POLL What's the right price point for PRO/AMs in The West

[kmah]

What's the right price point for shared weight 2 day PRO/AMs in The West

All in

Pro entry fee

Consider what is paid out on the back end.

[Rich hamilton]

Ken,

Great question. For me it is about getting out and doing it at a reasonable price ($400) and not having to feel finnancial pressure. I would like to see realistic paybacks (lower) with more events.

Folks base and advertise paybacks at a 150 boat field which will not happen in california until the unemployment rate drops drastically.

My thought process is this on northern california lakes: $400 for entry fee, $400 lodging, $400 fuel/oil, $200 on tackle and food. $1400 to just break even. If you look at most paybacks that is a top ten finish.

I would like to see the paybacks spread down the line and not top heavy.
I have tried to not complain about the fees for this year in the pro/ams offered but as my post indicates I do not like the structure.

Simply put, lets charge and fish for the available money out there in this finnancial time period and be realistic with payback and entry fee. Organizations want to charge what they think the industry will bear versus listening to the current finnancial situation and the data available to make sound finnancial judgements.

[crawdaddy]

Since I just ponied up $700 for the WON Bass on Oroville I would have to say that. Ideally I feel $400 with options for the shared weight stuff and $800 for the non-shared weight. I just can't see paying any higher for a shared weight format.

[Kenny Webb]

Rich Hamilton nailed it.

Ken,

Great question. For me it is about getting out and doing it at a reasonable price ($400) and not having to feel finnancial pressure. I would like to see realistic paybacks (lower) with more events.

Folks base and advertise paybacks at a 150 boat field which will not happen in california until the unemployment rate drops drastically.

My thought process is this on northern california lakes: $400 for entry fee, $400 lodging, $400 fuel/oil, $200 on tackle and food. $1400 to just break even. If you look at most paybacks that is a top ten finish.

I would like to see the paybacks spread down the line and not top heavy.
I have tried to not complain about the fees for this year in the pro/ams offered but as my post indicates I do not like the structure.

Simply put, lets charge and fish for the available money out there in this finnancial time period and be realistic with payback and entry fee. Organizations want to charge what they think the industry will bear versus listening to the current finnancial situation and the data available to make sound finnancial judgements.

[GW]

ya, what Rich said. There are alot of folks being priced out of it right now, and you wonder why the FPT / BBT are doing so well.....and actually adding sponsors.....not that I am a huge fan of these "rookie leagues" (unless used properly) but they are doing something right.

[Cooch]

I'm kinda right there with Rich with the points he's mentioned. I don't know that coming to a "price point" consensus is the place ta start in today's economy to attract anglers. Personally, in my mind, Shared weight Pro-Ams are just a high end Team Tournament. There was a point in time, where this worked for the western anglers. $400-600 entry fee, we fished for a boat and paybacks were enticing down the line to keep anglers comming back and these events were the only game in town. That's all changed, as we began to get into a position where we are simply fishing for our own money. The fact that BASS & FLW poked their heads into the west in the late 90s and early 2000s, showed anglers a different ball game from a competative standpoint, true Pro-Ams for bigger bucks. These two circuits worked great initially, yet fields by comparison to the rest of the country, failed to fill. BASS left, as did half of the FLW events(BFL Included). With the falling economy, those high end entry fee tournaments became less attractive to the average angler, who were participating back then. Today, both Pro-Am tournament options, shared and non-shared weight, are suffering from participation, and I believe it is indeed directly related to the economy.

Personally, I'll never fish another "shared weight" event, no matter what the cost of entry fee is, as long as we are simply fishing for each others entry fees. If I'm gonna fish a team event for that kinda money, I want to dictate who my partner is. This is one of several reasons that tipped the scales in my decision to get out of tournament fishing. Shared weight Pro-Ams, did not satisfy my individual competative Ego.

[rickyshabazz]

Great post Ken. No comment!

[GKramer]

I would feel a lot better about this conversation if the poll sampling were more like 200 to 300 guys in a 5-day period--not 23. I know that my number is different than someone else's, but it seems like guys are hiding their preference for little entry fees. The economy is the biggest issue, of course. Once we had 40 to 60 tradesmen and 10 to 12 building contractors fishing regularly in the lower end of the state. It was those 30- to 40-something, outdoor types with chunks of disposable income that filled out the fields. Today, the fields are only made up of accountants.

[doug77]

George
The field doesnt have just accountants.The lawyers and people that claim state disability still have the money to fish-especially the ones with back problems( at least in California)

[El Grande]

Please don't blast me on this but just trying to understand why the price difference for shared weight vs. non shadred weights.

[calfisher71]

I think 300 Pro Entry then options up to 450-500

Lets get the boat count and participation numbers up!

[bazs]

The thing I don't understand with us western anglers is why guys are willing to risk money with only a small opportunity to make any profit. I fully understand that times are tough and there is not a lot of extra cash in most guys pockets. I'm right there with you, but with a low entry comes a super low payout. What I see is a ton of guys who want to fish tourneys for tourneys sake.
When I was finally able to get into tournaments, after I graduated college, there were only pro ams really and you saved up and put in as much work as you could and competed and tried to make some fishing money. Now a days guys are so tempted with ultra low entry "semi pro" style events that the pool of anglers are to spread out and all circuits suffer. While "semi pro" events are great testing grounds for newcomers they should be limited to just that, temporary proving grounds.
What I say is necessary is a maximum amount of time a guy can spend in the "semi pro" ranks. If folks don't want to move up then they can return to club events. If they like the tournaments then its time to make the next step. There are a ton of great anglers picking on the semi pros and never stepping up so they will not loose their eligibility. Those circuits draw the biggest numbers and guys are happy to put up small entries with a very small chance of profitability.
Money is tight but why risk any money with no real chance of making any back? At least with a $600 or more entry fee allows for some real money to be available in the checks.

And for the reason why I and others are willing to pay more for non shared weight events is simple in my opinion. I am not competing with the co angler that catches a kicker for his pro. I will be putting up more money to only compete against the others in my division..

What do you guys think? I have tough skin

Tight lines
Zack Thompson
Aka Bazs

[Colebass]

There is no question that the west is different. The economy is the west is also worse than the rest of the country as far as wages vs housing prices. if you live in Arkansas, Oklahoma, LA or MS and your house cost is $175K or below then it's a different story. But living in California where a decent area is $300K plus! You can't go gamble 4-10 weekend a year on Fishing. How many people really only fish for a living in the entire US? I'd bet on the high side 300 people. I'm sure some will disagree but many of the guys you name have "other" jobs! The are reps for products, they do construction, they guide etc. etc. And of the 300, how many live in the west? My educated guest is less than 30.

My point here is simple! If you want to draw "Pro's" (experienced anglers) and grow the sport, make the entry $300-500 with no option. Run the Am (people afraid to put it on the line or casual angler) $150. Make the payback 100% for Pro's and 50% for Am's, give away some tackle to both groups at the draw, more tackle to the am's as payback and call it good. Shared weight? That's fine but non-shared would be better in the long run as it's trains the each angler to catch their own fish and would help in their growth towards a BASS or FLW career if they so desire.

Just my .02

DC

[dwise]

Back in the old days there wasn't a shared weight format. BUT the boater had to give up control of the bow for half the day, and the non-boater could pick spots to fish.

Then came the shared weight format, which gave the Pro complete control of the bow all day, and he/she got to pick the fishing spots. The CO doesn't have any say-so.

If the formats were to revert back to a non-shared weight format, are the Pros willing to give up control for half the day to their non-boater?

[bazs]

D-wise,
The back in the day format you mention were "draw" events meaning they were all pro on pro. The entry was the same, there were no co-anglers or am divisions. The non shared weight format Ken and the others refer to is the format FLW employs. The co-anglers fish for their own limit in contrast to events that employ shared weight events like the WON Bass pro ams. In those events the co angler and pro fish for a combined 5 fish limit and both get the credit for the combined weight.
If the format returned to "Draw " events the sharing of boat time would need to be reinstated. Personally I would not mind a return to the old school like the B.A.S.S. Opens used to be but I seriously doubt there would be any support, especially since it seems most guys want to limit entries below $500. Those events were closer to $1000 an event is my memory isn't failing me.
The dilemma the west faces is lack of a cohesion! Pure and simple.

Tight lines,
Zack Thompson
Aka Bazs

[bassmeout]

300 pro side - payback 90%
150 co angler - payback 40% + sponsors gift
50 big fish options -

Guarantees full field .... 150 boats for sure with a chance at maybe 200 boats

Big fish $ - 1st and 2nd - not such a thing as co angler big fish or pro side big fish - one purse for all

50 x 300= 15k
Anglers get 10k
Tourney org = 5k
Big fish 1) 3k x two days
Big fish 2) 2k x two days


150 x 300 = 45k
Tourney org keeps = 4.5k
Payback = 40.5k

150 x 150 = 22.5k
Tourney org keeps = 13.5k
Payback = 9k

Total purse = 82.5k
Anglers = 59.5k
Tourney org = 23k


If tourney org wants to keep an extra 10% of the. Pro side and make it a 80 % payback I'm ok with that ....

[Rich hamilton]

Zack,

Good questions. simply put I fish for fun. When I stop having fun fishing I will quit. The life's lessons etc that came and still come from fishing are priceless.

My perspective about the industry and how it works is derived from experience. Without getting on a long rant I got to watch many folks and learned a lot from them.

These are and were some really cool people. What does this have to do with your question?
Fishing really is not about making money and making a living at it.

There are a few that do but like you said the economy has minimimized that.

So to answer your question, for some of us fishing offers a wide range perspective of life lessons, interacting with people and so on. Sometimes we are lucky enough to cash a few checks along the way which is a bonus.
This is the cold hard truth especially here on the west coast.

[jg]

Well az should find out on numbers at a 350.00 price point. John Murray is putting toghether a pro am on feb 2cd. It will be interesting to see how many boats show up for it.

[Noluk]

Truth for the average fisherman is thus. Most of us are not being asked for what entry fee we can afford to pay.. we are asking what we can most likely donate/lose. There are some pro's in our state who are making money fishing. It is not very many people. How many filed taxes with a positive cash flow listing tournament fishing winnings as their primary source of income. Maybe 20-30 people (not counting our touring pro's from CA.) How many of those made over 65k (a nice full time salary) for the year fishing? Not very dang many is that answer. So if an org is building a fishing trail by planning to appeal to professional CA fisherman they are talking to 20-30 guys. Plus a few more who will join because it is their home lake or they have been doing well lately. The rest of us, with full time jobs and 2 weeks of vacations are going to continue to pass on any offering that is going to cost us more than we can comfortably afford to lose. Side jobs, independent consulting gigs etc. are gone for the most part in my field. So is going a few weeks without pay just so I can go fish on a lake I haven't seen in two years against guys who fished it 75 times last year. Let's not even start with travel time and costs etc with prefsih and everything else thrown in.

Want to get my attention in a pro-am circuit. Build a better mousetrap. I am not looking to ever make a living fishing but I am NEVER going to go work a second job so I can fish a tournament. Make it affordable, make it fun and make it fast. I know this goes against the way things were and always have been. I also know that some true pro's will not be keen on a fishing trail such as this but these are some things that get my attention. Plan the trail for working folks. Got a 3 day weekend.... good weekend to fish. Make it around 300 or so all in and pay 1 in 3 or 1 in 4. Smaller checks throughout the field keep more anglers coming back. Yes the winning money is much lower but the winner is still happy he won and much more of the field will return for the next event as well. You may actually lose a few pros who normally fish pro-ams because the winning pot isn't big enough but there will be people picking up that slack. 300 pro side 175 am side. Payback 85% pro 75% am. Plan a championship. First year may not have much but I bet you can find sponsers for a boat next year if you draw a field. Limit it to 4 2 day events and don't forget that holiday weekends are good. Go out of venues that have affordable lodging or camping options nearby. You want 100 boat fields you are going to have to try something new. I don't think shared weight or catch your own matters too much to the majority of fisherman. I can certainly say that a shared weight is better for the fishery and will result in a much less delayed fish mortality and overall stress to the lake. Ideally it would be 1 day pre-fish (friday) with a Saturday/Sunday tournament. And get the guys back on the road at a reasonable hour on Sunday since many are working on Monday. Announce your dates 90 days or more in advance so we can plan for them around normal lives.

Bottom line Pro/ams are not working In California right now. So maybe it is time to build something for amateur professional and co-anglers. Am-Pro's and Co's might be able to draw some interest. At a minimum there are more Am-Pro's in the fishing pool that there are full-time pro's. And to be honest, all those sponsers that won't step up to a pro-am now, are very interested in appealing to all of those full-time working Amateur pros.

[drew]

Isn't the real question about the payout. The turn out will decline if the entries are too high or too low. Most likely the turn out will be at its maximum with a relatively low entry, but the caliber of the competitors will also be lower. So ultimately its turn out vs quality.
In yesterdays economy it might have been $300-500/day. Today it might be half of that especially in CA were the middle class is losing 50% of their annual earnings to taxes.

[N.A.R]

REDMAN (BFL) ON STEROIDS
100 Boats
Boater 1000.00 entry fee
1st place 10K
2nd place 7K
3rd place 5k
4th place 3.5K
5th - 25th 3k

3 events per year.
Top twenty five will pay your entries for the entire season.
Two top 25's = Profit

Same with the Co-Angler 200-300 (entry fee) non shared weight.

End of story.... Leave the "lotto mentality" at the door...45K for first place? for what...
In the West we have "Pleased" 1 angler when we should "please" 20...
Pretty simple in my opinion....

[Brian D.]

Truth for the average fisherman is thus. Most of us are not being asked for what entry fee we can afford to pay.. we are asking what we can most likely donate/lose. There are some pro's in our state who are making money fishing. It is not very many people. How many filed taxes with a positive cash flow listing tournament fishing winnings as their primary source of income. Maybe 20-30 people (not counting our touring pro's from CA.) How many of those made over 65k (a nice full time salary) for the year fishing? Not very dang many is that answer. So if an org is building a fishing trail by planning to appeal to professional CA fisherman they are talking to 20-30 guys. Plus a few more who will join because it is their home lake or they have been doing well lately. The rest of us, with full time jobs and 2 weeks of vacations are going to continue to pass on any offering that is going to cost us more than we can comfortably afford to lose. Side jobs, independent consulting gigs etc. are gone for the most part in my field. So is going a few weeks without pay just so I can go fish on a lake I haven't seen in two years against guys who fished it 75 times last year. Let's not even start with travel time and costs etc with prefsih and everything else thrown in.

Want to get my attention in a pro-am circuit. Build a better mousetrap. I am not looking to ever make a living fishing but I am NEVER going to go work a second job so I can fish a tournament. Make it affordable, make it fun and make it fast. I know this goes against the way things were and always have been. I also know that some true pro's will not be keen on a fishing trail such as this but these are some things that get my attention. Plan the trail for working folks. Got a 3 day weekend.... good weekend to fish. Make it around 300 or so all in and pay 1 in 3 or 1 in 4. Smaller checks throughout the field keep more anglers coming back. Yes the winning money is much lower but the winner is still happy he won and much more of the field will return for the next event as well. You may actually lose a few pros who normally fish pro-ams because the winning pot isn't big enough but there will be people picking up that slack. 300 pro side 175 am side. Payback 85% pro 75% am. Plan a championship. First year may not have much but I bet you can find sponsers for a boat next year if you draw a field. Limit it to 4 2 day events and don't forget that holiday weekends are good. Go out of venues that have affordable lodging or camping options nearby. You want 100 boat fields you are going to have to try something new. I don't think shared weight or catch your own matters too much to the majority of fisherman. I can certainly say that a shared weight is better for the fishery and will result in a much less delayed fish mortality and overall stress to the lake. Ideally it would be 1 day pre-fish (friday) with a Saturday/Sunday tournament. And get the guys back on the road at a reasonable hour on Sunday since many are working on Monday. Announce your dates 90 days or more in advance so we can plan for them around normal lives.

Bottom line Pro/ams are not working In California right now. So maybe it is time to build something for amateur professional and co-anglers. Am-Pro's and Co's might be able to draw some interest. At a minimum there are more Am-Pro's in the fishing pool that there are full-time pro's. And to be honest, all those sponsers that won't step up to a pro-am now, are very interested in appealing to all of those full-time working Amateur pros.

Some good points George!

[Ceaser]

Zack,

Good questions. simply put I fish for fun. When I stop having fun fishing I will quit. The life's lessons etc that came and still come from fishing are priceless.

My perspective about the industry and how it works is derived from experience. Without getting on a long rant I got to watch many folks and learned a lot from them.

These are and were some really cool people. What does this have to do with your question?
Fishing really is not about making money and making a living at it.

There are a few that do but like you said the economy has minimimized that.

So to answer your question, for some of us fishing offers a wide range perspective of life lessons, interacting with people and so on. Sometimes we are lucky enough to cash a few checks along the way which is a bonus.
This is the cold hard truth especially here on the west coast.

+1

[crawdaddy]

Since the "rookie" leagues were brought up I felt the need to chime in. I fished the FPT for several years and thoroughly enjoyed the experience. I got so tired of hearing people say the "Rookie" leaguers need to step up. A lot of the "step up" crowd were the zip code fishermen. When I stepped up I continued to do like I did in the FPT and FISH ALL OVER!
I invite all the zip code guys to challenge yourself a little bit and learn a new lake and compete out of your comfort zone. Develop a new technique on a new lake, you will be surprised how rewarding it is. Try a tidal water or shallow water fishery or maybe even catching fish in 50 feet of water. I bet if some of the homers would get out a bit and compete we could see a decent rise in our participation numbers.