Annual Tour Fees

JoeyA

Efren's Mini-Tourn BACKER
Silver Member
Something that has bothered me for a long time and I haven't mentioned it except in private with other players.

I understand the need for additional revenue streams for tour operators and annual tour fees aren't totally unwarranted. However, these annual fees are an irritational expense burden to some of the people who won't be participating on a regular basis and who are from out of state. While it is "only" $20, the fact is that many people from out of state might participate in an out of state tournament tour only once per year. I would think that the tour operators might make an exception for out of state players because of their additional traveling expenses.


What are your thoughts? Should special exception be made for out of state players who don't regularly participate in that particular tour's tournaments?
JoeyA
 
JoeyA said:
Something that has bothered me for a long time and I haven't mentioned it except in private with other players.

I understand the need for additional revenue streams for tour operators and annual tour fees aren't totally unwarranted. However, these annual fees are an irritational expense burden to some of the people who won't be participating on a regular basis and who are from out of state. While it is "only" $20, the fact is that many people from out of state might participate in an out of state tournament tour only once per year. I would think that the tour operators might make an exception for out of state players because of their additional traveling expenses.


What are your thoughts? Should special exception be made for out of state players who don't regularly participate in that particular tour's tournaments?
JoeyA


How is the tour operator supposed to know if a player is only going
to play once, unless it is late in the season? I see Zim's Rack cuts
his fee in half toward the end, which is a smart move.

The people doing all the work deserve some money also.

You make a good arguement though with the price of travel.
 
JoeyA said:
Something that has bothered me for a long time and I haven't mentioned it except in private with other players.

I understand the need for additional revenue streams for tour operators and annual tour fees aren't totally unwarranted. However, these annual fees are an irritational expense burden to some of the people who won't be participating on a regular basis and who are from out of state. While it is "only" $20, the fact is that many people from out of state might participate in an out of state tournament tour only once per year. I would think that the tour operators might make an exception for out of state players because of their additional traveling expenses.


What are your thoughts? Should special exception be made for out of state players who don't regularly participate in that particular tour's tournaments?
JoeyA

Most tours offer a discount (the Viking Tour does) for playing in just 1 event. Ut's usually either 1/3 - 1/2 of the normal price. You usually pay the difference or the full amount if you play again.

Mj
 
JoeyA said:
Something that has bothered me for a long time and I haven't mentioned it except in private with other players.

I understand the need for additional revenue streams for tour operators and annual tour fees aren't totally unwarranted. However, these annual fees are an irritational expense burden to some of the people who won't be participating on a regular basis and who are from out of state. While it is "only" $20, the fact is that many people from out of state might participate in an out of state tournament tour only once per year. I would think that the tour operators might make an exception for out of state players because of their additional traveling expenses.


What are your thoughts? Should special exception be made for out of state players who don't regularly participate in that particular tour's tournaments?
JoeyA

Most tours offer a discount (the Viking Tour does) for playing in just 1 event. Ut's usually either 1/3 - 1/2 of the normal price. You usually pay the difference or the full amount if you play again.

Mj
 
JoeyA said:
Something that has bothered me for a long time and I haven't mentioned it except in private with other players.

I understand the need for additional revenue streams for tour operators and annual tour fees aren't totally unwarranted. However, these annual fees are an irritational expense burden to some of the people who won't be participating on a regular basis and who are from out of state. While it is "only" $20, the fact is that many people from out of state might participate in an out of state tournament tour only once per year. I would think that the tour operators might make an exception for out of state players because of their additional traveling expenses.


What are your thoughts? Should special exception be made for out of state players who don't regularly participate in that particular tour's tournaments?
JoeyA

Most tours offer a discount (the Viking Tour does) for playing in just 1 event. Ut's usually either 1/3 - 1/2 of the normal price. You usually pay the difference or the full amount if you play again.

Mj
 
I used to run the ladies florida tour a decade ago and we would let the ladies pay a one time only fee ($15-$20 I think) rather than the entire membership fee. This worked well for the ladies who would be visiting Florida on vacation and wanted to compete.
Most of the money from memberships and one time only fees were used to run our non profit organization. Flyers, posters, stamps phone bills etc.
We don't mean to seem mercenary but, there are a lot of costs to form and maintain a tour.
 
Last edited:
poolhall maven said:
. Flyers, posters, stamps phone bills etc.
We don't mean be seem mercenary but, there are a lot of costs to form and maintain a tour.

I understand that. I think I like Mik Janis's way of handling it about as well as anything I have seen.

I just see waiving or discounting the tour fee as a way of encouraging out of state players to travel to the tournament.

I wonder what portion of the players travel from out of state to the Viking Tour tournaments and if it would really make a difference if the fee was waived, at least for the first time. I agree if you hit the tour a second time in one year, you have to pay.

MOST tours in our area are already at least an hour and a half drive from where I live and that is the CLOSEST tour tournament of the year for me.

I doubt very seriously if I would attend another tournament even further away.

I don't see the out of state players as being parasites but as people who have additional expenses and this is but one way to encourage them to travel to the tournaments. Two visits in one year and you have to pay the fee... That would be my modus operandi. :boring2:

JoeyA
 
Just last week I noticed an Ad for an event and it was $50 entry and
a $20 Tour fee.

At first glance I thought that $20 was a little high but I wouldnt mind paying it so that events keep happening.

Then I saw where $20 of the Entry went to Fees. Only $30 to the event itself.

$70 to play a $30 entry tourney. I could not do it myself. Not sure that I would pay $50 for a $30 entry event.


Running a pool tour has to be tough.
 
The tours that have yearly dues in my region handle it a couple of different ways.

One tour charges a higher entry fee to the out-of-town player if they don't want to pay the annual tour dues.

Some tour directors use these monies collected for the dues to advertise the various tournaments, send out posters, travel costs to each event, hotel costs, et cetera.

One thing that ALWAYS bothered me about some tours is the year-end Season Finale event.

Some tours don't allow anyone to play in the year-end Season Finale unless they have competed in a certain amount of tournaments on the tour during the season.

Most times, the Season Finale has a lot of added monies. It doesn't seem fair that, for instance, Efren Reyes could compete in the Season Finale for a $75 entry fee when he never played in one single event during the season.

Some tours will raise the entry fee of the Season Finale to players who didn't compete during the season. I think this is the fair thing to do.

Some tours take out monies throughout the season and save it up for the added monies in the Season Finale. That is why it makes sense to me to have the dues-paying card-holders be the only ones allowed to play in the Season Finale.

However, not every tour sees it that way. Some tours just raise the entry fee for the Season Finale to $350 and all dues-paying tour members only have to pay $75, as one example.

I do understand the annual tour fees and see the need for them. The tour directors have to cover their own expenses getting around. Though most of 'em do it as a labor of love, they gotta eat too! :grin:

JAM
 
You shouldn't be allowed to play in a Season Finale if you weren't
part of the original season!

It's great for the venue who hosts the final, but what about all the
rest of the contributing venues. Everyone should have to play in
two or three events providing there is ten or better to choose from.

Nice post JAM
 
Pool players kill me! They want everything for free or cheap as hell. If $20 or $30 is going to stop you from playing in a pool tournament it sounds like you dont need to play anyway.
I am in the military so i am not rich, but I will give up things and plan ahead so i can afford to play.
Also I will drive up to 10 hrs to a pool tournament because I love pool!!!!
The point is Mike Janis runs the tournaments correctly and for a little fee he($20,30 etc) should be rewarded.There are alot of politics behind the scenes that you dont see as players.
Running tournaments is very hard & time consuming if you run it the RIGHT way!

Thanks and God bless to all,
SFC Pierce
 
You're right JAM. It isn't fair for someone who has never supported a tour to come and win the lions share of the grand finale money.
Our grand finale was by written invitation only-- for our members who had competed in 2 or more events. That eliminated players from coming down and playing in an event that had lots of money added. We also had prizes for those playing in all the events, most improved player, player of the year etc. We tried to make it fun, but, it was for the players who supported the tour through out the year. We even dressed in semi formal attire--probably not a great idea in hindsight, but it was fun. The Ladies Spirit Tour still does this and they make it fair & fun.
 
I agree also that players like Efren or whoever should not be aloud to play in the season Finale for a extra fee.
Players who are members and show up to the Finale should be able to take a vote and see if they want them to play or not.They would think twice about coming then because of the chance of the vote not going there way.The next year they would know at least enter a few tour stops so they can be in the Finale!
Smokin Joe
 
9ballpoker said:
You shouldn't be allowed to play in a Season Finale if you weren't
part of the original season!


Nice post JAM


Jam, I rarely disagree with you but on this one, I HAVE TO.

Right now it is tough enough to sell events to room owners and sponsors alike. A reason to keep people away from an event would just be bad business for everyone. As long as a player pays a membership fee and/or a higher entry fee they to should be allowed to play.

Mj
 
joepwins8 said:
Pool players kill me! They want everything for free or cheap as hell. If $20 or $30 is going to stop you from playing in a pool tournament it sounds like you dont need to play anyway.
I am in the military so i am not rich, but I will give up things and plan ahead so i can afford to play.
Also I will drive up to 10 hrs to a pool tournament because I love pool!!!!
The point is Mike Janis runs the tournaments correctly and for a little fee he($20,30 etc) should be rewarded.There are alot of politics behind the scenes that you dont see as players.
Running tournaments is very hard & time consuming if you run it the RIGHT way!

Thanks and God bless to all,
SFC Pierce

There are always different views. For me I always look at what I am getting out of my money and if its worth it.

I don't mind getting in events when I don't have a reasonable shot at finishing high IF I think it will be worth it. Honestly not playing and putting that money towards more practice and lessons would be better spent.

If we are looking at $20-30 as a random amount then its not alot of money. However, if we consider it on top of a entry fee and for an event in which we just want to see how we do (deadweight) then the additional amount matters.
One reason that I like the AM events that are poping up is that it provides a place for the majority of players. I would feel much better about paying an additional amount in an event that I was not going to be run over and embarrased in playing.

Pool players are considered cheap and probably well deserved but they also are spending money nightly, weekly and monthly playing.

Setting price points in any business is extremely tough yet one of the most important aspects. Its not an exact science for sure.

As for Tour membership fees vs greens fees.... I would pay the tour 10 x as fast as a greens fee. The tour is the one bringing the biz to the rooms.
 
MikeJanis said:
Jam, I rarely disagree with you but on this one, I HAVE TO.

Right now it is tough enough to sell events to room owners and sponsors alike. A reason to keep people away from an event would just be bad business for everyone. As long as a player pays a membership fee and/or a higher entry fee they to should be allowed to play.

I definitely understand your opinion, as a well-known and hard-working tour coordinator extraordinaire! :smile:

Your goal is to make everybody happy, the player/competitor and the host pool room. You also are mindful of sponsors, their contributions to the tour, and you do exert a great deal of effort to make sure they get the recognition they deserve by supporting your tour.

That said, I am speaking from a player's point of view, and I am sure there are others who may not have the same opinion as me.

Let me give you one example, Mike. I am going to say it is a hyopthetical example, but it mirrors almost exactly one tour I am familiar with.

There is an annual tour card that costs $25. Each entry fee to the event is $75, and 38 percent of all monies collected from entry feels is not paid out in the tournament payouts. Rather, this 38 percent is used to sustain the tour, pay for the expenses, AND $5 from every single $75 entry fee collected throughout the entire tour of 12 to 15 events is put in an escrow account, which is to be the monies added for the Season Finale.

So every time a player pays a $75 entry fee, not only is 38 percent of that entry fee used to sustain the tour, but $5 of their entry fee goes to the Season Finale tournament. Some pros got to play for "free," those who were sponsored by the tour's main sponsor. That didn't sit well with some tour members either.

Why should Efren Reyes -- I'm not picking on Efren, just using him as an example -- be allowed to play in one tournament only, the Season Finale, when the dues-paying card-holders of this tour, their monies in a way sustained the tour? 38 percent, Mike, is a big chunk of change to cut out of tournament entry fees collected, to include $5 from every single entry fee throughout an entire year of the tour, 12 to 15 events, 100-plus competitors at each event. That's a lot of $5.

Now, on the one hand, the host pool room owner would love to have Efren Reyes attend his Season Finale. On the other hand, those players who were loyal to the tour, attending every single event, paying their $75 entry fees and tour cards, know they ain't got a chance in hell to win against Efren. Efren walks away with the $3,000 first-place prize monies, consisting of all those $5 collected throughout the year.

This is, again, a hypothetical example, but one which I hope illustrates the dues-paying tour member's point of view. :p

We used to go to weekly tournaments in our area, $25 entry fee, a few years ago on a regular basis. There were some players at these weekly 9-ball tourneys who did not like Mike Davis and/or Keith McCready playing in those weekly events. They didn't think it was fair. Truth be told, though, the local bangers in my neck of the woods are so strong that Keith and Mike didn't win as much as one might think at these weekly $25-entry-fee 9-ball tournaments. We do have some strong local players in my neck of the woods, which consist of BCA instructors, action men, retired pros, and young guns. ;)

JAM
 
Last edited:
so we heard the players perspective and the td's perspective. now heres a fans perspective. i rarely play in tournaments b/c truthfully i am just not that great a player, but i love to watch a great match.

i love season finales that bring in big name players! i'm most familar with the Joss NE finales at turningstone. where else can i see two giants of pool sqare off for free? where else can i see a local great make a great run against world champs? dont the local players like a chance to play the best?

so whatever needs to be done from the business prospective is fine with me, but this pool fan loves these kinds of events. i just wouldnt drive 3 hours to turningstone if the champions werent going to be there. and thats exactly what the sponsors what.

brian
 
frankncali said:
There are always different views. For me I always look at what I am getting out of my money and if its worth it.

I don't mind getting in events when I don't have a reasonable shot at finishing high IF I think it will be worth it. Honestly not playing and putting that money towards more practice and lessons would be better spent.

If we are looking at $20-30 as a random amount then its not alot of money. However, if we consider it on top of a entry fee and for an event in which we just want to see how we do (deadweight) then the additional amount matters.
One reason that I like the AM events that are poping up is that it provides a place for the majority of players. I would feel much better about paying an additional amount in an event that I was not going to be run over and embarrased in playing.

Pool players are considered cheap and probably well deserved but they also are spending money nightly, weekly and monthly playing.

Setting price points in any business is extremely tough yet one of the most important aspects. Its not an exact science for sure.

As for Tour membership fees vs greens fees.... I would pay the tour 10 x as fast as a greens fee. The tour is the one bringing the biz to the rooms.

Frank,
You bring up a lot of excellent points. Often, when I enter a tournament, although I have every intention of winning every match and making every ball I shoot at, I run up against players who have devoted their whole life to the game. They often have more talent, more experience and more time on the table than I have. I always enjoy competing against better players and it hasn't killed me yet but I think that perhaps the answer that I am looking for is more down this line: I think that Amateur players from out of state (who are not likely to play in the tour more than once a year) playing in Open tournaments should have 100% of their annual fees waived. If they play a second time, they have to pay the annual fee.

The amateur tournaments popping up around the country are a big plus for players at our speed. Unfortunately, it will probably leave a hole for those who try to make a living playing on the Open Pool Tournament Trail. Regardless if the amateur tournaments make it to my part of the world, I will continue to try and support the regional and national open tournaments when I can justify time and money.

Currently, there are no amateur tours operating in our area.
JoeyA
 
MikeJanis said:
Jam, I rarely disagree with you but on this one, I HAVE TO.

Right now it is tough enough to sell events to room owners and sponsors alike. A reason to keep people away from an event would just be bad business for everyone. As long as a player pays a membership fee and/or a higher entry fee they to should be allowed to play.

Mj

When dealing with open events, what if the majority of the players say,
I can just pay extra and go to the finals? They can hit some of the other
tours that fall on the same weekend as your tour stops and save all the
travel expenses.
I don't think you are doing the other participating rooms right by not requiring players to qualify for the finals and support them also.
I hope the amateur events are not set the same way. The better
players will come in for the $2500 added events, take home the cash
and you won't see them the rest of the season.
 
Back
Top