You gotta stop bringin' a knife to a gunfight
Originally posted by Intheno
1--I'm with Baca on this one.
I think that everything should be completely free for the players , and included in the membership fee's (which should be lower - who are they trying to kid...?).
2--If PP can't afford to keep putting on the level of event we all expect now, then they will just have to go out of business, and we will wait around for someone else to do it instead, until they can't afford the expense, and so on.
3--Also, Baca has every right to expect the NPPL to prove the demand for the seats, I am sure they have all the time in the world to do this. If they push the price to $6 a seat they could pay someone to analyse said demand and do a detailed report on which they could base this 'seating referendum' that we all want to see....
4--In the meantime I am sure we would all be happy to go back 2 years and forsake the progress that has been made, because I sure ain't paying $5 for a seat to watch the best teams in the world battle it out. Especially if this is used to improve the quality of event and keep the Super 7 Series a viable financial undertaking.
5--There is one thing though. Are we are saying that the NPPL provides inadequate seating? Don't they provide 10 times more seating than anyone else? How much seating should they provide. Who should pay for this seating? Should Chuck ask the bleacher fairy?
6--I also agree that the NPPL members should get a cut of the gate. Likewise if the event was to lose money, each player should have an invoice sent to them so that this deficit can be made up. It's only fair...
7--I think the basic thing here is that selling seats in itself will not 'bring paintball to the masses'. Presumably the money it generates would be used to do this though...
8--To say that the unsuspecting NPPL 'sheep' are
'dishing out their cash on nothing but blind faith and "free" water',
is insulting both to Pure Promotions and all the players in the NPPL, and is underestimating the intentions of both parties.
9--But then it has always been Comrade Loco's aim to stir the pot, as his last 3 threads have been:
nppl 'discovers new revenue source
chi-town D1 bracked rigged
is a left coast bias in the works?
10--If I had that much suspicion and resentment on board I would give up tournaments altogether, as there seems to be a slim chance that someone could work hard and end up being successful at it, and that would be unfair. Extremely unfair!
11--I look forward to the sport going backwards a few years, I might even be considered a good player again....
1--C for sarcasm. F for accuracy. But a nice try. Put words in my mouth I didn't say and then take a shot, cheap or otherwise. So in terms of a substantial reply you're 0 for 1.
2--Another sad offering. Scare the poor sheep. What would they do without PP? As I stated earlier in this thread PP is entitled to charge whatever they want for whatever they want. If at the end of the day they can't make the endeavor profitable that's their problem. The only aspect of the money gathering I object to is the perpetual crying of poverty while laying the blame on the players. Poor Pure Promotions is taking a bath. We only raised prices and added extra fees because you the player demanded it. It's disingenuous and shows far greater lack of respect for the average player than I ever have. 0 for 2.
3--you should at least read the NPPL Press Releases. Camille claimed the seating is being charged for based on demand. Is it unreasonable to want to know what sort of demand? Apparently it is. And as TicketMaster is responsible for the tickets they will know precisely how many tickets were purchased by players or non-players. Won't require any outside accounting firms or extra labor at all. But again, as I stated previously squeezing a few more bucks from the sheep isn't the issue. Squeeze away. I don't care. Go back and read my posts extra slow and get a 12 yr. old to help you with the big words. 0 for 3.
4--no seat money is a return to the unhappy past. LMAO. Once more with the time honored approach of laying all responsibility for the league's success or failure on the players when it's a convenient rationale for placing more demands on them. 0 for 4.
5--Doesn't wash either. PP can and should provide whatever seating they choose to--which is precisely what they've been doing up until now. If it ain't a fiscally responsible course they should stop providing it. If, in fact, the players really demand it then PP has every reason to expect the players to pay for it. Works for me. But that isn't what's happening at present. 0 for 5.
6--It would indeed be fair so I guess we can then agree the players aren't and never have been members in any meaningful sense of the word. In which case why is it their responsibility to pay for the league's success? What the players are, is customers. I'll give you that one even though you didn't intend for that conclusion to be drawn. 1 for 6.
7--Once again, no legitmate argument. Not even a promise. And when, oh, when is somebody gonna offer an explanation for how bringing PB to the masses is gonna change anything for the majority of players? 1 for 7.
8--I didn't say the sheep were "unsuspecting" because that implies something underhanded going on whereas if you had read my posts I specifically stated asking questions and seeking answers didn't suggest I believed anything was wrong. Further, I have categorically stated in this thread PP can make as much money as they want however they want and I have no problem with it. I didn't even suggest the sheep were being fleeced. As to the rest--the water ain't free--and everybody with a lick of sense knows it. And PP, in my opinion, hasn't offered its player/ customers anything beyond slogans and platitudes in explaining its' intentions so how could I possibly underestimate them? Not 1 in 100 of the players has any clue what PP's intentions are. At the present all the majority of players care about is the next event and how well it comes off. If the players find that satisfactory, so be it. My point is, (again, in my opinion) if the players were truly interested in their competitive futures they would be wise to ask for more information. They haven't. 1 for 8.
(I don't expect the players to appreciate being called sheep. So what? And I suppose PP mightn't be overjoyed with me either. Not my problem.)
9--Hurray. You got one right but you skipped 'NXL: Fact or Fiction.' Are you suggesting we should all be good--
dare I say it?--little sheep and not risk rocking the boat? For the record let's make it clear I don't play any favorites or spare anyone; PP, PSP, MIL or anyone else. 2 for 9.
10--Did you happen to notice that in that lengthy post of yours you never once addressed a specific question asked previously and instead spent your time with the typical scare-mongering or in knocking down arguments I never made but you attributed to me anyway? You and Knobbs should get together. You could have a fine time telling each other what you want to hear. 2 for 10.
11--you were once considered a good player?
As always I'm happy to have the readers of the forum draw their own conclusions.
