Except that:
a) Nobody said anything even remotely like that
b) That would be a valid complaint :grin-square:
Turning Stone - rip off
- Thread starter cleary
- Start date
Except that:
a) Nobody said anything even remotely like that
b) That would be a valid complaint :grin-square:
trifectasss
Registered
Heck, I agree with you. By giving money back they would be encouraging a stampede to sign up with a very high percentage doing it for the small chance they can make it. Just wanting to lock up a spot "just in case". If you return their money it would set up that 40 percent of the the early entries would back out. During this process, a lot more players dedicated to the tournament would get shut out and have to be put on a waiting list. A waiting list that when your name is finally at the front of the line might be too late because you've made other plans in the 3 or 4 months since sign up.
It's pretty simple, this tournament is for people who will put this tournament on this date as a very high priority that only very important personal issues could top. In the case that happens, oh well, it's only 200 dollars, if it's that much of a hardship, maybe you shouldn't be entering such a high dollar tournament.
Something isn't a rip off when you're made aware of the terms and conditions well in advance and agree to them.
What Best Buy (actually Capital One) tried yesterday, hitting my card with $200 in interest because they stated I hadn't paid off the balance of an item in the 18-month interest-free period when it was paid off a month early, is a rip off.
What Best Buy (actually Capital One) tried yesterday, hitting my card with $200 in interest because they stated I hadn't paid off the balance of an item in the 18-month interest-free period when it was paid off a month early, is a rip off.
I like how you were able to apply science to the matter and have determined 40% will register and not attend.
Stampede to sign up...people registering with low likelihood of actual attendance?
Hmmmph.
Stampede to sign up...people registering with low likelihood of actual attendance?
Hmmmph.
Yes...true.
In today's work environment, where all pre event tasks can be accomplished electronically,...
What's would difference be to offer 100% refund until 90d prior to event, maybe 50% until 30d prior, then perhaps no refunds inside the 30d.
trifectasss
Registered
You're right, 40% was a loose estimate and hypothetical, I should've stated that so as not to confuse you.
Yes, when signing up is 1/2 a year prior to an event there's going to be a major difference in the percentage that actually do attend when between a refund and no refund policy. That's not science, that's common sense.
trifectasss
Registered
You needn't have gone through the trouble. My comment wasn't directed toward the people that cry over eating a 200 dollar loss because they can't keep their commitments. Again, the tournament isn't for you, but it is for others. I'm sure you can find a tournament that will refund your 10 dollars when you don't show.
The only people that cry about the non-return policy are those that can't keep their commitments. I wouldn't care about those people either if I ran a business that sold out it's product every time either.
Imagine a company that sells a service to 101 customers for a buck each for an income of $101. The company has expenses $100 and so the profit is $1.
From the point of view of customer #57, the company is dead even without him, and so his dollar is pure profit: "they're making a dollar off of me!"
Bad logic? Yes of course. There are a hundred other people who could adopt the same myopic point of view. It is a kind of bad logic that is rampant around here, though....
When someone like Mr. Zuglan is planning the next big event, there is considerable pressure to hit a certain added $$ figure and total purse, and the plus columns and the minus columns on the planning spreadsheet are pretty long and complex. Trying to make the minus column not exceed the plus column is hard. Do you assume the fraction of no-shows, or late fees if applicable, will be similar to what it has been in years past? Of course you do. It is part of the planning. It is part of the big picture of what makes the event happen, not some sort of windfall free money.... It is incumbent on the organizers to be clear about the policy, and I don't know whether they are or not. But outside of that, there really is nothing to see here.
---except yet another example of criticizing someone who actually does something in our industry with voodoo keyboard economics...
From the point of view of customer #57, the company is dead even without him, and so his dollar is pure profit: "they're making a dollar off of me!"
Bad logic? Yes of course. There are a hundred other people who could adopt the same myopic point of view. It is a kind of bad logic that is rampant around here, though....
When someone like Mr. Zuglan is planning the next big event, there is considerable pressure to hit a certain added $$ figure and total purse, and the plus columns and the minus columns on the planning spreadsheet are pretty long and complex. Trying to make the minus column not exceed the plus column is hard. Do you assume the fraction of no-shows, or late fees if applicable, will be similar to what it has been in years past? Of course you do. It is part of the planning. It is part of the big picture of what makes the event happen, not some sort of windfall free money.... It is incumbent on the organizers to be clear about the policy, and I don't know whether they are or not. But outside of that, there really is nothing to see here.
---except yet another example of criticizing someone who actually does something in our industry with voodoo keyboard economics...
Sorry, but if you make the commitment, then you make the commitment.
If you aren't serious about making the tournament a priority then Mike Zuglan does not want you to sign up.
Too complicated to manage I'd imagine. If I were a TD I would not allow this either.
Your friends broke their commitment. That is on them.
If they didn't agree with the refund policy, they did not have to purchase the spots.
Seeing as it takes 9 months to make a baby, yeah I'd think he'd have been able to plan around that one...
Just like everyone else disputing the original post of this thread, you missed the point of this thread. If he doesn't want to give refunds out cause it might hurt his bottom line, that is sorta fine. I would still give a refund if I was given notice and if I could fill the spot with a player on the waiting list. Beyond the fact that is not the case and your example above is flawed because he has a waiting list and it was explained people actually go to the tournament each time hoping to get in when someone doesn't show up. So he doesn't have a hole in his plus column under any circumstance.
The main issue is not that he won't give a refund, it is that he pockets the refund money and then takes another entry fee from the incoming player. The lesser issue is that he won't give a refund if you give him ample notice that you cannot attend. He gets the notice and he fills the spot beforehand. No harm no foul to his plus column.
As I compared this to golf, a legitimate sport, the non refund and subsequent pocketing of additional entry fees would never be done.
The mentality of, we should accept what someone does cause it is better than most, doesn't fly with me. There is a wrong and a right. There are no attaboys.
I understand your point. I think in the case of pool though, the game is inherently full of hustlers and tire kickers. Its the nature of the beast. I don't know if golf is the same way or not, I have zero experience in that game. I think Zuglan knows this, and made the leash super tight on his players, on purpose. For sure he had the same ideas as everyone else in this thread. He's not an idiot. But the way he does it now, guarantees the people who sign up, are dead serious about playing.
Yes, unfortunately, there will be a handful of players where something comes up and they can't make it. I think the positives of this policy far outweigh the 200 or 300 those people are out.
You missed my point Steve.
If in 2014, 2015, and 2016, the event broke even and collected 134, 135, and 133 entry fees for 128 slots, a projection for 2017 might be that 133 entry fees are collected. This is no different on the plus side than, say, Walmart assuming x% shoplifting on the down side.
The previous Turning Stone tournament was the first week of January. Let's say I went to play and took my wife up to watch. After she saw me destroy a top pro, she couldn't resist herself that night and we made passionate love. The next morning, I also signed up to play the next Turning Stone because I'm trying to make the Mosconi team.
About a month later, we find out a child is on the way. Oh how thrilled we are but.... "OH NO HONEY! EXACTLY 9 months from the conception date is the next Turning Stone! What should I do???? Should I honor my commitment so I'm not brutally shamed by some asshat on AZBilliards ANNDDDD lose $200 that would go to buying diapers? Or miss the birth of our child to play in this tournament." I would sure have some choices to make. I mean, I know what you would do...
So yea, maybe your 9 months thing has some holes. Keep working on a good excuse though.
BINGO! Watchez gets it! How is this so tough?
If a few innocent people go to jail along with the ones that are really guilty, that's ok.
And Mike Page, how do we know the event broke even? I don't know MIke Zuglan from Adam and he probably is a great guy, but most business people don't let youi know what they make cause that leads to people wanting to take advantage of them further.