Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Hypothetical USA curling club with 100-150 members, like all organizations needs to keep handle on expenses and on dues. Should club increase its net revenue by stopping USCA membership? Does the club realize benefits from its USCA membership or is it better off retaining those dollars. Does answer change if club is new or well established? If club has fewer or more members? Just wondering...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: New York
Posts: 592

You are correct my friend, USCA does nothing for the Tuesday night curler. Should we pay GNCC dues? What do we get? Zip ,Nada, Nothing.... I will say that Da Olympics is key, we need a presence.. But at what price? Curlers curl because they like the club the atmosphere and the people, if that ever stops we're done......

__________________
We'll see you on the Ice! Willy

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2012
Location:
Posts: 324

I flipped through the last USCA curling news again a couple of nights ago. Only Tuck had any item truly geared to club curling or the "Spirit of Curling" when he promoted the importance (to competitive curler readers) of going to bonspiels including outdoor events. Thank you, Tuck!

Not a single photo of the S.O.B. 1st ever outdoor event in Idaho complete with light strips routered into the ice.... Nor of the neon rings of Nutmeg's blacklight event.... No pix of the first curling on natural ice in California this winter. Just the lists and pix of winners of spiels and tournaments.

Not a single item about how a new club is growing. Nor an item about how any club overcame near death. No update on the new dedicated ice facility in Portland or the club which rebuilt after a fire. Where are the pix and huzzahs for them?

Instead, 90% of the content is about winners of competitive events.

If I could join a local club and just pay dues to national through annual membership in my region if I want to compete outside clubs, I would do so. The majority in my club playing in leagues are likely to do the same. And until USCA spreads around "elite" money more than just to a favored few in one or two regions - who are not always truly dominant in all competitions - I suspect most competitive curlers would withhold dues, too, if they could opt out. Spirit of Curling sheep supporting a few wolves. Is that what we majority of the flock have become?

It is time for the USCA board to be accountable to all competitive curlers and all club curlers instead of just the USOC and TV networks.

Last edited by Alice on 04-08-13 at 12:50AM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: US - CT
Posts: 1431

One thing the GNCC does is run the very well attended 5 and under events. Proving patches, pins and trophies. There have been some very good presentations made at the annual meeting including one on how to handle the Olympic influx. There is a PDF file on the GNCC website (under "ABOUT") that describes all the things that GNCC curlers get for their dues.

The USCA also provides insurance to member clubs for liability. I believe there is an article on the USCA site as well about what they do for curlers.

To answer the original hypothetical question - that would be a good debate. I think you would need to figure out additional costs such as private insurance and what the net affect would be to the club.

JH

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

Availability of insurance is not a very strong selling poing, I'm afraid. It's great that GNCC provides special events for members. I guess USCA promotes arena championship but that is limited primarily to new clubs. And state associations and USCA do have club nationals and mixed nationals [though not sure how much USCA spends on those events], but only a small percentage of club curlers are interested in those events. Seems that USCA should allow curlers to choose if they wish to belong or not - more competitive curlers might say yes but I fear that most club curlers would not be interested. Most club curlers are hardly aware of USCA -- I wonder how many of them know how much of their club dues goes to USCA [and it ain't pennies anymore].

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Sep 2002
Location: US - CT
Posts: 1431

Well, the USCA spring meeting is coming up at the end of the month in Minneapolis. All are invited to attend. I would be great to see people that are concerned there and expressing those concerns. I would also urge you to speak with your rep and have them express those concerns.

If you make it, look me up. I will buy the first beer.

Jeff Hannon
USCA director from GNCC

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 136

I think I wrote something very similar about my club about two years ago. About the same , 100 to 150 members, Midwest, small town so frankly olympic coverage is difficult to capitalize on because of the small population base and not many big companies to go to for sponsorships. The bottom line was bad. I think I vented and or commiserated here. If I remember right, tuck and chapnlie both noted similar clubs that had regretfully disappeared in ND. It was a temptation to cut ties, but we decided to be as creative as we could.
The liability insurance was a bit more important to us and although we don't have much for mens or womens competitive curlers our junior program churns out competitive curlers like crazy. Things we did - golf tournament in summer, sell a few parking spots by the club, sell rocks so that if the club folds person will get those rocks, one day spiels with voluntary donation, some luck with on ice advertising, local couple actually did outdoor spiel for many years, rent ice to school, starting to attract more Iowans and groups in. No major breakdowns recently either. It does seem that clubs that get out are often getting back in a couple years later, but I know where you are coming from. Best of luck. clutch

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2008
Location:
Posts: 209

Wisconsin had a club opt out of WSCA and USCA dues a few years back for several years but are now enrolled again.

We also have another club that just withdrew this year.

Sometimes that $2500-$4000 every year can make a huge difference in the finances of a club.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Nov 2007
Location:
Posts: 142

I get the financial strain that all clubs are under. Still the USCA does offer something back in return. I remember a lengthy response from John Benton a few years ago regarding this same issue in which he did a great job outlining the programs and benefits of membership.

I know on the surface the focus has been on High Performance. I also feel like we a holding an empty bag with the departure of Scott Higgins. After 6 years all we have to show for a grass roots coaching program is a framework and some glitzy promo material. There is no intellectual property. This would have made a big difference to clubs, their juniors, and entry level competitive curlers. This chapte is behind us now and someone will pick up the pieces and move forward.

Yet, things are getting done. The arena curling program is making great strides. Instruction is staged to train the next army of regional course conductors next month in order to help clubs take advantage of the surge of interest coming with the Olympics. Yes, we still have a sure bet with the Women�s teams. A lot of volunteer effort has gone in to making this program a first rate course.

I think we need to look at it the other way. Instead of what do we get out of membership, how about, what does our membership help drive. You give to church to build a greater good. Same with charitable donations, not expecting anything in return but with the hope that you can be part of building something you believe in. We all believe in curling and want it to thrive in the USA. Hopefully we will all be part of that success.

Dave Jensen

Not running for anything...trust me

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 136

Dave went where I was afraid to go. By being part of a larger organization, it is the price we pay to promote the game we love. Now it is true, you can probably reap many of the benefits of that promotion without being a member club. My club is in such a small town that it is difficult to do that, but it can be done. I think JB posed this question a couple years ago too What do you want ? What do we want ? Above, Alice talked about more club related info in the Curling News - gosh I think the board and staff would be responsive to that. I know the budget is limited, but we have a relatively lean, creative, intelligent board and staff that will be as responsive as possible to their clubs - at least that is what I believe. On the other hand, I don't presume to know the specific situation of any club besides my own. Curling clubs truly are the lifeblood of curling. Best Wishes.

clutch

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

My question really was hypothetical -- not descriptive of my club at all -- but I really do wonder whether my club's dues could not be better spent at home than at the USCA. I get the argument that we are really investing in the future of curling. But in spite of what USCA says, it seems to me that the the primary focus of USCA is whatever the USOC says it should be, and I am searching for real tangible benefits that my club gets for the significant dues we are paying. I don't question that Olympic exposure has helped grow the game but I also do not see Olympic curling as a panacea for our sport. Instead I see a sport divided -- competitive curlers and the rest of us -- where there did not used to be any division. So where the USCA probably once did represent all curlers, I am not so sure that is still the case. And if it is not, are clubs being fair to their members by requiring them to pay national and state dues as part of their club membership fees? I suspect that many curlers do not even know that they are paying national dues or, if they do, how much those dues are. If clubs gave their members a choice of whether to pay or not and members thus looked at what they were getting for those dues, I wonder how many would say yes?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 282

quote:

---

Originally posted by clutch
...By being part of a larger organization, it is the price we pay to promote the game we love...
Alice talked about more club related info in the Curling News - gosh I think the board and staff would be responsive to that. I know the budget is limited, but we have a relatively lean, creative, intelligent board and staff that will be as responsive as possible to their clubs....
clutch

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613

Should a struggling club continue to be a member of the USCA?

Here is my short answer:

Yes, continue to pay dues as best as you can. Where would the sport be if our fathers opted out? Where would we be now? What would the game look like if those who came before us had answered the same question differently? Icemaking? Growth? Competitive play? Coverage?

Not all is good and that is a big check to write from a small account...but not all is bad.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

I appreciate what the USCA has done with dues that our father paid... but am concerned now about what the USCA does with the dues that I pay today. It seems that nearly all of those curlers who paid dues in the past realized some benefits for doing so. I wonder how many of the curlers paying dues today are getting much for them. I wonder if most of them even know they are paying national dues and if they can identify the benefits of doing so. With all the time/money/focus given to competitive curling and to chasing the holy grail that is the Olympics, I really wonder what the club curler gets for his/her dues which, not incidentally, have become much, much higher than the dues paid by our fathers.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Houghton, MI
Posts: 17

As a member of the USCA Board of Directors, you now have my ear...

The Individual Member dues for the USCA is $28.

I will now turn the question around, what would you regard as a "good value" for the average "Tuesday League" for that $28? What would you expect the USCA to deliver to you for $28?

Gordon Maclean, USCA Rep from the GLCA

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Oct 2012
Location:
Posts: 11

For the hypothetical club, $28 per member ends up being $2800-$4200. No doubt that money would be better spent on improvements to the club or whatever else, instead of sending it to the USCA, who spends it on high performance teams and coaches, which don't benefit the club at all. It seems silly to give someone your money when they're going to use it to pursue the interests of someone else who is giving them more money (USOC). The USCA used to do a lot of good stuff growing participation before the USOC and Olympics got brought into the mix, the US teams were much more successful at world competitions, the bonspiels were doing well, and we had playdown numbers we can't come close to touching anymore.

If the USCA want to make a good effort to grow the game, then the clubs should support them. But looking at a completely wasted opportunity and a game shrinking since it became an Olympic sport, I just don't see that happening. Maybe the sport has grown somewhere else, but it sure hasn't been in Minnesota (which should a major concern if they're looking for medals). If the USCA wants to spend its money trying to manufacture a curling team, clubs (or curlers) should just keep their money.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Dec 2005
Location: St. Thomas, North Dakota
Posts: 2613

I'm not on the Board, nor have I ever been on the Board, but I think those are assumptions and differ from the facts.

Competitive programs tend to be totally funded by the US Olympic Committee. The USOC also supplies funding for some of the USCA staff. Our dues go towards different programs.

I also believe that the real numbers nationwide show that curling was in steady decline before becoming an Olympic sport. That trend has been totally reversed and now shows growth. Granted, there is not growth everywhere

Looked upon as $28 a curler, the dues seem reasonable and not burdensome. Multiplied by 100 or 200 curlers, it becomes a very large budget item. My thinking when I served on club boards was that certain money was never really ours...we were merely collecting it for the state and national organizations.

Do we get our $28 worth? I think so, but it is certainly debatable. My contention that we would be far worse off if there was never a USCA remains pretty much unchallenged. Going forward, I think the future is brighter with a strong USCA than it will be without it.

Ben Tucker

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2011
Location:
Posts: 136

Everyone above makes fair points. We do have a situation with our juniors where their dues are fifty bucks for the season. So if about thirty goes to national and local organizations, that means the club gets twenty for lets say 15 games but they can actually play an extra night at no extra charge so the club gets twenty dollars for twenty five games - not a good deal for the club but a great deal for everyone else. I don't want to write out a bigger check at the beginning of the year, but obviously our junior dues should be increased. The pessimist says would say we train the kids and then they go live and curl in the Twin Cities, the optimist says a few stay home , curl and become icemakers and board members. We don't really take advantage of any training opportunities sponsored by the USCA, but we have been blessed to have Larry Barott who has taught or coached hundreds upon hundreds of young people. We do have many juniors who have participated in playdowns, U-18, etc... over the years. Just this year, Myers and Gartner played with Persinger in nationals and Landsteiner played with Shoostie, Howie and Jaeger played at junior nats with Tony Wright, some of our kids just got back from U-18 , and we have couple of real nice junior teams one which should challenge for title next year - not sure if this model is financially sustainable but it does churn out excellent curlers. clutch

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2009
Location:
Posts: 99

You want more money for the USCA to spread around to other programs without raising your $28/person dues?

There is a simple answer... Help the USCA by approving the new governance when it comes around again. One of the biggest reasons for the USCA trying to change the structure of their board of directors and the way it runs is to bring in more fundraising from sources they previously could not reach. By having a certain number of members on the board that are not familiar with curling but ARE familiar with running nationally successful businesses and non-profits we have people that can only help our cause in ways we couldn't before.

My club has seen this first hand. They tried for years to fund raise knowing we needed a new building. We got lucky enough to bring some very successful business-minded people into our club as parents of youth curlers. They eventually became curlers as well and saw our struggles first hand. Now with their knowledge and connections we are breaking ground on our new building later this month. We raised 99% more funds in the last 2 years with their help than the 10 years before that.

The USCA is not some big corporation out to screw everyone for medals and money. They have goals for the good of all of us and plans to get there. If you don't trust them to do it, then keep your $28/person in the club, or step up and be part of it yourself. I for one, gladly pay my dues and trust it to be used accordingly.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2009
Location:
Posts: 695

I would like to see the USCA get the clubs some help on icemaking and, yep I'll say it, papering stones. I curled at approximately 20 clubs this year and less than half had two feet of curl. Where is the help to get quality ice in our clubs? The best ice. I played on this year had brought in their own outside help to show them the way.

I am sure for $4000 you could fly a Canadian down to teach you how to improve ice.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2005
Location:
Posts: 282

quote:

---

Originally posted by biterbar
I would like to see the USCA get the clubs some help on icemaking and, yep I'll say it, papering stones. I curled at approximately 20 clubs this year and less than half had two feet of curl. Where is the help to get quality ice in our clubs? The best ice. I played on this year had brought in their own outside help to show them the way.

I am sure for $4000 you could fly a Canadian down to teach you how to improve ice.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

quote:

---

Originally posted by gmaclean
As a member of the USCA Board of Directors, you now have my ear...

The Individual Member dues for the USCA is $28.

I will now turn the question around, what would you regard as a "good value" for the average "Tuesday League" for that $28? What would you expect the USCA to deliver to you for $28?

Gordon Maclean, USCA Rep from the GLCA

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Houghton, MI
Posts: 17

Thanks for the thoughts so far. As far as the last point regarding a separation between the club curler and the competitive curler, I dont entirely agree with the assertion. Last summer I took a team of first time bonspielers to the Green Bay Summerspiel, and the event was loaded with names that we all would recognize. Naturally we got creamed, BUT after every game against our "name" opponents, they spent time just being "regular" curlers. My teammates spent most of the drive home talking about how cool it was to meet so and so. But that is a summer event and none of the competitive curlers were really there to hone skills.

I think that you have to remember that the curling world is MUCH more competitive than it was even 10 years ago. The players who strive compete against the likes of Kevin Martin et.al. can't afford to be club curlers or "regular" bonspielers. The challenge for them just isnt there if the goal is to compete against the best in the world, any more than a professional baseball player would stand a chance if they spent their time playing in community leagues.

For better or worse, that aspect of the curling world has changed dramatically and we cannot expect the model that used to work, to be the model that will work now.

As to Ice Tech courses, things are changing there and look for just that type of thing in the not to distant future. In the past year or so Kim Nawyn (Growth and Development Manager) has been working on some pretty impressive things that you should start seeing more prominently next Fall. Part of the problem is that there has been a lack of consistency in the past between courses around the country (and not just in Ice Tech). So there has been a step back in the past year to get everybody on the same page. These efforts take some time but in the long run, everyone will benefit.

The numbers for this year are not in yet, but in the 2011-12 season the USCA conducted 14 Level 1 Instructor Clinics, five Level 2 Instructor Clinics, and 13 Officiating Clinics throughout the United States plus three Skills Camps with 163 club curlers in attendance. I would imagine that many clubs benefited from those events alone.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2013
Location:
Posts: 812

I am not suggesting for a minute that the curling world has not changed, although I don't know that it follows that competitive curlers cannot be club curlers. Since the USCA's prime focus has become Olympic curling, then it is the USCA's job to sell themselves to curling clubs and their members. If they had done a better job of doing that, then we would not hear curlers and clubs questioning the value of membership. Instructor clinics are great but Officiating clinics are of little value to most clubs. While we have seen growth in arena curling, look at the number of relatively smaller clubs that have folded in recent years. Maybe USCA can help clubs get kids involved in curling again as they are doing in Manitoba to try to stop the demise of older clubs http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/op...-196406381.html

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jan 2007
Location: Dartmouth, NS
Posts: 207

While the Carberry club bought the Rocks and Rings set (you question paying a couple of dollars to the USCA but you would pay $500 for you to own own Rocks and Rings? http://floorcurl.com/order-now/), it is available throughout Canada and in the a small area of the US sponsored by Capital One.

http://rocksandrings.com/

in the US, http://rocksandrings.com/usa/

Any Canadian curling club that left the CCA would automatically lose at least 25% and likely more likely 50+% of it's membership. Any Canadian curling club that has a provincial champion, and particularly a Canadian champion, usually has a 10% to 20% membership increase the next year (among your proverbial Tuesday Night League particularly), and a Canadian club which stumbles and loses competitive respect usually has a steep drop in all levels of membership. Being able to rub elbows with a provincial or Canadian champion in your own club is a boon to membership in all levels in that club.

To a Canadian curling club, leaving the provincial association and/or CCA would be tantamount to suicide for that club.

Of course, US curling is still in the horse and buggy days at all levels.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged