 |
|
|
probullstats |
||
|
Home News Rodeos Contractors Links Message Board Search Guestbook |
|
Went to the big judges seminar in Colorado Springs this past Tuesday. Had to address 40-50 of the top rodeo officials (hopefully some of which were judges). When I got there I had to ask… just wondering, you know……. wondering how the contestant poll turned out in regard to who would be judging the 2000 NFR. No poll this year (the bull riders got a different kind of POLLED). Instead of the vote results (which they usually didn’t go by even back when they DID have the cowboys vote)—the Program Supervisor and/or his three hench men assigned the positions. Not really that big a deal, since most years we only got two of the top four in the contestant voting anyway. In the horse riding events there have been year’s when a judge that rated right near the bottom with the contestants judges the NFR because that person was thought to be the BEST by the Program Supervisor. So instead of the poll results, they (the EVALUATORS (or Terminators) …. showed me a BIG CHIEF tablet… lots of crossed-out crayon marks…. arrows going here and there… happy faces…. sad faces…. you know, fifth grade, bored student type stuff. Best I could tell they plan to use:
Chute Judges: Watch for fouls, loops, slaps, Etc. Probably the two most important assignments. This year they will have to sign off on a chute bosses decision on the $250 fine (which doubles each successive time) for jacking around too long in the chute or decide if a cowboy is stalling in order to get a reride. Undoubtedly they will end up in the middle of many disputes between the NFR head man or his three hundred pound chute bosses and some poor unfortunate, never-in-the-wrong, bull rider who’s spent much of his life trying to get to the NFR and is only trying to give himself a chance to get out of the chute in relatively good shape. A position I do not envy, but then these two guys probably deserve it. Both are scheduled for appearances on the NEW DATING GAME show. If the bull riders HAD voted these two might have come out at the top of the list.
Back Ground Information: In past years I believe that they tried to poll the NFR qualifiers in each event to see which judges they wanted. What often happened is that two or three judges were preferred by more than one event. Since they tried to let every full timer judge something, there was always animosity. Some event reps were ticked off because they didn’t get the guys they wanted and the judges who did more than one event complained because they got paid the same amount as a guy who did only one event. I’m thinking they get around $4,500. Then… when in 1999 one horse riding Event DIRECTOR managed to get the Commissioner’s ear... 3 reserves were tossed into the NFR judge’s pool. A revolt developed among the full timers when the head of the program notified them that they would be receiving less money for their NFR bonus. The NFR judging budget was to be divided 10 ways instead of 7. Think it would’ve cost them $1,200 each. “Foul,” they pouted. “we don’t care if the scrubs come but you shouldn’t be paying them out of OUR money.” Good point, I thought. “But”, the Program Head said, “Instead of leaving three of you full timers at home, I included you in the bonus pay-off.” Way to bow up there, Super. Me? I’da left them home. At that point the Riding Event Director (also an NFR contestant) bailed them out by going back to the Commissioner and getting the extra money. Still…. I’m guessing there were some hard feelings between some of the judges and the program Supervisor. More likely HURT feelings. Last year, when they brought 3 reserves to the NFR, there were 7 salaried judges. At one time there were 9 full timers. Instead of filling those other two positions they had been using the money for some travel expenses and bonuses for the top half dozen reserves. It’s a lot cheaper and more cost efficient. Now there are only 5 full time officials ( Butch, Jade, Larry Davis, Harry Rose, George Gibbs), and 3 full time EVALUATORS ( Thomas Keith, Esq., Buddy Lytle, and John Davis (Larry Davis’s taller brother ( 4’ 6” versus 4’ 5 ½”). It’s a valid concept… evaluating officials with field men. I would think that the full time contestants like the idea because they think the full time officials are pretty much untouchable and they anticipate some turnover in the program. I’d also guess that the circuit system cowboys also would endorse the idea since they anticipate some firings or reassignments in the reserve ranks. The fallacy of those theories is that they probably won’t roll any of the 5 full timers out—just move 3-4 reserves up. Really isn’t any basis for rolling those guys out… their numbers are solid… they aren’t serial killers (or haven’t been caught yet.) As for the reserve official hopes, there may be some shuffling on the assignments but the evaluators and the contestants already know who the best reserves are and they already get the most jobs and the best jobs. The kind of judge that might get dropped is usually the only judge that will take some of the little rodeos he goes to anyway. Doubt that they will fill the 9th salaried position since it is cost prohibitive, especially when they are paying for salaries, insurance, travel, retirement, etc. on 3 guys who aren’t going to judge at all. The cost of fielding a full time official can run as high as $700 or more per performance versus $145 for a reserve. On one hand you really need to judge their porky butts off (more than 120 performances per year) in order to justify their existence. On the other hand, you can’t… travel costs are too high. It’s often cheaper to just leave them at home and eat their fixed cost. So is the full time official’s program worth the investment? I think so …. but let’s play with some numbers and see. For Example… (all these figures are MY guestimates). take a big winter rodeo like a Denver…. let’s assume that the judges are there 17 days (think it is more than that). Slack starts a couple of days before the rodeo. 23 performances. Might be 500 slacks runs too. I’m not sure but I think a reserve gets another performance pay for every 150 slack runs. Think the first bonus kicks in on the 51st run and then it goes in 150 run increments. He also gets $45 per day as a lodging/meals per diem allowance. Usually-- if the full timers like the reserves—they get to stay with them. The reserves still get the $45 per diem. For that, they must do favors for the full timers (most of them of a sexual nature). Just kidding. (I hope.) Let’s assume that they send 1 full timer and 2 reserves to that rodeo. Let’s guess that the total room costs were $100 per day = $1,700. Airfare for the 1 full timer is maybe $400. Rental car… $500? Meal per diem: $20 per day =$340. These figure are based on the assumption that it is the only rodeo the full timer judges that month. This could change if he picked up a smaller rodeo that month but if you figure each judge is out in the field FAR less than ½ of each rodeo season—we are probably being more than fair. Lets’ calculate his gross monthly salary $2,500-$3,000 (guessing). Figure his benefit package costs the PRCA another ¼ of that amount….maybe $700. So the cost of having 1 full timer at Denver could be: $1,700 + $400 + $500 + $340 + $2,500 + $700 = $6,240. Figuring 23 performances that is pretty cheap… around $250 a performance. On the other hand… for a reserve it would be $145 X 23 performances + $600 for slack = $3,935 or $128 per performance. So a full timer costs twice as much. I think that’s acceptable. It’s a big payday for a reserve who can get his family through the winter until the rodeo season cranks back up. Plus…it doesn’t cost the program that much more to have a full timer there to make sure the timed event draw is correct and it saves the reserves the cost of getting a room. The cost of adding a second full timer in place of a reserve would be $4,140 (about the same as the reserve was getting). Same deal if you went with a third full timer. Why? There would be no duplication on the room and rental car costs. So….
In the year 2000, I’m thinking that Denver had to pay Ranch Headquarters $150 per judge per performance which would be $300 X 23 perfs = $6,900 then we need to add in $800 (the $1.00 per rodeo the contestants pay) (per rodeo—not per event). The total revenue coming IN to the program would be $7,700. Oh oh.. spaghettio’s. We’re somewhere between $4,000 and $7,000 short. Who comes up with the rest? I think I remember that Wrangler puts in $500,000-$550,000 a year for the rights to patch all judges. Beyond that, any shortfall at the end of the year has to come out of the PRCA’s general budget. However, the program did get a big financial bump at the last board meeting when they voted to raise the per performance/per judge fee on all United States rodeos up to $225. I’m guessing that it created a $350,000-$400,000 windfall. At Denver $225 per judge/per performance would improve the financial picture. $10,335 + $800 = $11,135 (or enough if they used only reserve officials). Initially, the Wrangler Judging Program’s financial contribution was earmarked for paying for 8-9 full time officials and a supervisor. Unfortunately, I don’t think that in 15 years that amount has been adjusted for cost of living salary increases or inflation in the travel economy. Therefore, while at one time fielding full time officials turned a profit, I’m guessing it is running at a deficit now and has for some time. By not filling the two available full timer positions they might’ve been able to keep things pretty close to break-even, however. Isn’t this fun? Let’s try another example… using a smaller rodeo (toital added purse is less than $4,500) See…. the program actually got the BUMP to $225 per performance due to the small rodeos. At small two performance rodeos that don’t have much slack, the program has had problems getting anyone to judge. I’m thinking that at that size of rodeo, the PRCA has been paying each judge $75 per perf with an additional $45 per diem = $120 per judge/per perf total. A judge grossed $240 for officiating that rodeo but had to pay for a room, gas, and food. Pretty much had to stay in a camper or cuddle up to the stock contractor’s truck driver in his sleeper (a good excuse). In fact, because the smaller rodeos paid less money per judge to the PRCA, some places where there was quite a bit of slack, the program lost money. If the first slack bonus kicks in after 50 runs, and if there were 51 slack runs at a rodeo, the program would have suffered a loss. Neither rodeo committees nor contestants pay extra to the judging program for slack competition. The contestants do pay something if you figure the $1 per rodeo entered but that might only come to $120,000-$140,000 a year if you figure in the contestants who work multi events. You can be entered in three events at a rodeo and still only pay $1 for the rodeo. The committees pay for providing the arena, cattle, and crew… so they pay their share. But usually the cost of having slack is included in the stock contractor’s bid. In most it isn’t even a line item—item. It’s just an assumed expense to the contractor. If contestant numbers go through the roof—he just has to eat it. Now don’t go to thinking I’m getting soft on stock contractors. Can’t stand um. They smell…. slobber… and proudly and in public--pass gas. Back to math…. Now let’s take a smaller 3 performance rodeo (put big enough to pay $100 per performance –think any rodeo that has a total added purse of $4,500 or more qualifies) that has enough slack that the reserve gets an additional performance’s pay. Let’s use 1 reserve from that area and add in the variable of flying in 1 full timer. The Reserve gets paid: 4 X $145 = $580 Full timer’s costs to the program: Airfare: $400 Car: $150 Meals: $80 (came in a day ahead) = $630 Close enough. Oooops …. we forgot the allocation for his salary and benefit package. Let’s figure that the full timer does three rodeos a month so we’ll just take 1/3 of his monthly fixed cost… $1,000. Oh oh. Now the full timer costs the judging program $1,630. More than $500 per performance. More than three times what it costs to have a reserve to judge it. THREE times as much. Revenue to the program: The rodeo will pay: $225 per judge per perf = $900 Add in the entry $1 (guessing) = $350 Total income to the program: $1,250 Total Expense: $1,210 A MONEY MAKER!!!! BUT…. if you figure in the full timer’s salary and benefit package the total expense to the program shows a LOSS: $2,210 - $1,250 = -$960. Using two reserves, the program actually makes money IF they don’t get a slack bonus. But actually it’s okay. Why? Wrangler’s (my estimate) $500,000-$550,000. See, originally I believe that the sponsor contribution was intended to cover the salary and benefits for those 8-9 full time judges (way back when they were called judges instead of officials) and 1 supervisor. Initially there was money left over which could be used to cover part of their travel expenses. So today, if they can keep the salary and benefit package for the group of 9 officials and 1 supervisor under $550,000 ($50,000-$55,000 per guy) …. things might be okay. It won’t be okay paying for 3 evaluators, however. Maybe they only can afford 1 if they plan to travel much. Maybe 2 if they don’t fill that 9th position. Dang… we forgot to figure in the Supervisor’s travel. OUR FINAL ANSWER…. To make the numbers work with the present revenue/cost structure, they can’t have more than 6 full time judges if they are going to retain 3 evaluators and 1 Supervisor—unless of course, the PRCA covers the shortfall. I got a C- in third grade math so I’m probably qualified to make these estimates. (Okay… it was a D++++ ). I think the program has been and is going be in the red (losing money). Maybe not…. I was just throwing some numbers around like some judges been slinging points. But which 6? After all the hoopla…I doubt they have the stones to make that decision. They are good guys… evaluating their friends. They’ll go with 8-9 and the program will lose money. Not THEIR money… but then the contestants have to have good judges. It’s probably a justified expenditure. We need good judges and they’d probably just blow the money on stuff like having champagne and caviar in the vending machines at Ranch Headquarters. Valet parking is a must. I’m really FOR the full timer concept (if you can afford them). Many years ago I sat in on a dinner meeting when the President of PRCA Properties and the Wrangler rep agreed on the deal. Just shows you what I’d do back then for a free meal. The idea was to get some full time guys that you could count on to be there when you needed them. Guys with character and integrity. Guys who knew the rulebook and who wouldn’t keep screwing up the timed event draws. Then…. reward their commitment by giving them a salary and benefit package and make sure their judging stayed objective by protecting them from outside pressure from contestants and contractors. I think they started them out at $22,000 per year and in twenty years some of their salaries are now probably in the mid $30,000 range. Add in the NFR bonus, most are probably close to $40,000. If you figure in inflation, their salaries today are probably worth a little less than they were back when they started. But they like rodeo… like to be around it… the work isn’t usually hard… the hours are great except for slack days… and a $30,000-$40,000 all expenses paid, first class rodeo vacation is a lot better than an 8-5 regular job. Throw in health insurance and retirement benefits and it really becomes a good deal. And free clothes… those boy’s under ware even have Wrangler stamped on them. I think the full time official concept has worked well… and I think we need to keep it. However, to make that happen, the contestants might have to pay $2-$3 more per entry (or higher dues) and Wrangler will need to make a significant increase in their contribution (probably 1/3 then have an annual cost of living increase). I’m not certain a sponsor would be willing to do that. The rodeo committees have already kicked in their share (raised up to $225 a perf for each judge). At a recent board meeting the Supervisor of Officials pleaded for one comp room per rodeo to house the judges. I’m thinking he asked for $150 (instead of $225) per judge per perf PLUS the free room. The Rodeo Committee directors didn’t think their people needed to get into the room business (even though most already are) so they gave the Supervisor an additional $75 per performance per judge to make up for it. I think the Committee Directors assumed that that money would go directly to the reserve judges at the little rodeos in order to solve their specific problem…. but that isn’t the case. That money will go directly into the judging program and the Supervisor will determine what the per performance/slack pay will be for the reserves. However, in recent years, the program had been paying the reserve judges more than it was taking in at many rodeos. I don’t think the committee’s per judge/per performance charge had been raised in the last 10 years or so. Probably should have been gradually rising over the years rather than hitting them with this big bump. However, I don’t recall them being asked for more until now. As it turns out, I think the program needed the $225 PLUS the free room. The Supervisor was correct. Lodging costs are the key. That and charging each contestant a buck or two per run in the slack. Did you hear the missiles going off in Time-ee Land? Maybe up to $5 per run if you want to include the secretaries and timers in the deal (which you should). Still pretty cheap deal for the slack contestants. Heck, at some rodeos the Steer Ropers pay $25-$50 per run as a stock charge just so they can HAVE their event. Oh yeah… better keep the full timer’s airfares under $400… and rental cars--go for subcompacts (they never have any so you get a free upgrade). And instead of wasting a $1,000 looking at a reserve, get some contestant’s wives to video a perf from two angles. We did it on the Winston Tour. Save you $800. The evaluators can stay home, kick back in their Bark-a-loungers, and evaluate the tapes. The “they don’t look the same on tape” excuse is true but standing in a crows nest isn’t much better. Standing in the arena right behind a guy also isn’t any good. We’re talking about LOTS of money here. Won’t work any other way—other than swiping funds from other areas. Areas like the now defunct member retirement program. Our Findings: As the program is currently financially structured… you shouldn’t have more than 10 salaried people (judges, evaluators, and supervisor). If the judging program can get the comp room and the $5 per run charge in the slack—they can have 9 salaried judges, 3 evaluators, and 1 supervisor. The annual contribution of the program sponsor has to cover all the fixed costs (not travel expenses) of the salaried judges, evaluators, and the supervisor. Take the previous years documented expenditures and add a cost of living increase. If they lose the title sponsor…they have to dump the full timers and evaluators. THE END P.S. Dear Ranch
Headquarters… please send $60,000 for our analyst fee. Cashiers check
or MO. |
|
|