2/6 ATR: Grening, Von Hemel, Chuckas, Chamblin, Rogers, more..

[Kasept]

Originally Posted by pweizer

Steve,

I just listened to the Keith Chamblin interview. You know I am a big contest player and tour supporter. Few people play in more contests than I do throughout the year. That said, it has become very hard for me to support the NTRA.

At the NHC in 2012, many players raised the issue with Keith about how much money the NTRA keeps in entry fees that come from players. While we never got an exact amount, I can assure you it is in the seven figure range. We were promised more transparency but never got any information.

This year, the NTRA held about 50% of all moneys collected from hosts and players to fund the NHC. I have enjoyed reading about the 52% takeout in the Rainbow 6. This is nearly as bad. And, at least with the rainbow 6, they tell you the exact amount. Here, the NTRA took in more than a million dollars above what they paid out.

There are so many great contests out there that pay back 100% or more to the players. All NYRA events, Keeneland, The Breeder's Cup Betting Challenge, The Wynn contest, Del Mar, etc. all return more than 100% to players. Sites like Ron Geary's Horsetourneys and Kevin Geraghty's HPQualify also offer many low or no take out contests. This only makes the NTRA's position all the more troubling.

Next time you talk to Keith or Eric Wing, perhaps you can ask them about the takeout and what justifies it? It would be a real service to all tournament players shed some light on this situation.

Paul

Paul,

You and the players very well know that answer already. In lieu of lost revenue from former sustaining member tracks, I'd have to think they need the contributing funds to sustain themselves and the tourney.

You asked as Beat the Host started why XB wasn't giving a seat away to NHC... I think you know to that answer too: The price increase levied on seat-buyers that forced decision-making as to affordability and breakeven points.

I'd guess that you and the serious tourney players have to ask yourselves what the price elasticity is for your participation. It's great that certain contest-offerers are returning all the money generated by fees back as prizes, but it would seem they are running those events as loss leaders or as a service to the industry. But from what I understand -- and I'd imagine you and the players know -- the NTRA isn't remotely in that position right now.

[pweizer]

Originally Posted by Kasept

Paul,

You and the players very well know that answer already. In lieu of lost revenue from former sustaining member tracks, I'd have to think they need the contributing funds to sustain themselves and the tourney.

You asked as Beat the Host started why XB wasn't giving a seat away to NHC... I think you know to that answer too: The price increase levied on seat-buyers that forced decision-making as to affordability and breakeven points.

I'd guess that you and the serious tourney players have to ask yourselves what the price elasticity is for your participation. It's great that certain contest-offerers are returning all the money generated by fees back as prizes, but it would seem they are running those events as loss leaders or as a service to the industry. But from what I understand -- and I'd imagine you and the players know -- the NTRA isn't remotely in that position right now.

Steve--thanks for the reply. Honestly, I do not know the answer to my questions. I don't think anyone does since the NTRA refuses to answer the question. I know you prefer to present the positive side of the game (which I appreciate). But, it is a fair topic to raise and maybe you could get a response where the contest players have not.

Paul