. Ok let's rack this off cos we're both having trouble understanding each other.I 'll try and be quick
Giles thing about the gun is this..
a) Environmental issue - they could stop us playing in the woods. I'm not well up on this, but... effectively it stops paintball but it doesn't ban it.
b) Public don't like image summat happens and they ban paintball. It's a point of semantics but how do you ban paintball? Do they say it is illegal for people to gather in the woods? It is illegal to wear camo? It is illeagal to organise yourself into teams and shoot paint at each other. OK. But that doesn't stop me owning a paintball marker and therefore the problem is still there. Take away my marker and I cannot play, easy rule and it effects no other group's rights.
I know I go on about shooting, but it is similar. They didn't ban shooting, they banned the gun. You tell me how you can ban paintball other than banning the gun?
Nick, to be frank I can't be arsed to go through all your points, as you can't mine so please don't get upset. I think these issues are important, but perhaps it's best to leave them until a face to face.
I am not well up on the german situation - please explain on what grounds they are banning it, and how effectively they are going about it? Are they banning the gun? Or are they banning paintball? See my point to Giles. Ithink this is the crux of our misunderstanding each other.
I am a bit precious, but I kinda get touchy people giving me lessons in marketing paintball. Email me and I'll explain more fully.
My comments on recball boil down to this:if it wasn't for the number of people playing non tournament paintball, there would be no paintball. A paint manufacturer could not survive on the paint that tourny players use. They would go out of business. There would be no tourny paintball without the rec market. Hence my original comment, "get down on your knees and thank them".
About wdp et al. You can't bring that up as an argument and then when you lose it, say it's not relevant. You're just tying my hands behind my back. The wdp point demonstrates my whole argument, pick another company and I'll show you the same.
Q: Do you think it would benefit paintball, if local sites were able to offer tournament style paintball to customers ?
A: Yes, but not exclusively.
Q: Do you believe site owners could maintain, or even expand, their present turnover by doing so ?
A: Expand? No. Not at the moment. Why do you?
Q:- Do you think altering the image of paintball (from wargames to sport) to the general public would be benificial ?
A: Yes. But it's not the panacea you believe it to be.
Q
o you believe it makes sense to market tournament paintball to the public, when they cannot try it at their local sites ?
A: Yes, I think the public get interested in paintball, not tournies. Any kind of responible coverage is good.
Q: Do you think it would benefit all concerned financially (site owners, tournament players, punters, manufacturers, etc.) if if paintball was essentially the same "product" from top to bottom ?
A: NO. Tournament paintball (these days) is elitist. How many paintballers the world over would give up (or play less) if you made them play tourney style rec days? More than you would attract.
How's that?
Hey I like this.