Thoughts
Hello,
I check in from time to time on the forums and more often than not, I want to respond, but because of my more recent (last three years) association with the WPBA (former board member, now chair of Strategic Partners and Production Committees), I’ve felt that my communiqué on a public forum was not appropriate. Hopefully the “regulars” view my past posts (in defense of Allison, or something else erroneous), as factual and a reality check. I’m direct, and while I pride myself on being diplomatic, certain issues get my blood flowing.
The internal issues with the WPBA are complex. Firstly, as many of you know, it’s predominantly a volunteer-run organization, which presents many challenges and are too many too expound upon now. Secondly, the structure of the organization (i.e. bylaws, or more importantly, the perception of the bylaws by the members), gives an inaccurate sense of entitlement to the members with regard to certain business decisions (format, field size, prize fund), which causes much of the hoopla that occurs on these forums. In my opinion, 1 and 25 posts actually have a clear understanding of what’s really going on. Most of it is speculation or misinformation that friends have received from players, who think they know, but actually have a subjective view. This isn’t meant to attack the players. It would be impossible (unless they sat in on board calls and spent countless hours running the organization) for them to fully grasp the internal dynamics and struggles the WPBA faces. At its core, it continues to operate like a “mom-and-pop”, very family oriented.
In my opinion, the first and most positive step the WPBA could take is to higher an Executive Director. The WPBA desperately needs leadership, not because others aren’t working tirelessly, but because they are volunteer and the accountability process is unreliable, which isn’t any one person's fault. A non-conflicting ED or management team would make a world of difference in assuring that tasks are being completed and that the vision/mission of the organization is being met.
With that in mind, the second positive step would be to redefine the mission/vision of the WPBA. It’s not the same organization it was 20 years ago, let alone the last five years. The available markets, exposure, player caliber, revenue opportunities, etc. are vastly different and continue to evolve into new initiatives that will require considerable attention to ensure the WPBA remains the leading women’s billiard organization. From my standpoint, the ideal vision/mission is multi-faceted and the direction far exceeds “promoting” events. Like the PGA, LPGA, etc., the WPBA needs to position itself as the premier women’s tour by introducing International and Domestic recognition that is fueled by first-class events, offering unique exposure to its partners, but placing a significant emphasis on its “stars”, programming, and community involvement.
Additionally, the programming and show quality, creativity, content, etc. needs to change, as well. I’ve had the pleasure of traveling to many parts of the World and have witnessed the varying levels of event branding and program editing that goes on for other events including pool and snooker. While the WPBA is mostly known for its ESPN exposure domestically, I can assure you that it reaches 10x more audiences Internationally; therefore, it’s within the best interest of the WPBA to cater to a new kind of market, while at the same time, reinvent itself Domestically. Ideally, the WPBA should seek time-buys or dedicated slots Domestically (i.e. PBA) whereby fans are familiar with when it’s going to be on and statistically we are able to determine the success of shows based on a multitude of variables. At this point (random scheduling), it’s very difficult to know the demographical “trends”, and the WPBA is at the mercy of ESPN’s discretion, which ultimately affects the value of the programming.
Regarding the topic/original thread, all major sports organizations have their members under some contract and those members must abide by certain rules. Every corporation has a similar agreement, parts of which refer to “conflict of interest”… Obvisously, Google doesn’t want its employees sharing new ideas with MS, and vice versa. The problem is that WPBA players aren’t “making-a-living” so the expectation of the rules becomes harder to enforce, but I’m not sure that means that the WPBA needs to relinquish them entirely. I’m not in favor of some of the guidelines given the current state of the WPBA; however, in an ideal business (i.e. profitable for players), I think they are acceptable.
I could go on and on about the many other challenges, including the regional tours, obligations to players, lack of standardized rules globally and the enormous effort it will take to establish this policy worldwide, the economy and securing sponsorship in and out of the industry, etc.
If anyone has a serious concern for the WPBA, i.e. wants to make a difference without complaining, then feel free to contact me (kcarter@wpba.com) for information.
Thanks.
Kristi
