Looking at the member roster kinda shocks me.
Some big names are no longer members.
Some big names are no longer members.
ACA - What has changed to force a friend to resign his memebership
- Thread starter abe
- Start date
I have nothing bad to say about the ACA. I am friends with many of them. When we started the ICA one of the reasons we did so was we felt many smaller cuemakers also deserved to get more exposure and a break on supply prices and such by joining together. We felt that $100 per year for dues was fair and that they would get more than that much in benefits. The ACA also provides some great benefits to their members, but they are not cost effective for most smaller cuemakers. I wish them well and rejoice that they are making great contributions to the image of cuemakers here in the USA just as we are doing on an International scale. We are two different associations with two different set of goals, but I feel both are great organizations.
cost effective
I have thought about joining that ACA for years now. When I was at the trade show this past year I was very seriously going to join. Then they had there meeting. I couldn't believe what I was told. $1000.00 to join and then $500.00 a year for the first 10 years. Now dont get me wrong here. I think that the ACA is a great organization for the billiard industry! However I just cant see paying that kind of money to join. That is just me though. I am a little tight with my cash. Now I know several of the ACA members. I know a few of them really good. They are very good cue builders and just good people.
That is just my honest opinion.
Like said this is not a knock to the ACA by any means at all. It's just not cost effective to join for me.
cueman said:
I have thought about joining that ACA for years now. When I was at the trade show this past year I was very seriously going to join. Then they had there meeting. I couldn't believe what I was told. $1000.00 to join and then $500.00 a year for the first 10 years. Now dont get me wrong here. I think that the ACA is a great organization for the billiard industry! However I just cant see paying that kind of money to join. That is just me though. I am a little tight with my cash. Now I know several of the ACA members. I know a few of them really good. They are very good cue builders and just good people.
That is just my honest opinion.
Like said this is not a knock to the ACA by any means at all. It's just not cost effective to join for me.
What has changed
"to promote the American made Cue as a unique collectable art form". That's right off of our opening page. Speaking for myself, I didn't join the orginization for a benefit to me. I did it to try and help promote that facet of the cue making industry. As to why some members come and go, or some cue makers aren't members, only they know for sure. Remember, artists tend to be on the egotistical side. As to the part time cue maker,
that issue was address at this years meeting. It was brought up as the "Haley Rule". Ron and several other members have other vocations that keep them from only making a living creating cues. We voted in the change just for cases like that. We didn't lower the quality of the work required, in fact, we sort of raised it. You now have to have two members endoresments to be considered. Both the ICA and ACA have their places in the Billiard Industry. Hopefully with the help of both, cuemaking will have a bright future.
"to promote the American made Cue as a unique collectable art form". That's right off of our opening page. Speaking for myself, I didn't join the orginization for a benefit to me. I did it to try and help promote that facet of the cue making industry. As to why some members come and go, or some cue makers aren't members, only they know for sure. Remember, artists tend to be on the egotistical side. As to the part time cue maker,
that issue was address at this years meeting. It was brought up as the "Haley Rule". Ron and several other members have other vocations that keep them from only making a living creating cues. We voted in the change just for cases like that. We didn't lower the quality of the work required, in fact, we sort of raised it. You now have to have two members endoresments to be considered. Both the ICA and ACA have their places in the Billiard Industry. Hopefully with the help of both, cuemaking will have a bright future.
dave sutton
Banned
i dont like the idea of someone judging my work as an artist. whos to say one is better then the other. quality is quality. whos to judge what is full time and part time. dont think i would be any part of a group even if asked. i know a few others that feel the same. some wont even join az they just lurk
dave sutton said:
Try reading the web site, artistic quality is specifically excluded from what is required in the entrance cue. Quality of construction is what is required. I'll pass on to the board you'd like to be put on the do not call list.
Blud pulled off a major miracle back when he started the ACA, getting the original group into one room was hard enough. Having them stay in there with out a fight breaking out was unthinkable. He did it, and the cue world has never been the same. Members come and go, just like in any orginization. What matters is that the mission isn't forgotten.
tuff going
Dan Dishaw resigned for his reasons, and it's no one elses business....
The ACA has made lots of friends, buyers and collectors, for all cuemakers, world wide, [ including non-members ], not to mention it made lots and lots of money for there famlies...
I now hope all this crap and thead, will end, it's about time.....
Again, thanks Steve.
blud
Steve, thanks for coming to the defence of the ACA. It's not for all and all are not for it. We had a vision, and it came true. Many sit back and judge, and make there comments. They have that right, but those who sit back and judge, not knowing the facts, should keep there opinions to themselves, because they really are not in the know. Not trying to start a fight with anyone, but if you really don't know, you don't.cutter said:
Dan Dishaw resigned for his reasons, and it's no one elses business....
The ACA has made lots of friends, buyers and collectors, for all cuemakers, world wide, [ including non-members ], not to mention it made lots and lots of money for there famlies...
I now hope all this crap and thead, will end, it's about time.....
Again, thanks Steve.
blud
cutter said:
I already "donate" enough of my time and money to other organizations.
I sell mostly to a local market, dont set up a booth at shows, and don't advertise much. I ca not see any way the ACA or the ICA can help a small time cue maker like me.
Until I see something that the ACA or ICA can do for me, some personal need that they fulfill, or some other meaningful reason, I will stay an independent.
I am not knocking or judging ... just stating why I, as a small American cue maker, KNOW I am not interested.
I guess CUTTER can add my name (William Lee - WilleeCue) to that ACA "do not call" list also.
Last edited:
dave sutton
Banned
cutter said:
i was not bashing the ACA. i was talking about what it takes to be a member. i work a full time job bc i choose to. i love it as much as cue making. if i could support myself as a full time maker i still wouldnt quit my other job. who is to judge what is full time. to deny anyone acceptence that builds a quality product is stupid IMO.
This could not be further from the truth. Dave, I understand what you are saying but sometimes it doesn't come out right. I do not believe it is "quality" but a standard. There are some that do quality work, but there are others that are the standard, the ones that we should aspire to be. Not in design, technique, construction but standard.
It is not about what either organization can do for you. It about what you, as a cue maker, can do for the trade. I do not think you need to be in any organizations, within this industry or not, but I do think you need to look at the big picture. Its not about you or any one member. The forest is more important than any one tree.
work
whos to say one is better then the other. quality is quality. whos to judge what is full time and part time. dont think i would be any part of a group even if asked. i know a few others that feel the same. some wont even join az they just lurk[/QUOTE]
Dave, think about what you have said,
whos to say one is better then the other. quality is quality. whos to judge what is full time and part time. dont think i would be any part of a group even if asked. i know a few others that feel the same. some wont even join az they just lurk[/QUOTE]
Dave, think about what you have said,
dave sutton said:
Since this thread was started, I've been very interested and talked several times with Barry Cameron, Cameron Cues, about the benefits of belonging to the ACA or the ICA. Barry is a member of the ICA, actually one of the directors, as I found out.
His opinion was that to a "beginning cuemaker" either of the organizations would be helpful to anyone that was dedicated to learning the craft, improving their skills and wanted to gain recognition. And that there are some excellent cuemakers in both organizations.
george
His opinion was that to a "beginning cuemaker" either of the organizations would be helpful to anyone that was dedicated to learning the craft, improving their skills and wanted to gain recognition. And that there are some excellent cuemakers in both organizations.
george
dave sutton
Banned
well said
Sometimes I have a hard time getting my point across in typed words.
I don't disagree with the organization of cuemakers. I think that's good. I disagree with the criteria for acceptance. For instance take Haley or showman both great makers very limited production a year. Elite some would say. Now take company B that makes 1000 cues a year. Not elite IMO. are members. Now take me I will make say 20 cues this year. Take my time everything straight fit and finish perfect. Yet I do not qualify. Under the rules. That's what gets me.
Now fastforward 10 years. Say I have become "elite" I will tell the organization to stick it bc I didn't qualify before making the same cues.
Sometimes I have a hard time getting my point across in typed words.
I don't disagree with the organization of cuemakers. I think that's good. I disagree with the criteria for acceptance. For instance take Haley or showman both great makers very limited production a year. Elite some would say. Now take company B that makes 1000 cues a year. Not elite IMO. are members. Now take me I will make say 20 cues this year. Take my time everything straight fit and finish perfect. Yet I do not qualify. Under the rules. That's what gets me.
Now fastforward 10 years. Say I have become "elite" I will tell the organization to stick it bc I didn't qualify before making the same cues.
Last edited:
georgeh said:
Well, I still have not read anything SPECIFIC as to exactly how joining an origination will help me learn more, improve my skills, or gain recognition.
Do they offer some sort of cue maker training program?
Perhaps some sort of marketing plan?
I do see a cost of $1500 for the first year to join one of them ... If I were accepted.
If I need help learning more I experiment in my shop, call another cue maker on the phone, or post here on AZB as there is a LOT of information offered right here.
If I wanted to gain more recognition I would buy advertising space here on AZB and in pool magazines.
I would also attend a few trade shows or tournaments, and display my unsold cues.
However, I am happy with where I am on that issue at this time.
All the top cue makers would still be top cue makers with or without an organization. There are quite a few top names missing from the membership list.
If they see benefit then they should join ... if they are allowed to do so.
I just do not see how the organizations will actually help the small time cue maker like myself and make it worth the cost.
Blud said:
I have thought about it Blud but so far have not heard one thing other than generalities that would help me and my craft and I really dont see how they had any effect on my choice to get into cue making.
The associations have nothing to do with this forum ... or so I think.
However, the internet is one of my most useful tools not only for cue making but for many other aspects of my life as well.
Like I said, I am not knocking them just explaining that they are not cost effective to me, a small time cue maker who plans on staying small time.
Last edited:
dave sutton
Banned
i can buy alot of wood for 1500$
cue makers group
one f the original ideas was group buying for there members i dont think that ever took off the way the wanted is there anyone intertested in group buying? the power of numbers is fantastic!!
dave sutton said:
one f the original ideas was group buying for there members i dont think that ever took off the way the wanted is there anyone intertested in group buying? the power of numbers is fantastic!!