FLW Announcment Disappintment

[disappointedddd]

Just in case u missed it flw announced their payouts for the bass guys and there are some very diappointed anglers. The sponsor logo restrictions run all 4 days now and they only added another 40000 for 51 thru 60th not exactly what we all thought after all the hype of walmart and t boone joining....dont look good for the walleye announcements

[Juls]

Walmart FLW Tour rules, registration announced
Changes enacted to paybacks, tournament format, logo policy

FLW Tour
06.Oct.2010
MINNEAPOLIS — FLW Outdoors announced Wednesday the rules, registration dates and more for the 2011 Walmart FLW Tour.

Trisha Blake, president of FLW Outdoors Marketing Division stated, “The adjustments made to the rules for 2011 are a reflection of the open dialogue between anglers, our staff and sponsors. The modifications will benefit anglers immediately and for the long term and have a positive impact on everyone involved in the sport of fishing.”

Anglers will be allowed to wear their own jersey when they make the cut, barring a conflict with an exclusive sponsor of FLW Outdoors and in adherence to the rules. Anglers fishing on day three will be allowed to fish out of their own boat. On day four, anglers will be required to fish out of a tournament-provided boat and will be required to have a patch on their jersey representing the sponsored boat they are fishing from. If an angler does not have a compliant jersey, FLW Outdoors will provide a jersey and allow the angler to apply compliant patches.

Announced earlier this year, the 2011 Tour will expand to 10 tournaments, plus the Forrest Wood Cup, the world championship of bass fishing. The Tour will consist of six FLW Tour Majors and four FLW Tour Opens. FLW Tour Majors, which will feature a 150-boat field, are open to professional anglers who enter all six tournaments. Pros fishing the FLW Tour Majors will receive priority when entering FLW Tour Opens and pros that enter all four FLW Tour Opens will receive priority over individual entrants. FLW Tour Opens will also feature a 150-boat field.

Pro anglers will compete for up to $125,000 and co-anglers will be vying for up to $25,000 in each tournament including Ranger Cup bonuses. With a full field, the paybacks will be $4,000 through 60th place on the pro side and $700 on the co-angler side. Entry fees are unchanged for 2011 at $4,000 per tournament as well as the $1,000 deposit for pros and $700 per tournament for co-anglers. Anglers can begin registering for the Tour on Monday, Oct. 18.

The full field will compete the first two days of each FLW Tour event. On day three, the top 20 pros and co-anglers will compete with the co-angler winner being crowned based on cumulative weight from all three days. Day four will feature the top 10 pro anglers with the winner determined by cumulative weight from all four days.

The 2011 FLW Tour Angler of the Year and the 2011 Forrest Wood Cup champion, in recognition of their success, will qualify for the 2012 Forrest Wood Cup. The prestigious Angler of the Year title for 2011 will be determined by the most points accumulated over the six Tour Majors and the pro winner will receive $100,000, while the co-angler title holder will win a new Ranger 198VX with a 200-horsepower outboard.

The top 30 pros and co-anglers from the FLW Tour Majors will qualify for the 2011 Forrest Wood Cup, which will consist of 58 pros and 58 co-anglers. In 2012, the top 35 pros and co-anglers from the FLW Tour Majors, along with the top five from the 2011 FLW Tour Opens, will qualify for the 2012 Forrest Wood Cup.

Each qualifying tournament will begin on Thursday and conclude on Sunday. The first two days’ weigh-ins for the FLW Tour Majors and Opens will be held lakeside. The final two days of weigh-ins for FLW Tour Majors will be held in convention centers or arenas in conjunction with the FLW Outdoors Expo. The final two days of weigh-ins for FLW Tour Opens will be held in Walmart parking lots. The complete schedule for the 2011 Walmart FLW Tour season (http://www.flwoutdoors.com/bassfishing/flw/schedule/2011/?search=1) is available online.

For more information regarding rules, registration requirements, logo policy and additional details, visit the official 2011 Walmart FLW Tour rules (http://www.flwoutdoors.com/bassfishing/flw/rules/).

Angler Reaction to New Logo Policy from the FLW Site:
http://www.flwoutdoors.com/fishing-articles/151626/angler-reaction-to-new-flw-outdoors-logo-policy/

Angler Reaction to New Logo Policy from Bass Fan:
http://www.bassfan.com/news_article.asp?ID=3748

[Juls]

http://www.bassfan.com/images/space.gif


2011 FLW Tour Format
New Logo Policy Slightly Looser But Still Restrictive
Thursday, October 07, 2010


FLW Outdoors recently issued a press release with details of its 2011 FLW Tour and published the 2011 Tour rules on FLWOutdoors.com. The long-awaited news also hints at what should be further announcements concerning Tour sponsorship.



New Logo Policy
The FLW Tour has long featured an ultra-restrictive logo policy, under which anglers fishing the final "TV" day or days wore FLW-supplied uniforms and fished from FLW-supplied boats.

The policy was slightly loosened last year to allow pros to attach small patches on TV days, provided such patches didn't compete with the Tour's exclusive sponsor categories.



The new policy goes a step further and allows anglers to wear their own jerseys every day, again provided the signage doesn't compete with any of the FLW Tour's exclusive categories. That's both good and bad news for some pros.



On the one hand, the list of exclusive categories is extensive, which would seem to signal an exceptionally healthy base of Tour sponsors soon to be announced. On the other hand, there's little room for pros to add sponsors to their fold, as the exclusive-category list is so extensive.



Exclusive categories do include boats, motors, vehicles and a host of sundries and consumables, but notably do not include fishing tackle.
For reference, here's the full text of the new FLW Tour Rule 19:



19. Logo usage and television coverage
FLW Tour, Majors and Opens and Forrest Wood Cup: During all days of competition any and all tobacco logos are prohibited and may not be worn or displayed. On day 4 of the FLW Majors and Opens (collectively and hereinafter "FLW Tour") and the Forrest Wood Cup, anglers who make the final-day cut must use boats and use camera equipment if supplied by FLW Outdoors. Anglers may wear their own jersey every day of the tournament so long as the main logo/design and any additional logos on the jersey do not conflict or compete in any way with the exclusive categories/companies below. If an angler wears his or her own jersey, that jersey must include the following logos on days 3 and 4 of the FLW Tour and Forrest Wood Cup: A 5-inch wide FLW Fantasy Fishing logo and on the upper left chest a 5-inch wide FLW Outdoors logo. Additionally on day 4 jerseys must include a 5-inch wide logo of the FLW Outdoors sponsor that corresponds with the FLW Outdoors sponsor boat (e.g. Walmart) that the angler will compete from. FLW Outdoors will provide these logos. Jerseys worn on days 3 and 4 may not include logos of another fishing tournament organization (e.g. BASS or PAA). If the angler does not have his or her own sponsor jersey he/she must wear one provided by FLW Outdoors.



Exclusive Categories:
Automotive
Boats
Marine electronics
Outboard engines
Trolling motors
Retailer – outdoor or other
Armed services/military
Coffee
Donation centers
Breakfast, including cereal, frozen breakfast, breakfast pastry
Snack crackers
Cookies
Cell-phone service provider
Alcoholic beverages
Meat, including but not limited to, chicken, hamburger, hot dogs, bratwurst
Boxed/shelf stable meals
Soup/stew
Invisible tape, painters tape
Fabric guard, stain guard
Bread
Paper products including but not limited to paper towels, paper plates, paper napkins, note paper
Salty snacks including but not limited to chips, pretzels, popcorn, nuts
Confectionery products including but not limited to chocolate, gum, mints, chewy candy, licorice
Dairy products including but not limited to ice cream, milk, cheese, butter
Condiments including but not limited to, peanut butter, jelly, ketchup, mustard, barbecue sauce, marinade sauces
Soft Drinks including but not limited to ice tea, water, sports drinks, juice, energy drinks
Pet food
Household cleaning products
Hygiene products including but not limited to shampoo, conditioner, soap, body wash
Lip balm
Over the Counter medications including but not limited to analgesics, cough and cold, sinus, allergy, antacid, proton pump inhibitor
Automotive tires and oil
Hardware tools
Fast food chains
Financial institutions including but not limited to banks, credit cards, brokerage firms
Electronics including but not limited to batteries, televisions, cameras, computers


FLW Outdoors reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to prohibit any angler’s jersey that it finds to be offensive or in any way competes with any of the above referenced categories/companies. Anglers that would like to wear their own jersey must get all jerseys approved by FLW Outdoors the night before day 3 competition for the FLW Tour and Forrest Wood Cup. Only approved jerseys may be worn or displayed during tournament hours extending through the weigh-in. Any angler displaying a non-approved jersey may be disqualified. On days 3 and 4 of the FLW Tour and Forrest Wood Cup, anglers may wear any hat or rain suit that does not in any way compete with the above referenced categories/companies or FLW Outdoors. On days 3 and 4 of the FLW Tour and Forrest Wood Cup, competitors may not fish while using tobacco products. Smoking is not allowed in the weigh-in line during all days of competition. On days 3 and 4 of the FLW Tour and Forrest Wood Cup, FLW Outdoors may, at its sole discretion, place a camera operator in a tournament boat. During the 2011 season FLW Outdoors reserves the right to add sponsors and categories/companies to the above list; however, if an angler has made FLW Outdoors aware of all anglers’ sponsors prior to FLW Outdoors adding the category/company to the list then the angler may be allowed to display the competing logo for the remainder of the year. All decisions are in FLW Outdoors sole discretion. For any questions regarding logos please contact Aaron Hall at 870.704.2276.


Immediate Effects
The fact that there's no exclusive category for fishing tackle (excepting boats/motors/electronics) could either mean that FLW Outdoors purposely left this category open to support anglers, or that the league does't have a fishing-tackle sponsor at a requisite dollar level to guarantee exclusivity.
Either way, such an arrangement allows pros like Mark Rose (Strike King) and Bryan Thrift (Damiki) to wear their own jerseys.



However, such an arrangement would appear to bar pros like Andy Morgan and Brian Travis from wearing their own jerseys. Morgan's title-sponsored by Timberghost, an outdoor retailer, while Travis is title-sponsored by Frog Tape, which is a painter's tape. Both compete with exclusive categories.
Although FLW does reserve the right to add exclusive categories during the competition year, Rule 19 grants leniency to anglers who inform FLW Outdoors of their sponsor portfolio prior to such a category being added.
Also of interest is the reference to an exclusive alcoholic-beverages category. Until this year, FLW Outdoors outright barred the display of alcohol logos. Display of tobacco logos is still prohibited.



About the new logo policy, FLW Outdoors marketing president Trisha Blake noted: "The adjustments made to the rules for 2011 are a reflection of the open dialogue between anglers, our staff and sponsors. The modifications will benefit anglers immediately and for the long-term, and have a positive impact on everyone involved in the sport of fishing."



Pay In, Pay Out
Also included in the announcement were some additional entry-fee and payout details.



The 2011 FLW Tour includes six Majors and four Opens. Entry fees are set at $4,000 for each Major and Open, or $40,000 for the entire 10-event season, which is payable over separate schedules for the Majors and Opens.



The 1st-place prize at each Major and Open is $100,000 and the purse pays $10,000 through 50th and $4,000 through 60th. A $25,000 Ranger bonus is available for each winner.


That payback is based on a full 150-boat field, although the rules state that the fields for each Major and Open will be 150 to 160 boats.
Additionally, the FLW Tour Angler of the Year will win $100,000.



The 2011 Forrest Wood Cup, which will be a smaller field than thisyear's Cup, will again pay $500,000 to the winner (plus an available $100,000 Ranger Bonus). The Cup pays $10,000 through 40th and $7,000 through 58th.



Formats
During both Tour Majors and Opens, the full pro field fishes the first 2 days. There's a cut to 20 for day 3, then a cut to 10 for day 4. Combined 4-day weight determines the winner.



That's a significant change from this year, when the full field competed for 3 days, then only the Top 5 made the cut to fish the final day.
The same format will be used for the 2011 Cup, again a departure from this year's Top 5 format.

[Juls]

Just in case u missed it flw announced their payouts for the bass guys and there are some very diappointed anglers. The sponsor logo restrictions run all 4 days now and they only added another 40000 for 51 thru 60th not exactly what we all thought after all the hype of walmart and t boone joining....dont look good for the walleye announcements

Maybe they are keeping the bass side the same as this year so they can put more on the walleye side for a change.

Let's wait and see what the announcements are before you start bashing them.

The simple fact that there is still a venue to fish on the walleye side is good in my opinion. They could have easily folded the walleye side after the poor showing of support from the tournament community this past year.

Juls

[stevefellegy]

Maybe they are keeping the bass side the same as this year so they can put more on the walleye side for a change.

Let's wait and see what the announcements are before you start bashing them.

The simple fact that there is still a venue to fish on the walleye side is good in my opinion. They could have easily folded the walleye side after the poor showing of support from the tournament community this past year.

Juls

my Dear Juls, to make a statement suggesting it could have been the ANGLERS fault that ANY circuit, let alone the sugar coated FLW, if it folded!

Let's get your not so veteran tournament angling mind put in place.

1. For 25 plus years, anglers have paid many more dollars out of their pockets supporting the circuits then they have been given back--in any form or fashion! Countless good people have given ALL they have had and more, sometimes to a point of life threatening amounts of both $$ and effort, to insure the circuits have a product to sell. How dare you or anyone else take a shot at the MAIN customer base FLW has!!

2. The FLW, of ALL circuits at their level, have put LESS of a percentage of the sponosr dollars they take in , ALL because of the anglers paying their OWN way--solely!! No circuit has shown LESS concern for the welfare of the anglers than the FLW! (angler sponsor dis-respect as a prime example) No way can you defend the FLW on THIS subject!

3. EVERY aspect of competitive angling gets paid directly, without gambling a life away, EXCEPT the KEY component--the angler! Wanna argue the sense of THAT business model?? And after all that--BLAME the anglers??

So knock off the lecturing/scolding of the anglers regarding the failures of the FLW or any other circuit! Countless good people, long before you dreamed about this whole mess, SUPPORTED the WHOLE industry with virtually NOTHING to show for it--except a failing business model they never had a voice in creating from the start.

I have more if you want......!!

[Juls]

my Dear Juls, to make a statement suggesting it could have been the ANGLERS fault that ANY circuit, let alone the sugar coated FLW, if it folded!

Let's get your not so veteran tournament angling mind put in place.

1. For 25 plus years, anglers have paid many more dollars out of their pockets supporting the circuits then they have been given back--in any form or fashion! Countless good people have given ALL they have had and more, sometimes to point of life threatening amounts of both $$ and effort, to insure the circuits have a product to sell. How dare you or anyone else take a shot at the MAIN customer base FLW has!!

2. The FLW, of ALL circuits of their level, have put LESS of a percentage of the sponosr dollars they take in , ALL because of the anglers paying their OWN way--solely!! No circuit has shown LESS concern for the welfare of the anglers than the FLW! (angler sponsor dis-respect as a prime example) No way can you defend the FLW on THIS subject!

3. EVERY aspect of competitive angling gets paid directly, without gambling a life away, EXCEPT the KEY component--the angler! Wanna argue the sense of THAT business model?? And after all that--BLAME the anglers??

So knock off the lecturing/scolding of the anglers regarding the failures of the FLW or any other circuit! Countless good people, long before you dreamed about this whole mess, SUPPORTED the WHOLE industry with virtually NOTHING to show for it--except a failing business model they never had a voice in creating from the start.

I have more if you want......!!


The numbers, "dear sir", speak for themselves. I stand by what I said.

With less than 50 anglers at some events, what makes you think the FLW owed the walleye tournament world anything this year? Nice bashing on the FLW by the way...

A full field was supposed to be 150. Almost a hundred bodies short there....yup, I can count too.

Amazing.....

Juls

[stevefellegy]

The numbers, "dear sir", speak for themselves. I stand by what I said.

With less than 50 anglers at some events, what makes you think the FLW owed the walleye tournament world anything this year? Nice bashing on the FLW by the way...

A full field was supposed to be 150. Almost a hundred bodies short there....yup, I can count too.

Amazing.....

Juls

That you can't see or admit to reality.

What makes me think the the likes of the FLW owed the tournament world? And you say you can count? Now that's almost funny.

But then..where do I start if your math is so poor? LOL Or if your "pro" circuit take is far above your obvious "anti" angler attitude. (based in your defense of the circuit versus the anglers--in this case)

Veteran anglers have called me all day upset at your earlier blame type statement! Maybe it's time to apologize to the guys who got you here instead of continuing with the attitude of "poor FLW".

[Juls]

That you can't see or admit to reality.

What makes me think the the likes of the FLW owed the tournament world? And you say you can count? Now that's almost funny.

But then..where do I start if your math is so poor? LOL Or if your "pro" circuit take is far above your obvious "anti" angler attitude. (based in your defense of the circuit versus the anglers--in this case)

Veteran anglers have called me all day upset at your earlier blame type statement! Maybe it's time to apologize to the guys who got you here instead of continuing with the attitude of "poor FLW".

LOL...Yeah, okay. I doubt your phone was ringing off the hook...really. They would have called me directly. They all have my number and know me too well not to have said something to me if it bothered them. Seems to only have bothered you, Steve.

Have a good night.

Juls

[stevefellegy]

LOL...Yeah, okay. I doubt your phone was ringing off the hook...really. They would have called me directly. They all have my number and know me too well not to have said something to me if it bothered them. Seems to only have bothered you, Steve.

Have a good night.

Juls
they asked me to speak for them? As I have for many years, in this type of setting? One actually said "I'd call Juls but I'm so mad I'd be afraid of what I'd say!"

Accusing me of lying? Try again....don't worry, you WILL hear from some of them, believe it or not, somewhere down the road.

FYI...most of the guys who called today are ones who are not fishing any more but were pioneers at their own expense...and now are paying the price in not so pretty forms. They felt your "message" loud and clear. They feel the attitude, better than anyone , that the likes of the FLW business model supports.

[Juls]

they asked me to speak for them? As I have for many years, in this type of setting? One actually said "I'd call Juls but I'm so mad I'd be afraid of what I'd say!"

Accusing me of lying? Try again....don't worry, you WILL hear from some of them, believe it or not, somewhere down the road.

FYI...most of the guys who called today are ones who are not fishing any more but were pioneers at their own expense...and now are paying the price in not so pretty forms. They felt your "message" loud and clear. They feel the attitude, better than anyone , that the likes of the FLW business model supports.

Great! I'll be glad to talk to them...anytime.

Juls

[Not Retired]

I don't see anything wrong with what Juls said. I don't think she was talking about tournament support from RETIRED anglers. I agree with what she said. If anyone owes anyone an apology I think you owe her one.

[stevefellegy]

I don't see anything wrong with what Juls said. I don't think she was talking about tournament support from RETIRED anglers. I agree with what she said. If anyone owes anyone an apology I think you owe her one.

You have no clue, either, where WE are coming from. We're defending present day and future pro anglers!

Oh well....

[stevefellegy]

I don't see anything wrong with what Juls said. I don't think she was talking about tournament support from RETIRED anglers. I agree with what she said. If anyone owes anyone an apology I think you owe her one.

And by the way.....Try to find a pro angler who "retired" because he wanted to. Name them! And then name the pro's that were forced out of the game because of the business model the circuits (including FLW) created that was and still is an obvious failure. Much of that model based on lies and mis-representation to the anglers.

"Retired"? Who??

[The Masked Avenger]

Relaxing in my snuggie and butterfly slippers, I was carefully shaving the hairs off my chest to allow a more arrow dynamic flow through the water when I noticed a narcissistic note within the walleye world.

Without too much time to loose I wiped the skin conditioning lotion from my adorable body. I had to stand and stare in the mirror for a moment to admire my half shaven torso with silky smooth skin. I started singing “Can’t Touch This” while providing timely injected pelvic thrusts when I realized I was wasting valuable time that was desperately needed by the victims of the unjust comments.

Don’t fret dear seeker of justice…The Masked Avenger is here!



Since when is telling numbers considered a bash?
In an industry that can’t materialize the cash?
Reminding us he has been there since he was a teen,
That from a person who lately is only heard and not seen.

Tired of hearing the thumping of pioneering the sport,
As if no one fished walleyes before they emerged on the court.
Cutting on someone who at least shows up at the events,
Sitting there to report from under her 10 by 10 tent.

You have good ideas Steve by this time you’re off bubble,
Making comments like that will only cause trouble.
AIM and FLW walleye were ready to fold,
Anglers not partly to blame? That is kind of bold.

It is wrong that there’s a mind set the top brass is always to blame,
And the rest are just innocent and being used for the game.
If this is the case then the blame also lies with you,
Investing in a tournament and expecting a return on profit too.

Thinking the pros have no blame to which they should own up,
Means you should stop drinking the Kool-Aid from that sippy cup.
There are many newer pros that knows what needs to be done,
They just have to wait until the elderly are finished trying to milk up the sun.

[Walleye Guest]

Get off your high horse Steve YOUR attitude and comments and the way you present them are making yourself look like a fool, as far as taking shots at Juls, you act as if she is a nobody, in case it slipped your mind she is and has been part of the game and is married to a pioneer as you call them.

At the end of the day walleye fisherman are just a bunch of guys chasing a NON lucrative dream, it never has been and never will be a money making venture. Regardless who you THINK you are in the scheme of things, the game as you so called veterans have dubbed it or whatever, you and every other fisherman including me, is a NOBODY as far as the world is concerned. So SHUT UP AND FISH!!

[stevefellegy]

Get off your high horse Steve YOUR attitude and comments and the way you present them are making yourself look like a fool, as far as taking shots at Juls, you act as if she is a nobody, in case it slipped your mind she is and has been part of the game and is married to a pioneer as you call them.

At the end of the day walleye fisherman are just a bunch of guys chasing a NON lucrative dream, it never has been and never will be a money making venture. Regardless who you THINK you are in the scheme of things, the game as you so called veterans have dubbed it or whatever, you and every other fisherman including me, is a NOBODY as far as the world is concerned. So SHUT UP AND FISH!!

You have the right to an opinion, no doubt. about me as well as the sport itself. I respect that. Agree? No way!

Over and out!

[Scott F.]

Steve asked for Juls to mention a pro that retired of his own accord. I'll throw my name in the ring. And although I rarely get involved in these discussions I think this one has an interesting issue that appears to have been missed.

Juls clearly implied that it was the anglers fault for having let down the circuit when she said "They could have easily folded the walleye side after the poor showing of support from the tournament community this past year." In fact, she also, perhaps inadvertently, neglected to mention that there is another option when she said "The simple fact that there is still a venue to fish on the walleye side is good in my opinion". Maybe she meant still an FLW venue?

In the altercation that has ensued between Steve and Juls' I think what is being missed at the intersection of "standing by the numbers" and Steve's position is a fundamental question of the overall business of competitive angling. In other words, who is the customer in this situation? If the anglers are the customers of the service/product that FLW produces then there might be one view of Juls' comments. If one views FLW as the customer of the anglers then an entirely different perspective is in order. Still yet, if one thinks that participating in FLW tournaments is a path to sponsorship riches another view could be held. That said, I might throw down a Fellegy like objection to the third possibility and the second makes no sense to me.

I tend to look at this situation as the FLW opening its doors and asking people to buy their product. If the customers don't/won't come is it really the correct view to say that the customers are at fault (i.e. poor showing of support...)? If one takes this view it seems like we are saying the customer is wrong. Sometimes they may be, but telling them that rarely is well received.

I can tell you that after fishing competitively for almost two decades and now deciding to pursue other paths I believe the characterization of the anglers owing something to the tournaments is front and center as a root cause of the current state of competitive walleye angling. Has the FLW provided a place for many walleye tournament anglers to compete for several years? Of course. Have some (very few) of those anglers found a way to make a living from efforts tangentially associated with the FLW? Of course. However, the vast majority have not.

I would not view the low overall participation of anglers to mean they don't support FLW (implied owing to the circuit) but rather that low participation means that the product was not fulfilling an unmet need. If most anglers can't afford to make it happen would you really advise them too? If they can't figure out a way to make money from something associated can you really blame them (this goes both ways)? But certainly blaming one party in this scenario doesn't seem to make sense. It works or it doesn't.

Better product, more closely aligned with the needs of the consumer = more customers. Not the other way around.

Who is the customer? My perspective is that it should be none of the above. Figure that out and then we can say the anglers owe the tournaments something and vice versa (real partnership). Just happens not to be true in the current state. So why assign blame to the current state customer?

For what its worth,

Scott Fairbairn
Retired Professional Angler (by choice)

[Juls]

Thanks for posting Scott. Good to see you're still watching the message boards.

Would it have made any difference if I would have stated it this way? "The FLW would have had a good reason to fold after this season since their numbers were down"....:huh:

I think you guys are reading way more into my words than what was meant when it was written in a hurry before I left to go perch fishing this morning. Really.

Juls
p.s. Steve didn't ask me to mention a pro that retired...He was talking to someone else....just say'n. ;)

[The Masked Avenger]

The angler doesn’t fish just because of the tournaments motions,
Rather they do it more because of their own preconceived notions.
Saying the angler is the customer gives me some reservations,
When most time and money is to get sponsors and locations.

Claiming to be a customer when you’re after your own money,
Is a presented concept that many think is pretty funny.
It really is not a product for fishermen when it can be done for free,
It’s more for sponsor exposure to sell their manufactured commodities.

I know there is a thinking that the fishermen are there to be used,
But that whole thought process is nothing but a self-induced ruse.
Me, as a customer, purchase with money a machine to do dishes,
The angler gambles with their money hoping to someday receive riches.

The pro fishermen are very much part of the equation,
When discussing who is to blame during this excavation.
Just keep the vision clear on the over-all objective market,
The angler is part of it but not the main marketing target.

[Scott F.]

Very clever Masked Avenger. And....I think your eloquence is touching on the ideas I was pointing out. So....point by point:

"The angler doesn’t fish just because of the tournaments motions,
Rather they do it more because of their own preconceived notions.
Saying the angler is the customer gives me some reservations,
When most time and money is to get sponsors and locations."

It is very common for businesses, especially sports businesses to have more than one customer. In the case of professional sports teams there are often several separate but related revenue streams. The fact that the Vikings sell tickets and at the same time sell the rights to their games to network broadcast companies (even if done collectively with other franchises) does not mean that both parties are not the customer. It should in fact be a virtuous business cycle and in this case appears not to be.

Claiming to be a customer when you’re after your own money,
Is a presented concept that many think is pretty funny.
It really is not a product for fishermen when it can be done for free,
It’s more for sponsor exposure to sell their manufactured commodities.

Agreed! You are clearly holding that option three from my earlier post is the key to all of this. In other words, somehow the anglers are supposed to take the exposure they receive and turn it into a sellable commodity (even if manufactured) and this is why they pay to enter FLW events. This still begs the question, does the product offered to these anglers allow them to do so? Hardly. If one seeks proof of this in action simply slide over to Bassfan and check out the news regarding sponsor contracts. Then ask yourself what has changed and it is easy to get the picture.

I know there is a thinking that the fishermen are there to be used,
But that whole thought process is nothing but a self-induced ruse.
Me, as a customer, purchase with money a machine to do dishes,
The angler gambles with their money hoping to someday receive riches.

Well said, however, I think that there are any number of businesses in Las Vegas that would be very surprised to hear that the guy sitting at the blackjack table isn't their customer. Services are every bit as much of a product as a dishwasher. In fact, if you hired someone to come in and do the washing by hand, the result is the same as buying the machine.

In the case of FLW what they are selling in stance #3 is a service. Stance #1 it is also a service. In fact the business is both. In the case of the angler customer in 2010, they said, with their attendance, these services do not meet my needs. Akin to the guy who goes to Vegas and says "the odds at that table were terrible and my wife didn't even like the show we went to". Of course, there are any number of sources that the casino customer can go to to find out how good the show is and which casino has the best odds. Not quite as clear cut in the tournament world (odds aside). I think we may have reached a tipping point where the "dream" of being a professional angler (sold as a good show that can make up for gambling losses) is now much more widely understood than a decade ago and no longer outweighs bad odds. In that scenario, the gambler (unless addicted) no longer has a reason to go.

The pro fishermen are very much part of the equation,
When discussing who is to blame during this excavation.
Just keep the vision clear on the over-all objective market,
The angler is part of it but not the main marketing target.

I think this is still the source of the rub. Juls has rephrased her comment in a recent post (and yes Juls that makes a difference) but the question still remains and is present in the tone of discussion in the tournament world. While I am out of the game I still talk on a regular basis to many of the anglers involved in the sport. And they tell me that over this past year there has been much written about the lack of "support" from the anglers for the sport of competitive walleye angling and especially FLW. Regardless of whether you hold to the view that the FLW business is selling sponsorships to promotional partners (i.e. Tide detergent), or that the anglers should have a more prominent focus, the fact remains that when weighing the decisions it seems as though blaming potential customers (even if they are minimally important) isn't the right answer. Why not ask what's wrong with the product (service)?

When you go there you see an unsustainable business model in the long run. First for the participants (they showed that this year) and eventually for the business itself. It really isn't about elevated importance, it is actually about finding a model that aligns both parties in such a way that an entirely external customer can drive the virtuous cycle. For those who are interested, "The Nascar Way" is a very interesting read on this subject.

Two more cents....I hope I don't go broke. :)

Scott F.

[Vikings Fan]

Well said Scott. Your comments, insights, ethics and professionalism while you competing were appreciated and have been missed in the tournament world. Thanks for commenting.

[stevefellegy]

Scott mentions was pushed for the fishing circuit owners to read many years back! I and others have tried to use the NASCAR model, when discussing how the fishing circuits view and works with the contestants, as proof the past and present model fails. We've begged them to use the "NASCAR WAY" as a successful example of how BOTH sides of the equation can thrive.

But...to this point, most fishing circuits prove to be either illiterate or don't give a d$mn about the pro anglers' well-being.

[The Fishing Fanatics]

The NASCAR model has been tried for years by BASS. It too has failed.

This is a point of discussion I have been involved with for many years. Unlike NASCAR, there is no appreciable on-site fan base. No crowds tailgating for days and filling the 30,000 plus seat stadiums to watch the events in person or millions of viewers tuning in for the live national coverage. Nothing like this occurs in professional tournament fishing except for the Bassmaster Classic. That event draws maybe 10-15 thousand visitors or so per day to check out the weigh-in and outdoor show, but not the actual tournament.

I love fishing tournaments, but frankly the NASCAR comparison has proven to be unworkable for tournament fishing.

[dutchboy]

I don't know. Just seems to me the public doesn't care about tournament fishing. Seems the sponsors and anglers are trying to make a living off of each other.

AIM will try their approach. FLW will try theirs. People from both will sit back and complain. In the meantime the public will golf, gamble & watch TV.

Maybe you need a way to handicap the events for the gamblers? :cheers:

[Scott F.]

Hey Pete, Thanks for the kind words about my career. I tried to do my best.

Fishing Fanatics. Have you read "the NASCAR way"? I think if you do you will find that the overarching point of the book is less about the exact model in which NASCAR operates and more to the principal of collaboration between the organization, the drivers/teams and the track owners. Granted, track owners don't particularly fit well in the fishing model but the principal of making decisions that are beneficial to all concerned parties moves things from customer mindset (which won't work here - described above) to partnership. If it is purely a transactional relationship, eventually things can tip to where the transaction no longer is feasible. But then....why blame the customer for not wanting to continue the transaction.

Put another way, when the scenario existed that anglers can derive significant "commodity" income from things related to the tournaments then the payouts don't need to be as high (scenario #3 - i.e. the wife still liked the show even if the gambling went poorly) and all is well. However, when the sponsorship lanes start closing down due to lack of opportunity to promote or just a plain old bad economy, then the payouts are all that is left. I think that if things were operating with a NASCAR way mindset, both sides would be much less transactional in the relationship and then it would make perfect sense to say that one entity owed something to the other. It's just not true in current form.

By the way, I'm certainly not going to say that this even seems possible at this point in time. Just trying to analyze a sick patient.

In the end, the book basically leaves the point that if one party reaps all of the gains from the system at the expense, or at least without consideration, of the other, the house will eventually crumble. Even if it seems like a great idea for each individual business. Really smart businesses often avoid a skimming strategy and move toward leaving some consumer surplus on the table. The better they are at doing that, the more likely they are going to be able to keep those relationships when a bump in the road appears (NASCAR or otherwise).

Does that help clarify?

Now I'm up to six cents. It's getting expensive. :)

Scott Fairbairn

[The Masked Avenger]

I agree 100% with you Scott but there is still one thing omitted
A thing the anglers don’t want to hear cause they’ll just get livid.
Many anglers don’t think their in a Vegas style contest,
They believe their in Disney World waiting for a pageant.

In Vegas they realized they’ll come back with less than they came,
It’s the chance at being rich that’s the lure of the game.
And anyone who thinks that the house just up and robbed them,
Well, that attitude denotes they have a gambling problem.

If one can’t afford it then I guess you don’t fish,
But the title of pro is the thing they can’t resist.
Why is it the angler who must be an innocent by-stander
When their just in for all the excitement and grandeur.

How can anyone blame or be mad at any company,
That can take something that cost nothing and charge a fee?
Many go for it because they just love to fish,
But too many are looking for a silver lined dish.

There are an awful lot of anglers who take money from a supporter,
And sit back and promote them like they are on the back burner.
Everyone gets screwed somehow when into this industry,
Why one part thinks they don’t do the screw’in is a Scooby-Doo mystery.

[Scott F.]

I agree 100% with you Scott but there is still one thing omitted
A thing the anglers don’t want to hear cause they’ll just get livid.
Many anglers don’t think their in a Vegas style contest,
They believe their in Disney World waiting for a pageant.

Hey M.A. I think you need to use your avenging skills to find out who perpetuates this terrible myth on the anglers. Are they naive? Of course. But....apparently only to a point (2010 FLW participation rate)

In Vegas they realized they’ll come back with less than they came,
It’s the chance at being rich that’s the lure of the game.
And anyone who thinks that the house just up and robbed them,
Well, that attitude denotes they have a gambling problem.

All the more reason to uncover the sinister plot. And....I certainly didn't say anything about the anglers being robbed. Simply that you can't blame them for avoiding the gambling problem.

If one can’t afford it then I guess you don’t fish,
But the title of pro is the thing they can’t resist.
Why is it the angler who must be an innocent by-stander
When their just in for all the excitement and grandeur.

But once again, the arena of excitement and grandeur is a product that is sold to the anglers by someone. Who could it be? And...apparently the vast majority can "resist" which was the source of this whole conversation in the first place.

How can anyone blame or be mad at any company,
That can take something that cost nothing and charge a fee?
Many go for it because they just love to fish,
But too many are looking for a silver lined dish.

Something that cost nothing? Who was mad at the company? Not sure I make the connection as this all started out with blaming the anglers.

There are an awful lot of anglers who take money from a supporter,
And sit back and promote them like they are on the back burner.
Everyone gets screwed somehow when into this industry,
Why one part thinks they don’t do the screw’in is a Scooby-Doo mystery.

I have been willing to be good natured about all of this discussion right up until this final charge. I must tell you M.A. that I am personally offended by the assertion that I (and I definitely recognize that you are generalizing) ever did any "screw'in" of the partners I was involved with during my career. I worked extremely hard to promote my sponsors and partners and I feel very confident that they did not ever get the short end of the stick. I believe all would attest. I actually can put real numbers to that fact.

Is it possible that it occurs? Certainly. Does it last long? No. And by the way, who are you to assert that someone is "screw'in" someone else in the industry? I think that you may have a highly overestimated view of the actual transactions that occur between sponsors and anglers.

Perhaps you could enlighten all of the people watching about the specific types of "screw'in" you are referring to. But in doing so, don't just cast aspersions, actually lay out the nuts and bolts of how it works. XXX dollars went to YYY angler and he did 0000 for it. Make your case. After all, you are the Avenger, let us all know how exactly the anglers have been taking advantage of the sponsors.

Sorry for the heated response. Include me in a conversation that turns to attacking my character and I am likely to get a little riled up.

Scott

[The Fishing Fanatics]

Scott,

The concept of how NASCAR operates is a solid business model which avoids the owner/worker issues of MLB, NFL etc., and allows for money to be made by all parties involved.

However, many from the NASCAR world were hired over the years at BASS to install a BASSCAR business format. It failed.

We all can speculate as to the best way to operate, but until a tournament circuit with millions in capital can pursue a NASCAR or PGA style model this will simply be academic.

Without having the millions of dollars in operating capital to back the business, failure is inevitable in the tournament fishing world if you are attempting a truly ground-breaking model as opposed to simply copying what has already been done.

[The Masked Avenger]

Generalizing to all is not my intended assertion,
There are specific players who play the desertion.
If you want to say all sponsors are totally happy,
With the representation they get then honesty is lacking.

There are anglers that represent their sponsors with great proportion,
But to say all are at that level is a difficult verbal contortion.
If offence you do take there is nothing I can do,
For the comment before was not aiming at you.

One could write a long list of pros that do great at the missions,
And so could one write an equal list of ones that are fictitious.
To say all are the same and deserve equal ground footing,
Is the type of mindset that needs some up rooting.

You’re attacking the only type of locale that gives you recognition,
At the same time saying everyone else is cleared of suspicion.
The anglers take a risk to attempt to fish provided venue,
A risk also the tournament takes to provide fishermen this menu.

All anglers are not as pure as the wind driven snow,
Beating up on the directors will not make this fact go.
If the FLW you not like then ignore it ever existed,
Fish an event where you feel the anglers are respected.

Asking for names and numbers is a nice little ploy,
I don’t even think you would touch that little toy.
Your legal background serves you quite well,
Attacking your character is not what I did tell.

[stevefellegy]

The NASCAR model has been tried for years by BASS. It too has failed.

This is a point of discussion I have been involved with for many years. Unlike NASCAR, there is no appreciable on-site fan base. No crowds tailgating for days and filling the 30,000 plus seat stadiums to watch the events in person or millions of viewers tuning in for the live national coverage. Nothing like this occurs in professional tournament fishing except for the Bassmaster Classic. That event draws maybe 10-15 thousand visitors or so per day to check out the weigh-in and outdoor show, but not the actual tournament.

I love fishing tournaments, but frankly the NASCAR comparison has proven to be unworkable for tournament fishing.

The point about NASCAR I was making and also Scott by the mention of the book title was that NASCAR SHARES a percentage of track/event sponsor dollars with the car owners/drivers and also has an arm of marketing that focuses on car/driver sponsors. In the beginning, they called it "tow" money. They realized that if the drivers/car owners can't afford the trip and all that it takes to be competitive, consistently, their side of the equation would eventually fail also. The FLW's of the world have never understood that....or cared enough to work toward that scenario. (contingency money is NOT FLW money!)

So--you missed the point again FishFan. In this discussion, we were NOT talking about attracting fans....or creating a product that creates fans. We are/were speaking to how the fishing circuits have NOT made much of an attempt to create a stable revenue stream for the pro anglers--unlike NASCAR and most major league sports as well.

[perchjerker]

"So--you missed the point again FishFan. In this discussion, we were NOT talking about attracting fans....or creating a product that creates fans. We are/were speaking to how the fishing circuits have NOT made much of an attempt to create a stable revenue stream for the pro anglers--unlike NASCAR and most major league sports as well. "


...but in the end...isnt it the fans that generate the revenue?

without fans, you got nadda.....

[stevefellegy]

"So--you missed the point again FishFan. In this discussion, we were NOT talking about attracting fans....or creating a product that creates fans. We are/were speaking to how the fishing circuits have NOT made much of an attempt to create a stable revenue stream for the pro anglers--unlike NASCAR and most major league sports as well. "


...but in the end...isnt it the fans that generate the revenue?

without fans, you got nadda.....

Brian, you are so right! And another aspect of the whole picture. But even if we did figure out how to create a fan base large enough to create more revenue, the FLW's of the world, if they kept the same model in place, would NOT stream a fair amount of the $$ to the pro anglers. That's our point here.(creating the fan base is another subject) Here, the well-being of the pro angler versus the well-being of the circuit is the nucleus of this prompted discussion.

So-right Brian! But it ALL needs to fit together--the "NASCAR WAY".

[way off]

"NASCAR SHARES a percentage of track/event sponsor dollars with the car owners/drivers and also has an arm of marketing that focuses on car/driver sponsors."

The NASCAR drivers have a substantial asset linked directly to a fan base which supplies money...something the fishing tournament world does not even come close to. The pro fisherman is not an asset to any type of money producing fan base so why should a tournament share the extra money they also bring in from their marketing efforts?

Bottom line is where is the large money the anglers bring in located at? Don't give indirect ways such as "more boats sell so Ranger sponsors more" I am talking directly to the tournament through fan revenue to the tournament. You can’t ask for more when you are not a money generating asset to the market

[stevefellegy]

"NASCAR SHARES a percentage of track/event sponsor dollars with the car owners/drivers and also has an arm of marketing that focuses on car/driver sponsors."

The NASCAR drivers have a substantial asset linked directly to a fan base which supplies money...something the fishing tournament world does not even come close to. The pro fisherman is not an asset to any type of money producing fan base so why should a tournament share the extra money they also bring in from their marketing efforts?

Bottom line is where is the large money the anglers bring in located at? Don't give indirect ways such as "more boats sell so Ranger sponsors more" I am talking directly to the tournament through fan revenue to the tournament. You can’t ask for more when you are not a money generating asset to the market

So you think Walmart and the rest would pay the FLW salaries without the anglers presence? Of course not...no anglers--no FLW/MWC/AIM and the list goes on.

If you're saying the anglers don't play a SUBSTANTIAL role in producing $$ for the circuits and the fishing industry in general, well...let's just say I dare you to say that to some of the guys face to face. As a matter of fact, the big wigs that run the big circuits have said that for years. "Without you guys, it doesn't happen! You guys are the key!!" Then....they keep all the money and expect the pro's to keep showing up. And scold the anglers if they don't.....

Come on man!!

[still off]

And the angler keeps coming back because without the tournament the title of pro disappears. Have all the anglers stop fishing tournaments for a couple of years and see what happens. Wal-Mart will still be here, Ranger Boats will still be around and lure companies will continue to sell and develop lures. The only thing that will become extinct are tournament pro fishermen and their tournaments. The fishing industry does not revolve and depend on the pro angler.

[stevefellegy]

And the angler keeps coming back because without the tournament the title of pro disappears. Have all the anglers stop fishing tournaments for a couple of years and see what happens. Wal-Mart will still be here, Ranger Boats will still be around and lure companies will continue to sell and develop lures. The only thing that will become extinct are tournament pro fishermen and their tournaments. The fishing industry does not revolve and depend on the pro angler.

Well, I've heard THAT attitude before! I could even guess (bet on)your background! LOL

Let's pretend MWC never happened. Let's pretend PWT never happened. And then you tell me the state of the walleye fishing tackle/marine electronics and boating industry as we've known it the past 20 plus years. And that said, let's pretend In-Fish didn't have the info driven from competitive fishing (all species) that has made the general public the fishemen(all species) they are today. Nothing changes?

See ya tomorrow in your 14ft. boat, fishing with your glass rod, your thick line, your 2-3 colors of floating raps and your stringer hanging much lighter (or empty)than your present day livewell. Yup--I've heard that attitude many times. ALL from mouths with the same background.

Yes, Walmart would do just fine without pro anglers. But if we're to believe your vision of things, Walmart must be just wasting their money? Knowing it means nothing to their bottom line? T.Boone throwing $$ at Irwin simply because their friends?

Come on man!

[off]

You need to stop living in the past and catch up to the present. Pro angling had its place in years past but today it does not have the impact...that is what I am talking about. Awful brazen to assume that none of the things mentioned would have come about without the pro, that the only people with innovative minds and needs are pro anglers. I wish my arms where that long to pat myself on the back.

[waz jr]

How soon we forget.....Who came on the scene with record bucks on the walleye tournament trail? The RCL/FLW. They pushed the envelope in big bucks walleye tournament fishing. Who stepped up to the plate and paid the full prize dollars at several tournaments when they were getting 70 to 80 folks fishing a tournament. The FLW/RCL did. They didn't have to. Those prize dollars where based on a full field.

Its easy to piss and moan and complain. We are all good at that. Those that step up to the plate and try to do something positive should be commended and not ridiculed.

Also I you haven't figure it out "Professional Tournament Walleye Fishing" is a hobby. Not a sport or career. Add up all the wanabe's that fished the PWT, MWC, RCL, FLW etc. Then add up the folks that worked exclusively in the "tournament biz". Less than 1% maybe made a meager living from it. Most all had to work real jobs to support their "Hobby".

Fishing is supposed to be fun. If you can't have fun fishing take up a different "hobby".

I love fishing and I love competitive fishing. Aways paid my own way and never begged for a handout from sponser or anyone else. Can't afford, have your wife get a part-time job.

[Scott F.]

Generalizing to all is not my intended assertion,
There are specific players who play the desertion.
If you want to say all sponsors are totally happy,
With the representation they get then honesty is lacking.

Who said that? Not I. In fact if you reread you will see exactly what I think happens to those that don't deliver value to their partners/sponsors. If the sponsors aren't happy, they can go and get someone else to do it. If they can't find someone to do the work at the price they are willing to pay perhaps the economic value is higher than they think and its time to adjust. Seems rather silly to me that they would stick with people who aren't representing them well in a market so full of people beating down the door wanting in. At the same time, I still am curious as to what the expectations are. This is a situation where it is a matter of perspective and perspective is all that really matters. If you aren't getting your money worth, shift course. But then again, this is what all of this was about in the first place.

There are anglers that represent their sponsors with great proportion,
But to say all are at that level is a difficult verbal contortion.
If offence you do take there is nothing I can do,
For the comment before was not aiming at you.

One could write a long list of pros that do great at the missions,
And so could one write an equal list of ones that are fictitious.
To say all are the same and deserve equal ground footing,
Is the type of mindset that needs some up rooting.

All are the same? Once again, go back and look at what you wrote and how I responded. One of us painted with a broad all encompassing brush. This is the problem with writing in rhymes. In order to maintain the cute process you keep adding things in that haven't been said.


You’re attacking the only type of locale that gives you recognition,
At the same time saying everyone else is cleared of suspicion.
The anglers take a risk to attempt to fish provided venue,
A risk also the tournament takes to provide fishermen this menu.

Attacking? When? If in your mind defending anglers being accused of not supporting tournament organizations is by proxy attacking those same organizations then perhaps your bias and the truth of who you seek to avenge truly is clear. Go back and look at the root of all this. I believe it was the anglers that were attacked and you continue to push this opposite line.

When the tournaments take the risk, it is because they are offering a service that they believe has value to a particular segment. When the anglers take the risk it is because they believe that the value available in the service they are buying is high enough to warrant purchase. I'm not sure how much clearer that could be. If the anglers don't see the value, then the tournament organizers made a bad call. I think you will agree that no one is twisting arms here...either way. Why all the anymosity toward the anglers?

All anglers are not as pure as the wind driven snow,
Beating up on the directors will not make this fact go.
If the FLW you not like then ignore it ever existed,
Fish an event where you feel the anglers are respected.

Nice try. No beating up on directors here. I consider most to be very good friends. Maybe if this superhero thing doesn't work out you could try politics. Most politicians spend tons of time in media training figuring out how to twist the story 180 degrees from where it started.

As far as fishing an event where the anglers are respected, I personally won't be doing any such thing. No tournaments for me. Fishing is way more fun than tournament fishing. That said, this is the first point in this poem where you have come around to the question that started all of this. Thank you.

Asking for names and numbers is a nice little ploy,
I don’t even think you would touch that little toy.
Your legal background serves you quite well,
Attacking your character is not what I did tell.

I suppose ploy is in the eye of the beholder. You cast aspersions on tournament anglers in a general sense. You follow up here and point out that the number of ne'er do well tournament anglers is approximately equal to those who promote well and aren't giving their sponsors a "screwin". I simply ask that if you are going to paint with a broad brush that at least you owe it to all the kids who look up to you to share some anecdotal evidence of this massive scheme being perpetrated.

So....leave out the names then. Tell us a story. If it is as bad as you say it is there should be plenty of stories that won't get anyone in trouble. No one could possibly notice the needle in that haystack. Put out the numbers. An angler was provided XXX from his/her sponsor and did YYYY which was worth zero to the sponsor. Certainly your superhero powers provide insight into how it all works. Please M.A. help protect the innocent masses.

Legal background? I have a degree in fisheries and wildlife management, and I am currently working on an MBA, but lawyer I am not. If you want clarification on that you can ask my JD/MBA classmates. They would get a large chuckle. If you refer to having a lawyer in the family then I am guilty. That said, I'm thinking the law has little to do with this.

Now I am in for at least a dime, so in the immortal words of one of our country's truly great poets: "Thank you for your time, you’ve been so much more than kind, you can keep the dime."

Scott

[The Masked Avenger]

Okay Scott, since the poetry is tripping you up here with the puns I’ll come out of character for this one time. As you well know the industry sponsors use the anglers and the anglers use the sponsors, this BS that all the anglers hearts are in the right place is enough to make anyone sick. You have the good and the bad and I’ll be darned if I will accept every pro angler as equal and with all good intentions because that would be as false of a statement as one could make. I remember several NPAA office holders, including the secretary, from the years past not once showing up at any kids events because “We put enough of our time in already” they said. Pretty much saying the kids are not important unless we get paid more.

You have an issue with the FLW, I get that. But it appears you are tossing out the angler “whoa is me persona” which is too much. Yes, in my opinion you are flat out attacking the FLW and since it is tournaments like the FLW that gave you legitimacy within the fishing world I find it reprehensible that it comes down to an us vs. them attitude. I have no animosity towards the anglers and am friends with many, I have animosity towards particular people who insist on throwing up smoke screens. There are decent people trying to make a difference in the fishing world and that includes the FLW. Why is Wal-Mart and others involved, it is not because of the angler. They have a marketing plan that goes way beyond the pro angler and even the FLW. The tournaments boost the angler ten fold more than the angler boosts the tournament right now and that shows by the credentials all anglers place after their names…2 time FLW champion, MWC tournament winner and so on. Without those titles the pro angler would essentially be a nobody in a very big world. There is no consistency in the tournament world that would allow the tournament to promote the anglers like a NASCAR and that is one of the huge obstacles. Neither the tournament nor angler can produce any sort of crowd, and this in house cannibalism is getting disgusting.

The reality is the angler does not have a draw and that is their own fault. There are many trying to swing that back around and make a relevant place in the market for the pro again but it is an up hill battle when there are many who sit on their rump and don’t make a move. A pro in most minds are the people who not only fish tournaments but also do things like hold kids clinics on their own and pay for the equipment out of their own pocket like Greg Karch, I respect that with all my heart. Not someone who says they fulfilled their contract and they will do more if the price is right.

The FLW is attempting to keep the industry afloat, could things offered be a little better…sure but the angler needs to step it up and bring a lot more to the table also.

Back to my stretchy pants.

[Juls]

"Why all the anymosity toward the anglers?"

There isn't any. I chose the wrong words and was attacked, and it steamed rolled from there. Nothing more.

It's another nice day here and I'm going fishing....again.

Have a great day. Play nice while I'm gone. :)

Juls

[observer]

"Why all the anymosity toward the anglers?"

There isn't any. I chose the wrong words and was attacked, and it steamed rolled from there. Nothing more.

It's another nice day here and I'm going fishing....again.

Have a great day. Play nice while I'm gone. :)

Juls

Always a class act Juls! Good luck today. :cheers:

[Raybob]

Okay Scott, since the poetry is tripping you up here with the puns I’ll come out of character for this one time. As you well know the industry sponsors use the anglers and the anglers use the sponsors, this BS that all the anglers hearts are in the right place is enough to make anyone sick. You have the good and the bad and I’ll be darned if I will accept every pro angler as equal and with all good intentions because that would be as false of a statement as one could make. I remember several NPAA office holders, including the secretary, from the years past not once showing up at any kids events because “We put enough of our time in already” they said. Pretty much saying the kids are not important unless we get paid more.

You have an issue with the FLW, I get that. But it appears you are tossing out the angler “whoa is me persona” which is too much. Yes, in my opinion you are flat out attacking the FLW and since it is tournaments like the FLW that gave you legitimacy within the fishing world I find it reprehensible that it comes down to an us vs. them attitude. I have no animosity towards the anglers and am friends with many, I have animosity towards particular people who insist on throwing up smoke screens. There are decent people trying to make a difference in the fishing world and that includes the FLW. Why is Wal-Mart and others involved, it is not because of the angler. They have a marketing plan that goes way beyond the pro angler and even the FLW. The tournaments boost the angler ten fold more than the angler boosts the tournament right now and that shows by the credentials all anglers place after their names…2 time FLW champion, MWC tournament winner and so on. Without those titles the pro angler would essentially be a nobody in a very big world. There is no consistency in the tournament world that would allow the tournament to promote the anglers like a NASCAR and that is one of the huge obstacles. Neither the tournament nor angler can produce any sort of crowd, and this in house cannibalism is getting disgusting.

The reality is the angler does not have a draw and that is their own fault. There are many trying to swing that back around and make a relevant place in the market for the pro again but it is an up hill battle when there are many who sit on their rump and don’t make a move. A pro in most minds are the people who not only fish tournaments but also do things like hold kids clinics on their own and pay for the equipment out of their own pocket like Greg Karch, I respect that with all my heart. Not someone who says they fulfilled their contract and they will do more if the price is right.

The FLW is attempting to keep the industry afloat, could things offered be a little better…sure but the angler needs to step it up and bring a lot more to the table also.

Back to my stretchy pants.

-Good read! :)

[Manxfishing]

This post has been an interesting read.

I myself can see both sides

But my thoughts would be
The FLW sold there sponsor exclusives rights to make up for lost revenue
It is what it is

So here’s how I see it
The FLW is getting money from
1.)There sponsors
2.)The locations that they fish at
3.)And 30% from the entry money

The Fisherman, angler or pro is getting
1.)70% payout if they win?
2.)Can’t have there sponsors shown now

There’s no risk and rewards there. It’s stacked were the FLW wins no matter what
It’s not like there doing any body a favor by having a FLW Walleye Tour
There making money by holding Tournaments

[The Masked Avenger]

They have a business model that provides them a profit,
So what, now we all get mad and sit back and mock it?

You're playing for your own money, everyone knows even the rookie,
All the tournament is doing is playing the role of a legitimate bookie

The angler did nothing to get the FLW sponsors or locations for the fun,
In fact no one knows whose playing until all that work has been done.

No one is forced to go to Vegas to loose money on the fall of the cards,
Same in tournaments, stay home if odds are against you and it's too hard.

[Manxfishing]

Buddy,

I'm not bashing the FLW in any way
Yes, they have had full fields in the past

But when you say your playing for your money
The correct term would be.
your playing for 70% of your money

It's just so funny that now to fish a tournament
Not only do you need to buy the right boat, fish with the right gear and have the money
there going to dress you up as well.

I myself don't have pockets that deep or the ego

Good luck with the buss. plan

[Scott F.]

Hey Juls, my comment regarding anymosity was not directed to you. You corrected your original statement to clarify your position earlier in this thread. I believe I noted that at one point but if not, thank you. That said, to say that there is none from you and none in this overall thread are two different things.

Which leads me to addressing M.A.:

Okay Scott, since the poetry is tripping you up here with the puns I’ll come out of character for this one time. As you well know the industry sponsors use the anglers and the anglers use the sponsors, this BS that all the anglers hearts are in the right place is enough to make anyone sick. You have the good and the bad and I’ll be darned if I will accept every pro angler as equal and with all good intentions because that would be as false of a statement as one could make. I remember several NPAA office holders, including the secretary, from the years past not once showing up at any kids events because “We put enough of our time in already” they said. Pretty much saying the kids are not important unless we get paid more.

I'm not tripped up by the poetry, it is actually that the poetry appears to be causing your story to be a moving target. Thank you for your willingness to move to a more equivelant form of discussion.

Now, who ever said that "all the anglers hearts are in the right place"? Certainly not I! In fact, if you go back and reread the thread you will see that I have very clearly stated what I think happens to those who are not. I never asked you to accept that "all have good intentions". But...poetry or not you are very clever in your ability to twist the original issue.

Here's the thing. If we know that there are far more anglers who want to be "pros" than who actually are able to do so, doesn't that mean that the sponsors have all kinds of choice? I mean couldn't they just say I'm not seeing the value from Jim so I'm going to align my company and brand with Joe because he does a much better job and at a significantly lower fee to boot? I think your attitude that either group is getting a "screwin" is utterly without merit. The anglers mostly know what they are getting into (I'm sure some will disagree) and the sponsors do too. Why the rub? Perhaps you had dealings with an angler who treated you wrong? I'm terribly sorry for that, but why didn't you go out into the market and make a better deal with someone who's heart was in the right place? Or is it that you had business dealings with anglers other than in a sponsor/angler scenario and they decided your value wasn't high enough to warrant continuing and went into the market to up their chance of success? I have no idea, but to claim that the anglers are in some way "screwin" or conversely being screwed doesn't fit logically. And as such ...I think your avenging bias is clear.

Thank you for giving a real world example. I do not know of the situation you describe, but, jumping from "putting enough of our time" to "kids are not important" is your conclusion. It might be that the truth lies somewhere between your bias and theirs.

You have an issue with the FLW, I get that. But it appears you are tossing out the angler “whoa is me persona” which is too much. Yes, in my opinion you are flat out attacking the FLW and since it is tournaments like the FLW that gave you legitimacy within the fishing world I find it reprehensible that it comes down to an us vs. them attitude. I have no animosity towards the anglers and am friends with many, I have animosity towards particular people who insist on throwing up smoke screens. There are decent people trying to make a difference in the fishing world and that includes the FLW. Why is Wal-Mart and others involved, it is not because of the angler. They have a marketing plan that goes way beyond the pro angler and even the FLW. The tournaments boost the angler ten fold more than the angler boosts the tournament right now and that shows by the credentials all anglers place after their names…2 time FLW champion, MWC tournament winner and so on. Without those titles the pro angler would essentially be a nobody in a very big world. There is no consistency in the tournament world that would allow the tournament to promote the anglers like a NASCAR and that is one of the huge obstacles. Neither the tournament nor angler can produce any sort of crowd, and this in house cannibalism is getting disgusting.

Issue with the FLW? Hardly. In fact, I think if you look into my history you will see decisions that directly refute that suggestion. "Whoa is me persona"? I have plenty to be woeful about but tournament fishing isn't close to the list. Actually for me at this point, I believe I am fairly objective. Most of the pro anglers out there don't like hearing what I say on their chances for longterm viability given the fundamental changes that have occurred in the last decade. On the other hand, you are showing a bias that helps all of us see who you are trying to avenge. And...I find it rich that the masked one has anymosity for smoke screens. It drips with irony.

As for the idea that the FLW gave me legitimacy (this time you did say you). I wholeheartedly agree. I happen to think I had a fair amount before that but I'm willing to accept your charge. THE PROBLEM IS, THAT HAS NEVER BEEN THE ISSUE I AM TALKING ABOUT! Go back and look at earlier threads and you will clearly see I acknowledge this. However, when the question of whether the anglers are at fault for not "supporting" the tournament circuits the situation is very clear. In 2010 we clearly saw that the value that anglers receive from being participants in FLW AND AIM was not sufficient. That includes the gamble. That includes the ability to sell manufactured commodities (I think those are your terms). That includes the value they place on enjoyment in the activity. I don't care how you slice it, blaming them for not seeing the value is simply ridiculous!

You used the word reprehensible. I'll tell you straight up that I think the idea that anglers should be made to appear as the villain for making that choice is reprehensible. What would you have them do? This is actually real money, real people, real families, real vacation time we are talking about. It isn't theoretical. You would have them throw those considerations out for the good of the sport (or any for-profit entity)? I find that reprehensible. Especially since you have already stated that a significant portion of this is gambling. Even the casinos would never acknowledge that attitude publicly. Now that I think about it, maybe there is a whole new sponsor set we have been overlooking. I'm guessing the credit card companies, the bill collectors and the divorce attorneys would want a piece of that action.

The reality is the angler does not have a draw and that is their own fault. There are many trying to swing that back around and make a relevant place in the market for the pro again but it is an up hill battle when there are many who sit on their rump and don’t make a move. A pro in most minds are the people who not only fish tournaments but also do things like hold kids clinics on their own and pay for the equipment out of their own pocket like Greg Karch, I respect that with all my heart. Not someone who says they fulfilled their contract and they will do more if the price is right.

That is a great story. I am glad that Greg is as dedicated as he is. But are you really going to say that the only way someone is a pro is if part of what they do requires spending out of their pocket. I'm a simple man, but if I'm spending out of my pocket, and I have no way of recouping those expenses, I know for a fact that I can only do it for so long or I am going to be subsidizing it from some other non related activity. Which is fine but I just don't feel that any person, let alone angler, should be ashamed if he/she chooses otherwise.

The draw is definitely an issue. But is it really just the anglers fault? It all rests on their shoulders? You can't think of any other reason? I see bias written all over that claim. I believe the draw issue is all the more reason for the interested parties to come together and figure this out. I will say that historically, that just hasn't been the case. I also don't think has ever been an issue of willingness on the angler's part which should be indicative of where the money resides in the system. And once again, not to inflame your pro FLW avenging efforts, I will say that is true across the board.

The FLW is attempting to keep the industry afloat, could things offered be a little better…sure but the angler needs to step it up and bring a lot more to the table also.

Or....the angler can make a different choice in response to what is available. If you take the odds down on winning money, if there is not an outlet for the manufactured commodity, if debt is required to make the system run, perhaps that is the time where the smart choice is to put down the shovel and climb out of the hole. I just don't believe anyone has a right to be upset about that choice...advocate or not.

Best of luck on the avenging.

Scott F.

[big feeling]

Fellegy has had this big me feeling ever sinse I can look back. no one understands fishing like him. Steve, your a pretty good guide and I gues your a "pro" fisherman, but most people in the world (including most fishermen) have never heard of you or most other pros unless they have tv program. pros in other sports have lots of fans you guys dont.

[Vikings Fan]

"Stay home if the odds are against you and it's too hard."

Masked Avenger,

That is exactly what far too many of us had to do this year. Unless things change drastically, even more of us will have to do just that for 2011. 1/3 to 1/2 full fields with their subsequent weak payouts and the long odds of receiving any kind of check when the odds went from 1 in 3 chances to 1 in 6 chances made staying at home an economic reality for far too many of us anglers.

For that? Some might shame and blame us for not supporting the FLW or AIM circuits in 2009 and 2010? There are a lot of very good anglers out there who would have liked to compete at the FLW / AIM level. Circumstances being what they are those anglers have had to do just what you suggested. "Stay home."

I do have a suggestion for you Masked Avenger. Don't discount how hard many of us have worked to promote competitive fishing, sponsors and recreational fishing in general. You have no idea the sacrifices some of us have made to promote this sport. Me thinks you exceed your realm of knowledge when you discount the contributions we pros have made in support of our sponsors and fishing.

Divided we are, yes! Opinions vary greatly as to what broke, why it broke and what needs to be done to get competitive walleye angling heading in the right direction. Even as such. We all share a common interest. Which is why you and everyone else who is reading this keep coming back to W/C. The frank, open and sometimes spirited discussion that takes place here on W/C certainly help to get these issues out in the forefront.

Not much of a poet here. But as Scott F. said, "Just my two cents."

[The Masked Avenger]

Scott…I kind of figured you would not know the secretary I was talking about, go figure.

This is getting old and both you and Fellegy (at least in this thread) sound like ex-wives that are disgruntled about their divorce and insist on telling their ex-husbands how to run their lives.

Viking Fan..."I do have a suggestion for you Masked Avenger. Don't discount how hard many of us have worked to promote competitive fishing, sponsors and recreational fishing in general. You have no idea the sacrifices some of us have made to promote this sport. Me thinks you exceed your realm of knowledge when you discount the contributions we pros have made in support of our sponsors and fishing."

If you came away with that thought you did not read the posts or others. What I heavily suggest is learn how to take constructive criticism.

[Scott F.]

M.A.,

I know that I served as secretary of the association in the early 2000's. But I don't recall ever having a conversation like the one you describe. I sincerely hope you are not referring to me because I would have to call foul. Either way, my point holds. Reaching from "I have done enough" to "I don't care about the kids" is a stretch derived by the perspective of where one is standing.

I would suggest that I am not telling others how to live their lives. In fact, I believe the issue I have been pointing out is the antithesis of that behavior and that the proverbial shoe is actually on the other foot.

We do agree on this....this is now very old.

Scott

[stevefellegy]

A high percentage of major league athletes you see appearing at charity events/hospitals/kids events etc. are PAID to do so--either directly by the league/the event itself/the players present or former team/ or via indirectly in one lump sum per contractual agreements in place from the past or present. This is true no mater the level of player he or she is. And that is fact....like it or not! Denied or not--it's a fact in MOST cases.

Why do I bring this up? Because the Avenger thinks it was wrong for the angler to say no to a kids event(s) unless there was a form of payment in place. So I'm saying why hold the pro angler at a different standard than any other major leaguer?

The bottom line of this whole subject is that the $$ playing field is and has been very one sided. And the side that has been shorted is at the end of the line. The business model that established competitive fishing
failed to consider both sides having to survive. Remember one key element from the start. The MWC (the original Manufacturers Walleye Council)was formed and came to the anglers and said--"if you do this and this and this--we will pay you to do so." THEY and the rest that followed, fell short of that agreement. And the anglers suckered for it....which I, for one, accept the blame for my and our stupidity.

For whoever takes a shot at me about speaking "big" about me? Although I might come across as if I'm speaking about "me", but in fact, I have a history of speaking on behalf of ALL pro anglers. My passion for the well-being of ALL pro anglers is well known within the ranks. I NEVER have spelled team with an "I".

I will now bow out. Good debate and a healthy one at that! I only wish others who have a basis for speaking to this subject would have the guts to do so. That silence and or fear is why we are where we are!

[jet man]

Steve, Scott and Juls I respect your willingness to put your name on the bottom line; more then I can say for the Masked Avenger.

[The Masked Avenger]

I will proudly take rejection because of the act of being surreptitious to the acceptance or malaise of utter personal attacks any day.

[Heywood J.]

...but in the end...isnt it the fans that generate the revenue?

without fans, you got nadda.....

BINGO!

If you don't have "fans" buying your hats, shirts, lures, boats, and generating revenue that can be turned over, we're all playing with our own money. Which is fine when it works.