Why are PDGA dues different for Am and Pro?

If I have received a good answer for this, I honestly can't recalll what it is. It is simply because a pro player receives money for finishing well, and an amateur receives merchandise? There must be some underlying assumptions about the financial status of a Pro player vs. an Amateur player that I am not following. Or is there more? Does the PDGA kick in more money or provide more resources for Pro events than Am events? If so, shouldn't that resource difference be reflected in what the person pays at the event? For the life of me, I can't figure out why keeping track of player information at the PDGA costs more for someone in a Professional division than an Amateur one.

Please help me understand.

[Brian Graham]

Hi Bill,

Good question!

The extra money that a professional member pays to the PDGA over that of an amateur member has historically been earmarked for projects that primarily benefit pro players such as:

- National Tour
- NT Spectator Program
- NT Poster
- NT Event Stipends
- Major Event Stipends
- NT Points Awards
- NT Series Cash Bonuses
- NT Website
- Touring Pro Cards
- Pro Worlds DVD
- Marshals Program.

The extra fee was first instituted in 2003 in direct response to members who overwhelmingly stated in a survey that they wanted the PDGA to invest money into marketing the sport to national sponsors and trying to get our events on television. That first deal with Sportsloop did not generate many positive results so the PDGA did not renew the contract.

I can tell you that this is a subject that the Board of Directors have been discussing quite a bit lately and that there may be some changes coming down the pike in the future.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director

[mark ellis]

The Pros are at the top of the food chain. The Pros benefit more from tournaments than amateurs do. The PDGA is a tournament -driven organization. It is fair and just that the Pros get both the advantages and the disadvantages they do. If the Pros paid twice what they do for PDGA dues that would OK, too.

The Pros should also do "Community Service" to their frisbee family. Pros should teach and encourage and promote the sport. They took from the sport. They should also give back. If any given Pro is also sponsored then they should do even more.

[Ben Calhoun]

Good point Mark. From what I've seen many pros don't do anything to promote or improve the sport at all.

[Bill Burns]

Hi Brian! Really enjoyed meeting you at the HOF last year. It doesn't seem like it was over a year ago, though!

And, thanks for your prompt and detailed response.

I just have one comment/question, and I don't want you to spend a lot of time on it. I noticed on your list that the additional revenue generated from Pro players is primarily focused on the National Tour and Major Events. Has there been any thought in regards to upping the amount per entry fee to those events that goes to the PDGA? I am not saying that this added source of revenue should completely replace the incremental revenue from the higher Pro entry fees, and I am all for having part of the dues going to support the growth of the sport, but it would be nice to have the players who are receiving a direct and immediate benefit from the NT pay for some of that benefit. And having the renewal dues closer together may increase the renewal percentage of Pro players, such as myself, who are non-touring and non-competing

Thanks for reading. Take care,

Bill

[Brian Graham]

Hi Bill,

You will probably be happy to hear that I gave a presentation to the Board at the Summit last week on just this subject. My presentation was not so much a hard and fast proposed change as it was to introduce the concept of the PDGA offering alternate membership levels and to get some ideas and opinions from the Board in this regard. In addition to a low cost supporting level membership, I proposed the idea of offering pro memberships at the same standard membership cost as an amateur membership but also offering an additional touring pro card, which for the extra fee would entitle pro players to additional benefits like participation in NT events and Majors. The flip side to this is that there would be requirements for getting a touring pro card such as taking the officials test. At this point everything I mentioned here is in the early discussion stage and we will continue to look into these options and many others with the goal being to improve and professionalize our top level pro tour events while maintaining a place for players like you and me who are less competitive and may not tour.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director

[eric beich]

good answers!

[Scoot_er]

Why doesn't the PDGA take $1 out of every entry fee from every event and add it to the Worlds purse? Seems like a good way to reach a $100,000 goal.

[Brian Graham]

Hi Scooter,

How would having a $100,000 purse at the Pro Worlds benefit our sport as a whole? Would it instantly get us more members or get thousands more people playing disc golf? While I would love to see a $100K purse at our World Championships in the future, I don't think that a tax on every person who competes in a PDGA event is the proper way to go about raising prize money that will ultimately end up in the hands of only 120 people. The best way to reach and sustain the $100K level is to invest our money into promoting the sport to new players at the grassroots level so that our numbers will look attractive to sponsors, who would then be willing to add their money to our events.

Regards,
Brian Graham
PDGA Executive Director

[Scoot_er]

But it would be something the members could actually see their money going towards. I would much rather see the PDGA use its resources to fund an amazing event that may be used to expose the sport to a wider audience. Anyway I'm pretty sure those 120 people pay higher dues and represent the "P" in PDGA.

[mark ellis]

At Worlds in 2000 we had a purse over $100,000.

A huge purse at any particular event is most beneficial to the top 20-25 players in attendance. Those same players are the ones who already benefit the most from tournaments and the vast majority are either sponsored or were sponsored and/or could be if they chose.

The exposure of the event and/or the sport of disc golf is not much different if we are playing for peanuts or thousands or more. Eventually the sport will reach a threshold of public interest where sponsors and TV will come to us. But is we threw all our eggs in one basket and somehow created an event with a million dollar purse it may not hasten that day.

For worlds 2000 we tried real hard to attract TV. In the end we were offered the chance to buy TV time at prices which were prohibitive. If corporations will not purchase ads on TV shows then the shows cannot make money. The audience for disc golf is not there yet.

The PDGA can best promote the sport through grass roots efforts-like encouraging the creation of new courses.

As a Pro with a realistic chance to cash at most events I love nice payouts. But I also understand that without substantial media or corporate interest we will remain in the "golden age" of disc golf where most of us play for the love of the game, not the monetary rewards.

[Scoot_er]

Was that just for the Pros or did that include AMs? I have played well over 100 PDGA events with $3 of each entry going to the PDGA but have no way of viewing where the money has gone with the exception of the IDGC. I would not mind if it was just a dollar from each Pro entry or even from our membership that went towards this instead of the lame excuse for a tour which zig-zags across the country.

[mark ellis]

My memory, which is feeble, is that the total purse for Worlds 2000 of Pros and Ams, singles and doubles was around $120,000.

I would guess that most of your money went to pay salaries and fulfillment. I think fulfillment is the stuff the PDGA sends to members like the magazine and sign up/renewel packages. Brian Graham might have a much more definitive answer on this.

At one time the PDGA Tour was set up to encourage players to tour the big events all year. How many players really lived on that tour during that time? Maybe a maximum of 20 -30? Another 20-30 did mini tours for a couple of months? With current gas prices not many players could survive on the road just on tournament earnings. I think the road warriors would be in trouble even if the tour were geographically structured.