<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16414" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I was talking about 2005 not 2006. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>You know I wasn't asking or referring to 2006, but
now you come to mention it and you have, as you say, exact information on how
much money was spent, </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><STRONG>What was the cost breakdown for the
2006 banquet? </STRONG></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></STRONG> </DIV>
<DIV><STRONG><FONT face=Arial size=2>I ask because this number is being
used as a "decision maker" and we should know exactly how it was
derived.</FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'd like to know, as an
NSRCA member, exactly how much the items cost for the 2006 banquet and
how much we collected. You should know exactly the meal cost, the room rental,
the audio equipment cost etc.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>To be $34 per head prices, must have gone up
considerably since 2005!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The NSRCA did roll up all of the costs that I
mentioned below into one figure in 2005. The meal was pretty close
to $25 per head. The tickets were $25 per head per adult with 10 free
tickets.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If it was $34 a head are you saying that we
subsidized the meal in 2006?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Before you do your usual on me, try and remember
that the example that I gave below, was how a specific number was arrived at but
when you took it apart the conclusion you could draw could be very different
than the point that was originally being made.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Regards,</FONT></DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>
<DIV><BR>Eric.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>P.S. I almost forgot, did the NSRCA organize the banquet or did they
hand that job over to the AMA?</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=derekkoopowitz@gmail.com href="mailto:derekkoopowitz@gmail.com">Derek
Koopowitz</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA Mailing List</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 02, 2007 3:52
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [NSRCA-discussion] NSRCA
contrubution to nationals</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Just to be clear - we know exactly how much money we spend on the Nats
for each of the items that Eric has outlined below. We have the bills
from the AMA which shows how much the actual dinner cost us - including rental
of the facility. Trophies and awards are NOT included in that cost as
they are separate. The $34 per head cost was based purely on the
convention center cost. There are no hidden/extra costs included in that
amount. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>This year we've budgeted $3500 for the banquet - so whatever bill we get
from the country club will hopefully be close to that amount (or less).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Here is our budget (May K-F):</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV><FONT face=Arial size=1>
<P align=left>NATS Expenses</P>
<P align=left>Awards 800.00</P>
<P align=left>Banquet 3,500.00</P>
<P align=left>Event Director 600.00</P>
<P align=left>Impound Personnel 300.00</P>
<P align=left>Judges 1,000.00</P>
<P align=left>Line Manager Site 1 240.00</P>
<P align=left>Line Manager Site 3 240.00</P>
<P align=left>Line Manager Site 4 240.00</P>
<P align=left>Meeting Expenses 350.00</P>
<P align=left>NSCRA Award BBQ 1,000.00</P>
<P align=left>Planning Meeting 450.00</P>
<P align=left>Postage 80.00</P>
<P align=left>Scoring HQ 300.00</P>
<P align=left>Scoring Site 4 180.00</P>
<P align=left>Site 1 Site Director 240.00</P>
<P align=left>Site 3 Site Director 240.00</P>
<P align=left>Site 4 Site Director 240.00</P>
<P align=left>Supplies 250.00</P>
<P align=left>TOTAL NATS Expenses 10,250.00</P>
<DIV></DIV></FONT>Hopefully we break even on this...
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=gmail_quote>On 5/2/07, <B class=gmail_sendername>Grow
Pattern</B> <<A
href="mailto:pattern4u@comcast.net">pattern4u@comcast.net</A>>
wrote:</SPAN>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote
style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV>What I worry and wonder about the most is how we just accept a
number and then beat the death out of something when there is no real
data, or the data is suspect or even wrong in the first
place. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The first number that I read was that the AMA lost $25K running the
Nat's. Then later on I read that they had not been tracking it very well.
That should immediately raise a doubt about the number of $25K.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Then I began to wonder if the number included the two locations that
are used to run the Nat's. (Not all of te Nat's is run at
Muncie). </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Then I thought about the running costs of the AMA site at Muncie.
<STRONG>After all, It runs whether the Nat's are there or
not.</STRONG> So if we extract ONLY the additional Nationals
related costs only, what are they really? </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Beyond the field, maintenance what is the EXTRA cost to the
AMA associated with the running all of the events that constitute a
Nationals. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- Then I asked myself what are the costs related to <STRONG>just
running PATTERN</STRONG>. Do they have contest related equipment
already, or do they buy new stuff such as tents etc. just for us.
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- I know that they put out the box poles and provide some PA
equipment, but are extra summer workers hired for just us? and what is
the cost for the four days that we are there.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>======================================================================================================================</DIV>
<DIV>In my business life I have seen numbers used to prove many
a point ,but almost every time the numbers did not hold up to close
examination.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In our case (pattern). In 2005 we raised around $10,400 in pattern
entry fees. ( I say "around" because there are a few late-entry fee entries
that are twice the normal fee and are hard to track). Our important number
is that we received $ $6755 from the AMA after they took their cut. The
AMA's important number is that they receive the balance which as
a round number of was in the region of $3600. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Is that enough to cover what we cost them? The year before the AMA
claimed that they had lost $12,000 running the Nat's. Now it is a
$25,000 loss. The only action that I know of that took place was to
increase the AMA entrance fee portion by $10. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>- What is more important is to ask what; </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>a) Difference did the fee increase make, and </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>b) Why did the costs still go up so much.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>c) Was anything done to reduce costs.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The real problem is that what you are being fed as factual money data
is "roll-up-accounting" at its worst. The devil may be in the details but so
is the answer. You cannot solve a fiscal problem if you don't know which
part is failing or broken. </DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV>======================================================================================================================</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Accounting roll-ups are the real emery of all good decision
making. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Let me give you a small example of what I mean. I am familiar with
the Pattern Nat's banquet. I read in the K-factor that the banquet cost was
too high and that another venue, [probably the golf club] would be used
again. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The number used was something like $34 a head and we should not
subsidize the meal. This looked similar to the 2005 number that I managed.
On the surface of it looked like good logic. BUT I happen to know also
that a bunch of other costs were dumped into the "banquet bucket" in
2005. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The true cost of the banquet meal is the vendor charge minus
the money collected for meal tickets. In short,we collected $2,560 from
112.5 people. (This was comprised of adult meals, kids meals and
10 comp. tickets for people like the Event director plus wife, AMA
Contest director plus wife, other key AMA officials and the HQ scoring staff
plus guest. The tickets were $25 per head. The NSRCA
subsidized the actual meal by $250. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Now for the hidden costs! the NSRCA holds and hosts a general
meeting at the Banquet so it eats the costs for the hall ($200 and
microphone/podium stuff etc.) reasonable so far. Then you add any trophies
and awards etc. Then the cost for the NSRCA board meeting the night before,
(we feed them way past midnight) was put in there. And then the costs for
the finals "free" meal and awards ceremony. [Note- NSRCA trophies we pay
for. AMA trophies we do not]. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>All of these relatively small items gradually pushed the "roll-up
accounting banquet" number up to nearly $4000. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Now you have a number that you can divide, say by 115 contestants and
you get $34. It is a good number that good people can and will tie
their argument to, but it is just plain WRONG data that give a wrong
conclusion. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Back to the shop.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards,</DIV>
<DIV><BR>Eric.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT size=3><FONT face=Arial
size=2> </FONT><STRONG>From:</STRONG> </FONT></FONT><A
title=JAStebbins@worldnet.att.net
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:JAStebbins@worldnet.att.net" target=_blank><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>Jerry Stebbins</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=3><B>To:</B> </FONT></FONT><A
title=nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:nsrca-discussion@lists.nsrca.org" target=_blank><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>Discussion -NSRCA</FONT></A><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=3><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, May 01, 2007 5:26 PM</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=3><B>Subject:</B> [NSRCA-discussion] Muncie's reason to
exist</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Tony,I do know, and as voiced by others around at the time, that
Muncie was defined, justified and implemented as a common location
to hold AMA NATS Events. Whatever else it did, or could do, was
secondary. </DIV>
<DIV>That being the case, why isn't the real question "How do we expand
all the NATS and cover any associated expenses".</DIV>
<DIV>We have heard these same old complaints about the NATS for
many years, and yet the EC seems to let them fester, rather
than solving them.</DIV>
<DIV>I also have heard threats that if "it" don't get fixed then the
NATS will go away. I have news for that position-if AMA takes that
road--they will go away since they could not stand a large
Membership reduction. They could quickly be replaced by a new viable
"service the membership" organization holding all the NATS! Maybe
that is what they want? </DIV>
<DIV>Wonder what the Greater Muncie CoC would have to say about
that?</DIV>
<DIV>The cost deficit I have heard has always been expressed based upon
Membership $. What about the large $s given to AMA every year by
donations/bequests, and what about Event fees? How about all the revenue
taken in from the family members and contestants on
shirts/caps/whatever, and at the Museum? Don't they all provide
additional resources, or are new tasks/jobs created to absorb them.
Maybe the answer is to reduce overall AMA growth/costs. </DIV>
<DIV>The majority of facilities/support items
(tents,tables,trailers,chairs,etc.) used to support the NATS are
already sunk costs-with typical periodic maintenance or
replacement costs.</DIV>
<DIV>What is it that "doesn't get done" for the time when a
few staff support the NATS, rather than their "normal" jobs?</DIV>
<DIV>It would be interesting to hear a candid position of each
Member of the EC, to see what they actually think</DIV>
<DIV>the role of AMA at Muncie is.</DIV>
<DIV>It sounds like they may have in mind a totally different mission
for Muncie than was originally defined. </DIV>
<DIV>Looks like that would be a good project for AMA Members from each
AMA District to find out. </DIV>
<DIV>In any case it smells like AMA is moving away from a
"service the Membership" mentality, and towards a "do
more-different/create more" growth business mentality, using
complaints/costs as a justification. </DIV>
<DIV>Jerry</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial
size=2></FONT> </DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing list<BR><A onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="mailto:NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org">NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org</A><BR><A
onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"
href="http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion"
target=_blank>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
</A><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>NSRCA-discussion
mailing
list<BR>NSRCA-discussion@lists.nsrca.org<BR>http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion</BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>