03 July 2009

Who is running the show?

Title: Who is running the show?

[Thoughts]
The recent cancellation of SPNS Leg 3 raised a query in my head.  Was that a PBAS decision?  Or was that RD speaking?

The call to register our interests online lasted 92+ hrs between 2009-06-25, 18:32:25 to 2009-06-29, 15:00:04.  There was no publicity, outside of the post in the forum, which may lead people to think that this was a lacklustre effort. 
What could be the factors contributing to this?

1. Costs
The organisers claimed that they ran into the red for organising SPNS '08 Leg 1.  Then onwards, they said they made "a little" from the subsequent legs.
For SPNS '09 Leg 2, the playing field was moved outside of RD; increasing costs.
Would this lead to lack of interests for the affiliated field: RD?

2. Attendance
There were difficulties in getting teams to sign up.  SPNS '09 Leg 1 almost couldn't see enough teams till Wargh! Nuts made their entrance, followed by Evil Avengers and Red West which tipped the scale and allowed the Leg to go on.
SPNS '09 Leg 2 had 16 participating teams, as compared to 9 teams from Leg 1, but this could be attributed to the draw of playing outside RD.  At least half the teams are either less active or do not train in Singapore.
Would this lead to fatigue among the organisers?

3. Complaints
From the cost of paint to unhappiness over perceived bad calls, this has dogged the series since Day 1.
Would this cause bitterness?


[Comments]
At the end of the day, it appears to me as a business decision.  "So many problems for so little rewards.  Why bother?" - That is the choice of a businessman and I respect that.
But who runs SPNS?
The forums and SPNS information page are hosted on a server belonging to a business entity - RD.  Does it mean that SPNS is therefore conducted by RD?  If not, then does that mean RD allows its business opportunity to be dictated by PBAS?
The two entities are so closely meshed that I can't really tell the difference. 
RD's responsibility is towards its shareholders.
PBAS's responsibility is towards the players it represents.
Should we be concerned if there's a conflict in interests?


[glossary]
PBAS - Paintball Association (Singapore)
RD - Red Dynasty

2 comments:

  1. Anonymous5/7/09 17:46

    I strongly agree with this post.

    Main factor is cost. Player demographic: young 'uns and older men with families or saving up for marriage. Now, I don't know how much boxes cost in Singapore, but I do know that once prices are slashed for competitive players, they tend to shoot alot more. Rec-ball prices can usually stay the same so that the field doesn't lose money.

    Have to understand bad calls dog every competition. Alot of "bad calls" are often perceived. All in all, the majority of complaints and the low attendance ultimately traces back to the issue of cost.

    Unless this cost issue is handled well by the organiser, be it the PBAS or RD management which appears to be closely meshed, that they are one and the same - it is unlikely that sustainable interest in paintball (from the older teams) can be achieved.

    It is not a matter of getting marker restrictions reduced. Not everyone, especially the kids, will be able to own an e-marker. The mentality of "If I get it/bring it here, they will buy and shoot more paint" does not hold water. The mentality of the player demographic is always COST COST COST.

    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Anonymous,

    agreed. but without someone or someone(s) sticking out their heads; nothing's gonna change.

    ReplyDelete