Will the 2023 Goode Nationals be streamed ?

[swbca]

Any info on Streaming the Nationals ?   Real Time or Delayed

I recall Archived coverage of many events other years,  but not sure if they were same day or later.

Edited August 3, 2023 by swbca

[lpskier]

No TWBC. Way too expensive to do four lakes. 

[buechsr]

Disappointing, particularly in light of the viewership of nationals vs pro events.  I don't recall any fundraising efforts this year to make it happen. I can appreciate that 4 lakes would be quite difficult anyway, without regard to cost. 

I floated several funding options in the past on here.  Apparently none were compelling. I think the number of people who'd be willing to contribute $100 would be large.  My other idea was that podium finishers were asked, not forced, to pay their proportionate share of their event group.  I got told that was punishment for doing well.  

 

[scoke]

7 minutes ago, buechsr said:

 My other idea was that podium finishers were asked, not forced, to pay their proportionate share of their event group. 

 

One of the theories is "if you wouldn't say it on the dock, don't say it on the internet". This holds true.

No offense, if you brought that up out loud on the dock at a bigger ski club with national skiers, they would laugh in your face.

 

[buechsr]

2 hours ago, scoke said:

One of the theories is "if you wouldn't say it on the dock, don't say it on the internet". This holds true.

No offense, if you brought that up out loud on the dock at a bigger ski club with national skiers, they would laugh in your face.

 

Admittedly not on the dock, I said it on the shores of multiple tournaments and regionals last year when there was discussion about the significance of continuing to webcast nationals when funding for 2022 was an issue.  No one laughed, in fact, it had agreement.  Since we're not privy to the exact expenses per day, it was hypothesized that podium finishers chip in a relatively nominal amount, say $100, a pittance in light of the expenses of a ski season to have their event group permanently memorialized.  Balance can be made up with traditional TWBC sponsorship. 

You can disagree.  But I'm more than happy to float ideas to keep nationals being webcast even if some result in online mockery.  I even think a "suggested donation" of $25 or $50 at time of national entry fee would be better received than one would expect.  

...but I'll ask again next week when I'm on the dock.  Admittedly, I'm not skiing, but my daughters are.  They, and their friends and family, are just disappointed there's no webcast.  Webcast from 2020 was the catalyst that caused my kids to starting competing.  

Edited August 3, 2023 by buechsr

[scoke]

15 minutes ago, buechsr said:hypothesized that podium finishers chip in a relatively nominal amount, say $100, a pittance in light of the expenses of a ski season  

You can disagree.

LOL socialism much? (Not a political statement)

 

”congratulations for your 3rd place podium finish. Here’s your invoice. We take Venmo or zelle in case you don’t have your wallet with you.”  Hilarious. 
 

 

im all for the thought of contributing-volunteering a few extra dollars to fund the broadcast but the idea at the top. LOL. 

[Horton]

@buechsr

A good webcast like TWBC is expensive ( and I am pretty sure their rates are fair) . If you want it for 2024 then start fund raising now.

West Palm stepped up to do Nationals and for whatever reason ( cost?)  they chose not do the webcast. I suggest we thank them for their effort and pitch in for changes you want to see in the future. 

[rico]

I believe they decided to run a 55k event instead of a webcast.

I really like what @JeffSurdej did in Chicago with webcast. I understand it was funded through go fund me and sponsorship.

As a side note I also think the format of America's cup was really good. 

[buechsr]

10 minutes ago, Horton said:

@buechsr

A good webcast like TWBC is expensive ( and I am pretty sure their rates are fair) . If you want it for 2024 then start fund raising now.

West Palm stepped up to do Nationals and for whatever reason ( cost?)  they chose not do the webcast. I suggest we thank them for their effort and pitch in for changes you want to see in the future. 

I understand.   AWSA did in fact fundraise last year in order to webcast it, apparently successfully.  There are solutions to funding problems if that's the reason TWBC wasn't feasible, but the starting point is ideas.  I've offered many in the past, from budget allocation to the regions, voluntary contributions, and event based contribution.  Scoke's responses to me are pretty much par for the course I've gotten here.  To generalize: "That's stupid".  Well, maybe...but unless we start thinking differently, outside the box, how can we expect anything to change, let alone get better?   I've made the argument ad nauseum that webcasting nationals is the best marketing outreach we have.  I'm all for watching the European events but try to get a non-skier to watch more than an hour.  Contrast that with nationals coverage, I got a number of kids skiing last year as a direct result of their watching their friends on the webcast.  Non-skiers can relate to amateurs, and spurs at least some interest, and while we all love watching pro events, it's not doing anything to grow the sport.  

I'm very glad Okeeheelee is hosting, and also that so many lakes will be in use.  People can be disappointed without being critical.  I'm in that camp.  I'd imagine virtually all skiers, families, and fans are in that camp, actually.  It's an awesome place, will be hopefully well-attended, and know it will be a great 4 days, just sad to see it not being webcasted.  Is that unreasonable?

 

[buechsr]

42 minutes ago, scoke said:

LOL socialism much? (Not a political statement)

 

”congratulations for your 3rd place podium finish. Here’s your invoice. We take Venmo or zelle in case you don’t have your wallet with you.”  Hilarious. 
 

 

im all for the thought of contributing-volunteering a few extra dollars to fund the broadcast but the idea at the top. LOL. 

You and I just view things differently.  If an average ski year costs an average competitive skier $5,000 (obviously some way more some way less), I just don't share the skepticism that at the penultimate event of the year, a podium finisher would be offended by being asked to throw in $100 (less than their hotel that night!) to webcast their event.  I don't think waterskiers, as a whole, are 1) that tight 2) that selfish 3) wouldn't want to show friends and family what they've been doing all year training 4) wouldn't see the bigger picture than unless 3 event competitive skiing gets more exposure, there soon may not be anyone to ski against.  

I'm not saying its the best idea.  But it is an idea.  If you've got one to share, lets hear it.  

[MDB1056]

No emotion here. This is strictly business . Organizers, venue hosts, broadcasters, promoters, sponsors , membership organizations all have a vested interest in having an event be as big and successful as possible. No one is in it for benevolent reasons. As such, like any other large event (sports, music, etc) planning is in motion at a minimum 1-2 years in advance.  Work the numbers, ink the deals, make the plans.  I'm always surprised that these discussions come up just before an event. It should have been known at least a year ago how this was all going to unfold for 2023.    

[Horton]

@buechsr

My pushback is that I think the value of webcast is exaggerated. You have to put it from an ROI perspective. Generally speaking, the only people watching are the families of specific competitors. Do we honestly believe that we're going to gain membership or additional competitors because of the webcast? I do know some smart people that think this will help grow the base, but I am pessimistic.

[buechsr]

44 minutes ago, Horton said:

@buechsr

My pushback is that I think the value of webcast is exaggerated. You have to put it from an ROI perspective. Generally speaking, the only people watching are the families of specific competitors. Do we honestly believe that we're going to gain membership or additional competitors because of the webcast? I do know some smart people that think this will help grow the base, but I am pessimistic.

 I can only speak for myself but I've been to the last 3 nationals as a DIRECT result of the webcast in Zachary.  And by direct I mean direct.  As in, my kids said at the end of each day, "this is way better than watching a pro event with you Daddy, can I do that next year?"  I said sure, skied a fall tournament in 2020, and they've skied competitively since (with the exception of my son who hasn't skied much in the past year).  All this came about literally as a result of watching nationals being webcast.  In the youtube shorts age, I think video exposure, particularly for kids, in invaluable outreach.  

Furthermore, I've taught countless kids to ski since then, as a direct result of watching nationals replays.  Most of whom said 3 years ago "Whats waterskiing?"  Show them a webcast of kids and every one asks to learn.  Some of them now have boats (parents).  Are they competing?  I can't think of any necessarily, but I think webcasting nationals has a profound impact on the organic growth potential.  Certainly way more than another pro event.  Heck my parents thought it was a hoot watching mens and womens 7 last year.  There is NO way they're watching a pro event.

Furthermore, I actually started skiing tournaments (badly) for the first time in 20 years to ski with my kids.  We wound up joining a club, buying another boat, I'm close to being an assistant scorer and judge, got my safety rating, and serve in some other capacities. 

So, as we're all experts on our opinion, my opinion is quite literally that the webcast of 2020 created 4 new consistent competitive skiers, a new official, and industry support.  I respect opinions to the contrary, but I am walking proof of the outreach that the nationals webcast has had.

I looked at last year's thread on this.  Per lpskier AWSA was looking for an additional $15,000, actually much less than expected.  $20 a skier easily pays that.  This year is of course different with 4 lakes.  I get it.  But it seems far from an insurmountable amount for next year when a local charity golf tournament can easily raise that in 4 hours.  

Edited August 3, 2023 by buechsr

[Horton]

Ok @buechsr I am a little slow. You are going to have to sell me on this.

Exactly how does the web broadcast of nationals motivate all these people. Are you telling me that you were home with your kids watching hours of Nationals on TV and that got them fired up? 

You are also telling me that kids who were not involved in skiing watched a nationals replay and then wanted to ski?

[buechsr]

1 hour ago, Horton said:

Ok @buechsr I am a little slow. You are going to have to sell me on this.

Exactly how does the web broadcast of nationals motivate all these people. Are you telling me that you were home with your kids watching hours of Nationals on TV and that got them fired up? 

You are also telling me that kids who were not involved in skiing watched a nationals replay and then wanted to ski?

110% accurate on both (with the exception that I wasn't glued to the webcast all day, I was at work, my kids were after I set them up on the webcast).

I know you must read a LOT of posts, but this is not the first time I've said this here.  The biggest thing for my kids was seeing that you didn't "have" to be a Regina protege to belong at nationals.  Hence, we started laying the groundwork to get there.

Edited August 3, 2023 by buechsr

[Horton]

I am not going to literally call bull shit because maybe but I really do not see how.

Is there anyone else who has had a similar experience?

I would love this to be true. I just do not see how. I want this to be true.

[buechsr]

17 minutes ago, Horton said:

I am not going to literally call bull shit because maybe but I really do not see how.

Is there anyone else who has had a similar experience?

I would love this to be true. I just do not see how. I want this to be true.

I'll find you on the dock Wednesday or Thursday and let my daughter tell you.  Regrettably, my other daughter can't ski (not coming even though she's qualified and skied regionals).  By the way, this is not the first time I've said this publicly here, but I know you read a lot of posts.  

Edited August 3, 2023 by buechsr

[Horton]

@buechsr I will say it again. I would love this to be true. I am ready to have my mind changed.

[MDB1056]

Anecdotal scenarios are nice to hear about, but are unique and don't apply to the masses .  It's a given that ROI is key. It's all by the numbers. Audience, market access, etc. Skiing today is down big time vs 25-30 yrs ago because of those being much lower today. Without a clear and supported strategy to reach large audience(s) that are of interest to potential sponsors etc., discussions are DOA, and we're left asking for donations to keep the lights on.... again.     

Planning ahead doesn't guarantee anything is going to work, but you'll at least know in advance if a go or a no go.   Reality check. 

[skierjp]

Steaming Nationals would be like watching paint dry. 

[BraceMaker]

@skierjp that's not entirely fair I know quite a few people particularly aunts and uncles and grand parents who got a real kick being able to watch their family ski.  If the juice is worth the squeeze... well that's hard to tell.

Of course 4 lakes adds cost and complexity but it does fix the issue you mentioned there isn't enough content on one lake at one time to really have thrilling events.  The content that was on TWBC around Kaifas and San Gervasio pro-am was excellent but that just goes to the power of the commentary that was being provided by Freddie and Matteo and Robert etc.  But if you have 4 lakes running you have enough skiers in motion to really keep action going on film.  Of course a lot of that action isn't necessarily that thrilling but if you could just have essentially plain live feed running on 4 youtube channels and then a single channel running commentary pulling action as needed from the lakes.  I think you'd have fairly compelling watching.  Enough to get the viewership high enough for people to watch it? Maybe.

 

 

 

 

[Horton]

average aunt or uncle is interested in about 5 minutes of the 4 days skiing 

[BraceMaker]

I agree.  But with a few hundred kids skiing each of those kids having a couple of relatives who might watch and the running order taking some time I think you do get a group of people who would tune in.

I don't think I'm saying its worth TWBC but I do think those relatives like it.  Of course there is always that professional photographer putting up shots from the event with their watermark so you can buy pictures from your kids set and how many shots do they sell over the course of 4 days.  Probably not that many.

 

 

[skierjp]

If there was a rock solid schedule to tell someone when you’re skiing it would be different but our sport doesn’t work that way. Maybe a professional YouTuber will be there? 

[jcamp]

8 hours ago, buechsr said:

"I floated several funding options in the past on here.  Apparently none were compelling."

 

Just posting ideas on Ball of Spray, forgive me @horton, is not the real, actual way to propose solutions. 

Did you go to an AWSA winter board meeting? Or your summer meeting? Talk about this with your regional rep? Email Charlotte at SCPB? Or Nate at USAWS HQ? Or even talk with your local inboard dealer about pitching in matching funds? 

People who work and volunteer in the sport don't come across a problem or challenge and say "let me see what posters on Ball of Spray suggest we do." 

 

 

 

[buechsr]

1 hour ago, jcamp said:

Just posting ideas on Ball of Spray, forgive me @horton, is not the real, actual way to propose solutions. 

Did you go to an AWSA winter board meeting? Or your summer meeting? Talk about this with your regional rep? Email Charlotte at SCPB? Or Nate at USAWS HQ? Or even talk with your local inboard dealer about pitching in matching funds? 

People who work and volunteer in the sport don't come across a problem or challenge and say "let me see what posters on Ball of Spray suggest we do." 

 

 

 

Well, it is a "real, actual way" to propose solutions.  Is it the most "direct" way?  Perhaps not, but it is nonetheless a healthy way for ideas to be tossed around and debated without tying up a large groups' time for an extended period at a meeting.  My posts, both last year and this, have failed to stimulate any agreeable solutions, anyway.  Maybe there are no good ones except finding a local wedding dress maker like in Illinois... but I'm willing to throw them out there, and have y'all tell me how dumb they are.  What's your idea, by the way?  Discard Nationals' webcasting because we can't raise $15,000 (the number provided by lpskier last year)?  If so, that's fine, but I want to strive for better.  

In response to your questions directed to me, I'll answer them in order:

I was at my region's winter meeting.   

I was at my region's summer meeting. 

I have a vote in my region.  If you mean contacting my regional rep for AWSA, I did not, as I didn't know this was an issue.

I did not email Charlotte.  If I'd have known that web casting was a budgetary issue that she could resolve, I would have.  I did not know until recently that there would be no webcast, anyway.  To be frank, I don't know her personally, but would have offered ideas, some of which I've offered here in the past, all of which, according to the collective peanut gallery, stink, anyway.  Furthermore, I can also appreciate that a 4 lake setup would too much to webcast regardless of a funding solution.

I did not email Nate at USAWS, as, again, I did not know this was not being webcasted until recently.  Even if I had known, from the education I have been afforded from others as to the shouldering of the expense, I would not have emailed him regardless.  

If I asked my local dealer to contribute, trust me, he would.  I actually offered that idea in last year's webcast funding thread.  Just 15 dealers paying $1,000 would have solved it.  $5,000 from the big 3 boat manufacturers would have solved it.  $3,000 from each region or $500 from each state would have solved it.  I have brought all of these alternatives up previously here.  There's myriad potential solutions.  Only one is needed to work.

I agree with MDB, this is just coming up too late to resolve.  I will be letting the appropriate people know that I'm willing to do all I can to help find a solution for  webcasting next year.  No, that does not mean I'm assuming responsibility for making it happen, but I'll spare time and coin to try.

 

[LeonL]

@skierjp "like watching paint dry".  Wow, I guess I'm a pretty dull person. Im the kinda guy who stays all day at a local tourney.  I thoroughly enjoyed watching the Nationals webcast.  I know enough people, in various divisions, that I spent a good deal of time watching.  I didn't necessarily watch live (so not needing to know a strict schedule) but was able to see who I wanted to see, and divisions i wanted to see.  A couple of beginners (in their 50's) at our lake were inspired by watching skiers of their own age range as opposed to watching pros.

No real input to the solution, just my experience. Disappointed that it won't the webcast.

[unksskis]

It is very disappointing.  It should be a focus of USA-WS to provide one for its largest membership segment.  I know I will get emails and notifications about the Show Ski broadcast.  I don’t care what the logistics may be, make it happen, it’s a reasonable expectation of membership to see an effort to provide one, and yes it brings exposure to the sport and organization. 

[MDB1056]

1 minute ago, unksskis said:

I don’t care what the logistics may be, make it happen, it’s a reasonable expectation of membership to see an effort to provide one, and yes it brings exposure to the sport and organization. 

@unksskis - "make it happen" ? ...................its funding. 

[dave2ball]

West palm is very spread out for a web cast. The jump  lake is not really near the main event focus of vendors row  2 main slalom  lakes and the trick lake. It would be a huge under taking to bring 4  links to cover all aspects of the nationals. And that costs money. When the nationals are on a 2 lake site everything is right there and the lakes are running all day more to view more cost effective.  It’s hard enough to find people who will host nationals because of the huge under taking if you add web cast stipulations that would place another mail into the coffin  for this sport. 
 

if someone here wants it that badly find sponsors in and outside the sport and sell them on the positive for their business   Personally I could really care less if there is a web cast or not   

 

Edited August 4, 2023 by dave2ball

[ForrestGump]

Honestly, if there was a ROI for sponsors, there would be a webcast.  If USA Waterski had identified it as a critical path to a successful Nationals, there would be a webcast.  The fact that there isn't a webcast as a defacto part of Nationals tells you a lot. So then it comes down to a wish list item for a few people.  So it'll always have issues getting funded and every year it will be the same thing, where someone has to do their best to drive "donations". Because that's what you're really asking for.