[SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review

Sun Oct 9 20:45:08 PDT 2016

Thanks Tim.

Is there a reason that we aren’t just offering the incentive for one event? Having free plays all weekend seems excessive to me. The idea is to get the newer players to the tournament to see what tournaments are all about. If they get a free play, they might come. Whether or not they choose to continue coming is up to them. I don’t think we need to continue to give them free plays after 5MP’s.

I agree with those who decided to remove the note from the flyer.

You know me…I am a data girl…and I think more information will be helpful. I certainly wouldn’t have voted to give 0-20 MP free plays all weekend long had I heard this new information.

From: Sbuboard [mailto:sbuboard-bounces+keng=forestridge.org at mailman.celestial.com] On Behalf Of Tim White
Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2016 8:14 PM
To: sbuboard at lists.celestial.com; Sharon Erwin <hilo2015sse at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review

While the board approved addition of the note to the flyer on free entry for players with 0-20 points, a new perspective has come to light suggesting the extent of 0-20 attendance (and its associated financial effect) could be greater than we had recognized or considered.  This is a question not just related to the Feb sectional, but also as a precedent for subsequent tournaments.

Has the Tournament Committee acquired and reviewed historical attendance data for players with 0-20 points at open sectionals, and has an estimate been made of the revenue impact of free plays for these folks?   It has been suggested that Sharon might be able to help us get this info in the same way she tracks down attendance by physical location.

In consultation with a couple of other board members at the NLM sectional tear-down this evening, I do think until these questions are resolved that it would be best to remove the 0-20 free entry note from the flyer.

Sharon,
Perhaps you can gather from this email string the sense of the issue before us.  Would you be able to contact the DICs for our most recent open sectionals (McKenzie for Feb, May and July 2016 and Jeff Jacob for Sept 2016) and seek to acquire data on the number of sessions played in each of these open sectionals by players with 0-20 masterpoints?

Thanks,
Tim

On Oct 9, 2016, at 6:44 PM, JC Chupack <jc.chupack at gmail.com<mailto:jc.chupack at gmail.com>> wrote:

Every piece of data we have suggests that this will end up being a large attendance sectional, between daylight hours on the weekend, Eastside location, preferred location (top ranked in survey), etc. which means this is our best opportunity to do this experiment without risking a negative balance for the tournament as a whole. Nick's recollection is 80% of the 199er, an event that frequently doesn't run because it doesn't have enough tables.  That's exactly why we wanted to offer this kind of incentive.  Those players are exactly who we want to encourage to play and they help fill out an event that we have trouble getting to run at our sectionals.  Offering them free entries is a lot less hassle and likely cheaper than trying to arrange for a guaranteed 199er event, on-site lessons, or any of a number of other things that we'd do to get newer players at the sectionals.

But, we cannot keep delaying the event's finalization, and it will be January before we have another board meeting.  Unless I hear a lot of affirmative perspectives given what's already been discussed, my default will be to remove the 0-20 free from this flyer when it's finalized on Monday (along with the other changes mentioned).

Thanks,
JC

--
JC Chupack
* Find me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, or Twitter: jcchupack

On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Ann Romeo <annromeo at gmail.com<mailto:annromeo at gmail.com>> wrote:
I like the less than 5 for free play at this tournament.  There are lots with less than 20....
BTW, todays turnout was very small--6 teams I think, and 6.5 tables in the pairs.  Yesterday was good, today big drop off.....

romeo

Ann Romeo
Personal email: annromeo at gmail.com<mailto:annromeo at gmail.com>
Local home: 425-392-8417<tel:425-392-8417>
Work email: Ann.Romeo at ORCInternational.com<mailto:Ann.Romeo at ORCInternational.com>
Work direct dial: 212-463-6331<tel:212-463-6331>
My cell: 425-615-1413<tel:425-615-1413>

On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 2:19 PM, Eng, Kim <Keng at forestridge.org<mailto:Keng at forestridge.org>> wrote:
Wow, had no idea the % was that high. What about less than 5 MP’s or less than 10 MP’s? The idea is to welcome new players and try to get them hooked on our tournaments so they can see how fun they are, right? I think once a player has played enough to get 10 MP’s (remember…they are much harder to come by when you are new…I remember it took a few scratches to get me to “1” ☺), they have already decided they enjoy the game and will continue coming back.

From: Sbuboard [mailto:sbuboard-bounces+keng<mailto:sbuboard-bounces%2Bkeng>=forestridge.org at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:forestridge.org at mailman.celestial.com>] On Behalf Of Tim White
Sent: Sunday, October 9, 2016 9:26 AM
To: Seattle ACBL Unit Board <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>>
Subject: Re: [SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review

Thanks JC,

Agree -- we should definitely change second session Saturday to 3:30.

Also agree with re-wording to "every board matters."

Re, the note about players with under 20 masterpoints play free.  Yes, we agreed to this at the recent board meeting, however some of us were discussing it with Nick yesterday at NSC.  He was surprised and alerted us that in 199er games at open tournaments his recollection is that on the order of 80% of the players have under 20 points.  That's a lot of entry fees.  Going to free plays for <20 points without qualification would make it hard to withdraw it later; the idea arose of calling it a "special" for this tournament and then seeing it's effects.  I'd like to hear John W's assessment of the potential long term financial impact of making the change permanent.

Tim

On Oct 9, 2016, at 8:44 AM, "Eng, Kim" <Keng at forestridge.org<mailto:Keng at forestridge.org>> wrote:

I agree with Mike about possibly adjusting the start times. I am sure people could find a place to eat and get back in time, but it won’t be a relaxing lunch.

Also, the write up about the BAM doesn’t make sense. It should read “every board matters”, not every match.

Thanks!
Kim

From: Sbuboard [mailto:sbuboard-<mailto:sbuboard->bounces+keng=forestridge.org at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:bounces+keng=forestridge.org at mailman.celestial.com>] On Behalf Of JC Chupack
Sent: Saturday, October 8, 2016 9:10 AM
To: Seattle ACBL Unit Board <sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>>
Subject: [SBU Board] Sweetheart Sectional Flyer - for review

Hi all,
Sorry about the delay on this. I ended up with less time on Thurs/Fri than I anticipated (but I picked up some silver points at the Las Vegas sectional, so yay!).
Attached is the draft Sweetheart Sectional flyer for the board's review.  This includes all the modifications we discussed at the past two unit board meetings, including location set to Bothell Union Hall.
Please review by 6pm on Monday.  (In particular, Tim, since you're my co-chair, if you could sign off affirmatively, I'd appreciate it.)
Thanks,
JC
--
JC Chupack
* Find me on Facebook, LinkedIn, Google+, or Twitter: jcchupack
_______________________________________________
Sbuboard mailing list
Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard

_______________________________________________
Sbuboard mailing list
Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard

_______________________________________________
Sbuboard mailing list
Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard

_______________________________________________
Sbuboard mailing list
Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com<mailto:Sbuboard at mailman.celestial.com>
http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/sbuboard

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.celestial.com/pipermail/sbuboard/attachments/20161010/858725fb/attachment-0003.html>