion team not so much, they go as a trip with their wives...
I personally like going to different cities that you probably wouldn't trvale to on a vacation ie: Billings, Knoxville, Baton Rouge, etc. I don't think the airfare cost is the biggest factor in deciding to attend the event. It's gotta be location location location. How many times can you go to Reno when the city stays exactly the same, granted they moved the bus terminal (wooooohoooo). What other things have changed if any??? I would go to Reno every year if there was any other excitement other than gambling. (and i also live in the northeast)
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: Jorge300 on November 03, 2011, 03:42:07 PM
Jaydee,
I think it is you who is missing the point. The deal Reno can give the USBC keeps the tournament profitable even if it drops under 10,000 teams.....now how far under that number I do not know. So it will offset the loss of some of the teams that decide not to go. I go for the chance that one of these years, myself, my double partner and my team will actually bowl to our full potential giving us a chance to win an Eagle. Making money in brackets is nice, winning money in side events is nice, but it is the Eagle that draws me back, and I will continue to go to try and achieve that. I too liked traveling to different cities, I even didn't mind going to Billings. But I also understand what the USBC is facing and Reno may be the answer for the long term future of the tournament.
TwoHand - Please don't take this personally...but I am so sick and tired of hearing people complain, b*tch, and whine about the tournament not coming to the East. It isn't the USBC's fault that no city bids for it. It isn't the USBC's fault that there are no open convention centers meeting the size requirements they need willing to shed yearly paying customers to bring in this tournament. If you really want this tournament in the East, work with your (or a neighboring large city) city council, your convention center board, your local businesses/casinos (if there are any) to put together a package for the tournament. If you put together a competitive bid then the tournament will come to the East. No one seems to understand that the larger convention centers have yearly shows/events that come back year after year. And they won't take kindly to being told that they will not be allowed back next year due to a bowling tournament. They will just find a convention center in a nearby town and hold their event their.....from that year on, costing the hosting center money. Why would they throw away guaranteed revenue year after year to take a chance on how much they may make from the USBC tournament for one year? Especially in these tough economic times. Sorry don't mean to lay this all on you, but it is the same thing year after year and no one is lifting one finger to do anything about it except complain on the internet.
Jorge300
Edited by Jorge300 on 11/3/2011 at 3:50 PM
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: jaydee on November 03, 2011, 04:31:50 PM
8 out of 10 years in the 90's, the tournament operated with less than 10,000 teams, and to my knowledge, they were all at convo centers with constructed lanes. Before the 90's, they hit 10k teams once. This isn't about if it's profitable, it's about how profitable. I don't think the men's tourney is nearly as "on the brink" as they want us to believe in order to justify having in Reno all the time. I know costs rise over time, but I doubt that the USBC's "rights fee" has stayed the same over time and I'm pretty sure entry fees have gone up a fair amount as well. I'm just not buying the arguement that "if it's not in Reno, we can't make money". If that is truly the case, it has more to do with mismanagement then anything else. This is about bigger profits for having it Reno, at the expense of being better for the game and appealing to a broader audience. And don't tell me no one else bids, we had El Paso, Syracuse, Vegas, San Antonio all going after 2015.
And my bigger point was that Reno somehow thinks that building a bowling HOF and 10 more lanes is more important to the average bowler than improving the city around it. Maybe they came up with that aftering polling people going after Eagles, but that is not the majority of Nats bowlers.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: jaydee on November 07, 2011, 12:25:34 PM
Of course costs aren't the same as the 90's. I already said that rights fees, bowler fees have increased over time to accomodate that. And brackets, USBC keeps 12.5% of all bracket money, which hasn't always existed and there's more and more side pots that USBC also keeps a slice of. Face it, USBC has INCREASED there streams of revenue over the years, they are making MORE money per bowler on average than in the past. I'm not sure how you can reasonably argue against that. USBC doesn't pay city rent on public facilities they borrow, cities pay them money to have the tournament there.
If you owned a business, would you throw away an amazing offer that can keep your business in the black for years to come just because it might not be liked by a minority of your customers?
You're assuming that Reno is the only city that the USBC can be profitable. Disagree. You are assuming that the majority of people are happy going to Reno and there's only a minority who "might not like" going back to Reno 2 out of 3 years. Strongly disagree.
"of the cities you listed... only one city is in the East"
What is that suppose to mean? I never said the tournament had to be in the East. And while Syracuse may not be "vibrant", it's got more going for it than Reno. Top 10 Div I NCAA basketball in Feb-March, March Madness Regionals almost every year, AHL Hockey Feb thru April, a good AAA stadium to watch baseball April thru July, Buffalo and Niagara Falls is less than 3 hours away, Lake Placid less than 4 hours away, NYC, Philly about 4 hours, Boston about a 5 hour drive, Dinosaur BBQ, Adirondack Mtn's, skiing, Finger Lakes, Indian Reservation Casino's nearby, etc. But whether or not Syracuse is a "vibrant city" isn't even the issue. If Syracuse won a bid for Nationals 2 out of every 3 years, I'd be just as unhappy, because this isn't about Reno, whether I like it or dislike it. It's about moving the tournament around, like they always have until now.
It just shows my point even more, that big cities and convention centers won't lose yearly business for our tournament. Mr. Thomas explained very well also.
No one is arguing against you that big cities aren't going to bid for Nationals, that's obvious. Why do you keep bringing this up like you're winning a point?
And to your last point, do you know how much it would cost to "improve" Reno as a city? Where do you expect them to get that kind of money?
City is already raising money $2 per hotel room per night for the betterment of the USBC tournament. This is well documented. They've raised $500k since July, and that's "offpeak" over just a few months, this tax is ongoing. And I already laid out suggestions for bettering the city with that money instead of improving the "bowling experience" of the city. They've got that covered, give us something other than casino's and bowling.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: milorafferty on November 07, 2011, 01:00:37 PM
Although I live in Northern California and Reno is very convenient to me for the tournament, I prefer a variety of different locations, not just Reno year after year.
That being said, I read a lot of comments here and other forums about Reno. Most of the crap that is written is not justified. If you travel to Reno to bowl and just hang around the downtown area, then that is your loss. You (jaydee) mentioned places/events that are "close" to Syracuse, but that doesn't even compare to the options a comparable distance from Reno. I would guess that 99% of the tournament bowlers coming to Reno never venture outside the Casinos and explore.
Again, I'm excited the tournament is in Baton Rouge this year, but if you don't take the time or interest to find out anything about the area, then Baton Rouge will be boring for you as well.
Title: Re: Reno politician says Reno deal looking good, Orlando 'dead' ... USBC says its talking to bot
Post by: DrBob806 on November 24, 2011, 08:36:07 AM
I'm not for Orlando at all. Tourist trap mecca of the USA.