Forum Search:
RSD No Spam
rec.sport.disc without the spam


Home » RSD » RSD Posts » Georgia opts out of C1
Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 06:55 Go to next message
CBrowning
Messages: 190
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 8:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...

Seems like they have reasonable concerns and probably made a wise
decision. It blows my mind that Cultimate would put this thing out
there without already having the teams on board. It would be like
saying "I'm putting a sweet club team together next year with Nord,
Beau, and Zip on it" before even talking to them. Crazy.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3118 is a reply to message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 07:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
S
Messages: 27
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 9:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...

I am very impressed with Georgia in this decision. I feel like
Cultimate made a rash attempt to take over College Ultimate without
thinking about the sport. This seemed like a power move where they
offered vast incentive for the top 25 to switch to their brand so the
power would shift there as well. They figured out they could do it,
and did it, but didn't think about what the repercussions would be.

That brings me to Georgia. They definitely were not counting on a
levelheaded team like this to sit down, think about the situation and
back out. I think Georgia should set the example. Not that all teams
should back out of C1, but they should all have a long discussion
before accepting these obvious and immediate benefits.

The impact of C1 is already being felt on this community and its been
2 days. I can't wait to see what happens within the next few weeks.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3123 is a reply to message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 07:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Daag Alemayehu
Messages: 249
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 9:55 am, CBrowning <cb.brown...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Seems like they have reasonable concerns and probably made a wise
> decision.  It blows my mind that Cultimate would put this thing out
> there without already having the teams on board.  It would be like
> saying "I'm putting a sweet club team together next year with Nord,
> Beau, and Zip on it" before even talking to them.  Crazy.

Think about if Cultimate had done it the other way around. It sends
private emails out to the 25 teams. Then it waits until it received
all 25 responses. If every response wasn't positive, then it sends
out another X emails, and then it waits for all X of those responses
too. By this point, its plans SURELY would have leaked to rsd or to a
blog or two. C1 doesn't make as big of a splash, or at the very least
Cultimate doesn't get to control how the info is released to the
frisbee community. I agree with you that it's interesting/crazy/risky
to do it the way they did it, but I'm not sure how much of a choice
they had.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3125 is a reply to message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 07:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
BJ
Messages: 197
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 9:12 am, Jerrod <JWolf...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 8:55 am, CBrowning <cb.brown...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 16, 8:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> > > Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> > > Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...
>
> > Seems like they have reasonable concerns and probably made a wise
> > decision.  It blows my mind that Cultimate would put this thing out
> > there without already having the teams on board.  It would be like
> > saying "I'm putting a sweet club team together next year with Nord,
> > Beau, and Zip on it" before even talking to them.  Crazy.
>
> "(4) People remember who wins the NBA Championship...no one cares who
> won the most ABA Titles."
>
> What if the UPA = ABA and Conference 1 = NBA...?
>
> Man, this is a really hard decision for the teams to make.  I don't
> envy the captains/programs that have to make this decision.

Zip seyz: only a schlemiel counts their chickens before they've
hatched.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3126 is a reply to message #3118] Thu, 16 October 2008 07:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sibert
Messages: 1
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 9:21 am, S <ehste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> > Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> > Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...
>
> I am very impressed with Georgia in this decision.  I feel like
> Cultimate made a rash attempt to take over College Ultimate without
> thinking about the sport.  This seemed like a power move where they
> offered vast incentive for the top 25 to switch to their brand so the
> power would shift there as well.  They figured out they could do it,
> and did it, but didn't think about what the repercussions would be.
>
> That brings me to Georgia.  They definitely were not counting on a
> levelheaded team like this to sit down, think about the situation and
> back out.  I think Georgia should set the example.  Not that all teams
> should back out of C1, but they should all have a long discussion
> before accepting these obvious and immediate benefits.
>
> The impact of C1 is already being felt on this community and its been
> 2 days.  I can't wait to see what happens within the next few weeks.

wow. to say that this is a rash take over is retarded. clearly there
is a distance between college ultimate and the general rsd poster. i
would not be surprised if Georgia is the outlier on this one. top
college teams have been chaffing under the yoke of the UPA for some
time. i bet most teams will accept. this has been in the plans for a
long time. just because people not involved in college ultimate
haven't heard about it doesn't mean it was 'rash'. btdubs good on five
ultimate for establishing themselves in the upper echelons. oh and I
hear that with the death of Paul Newman, Xtehn is now the only man
that can eat 50 eggs in an hour.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3127 is a reply to message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 07:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
seanc
Messages: 322
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 6:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...

well thought-out, nicely stated reasons, including a few
considerations i haven't seen on rsd yet. good job georgia and aj.
the blog mentions the timing of cultimate's announcement: so close to
the college season, doesn't give teams a whole lot of time to make a
huge, thorny decision, and also doesn't give cultimate a whole of time
to work out the inevitable bugs that will pop up. also, price
structuring. cultimate already figured out they could increase the
charge per player for a tournament and still get a strong turnout.
although conference1 is currently a sweet deal financially for invited
teams, there's no guarantee it will stay that way in the future.
again, a strong, level-headed showing by georgia in a short amount of
time.

sean
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3128 is a reply to message #3126] Thu, 16 October 2008 07:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Seamus
Messages: 32
Registered: October 2008
Member
Huh? Sample size of one?

On Oct 16, 7:48 am, Sibert <mattsib...@gmail.com> wrote:

> top
> college teams have been chaffing under the yoke of the UPA for some
> time. i bet most teams will accept.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3148 is a reply to message #3123] Thu, 16 October 2008 08:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Scheibe
Messages: 7
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
Honestly, it seems as though their tactic was to pressure the teams
into joining by throwing out this ultimatum at this point in the
season. A whirlwind of press (even if it's only RSD and blogs) would
hopefully force top teams into a tough decision they would rush. I
think Georgia did the right thing in coming out quickly and shooting
it down. I hope other top programs do the same. The fact that Cyle
is involved in this at the top makes me very nervous. Florida Winter
Classic a few years back (2006 I think) was probably the worst run
tournament I've ever been to. Cultimate has shown they have the
ability to host a well run tournament like Vegas and Centex, however.

Hopefully this will end up being a catalyst for change in the UPA and
not an engine for Cyle & Co. to take money from college programs (and
gamble it away).


scheibe


On Oct 16, 10:48 am, Daag Alemayehu <daag.alemay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:55 am, CBrowning <cb.brown...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Seems like they have reasonable concerns and probably made a wise
> > decision.  It blows my mind that Cultimate would put this thing out
> > there without already having the teams on board.  It would be like
> > saying "I'm putting a sweet club team together next year with Nord,
> > Beau, and Zip on it" before even talking to them.  Crazy.
>
> Think about if Cultimate had done it the other way around.  It sends
> private emails out to the 25 teams.  Then it waits until it received
> all 25 responses.  If every response wasn't positive, then it sends
> out another X emails, and then it waits for all X of those responses
> too.  By this point, its plans SURELY would have leaked to rsd or to a
> blog or two.  C1 doesn't make as big of a splash, or at the very least
> Cultimate doesn't get to control how the info is released to the
> frisbee community.  I agree with you that it's interesting/crazy/risky
> to do it the way they did it, but I'm not sure how much of a choice
> they had.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3166 is a reply to message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 10:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
I don't think Georgia is timing their decision correctly. They don't
know the whole situation/proposal (nobody does, yet), they don't know
how involved the UPA will be (if at all), and they could very well be
shooting themselves in the foot. They are voicing legitimate concerns,
but instead of trying to work towards an amicable and acceptable
solution, they are prematurely throwing in the towel.

Ryan Thompson
Stanford Ultimate
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3167 is a reply to message #3108] Thu, 16 October 2008 10:11 Go to previous messageGo to next message
jesshill
Messages: 4
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 12:49 pm, bslad...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...
>
> Still highlights... they haven't bothered to take them down yet.

That's because they'd have to make a whole new big image to pass off
as a website.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3175 is a reply to message #3166] Thu, 16 October 2008 10:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
canadian
Messages: 10
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 1:09 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> I don't think Georgia is timing their decision correctly. They don't
> know the whole situation/proposal (nobody does, yet), they don't know
> how involved the UPA will be (if at all), and they could very well be
> shooting themselves in the foot. They are voicing legitimate concerns,
> but instead of trying to work towards an amicable and acceptable
> solution, they are prematurely throwing in the towel.
>
> Ryan Thompson
> Stanford Ultimate

Two random dudes are trying to annex the college series to make money.
What else is there to know?

Good decision Georgia. Hopefully other teams will follow.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3177 is a reply to message #3175] Thu, 16 October 2008 10:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jackson
Messages: 97
Registered: October 2008
Location: Stanford Bubble
Member
I think Georgia is in a very different situation than most other
college teams. They do not practice in the fall [1]. Instead they run
an intramural-type league and then start practices after that league
is over. Since every game counts in C1, Georgia would be at a
significant disadvantage in its early season games.

I remember hearing a few years ago that Brown did something similar,
but I don't have written proof for that.


[1] Source material from http://tnilan.blogspot.com/2008/07/fall-2008.html

At last year's CCC in DECEMBER, we played Wisconsin in the finals and
got beat. I was frustrated with the outcome of the game. Our team,
which was selected a week earlier, couldn't come together and win. To
console my emotions (which I have a lot of because I have a blog),
someone said to me, "You shouldn't be that made Taylor, Wisconsin has
been practicing since August/September." That made me feel a little
better. Then, I started thinking aloud, "Why don't we practice during
the Fall?"

During the Fall, we have always had intramural Fall League. This is a
great way to recruit talent. In fact, a couple of our team members
made the team through this event. We split our A team up onto
different teams, and then fill in the rest of the teams with members
from the B and D team, as well as newcomers.

This Fall, we will have Fall League as well as two morning practices a
week starting at around 7 am. During the morning practices, we will be
focusing on conditioning more than anything, so when it comes time of
the college series, we will [hopefully] be beasts from the easts. I am
writing this because I am sincerely interested in hearing what other
big teams do during the Fall. What type of fall practice do you have?
When do you start practice? When do you have tryouts? Do you like
turkey sandwiches?
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3178 is a reply to message #3166] Thu, 16 October 2008 10:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Torre
Messages: 226
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 1:09 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> I don't think Georgia is timing their decision correctly. They don't
> know the whole situation/proposal (nobody does, yet), they don't know
> how involved the UPA will be (if at all), and they could very well be
> shooting themselves in the foot. They are voicing legitimate concerns,
> but instead of trying to work towards an amicable and acceptable
> solution, they are prematurely throwing in the towel.
>
> Ryan Thompson
> Stanford Ultimate

True- it might be premature, but if they decide they do want in after
the UPA makes their announcement and Georgia wants in, don't you think
they'd let them join?
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3181 is a reply to message #3175] Thu, 16 October 2008 10:56 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tom Shane
Messages: 25
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
> Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> What else is there to know?
>

fix'd
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3183 is a reply to message #3181] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:09 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mcgillultimate
Messages: 3
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > What else is there to know?
>
> fix'd

Fix the college series? How so? By going behind the UPAs back to
construct a series that makes them a whole bunch of money? The point
is that we can run around in circles with this argument, but
regardless of whether you think the series they are proposing is a
good idea or not, you have to admit that their motivations and methods
are suspect.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3185 is a reply to message #3166] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
joe.m.segal
Messages: 185
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 1:09 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> I don't think Georgia is timing their decision correctly. They don't
> know the whole situation/proposal (nobody does, yet), they don't know
> how involved the UPA will be (if at all), and they could very well be
> shooting themselves in the foot. They are voicing legitimate concerns,
> but instead of trying to work towards an amicable and acceptable
> solution, they are prematurely throwing in the towel.
>
> Ryan Thompson
> Stanford Ultimate

Stanford Invite = a conference 1 tournament this year ???
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3187 is a reply to message #3185] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:15 Go to previous messageGo to next message
canadian
Messages: 10
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
> Stanford Invite = a conference 1 tournament this year  ???

Great point.
So how much money has Cultimate offered Stanford to host the
tournament at their facilities?
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3188 is a reply to message #3181] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:17 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ben sprung
Messages: 24
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > What else is there to know?
>
> fix'd

And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?

When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3192 is a reply to message #3188] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 11:17 am, ben sprung <bspr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > > What else is there to know?
>
> > fix'd
>
> And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.

not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
profit
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3204 is a reply to message #3166] Thu, 16 October 2008 11:52 Go to previous messageGo to next message
asya.ru
Messages: 3
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 10:09 am, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> I don't think Georgia is timing their decision correctly. They don't
> know the whole situation/proposal (nobody does, yet), they don't know
> how involved the UPA will be (if at all), and they could very well be
> shooting themselves in the foot. They are voicing legitimate concerns,
> but instead of trying to work towards an amicable and acceptable
> solution, they are prematurely throwing in the towel.
>
> Ryan Thompson
> Stanford Ultimate

I think the only way to really get Cultimate to cooperate with UPA is
for the teams to opt out of it this year.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3224 is a reply to message #3192] Thu, 16 October 2008 12:50 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 12:46 pm, Nathan <nwi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2:22 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 11:17 am, ben sprung <bspr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > > > > What else is there to know?
>
> > > > fix'd
>
> > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > profit
>
> Ryan-
>
> Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> Nathan

What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3225 is a reply to message #3192] Thu, 16 October 2008 12:46 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nathan
Messages: 22
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 2:22 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 11:17 am, ben sprung <bspr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > > > What else is there to know?
>
> > > fix'd
>
> > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> profit

Ryan-

Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?

Nathan
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3230 is a reply to message #3224] Thu, 16 October 2008 12:55 Go to previous messageGo to next message
S
Messages: 27
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
I do not know that they will just "become" non-profit. For anyone
that has ever tried to make their ultimate club non-profit (which UCF
is trying to do) it takes a significant amount of time and effort and
money (lawyer). You must become 501c3 which has never been something
Cultimate has expressed interest in doing (from what I've heard)

On Oct 16, 3:50 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 12:46 pm, Nathan <nwi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 2:22 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 16, 11:17 am, ben sprung <bspr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > > > > > What else is there to know?
>
> > > > > fix'd
>
> > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > profit
>
> > Ryan-
>
> > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > Nathan
>
> What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3233 is a reply to message #3224] Thu, 16 October 2008 13:16 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Frito
Messages: 26
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 3:50 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> > Ryan-
>
> > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > Nathan
>
> What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.

Quoting http://www.the-huddle.org/features/conference-1/a-detailed-b reakdown/
[What Cultimate Wants to Create
Simply put, Cultimate wants to make College Ultimate similar to an
NCAA sport. Meaningful regular seasons, better publicity and tiered
competition; a proposed plan which could potentially accelerate the
development of the sport. This altruism is balanced with their
entrepreneurial nature; Cultimate also wants to make money off a
division which has been, in the past, almost completely run for the
financial betterment of individual teams.]

It doesn't sound like they are going for non-profit to me. Cultimate
has always been about making money.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3244 is a reply to message #3233] Thu, 16 October 2008 13:29 Go to previous messageGo to next message
info
Messages: 13
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 1:16 pm, Frito <fritolay0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 3:50 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Ryan-
>
> > > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > > Nathan
>
> > What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> > Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
>
> Quoting http://www.the-huddle.org/features/conference-1/a-detailed-b reakdown/
> [What Cultimate Wants to Create
> "This altruism is balanced with their entrepreneurial nature; Cultimate also wants to make money off a
> division which has been, in the past, almost completely run for the financial betterment of individual teams.]
>
> It doesn't sound like they are going for non-profit to me.  Cultimate
> has always been about making money.

Keep in mind; this is the result of interviews with Cultimate
conducted earlier this week. It is possible that Cultimate might have
changed their plan, or might still change their plan after talking
with the UPA. The Huddle is not part of Cultimate, and like any news,
our material from Tuesday is now already dated.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3251 is a reply to message #3244] Thu, 16 October 2008 14:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Bolt43
Messages: 8
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
Even more questionable that they changed their mind about what type of
organization they want to have after already introducing it to the
public...
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3267 is a reply to message #3251] Thu, 16 October 2008 15:22 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Daag Alemayehu
Messages: 249
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 16, 5:21 pm, "Bol...@gmail.com" <Bol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Even more questionable that they changed their mind about what type of
> organization they want to have after already introducing it to the
> public...

So if, let's say, they saw the initial shitstorm on rsd, in the blogs,
and perhaps in intial feedback from the UPA and decided maybe they
should make some changes to make more people happy, you'd FAULT them
for that? Strange. You must be one of those George-W.-Bush-mission-
accomplished-stay-the-course kinda guys (or gals, you never can tell
with you anonymous posters).
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3270 is a reply to message #3118] Thu, 16 October 2008 15:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
j.krieger.51
Messages: 11
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 9:21 am, S <ehste...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> > Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> > Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...
>
> I am very impressed with Georgia in this decision.  I feel like
> Cultimate made a rash attempt to take over College Ultimate without
> thinking about the sport.  This seemed like a power move where they
> offered vast incentive for the top 25 to switch to their brand so the
> power would shift there as well.  They figured out they could do it,
> and did it, but didn't think about what the repercussions would be.
>
> That brings me to Georgia.  They definitely were not counting on a
> levelheaded team like this to sit down, think about the situation and
> back out.  I think Georgia should set the example.  Not that all teams
> should back out of C1, but they should all have a long discussion
> before accepting these obvious and immediate benefits.
>
> The impact of C1 is already being felt on this community and its been
> 2 days.  I can't wait to see what happens within the next few weeks.

Baer, they definately DID count on teams to sit down and talk it
through, considering they've given everyone 2 weeks to make their
decisions, and 23 of the 25 still haven't responded. So really, since
Georgia has already announced within a couple days, it is safe to
asssume that most teams are spending MORE time than them "sitting down
and thinking about the situation."
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3285 is a reply to message #3270] Thu, 16 October 2008 16:58 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Claire
Messages: 6
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 5:42 pm, j.krieger...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Oct 16, 9:21 am, S <ehste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 9:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> > > Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> > > Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well...
>
> > I am very impressed with Georgia in this decision. I feel like
> > Cultimate made a rash attempt to take over College Ultimate without
> > thinking about the sport. This seemed like a power move where they
> > offered vast incentive for the top 25 to switch to their brand so the
> > power would shift there as well. They figured out they could do it,
> > and did it, but didn't think about what the repercussions would be.
>
> > That brings me to Georgia. They definitely were not counting on a
> > levelheaded team like this to sit down, think about the situation and
> > back out. I think Georgia should set the example. Not that all teams
> > should back out of C1, but they should all have a long discussion
> > before accepting these obvious and immediate benefits.
>
> > The impact of C1 is already being felt on this community and its been
> > 2 days. I can't wait to see what happens within the next few weeks.
>
> Baer, they definately DID count on teams to sit down and talk it
> through, considering they've given everyone 2 weeks to make their
> decisions, and 23 of the 25 still haven't responded. So really, since
> Georgia has already announced within a couple days, it is safe to
> asssume that most teams are spending MORE time than them "sitting down
> and thinking about the situation."

How many here are actually unbiased and putting the sport first?

Ryan brings up good points and all everyone is saying is that
Cultimate is a power hungry, mismanaged organization with poor
timing. In leiu of this, you all praise Georgia for doing the same
thing. They talked for not more than 2 days and concluded it to be
poor without enough information. Georgia should not be praised for
making a rash decision anymore than Cultimate should be praised for
trying to enact this so quickly. It is not worth making a final
decision without all the information, simple Game theory has proofs
that show decisions are inherently suboptimal without complete
information.

I am not for or against Conference 1 and Cultimate, but I do think ill-
informed, biased individuals are definitely not the ones to be making
the decision.

This whole thread sounds like a bunch of fire carrying, pitch fork
wielding, towns people looking to lynch Frankenstein. Instead of
jumping to ridiculous conclusions, citing a single person's mistake in
the past as a reason not to trust or buy into it, look at the facts
and wait to hear everything before ripping things apart.

I am sure each and every one of you has made a big mistake in your
life, yet employers don't write you off and fire you just because of
it. Think of a friend of yours who has driven drunk, or committed
academic dishonesty, yet they were surely forgiven, to a degree, and
given another chance.

Those within sin cast the first stone against Cultimate.

From there, instead of putting YOUR personal feelings at the
forefront, be objective and think from an outsiders view and then
post.

There are pros, there are cons, weigh them up and discuss those.
Saying, "Cultimate is evil and Cycle screwed up 2 years ago!" is
meaningless and trivial, it is no way helps.

Telling teams to drop out because Team X isn't invited is not a good
reason inherently. No team had control over who was invited, and
trying to make a decision based upon factors you can't control is also
meaningless. It is the same idea as trying to decide whether to play
a tournament based upon the weather that weekend, you can't control it
so why take it into consideration?

I know that teams that were invited to Conference 1 have also received
an e-mail from the UPA asking to not make a final decision until the
UPA and Cultimate have engaged in more talks, which again makes
Georgia's quick decision illogical and irrational again as they don't
even know what the UPA's real perspective is yet.

All in all, lets be objective and show the teams that do have control
over this decision what the right move to make is. Telling them
Cultimate is evil is not going to change their minds when there are
much more important variables to consider.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3302 is a reply to message #3285] Thu, 16 October 2008 17:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
alex.walex
Messages: 1
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 6:58 pm, Claire <lccal...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 5:42 pm, j.krieger...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 9:21 am, S <ehste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 16, 9:38 am, Baer <collin.b...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > According to this blog, Georgia has declined Cultimate's invitation:http://ultfris.blogspot.com/2008/10/georgia-decli nes-conference1-offe...
>
> > > > Who's next? When are other teams gong to be making their decisions?
>
> > > > Cultimate's website highlighted a Florida/Georgia rivalry, as well....
>
> > > I am very impressed with Georgia in this decision.  I feel like
> > > Cultimate made a rash attempt to take over College Ultimate without
> > > thinking about the sport.  This seemed like a power move where they
> > > offered vast incentive for the top 25 to switch to their brand so the
> > > power would shift there as well.  They figured out they could do it,
> > > and did it, but didn't think about what the repercussions would be.
>
> > > That brings me to Georgia.  They definitely were not counting on a
> > > levelheaded team like this to sit down, think about the situation and
> > > back out.  I think Georgia should set the example.  Not that all teams
> > > should back out of C1, but they should all have a long discussion
> > > before accepting these obvious and immediate benefits.
>
> > > The impact of C1 is already being felt on this community and its been
> > > 2 days.  I can't wait to see what happens within the next few weeks..
>
> > Baer, they definately DID count on teams to sit down and talk it
> > through, considering they've given everyone 2 weeks to make their
> > decisions, and 23 of the 25 still haven't responded. So really, since
> > Georgia has already announced within a couple days, it is safe to
> > asssume that most teams are spending MORE time than them "sitting down
> > and thinking about the situation."
>
> How many here are actually unbiased and putting the sport first?
>
> Ryan brings up good points and all everyone is saying is that
> Cultimate is a power hungry, mismanaged organization with poor
> timing.  In leiu of this, you all praise Georgia for doing the same
> thing.  They talked for not more than 2 days and concluded it to be
> poor without enough information.  Georgia should not be praised for
> making a rash decision anymore than Cultimate should be praised for
> trying to enact this so quickly.  It is not worth making a final
> decision without all the information, simple Game theory has proofs
> that show decisions are inherently suboptimal without complete
> information.
>
> I am not for or against Conference 1 and Cultimate, but I do think ill-
> informed, biased individuals are definitely not the ones to be making
> the decision.
>
> This whole thread sounds like a bunch of fire carrying, pitch fork
> wielding, towns people looking to lynch Frankenstein.  Instead of
> jumping to ridiculous conclusions, citing a single person's mistake in
> the past as a reason not to trust or buy into it, look at the facts
> and wait to hear everything before ripping things apart.
>
> I am sure each and every one of you has made a big mistake in your
> life, yet employers don't write you off and fire you just because of
> it.  Think of a friend of yours who has driven drunk, or committed
> academic dishonesty, yet they were surely forgiven, to a degree, and
> given another chance.
>
> Those within sin cast the first stone against Cultimate.
>
> From there, instead of putting YOUR personal feelings at the
> forefront, be objective and think from an outsiders view and then
> post.
>
> There are pros, there are cons, weigh them up and discuss those.
> Saying, "Cultimate is evil and Cycle screwed up 2 years ago!" is
> meaningless and trivial, it is no way helps.
>
> Telling teams to drop out because Team X isn't invited is not a good
> reason inherently.  No team had control over who was invited, and
> trying to make a decision based upon factors you can't control is also
> meaningless.  It is the same idea as trying to decide whether to play
> a tournament based upon the weather that weekend, you can't control it
> so why take it into consideration?
>
> I know that teams that were invited to Conference 1 have also received
> an e-mail from the UPA asking to not make a final decision until the
> UPA and Cultimate have engaged in more talks, which again makes
> Georgia's quick decision illogical and irrational again as they don't
> even know what the UPA's real perspective is yet.
>
> All in all, lets be objective and show the teams that do have control
> over this decision what the right move to make is.  Telling them
> Cultimate is evil is not going to change their minds when there are
> much more important variables to consider.

Clearly, Claire knows that 2 days is not enough time to make a wise
decision. Of course to join Cultimate would be to condone Cyle Van
Auken's vision of elite ultimate. In his apology to the ultimate
community, Cyle described elite level ultimate. "Elite Level ultimate
is very difficult to understand." You wouldn't understand, Claire.
He continues, "What classifies a spirited team/player in the larger
whole of Ultimate does not translate to the elite level. All of the
top teams intimidate the lower-tier teams, physically or verbally, but
there is a respect among the teams that exist within that elite
level."

Some apology. If there are no lower-tier teams to intimidate in the
top 25, how will the "elite" maintain their status. I guess Cultimate
fails, the end. This came straight from the person in charge of
Cultimate. How quickly we forget. Maybe Georgia didn't.

-Tub G
LSU Alum
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3304 is a reply to message #3285] Thu, 16 October 2008 18:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SGSchaffer
Messages: 6
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
> This whole thread sounds like a bunch of fire carrying, pitch fork
> wielding, towns people looking to lynch Frankenstein.  Instead of
> jumping to ridiculous conclusions, citing a single person's mistake in
> the past as a reason not to trust or buy into it, look at the facts
> and wait to hear everything before ripping things apart.
>
> I am sure each and every one of you has made a big mistake in your
> life, yet employers don't write you off and fire you just because of
> it.  Think of a friend of yours who has driven drunk, or committed
> academic dishonesty, yet they were surely forgiven, to a degree, and
> given another chance.

If you are in a work place, or working for heading up and organization
that will be handling money, you will be held accountable for any and
all financial transactions that occur in your presence. No matter how
long ago a financial mistake happened in the past, it haunts you for a
very long time. Think about credit agencies, car loans, home loans,
small business loans, etc. they all check the persons credit history
to see exactly what type of financial situations they have been in the
past and are currently in. A lot of high level CFO, CEO, COO positions
require a credit history check to help determine employment and they
do it for a reason. I don't think this should be any different. I do
agree that re-posting his apology letters may be a little ridiculous.
However, I don't think that ignoring his poor financial and ethical
decisions and trying to forget that it happened is wise, either.
Especially considering that if C1 does start up any time soon that
will put him back behind the wheel with a lot more money to be
managed.

Yes, people make mistakes like driving drunk, academic dishonesty,
late bill payments, etc. but while this may be a college sport, this
doesn't need to be ran as a college organization. They are essentially
creating a business with potential to make a lot of money. Money
which is a very big deal and something that is not to be taken so
lightly as you have just put it. Money changes people, it changes
situations and if he were to have been employed by someone when he did
this 18 months ago, he would have been fired without a doubt in my
mind. I think that this a very real situation that needs to be heavily
weighed upon and not tossed so freely out the door. Money is the root
of all evil....
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3326 is a reply to message #3302] Thu, 16 October 2008 20:43 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tom Shane
Messages: 25
Registered: September 2008
Junior Member
> Some apology. If there are no lower-tier teams to intimidate in the
> top 25, how will the "elite" maintain their status. I guess Cultimate
> fails, the end.  This came straight from the person in charge of
> Cultimate. How quickly we forget. Maybe Georgia didn't.
>
> -Tub G
> LSU Alum

You are just demonstrating such a clear understanding of college
Ultimate right here...it's...it's just incredible.

Tom "facepalm" a-Shaned
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3389 is a reply to message #3285] Fri, 17 October 2008 07:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Alex Morrone
Messages: 113
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
It is the same idea as trying to decide whether to play
> a tournament based upon the weather that weekend, you can't control it
> so why take it into consideration?
> > - Show quoted text -

I just think this is funny.

Player A - Hmmmm there is a tornado literally ontop of the fields, I
don't think we are going to play this tournament
Player B - No way, we can't change that so lets not let it stop us
from playing.

Hopefully you meant it as do we sign up for this tournament or not,
but either way I think it's a silly analogy
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3393 is a reply to message #3224] Fri, 17 October 2008 07:42 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Nathan
Messages: 22
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 16, 3:50 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> On Oct 16, 12:46 pm, Nathan <nwi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 16, 2:22 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 16, 11:17 am, ben sprung <bspr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Oct 16, 1:56 pm, Tom Shane <tomshanetomsh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Two established members of the college Ultimate community are trying to fix the college series to make Ultimate a legitimate sport.
> > > > > > What else is there to know?
>
> > > > > fix'd
>
> > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > profit
>
> > Ryan-
>
> > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > Nathan
>
> What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.

So, just to be clear, will Cyle and Skip earn money from this venture?
Not that there is a problem with that (in fact, anybody who can put on
a championship series should of course earn money0, but I think when
some people here the phrase "non-profit", they assume that these guys
are just volunteers, which I do not think is the case.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3425 is a reply to message #3393] Fri, 17 October 2008 09:23 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Abbie
Messages: 7
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
A lot of talk about "for profit" and "not for profit".

The 501(c) tax-exempt status certainly does not guarantee that an
organization does not keep most of the money that it brings in and
line the pockets of its Board of Directors and highest-paid employees
(known as Excess Benefit Transactions, which carry stiff penalties if
discovered and proven). You can look at non-profits at Guidestar -
look at the form 990s and see the numbers that apply to your favorite
organization - although many are bad about filling out 990s fully
because the IRS doesn't necessarily know that something shady is going
on unless there are complaints. It is required that the organization
list any employees that make over $50,000 and how much money is coming
in, and going out each year. There is not really a "requirement" that
people involved in a "non profit" don't MAKE MONEY.

Example: Cultimate could apply and get 501(c) status, nominate Skip
and Cyle to the Board of Directors, and pay them whatever salary they
want as long as it doesn't violate the "excess benefit" guidelines.

Since online availability has increased public awareness and scrutiny
of non profits, there have been many stories of how some 501(c)3
organizations have abysmal records of serving the mission they tout
when pulling in money from the public or the government.

So it doesn't really matter to me whether or not Cultimate gets tax-
exempt status, because they can still run their organization the way
they want - without shareholders.Here, the more significant difference
is not in the tax distinction of the incorporated entity, but how it
is governed:

When it comes to the UPA, every ultimate player, can be both a
shareholder: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) and a
stakeholder: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate).

When it comes to Cultimate and C1: all of the players in C1, and the
players whose teams hope to be in C1, the UPA, and arguably non-
college players are affected by that Cultimate chooses. What recourse
is there, except something along the lines of a players' strike if
teams and players don't like Cultimate's practices?



> > > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > > profit
>
> > > Ryan-
>
> > > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > > Nathan
>
> > What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> > Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
>
> So, just to be clear, will Cyle and Skip earn money from this venture?
> Not that there is a problem with that (in fact, anybody who can put on
> a championship series should of course earn money0, but I think when
> some people here the phrase "non-profit", they assume that these guys
> are just volunteers, which I do not think is the case.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3430 is a reply to message #3425] Fri, 17 October 2008 09:40 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ben sprung
Messages: 24
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
On Oct 17, 12:23 pm, Abbie <abigailemer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A lot of talk about "for profit" and "not for profit".
>
> The 501(c) tax-exempt status certainly does not guarantee that an
> organization does not keep most of the money that it brings in and
> line the pockets of its Board of Directors and highest-paid employees
> (known as Excess Benefit Transactions, which carry stiff penalties if
> discovered and proven). You can look at non-profits at Guidestar -
> look at the form 990s and see the numbers that apply to your favorite
> organization - although many are bad about filling out 990s fully
> because the IRS doesn't necessarily know that something shady is going
> on unless there are complaints. It is required that the organization
> list any employees that make over $50,000 and how much money is coming
> in, and going out each year. There is not really a "requirement" that
> people involved in a "non profit" don't MAKE MONEY.
>
> Example: Cultimate could apply and get 501(c) status, nominate Skip
> and Cyle to the Board of Directors, and pay them whatever salary they
> want as long as it doesn't violate the "excess benefit" guidelines.
>
> Since online availability has increased public awareness and scrutiny
> of non profits, there have been many stories of how some 501(c)3
> organizations have abysmal records of serving the mission they tout
> when pulling in money from the public or the government.
>
> So it doesn't really matter to me whether or not Cultimate gets tax-
> exempt status, because they can still run their organization the way
> they want - without shareholders.Here, the more significant difference
> is not in the tax distinction of the incorporated entity, but how it
> is governed:
>
> When it comes to the UPA, every ultimate player, can be both a
> shareholder: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) and a
> stakeholder:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate).
>
> When it comes to Cultimate and C1: all of the players in C1, and the
> players whose teams hope to be in C1, the UPA, and arguably non-
> college players are affected by that Cultimate chooses. What recourse
> is there, except something along the lines of a players' strike if
> teams and players don't like Cultimate's practices?

Well said, I agree.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3453 is a reply to message #3425] Fri, 17 October 2008 11:06 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jeff
Messages: 338
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
Cultimate as presently configured could not get a 501(c)3 status. If
it had a clearly defined educational mission it 'might' qualify. The
UPA Ultimate Leagues Yahoo board has a pretty good discussion about
that a while back ...

Not a UPA apologist, bomb thrower or martry ... just don't like people
doing really nonsensical things


On Oct 17, 12:23�pm, Abbie <abigailemer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A lot of talk about "for profit" and "not for profit".
>
> The 501(c) tax-exempt status certainly does not guarantee that an
> organization does not keep most of the money that it brings in and
> line the pockets of its Board of Directors and highest-paid employees
> (known as Excess Benefit Transactions, which carry stiff penalties if
> discovered and proven). You can look at non-profits at Guidestar -
> look at the form 990s and see the numbers that apply to your favorite
> organization - although many are bad about filling out 990s fully
> because the IRS doesn't necessarily know that something shady is going
> on unless there are complaints. It is required that the organization
> list any employees that make over $50,000 and how much money is coming
> in, and going out each year. There is not really a "requirement" that
> people involved in a "non profit" don't MAKE MONEY.
>
> Example: Cultimate could apply and get 501(c) status, nominate Skip
> and Cyle to the Board of Directors, and pay them whatever salary they
> want as long as it doesn't violate the "excess benefit" guidelines.
>
> Since online availability has increased public awareness and scrutiny
> of non profits, there have been many stories of how some 501(c)3
> organizations have abysmal records of serving the mission they tout
> when pulling in money from the public or the government.
>
> So it doesn't really matter to me whether or not Cultimate gets tax-
> exempt status, because they can still run their organization the way
> they want - without shareholders.Here, the more significant difference
> is not in the tax distinction of the incorporated entity, but how it
> is governed:
>
> When it comes to the UPA, every ultimate player, can be both a
> shareholder: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) and a
> stakeholder:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate).
>
> When it comes to Cultimate and C1: all of the players in C1, and the
> players whose teams hope to be in C1, the UPA, and arguably non-
> college players are affected by that Cultimate chooses. What recourse
> is there, except something along the lines of a players' strike if
> teams and players don't like Cultimate's practices?
>
>
>
> > > > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > > > profit
>
> > > > Ryan-
>
> > > > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > > > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > > > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > > > Nathan
>
> > > What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> > > Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
>
> > So, just to be clear, will Cyle and Skip earn money from this venture?
> > Not that there is a problem with that (in fact, anybody who can put on
> > a championship series should of course earn money0, but I think when
> > some people here the phrase "non-profit", they assume that these guys
> > are just volunteers, which I do not think is the case.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3455 is a reply to message #3453] Fri, 17 October 2008 11:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Ryan Thompson
Messages: 364
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
On Oct 17, 11:06 am, Jeff <Jffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Cultimate as presently configured could not get a 501(c)3 status.  If
> it had a clearly defined educational mission it 'might' qualify.  The
> UPA Ultimate Leagues Yahoo board has a pretty good discussion about
> that a while back ...
>
> Not a UPA apologist, bomb thrower or martry ... just don't like people
> doing really nonsensical things
>
> On Oct 17, 12:23 pm, Abbie <abigailemer...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > A lot of talk about "for profit" and "not for profit".
>
> > The 501(c) tax-exempt status certainly does not guarantee that an
> > organization does not keep most of the money that it brings in and
> > line the pockets of its Board of Directors and highest-paid employees
> > (known as Excess Benefit Transactions, which carry stiff penalties if
> > discovered and proven). You can look at non-profits at Guidestar -
> > look at the form 990s and see the numbers that apply to your favorite
> > organization - although many are bad about filling out 990s fully
> > because the IRS doesn't necessarily know that something shady is going
> > on unless there are complaints. It is required that the organization
> > list any employees that make over $50,000 and how much money is coming
> > in, and going out each year. There is not really a "requirement" that
> > people involved in a "non profit" don't MAKE MONEY.
>
> > Example: Cultimate could apply and get 501(c) status, nominate Skip
> > and Cyle to the Board of Directors, and pay them whatever salary they
> > want as long as it doesn't violate the "excess benefit" guidelines.
>
> > Since online availability has increased public awareness and scrutiny
> > of non profits, there have been many stories of how some 501(c)3
> > organizations have abysmal records of serving the mission they tout
> > when pulling in money from the public or the government.
>
> > So it doesn't really matter to me whether or not Cultimate gets tax-
> > exempt status, because they can still run their organization the way
> > they want - without shareholders.Here, the more significant difference
> > is not in the tax distinction of the incorporated entity, but how it
> > is governed:
>
> > When it comes to the UPA, every ultimate player, can be both a
> > shareholder: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) and a
> > stakeholder:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate).
>
> > When it comes to Cultimate and C1: all of the players in C1, and the
> > players whose teams hope to be in C1, the UPA, and arguably non-
> > college players are affected by that Cultimate chooses. What recourse
> > is there, except something along the lines of a players' strike if
> > teams and players don't like Cultimate's practices?
>
> > > > > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > > > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > > > > profit
>
> > > > > Ryan-
>
> > > > > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > > > > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > > > > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > > > > Nathan
>
> > > > What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> > > > Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
>
> > > So, just to be clear, will Cyle and Skip earn money from this venture?
> > > Not that there is a problem with that (in fact, anybody who can put on
> > > a championship series should of course earn money0, but I think when
> > > some people here the phrase "non-profit", they assume that these guys
> > > are just volunteers, which I do not think is the case.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>

Cultimate wouldn't be a 501(c)3 - the organization they would
establish solely to run the college division would be, though. From
what I understand.
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3463 is a reply to message #3455] Fri, 17 October 2008 11:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Jeff
Messages: 338
Registered: September 2008
Senior Member
501(c)3 status is not available to sports organizations

On Oct 17, 2:10�pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
> On Oct 17, 11:06�am, Jeff <Jffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Cultimate as presently configured could not get a 501(c)3 status. �If
> > it had a clearly defined educational mission it 'might' qualify. �The
> > UPA Ultimate Leagues Yahoo board has a pretty good discussion about
> > that a while back ...
>
> > Not a UPA apologist, bomb thrower or martry ... just don't like people
> > doing really nonsensical things
>
> > On Oct 17, 12:23 pm, Abbie <abigailemer...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > A lot of talk about "for profit" and "not for profit".
>
> > > The 501(c) tax-exempt status certainly does not guarantee that an
> > > organization does not keep most of the money that it brings in and
> > > line the pockets of its Board of Directors and highest-paid employees
> > > (known as Excess Benefit Transactions, which carry stiff penalties if
> > > discovered and proven). You can look at non-profits at Guidestar -
> > > look at the form 990s and see the numbers that apply to your favorite
> > > organization - although many are bad about filling out 990s fully
> > > because the IRS doesn't necessarily know that something shady is going
> > > on unless there are complaints. It is required that the organization
> > > list any employees that make over $50,000 and how much money is coming
> > > in, and going out each year. There is not really a "requirement" that
> > > people involved in a "non profit" don't MAKE MONEY.
>
> > > Example: Cultimate could apply and get 501(c) status, nominate Skip
> > > and Cyle to the Board of Directors, and pay them whatever salary they
> > > want as long as it doesn't violate the "excess benefit" guidelines.
>
> > > Since online availability has increased public awareness and scrutiny
> > > of non profits, there have been many stories of how some 501(c)3
> > > organizations have abysmal records of serving the mission they tout
> > > when pulling in money from the public or the government.
>
> > > So it doesn't really matter to me whether or not Cultimate gets tax-
> > > exempt status, because they can still run their organization the way
> > > they want - without shareholders.Here, the more significant difference
> > > is not in the tax distinction of the incorporated entity, but how it
> > > is governed:
>
> > > When it comes to the UPA, every ultimate player, can be both a
> > > shareholder: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) and a
> > > stakeholder:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate).
>
> > > When it comes to Cultimate and C1: all of the players in C1, and the
> > > players whose teams hope to be in C1, the UPA, and arguably non-
> > > college players are affected by that Cultimate chooses. What recourse
> > > is there, except something along the lines of a players' strike if
> > > teams and players don't like Cultimate's practices?
>
> > > > > > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > > > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > > > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > > > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > > > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > > > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > > > > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > > > > > profit
>
> > > > > > Ryan-
>
> > > > > > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > > > > > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > > > > > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > > > > > Nathan
>
> > > > > What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> > > > > Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
>
> > > > So, just to be clear, will Cyle and Skip earn money from this venture?
> > > > Not that there is a problem with that (in fact, anybody who can put on
> > > > a championship series should of course earn money0, but I think when
> > > > some people here the phrase "non-profit", they assume that these guys
> > > > are just volunteers, which I do not think is the case.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> Cultimate wouldn't be a 501(c)3 - the organization they would
> establish solely to run the college division would be, though. From
> what I understand.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Re: Georgia opts out of C1 [message #3467 is a reply to message #3463] Fri, 17 October 2008 12:13 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Abbie
Messages: 7
Registered: October 2008
Junior Member
Am I missing something? See below, copied and pasted from http://www.irs.gov.

Exempt Purposes - Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3)

The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable,
religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public
safety, fostering national or international amateur sports
competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term
charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes
relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged;
advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting
or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the
burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating
prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured
by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile
delinquency.

In addition to 501(c)(3), there are other tax-exempt distinctions in
the 501(c) section. That is why I didn't put the "3" in certain parts
of my earlier post.

Again, not *necessarily* pro/anti Cultimate or Five Ultimate. I am pro
"good governance" when it comes to not for profit organizations (cue
Toad or Frank or whatnot...).


On Oct 17, 2:41 pm, Jeff <Jffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 501(c)3 status is not available to sports organizations
>
> On Oct 17, 2:10 pm, Ryan Thompson <thomp...@stanford.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Oct 17, 11:06 am, Jeff <Jffr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Cultimate as presently configured could not get a 501(c)3 status. If
> > > it had a clearly defined educational mission it 'might' qualify. The
> > > UPA Ultimate Leagues Yahoo board has a pretty good discussion about
> > > that a while back ...
>
> > > Not a UPA apologist, bomb thrower or martry ... just don't like people
> > > doing really nonsensical things
>
> > > On Oct 17, 12:23 pm, Abbie <abigailemer...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > A lot of talk about "for profit" and "not for profit".
>
> > > > The 501(c) tax-exempt status certainly does not guarantee that an
> > > > organization does not keep most of the money that it brings in and
> > > > line the pockets of its Board of Directors and highest-paid employees
> > > > (known as Excess Benefit Transactions, which carry stiff penalties if
> > > > discovered and proven). You can look at non-profits at Guidestar -
> > > > look at the form 990s and see the numbers that apply to your favorite
> > > > organization - although many are bad about filling out 990s fully
> > > > because the IRS doesn't necessarily know that something shady is going
> > > > on unless there are complaints. It is required that the organization
> > > > list any employees that make over $50,000 and how much money is coming
> > > > in, and going out each year. There is not really a "requirement" that
> > > > people involved in a "non profit" don't MAKE MONEY.
>
> > > > Example: Cultimate could apply and get 501(c) status, nominate Skip
> > > > and Cyle to the Board of Directors, and pay them whatever salary they
> > > > want as long as it doesn't violate the "excess benefit" guidelines.
>
> > > > Since online availability has increased public awareness and scrutiny
> > > > of non profits, there have been many stories of how some 501(c)3
> > > > organizations have abysmal records of serving the mission they tout
> > > > when pulling in money from the public or the government.
>
> > > > So it doesn't really matter to me whether or not Cultimate gets tax-
> > > > exempt status, because they can still run their organization the way
> > > > they want - without shareholders.Here, the more significant difference
> > > > is not in the tax distinction of the incorporated entity, but how it
> > > > is governed:
>
> > > > When it comes to the UPA, every ultimate player, can be both a
> > > > shareholder: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareholder) and a
> > > > stakeholder:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_(corporate).
>
> > > > When it comes to Cultimate and C1: all of the players in C1, and the
> > > > players whose teams hope to be in C1, the UPA, and arguably non-
> > > > college players are affected by that Cultimate chooses. What recourse
> > > > is there, except something along the lines of a players' strike if
> > > > teams and players don't like Cultimate's practices?
>
> > > > > > > > > And playing in a 25-team preselected division, run by a for-profit
> > > > > > > > > operation (in *college* athletics) helps this how?
>
> > > > > > > > > When I explain ultimate competition to someone who doesn't know
> > > > > > > > > anything about it (now and before when I played college), sure
> > > > > > > > > sometimes they think the game itself sounds silly. But no one's ever
> > > > > > > > > said that sectionals, regionals, nationals doesn't sound legit.
>
> > > > > > > > not for profit not for profit not for profit not for profit not for
> > > > > > > > profit
>
> > > > > > > Ryan-
>
> > > > > > > Are you saying here that Cyle and Skip do not intend to make any money
> > > > > > > off of this venture, or that the organization as a whole (after paying
> > > > > > > salaries and bonuses to Skip and Cyle) will not be making a profit?
>
> > > > > > > Nathan
>
> > > > > > What they told me was that their organization will be a non-profit.
> > > > > > Which will force them to be more transparent than they have been.
>
> > > > > So, just to be clear, will Cyle and Skip earn money from this venture?
> > > > > Not that there is a problem with that (in fact, anybody who can put on
> > > > > a championship series should of course earn money0, but I think when
> > > > > some people here the phrase "non-profit", they assume that these guys
> > > > > are just volunteers, which I do not think is the case.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Cultimate wouldn't be a 501(c)3 - the organization they would
> > establish solely to run the college division would be, though. From
> > what I understand.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
Previous Topic:Road to Vancouver, little more description?
Next Topic:Obama, I'm inspired (conference 1)
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Sun Feb 23 22:10:04 PST 2020
.:: Contact :: Home ::.

Powered by: FUDforum 3.0.0RC2.
Copyright ©2001-2009 FUDforum Bulletin Board Software