Mystery Thing
Administrator
You aren't "donating" your money to the game. Nobody is. You're paying for a product and receiving something in return.
Fall Regional Prizes Anounced
- Thread starter Prodigiosus
- Start date
You aren't "donating" your money to the game. Nobody is. You're paying for a product and receiving something in return.
z-man
New Member
Woah woah woah slow down. First off, are you not taking into account that some masters are also minors? My brother just turned 15 and he's in masters now. There's no way that my parents would let him go alone to nationals. Does he not deserve the extra money simply because he's a year older than 14?
Secondly, let's define discrimination. According to dictionary.com, discrimination is the act of showing favor for or against one person or group based on a certain category that that group belongs to. There is no discrimination on the juniors and seniors. P!P isn't favoring them by giving them equal money as masters. Sure the money might be spread more thinly, but the same amount of money is there. Masters are being discriminated against because they are given less money for the exact same accomplishment. The fact that it is more expensive for two people to go to nats than for one person to go to nats is not discrimination. That is how our economy works. Sorry, but there's very little that TPCi can do about that. Having a clause that gives extra money if a guardian is necessary is great, but don't issue money in broad strokes based on "14 and younger" and "15 and older". That is ridiculous.
JWittz
New Member
That isn't what I meant. They are making a greater overall sacrifice of their income by making the choice of playing. Replace "donating" with "paying", doesn't change a thing.
Mystery Thing
Administrator
Get petty and insulting, I couldn't care less. If I want to play in Nationals, I still get to pay my own way there too. If I'm selfish because I think it's reasonable for a parent to USE TRAVEL MONEY AS TRAVEL MONEY, then so be it.
:nonono:
psychup2034
New Member
The fact that you're resorting to a game of semantics adequately demonstrates how weak your argument is. :nonono:
You could substitute the word "donate" in JWittz's post with "spend" and it's still a valid point.
I think it's fair to say that a Junior isn't going to grasp winning $500 because mom and dad still pays for about everything. Teens are at the point they start doing odd jobs for money so they comprehend winning money better. Have not won a stipend from TPCi before so is it 500$ for a JR with their parent or 500 for a Junior and 500 for their parent? If the latter is the case I'd be a bit more annoyed. If the increase is to one prize pot (say 300 vs 500) to accommodate that it's for parent AND child I'll agree with that all day long.
My other peeve, assuming it's 500 per parent and child, though is that JRs and SRs can really look at the "Ok you've got your part of the trip covered now you need to help make money for me to go with you." I'm all about teaching the value of money and such. They should realize this is a something their parents don't have to do, but do anyway. When I was playing in 15+ division my dad would take me all over, but I'd always have money to pay tolls or buy us dinner or something to say thanks. Again if its only 500 for the player moot point.
Yes Masters likely can carpool and split a room to cut costs and that's not really viable for Juniors, but that's not to say a Master should shoulder the full burden of the cost.
I sort of feel like the increase to the younger player's prize pool is to up attendance, but if Masters have high attendance we should get something for already being on top. No we're not the target audience, but we also shouldn't be ignored. Let me also say I don't feel we deserve or are owed anything, but I couldn't word that last sentence better.
Now let me also say I without knowing any of this decided I wanted to be more active in judging this year, so it's not a case of I feel slighted. I genuinely feel bad for the players who are losing out.
My other peeve, assuming it's 500 per parent and child, though is that JRs and SRs can really look at the "Ok you've got your part of the trip covered now you need to help make money for me to go with you." I'm all about teaching the value of money and such. They should realize this is a something their parents don't have to do, but do anyway. When I was playing in 15+ division my dad would take me all over, but I'd always have money to pay tolls or buy us dinner or something to say thanks. Again if its only 500 for the player moot point.
Yes Masters likely can carpool and split a room to cut costs and that's not really viable for Juniors, but that's not to say a Master should shoulder the full burden of the cost.
I sort of feel like the increase to the younger player's prize pool is to up attendance, but if Masters have high attendance we should get something for already being on top. No we're not the target audience, but we also shouldn't be ignored. Let me also say I don't feel we deserve or are owed anything, but I couldn't word that last sentence better.
Now let me also say I without knowing any of this decided I wanted to be more active in judging this year, so it's not a case of I feel slighted. I genuinely feel bad for the players who are losing out.
psychup2034
New Member
Once again, you're dodging the point. I was countering your statement: "Don't kid yourself, that $500 isn't going to the kid, it's going straight to the parent."
I was merely pointing out that most parents would save that money for their kids because they're not as selfish as you assume them to be.
z-man
New Member
that isn't a fair thing to say. If I were a parent of a senior, I would definitely spend the stipend and save the money I would have spent on the trip (put it elsewhere). If the money is earmarked as a stipend, most people will spend it as a stipend.
psychup2034
New Member
Put it elsewhere. Like in your child's college fund?
Mystery Thing
Administrator
Just because you disagree with me (and that's fine) doesn't make it a weak argument. Everything I've said is factually correct. It DOES cost more for a JR/SR player to play in Nats than most Masters. Yes, the 15-19ish group is the exception. Hense my staying "in most cases" in my first post in this mess.
It's ridiculous to assume that every late teen/early 20s Master is in school and drowning in student loans, and it's ridiculous to assume that every child who plays the game has parents who can drop the time and money to take their kid to Nationals for a 5 day weekend.
I couldn't disagree more, but that's all speculation anyway. I think it's very reasonable for a parent to want to put a travel award towards travel. You're assuming that every parent of every skilled player is rolling in the dough and could have afforded the trip for both themselves and the player, and that's just silly.
BlisseyRocks
New Member
Whats really dumb to me is that its a travel stipend, meaning mommy and daddy will STILL probably not pay for themselves to go to nationals, aka the $500 their kid just won is wasted. Like this just makes NO sense.
Look at it from this perspective....TPCi knows the number of each player in the age groups that played in OP the last few years. Then look at the Nats #s. MAs have continued to grow while JRs and SRs are not. Why? Maybe the families cannot afford that last bit of travel. MAs seem to have zero problems getting there. So, they sweeten the pot some for the JRs and SRs. Why cant you be happy the prize pool has increased? I know....it isnt for the MAs, so something is wrong! Please....be happy the prizes got a bit better for some.
Keith
PS It is 7 am in the UK....NoPoke is probably just waking up LOL
Keith
PS It is 7 am in the UK....NoPoke is probably just waking up LOL
the stipend amount is for parent/child PAIR, not each.
...and sorry keith, out of 'thanks' for the day..
...and sorry keith, out of 'thanks' for the day..
Last edited:
z-man
New Member
So why not give money to everyone! When they achieve the exact same thing, why not give stipends to all groups as opposed to just the seniors? Again, why not just give extra money if a guardian is needed? Wouldn't that solve all the problems? As a college student, there's no way that I could fit a trip to Indianapolis into my budget. I have a job, but it merely gets me from day to day. I polled my suite (7 other college students), and only one of them had the financial safety to make a four day trip to Indianapolis. None of us are drowning in student loans, but we certainly don't have enough money to fly to Indy and stay there for four days.
I'm all for increasing prizes. That's exactly what we wanted! Most of us just feel that this is unfair due to the JRs and SRs getting preferred treatment over the MAs. Why can't we all just get equal prizes? If they're gonna have 3 divisions, they better support them equally.
Last edited:
Mystery Thing
Administrator
I didn't say it wouldn't. That sounds perfectly reasonable to me.
Well, other than that that would look like a reduction in the prize pool, and then you would all be losing your minds over that.
I understand that Keith, but shouldn't P!Ps goal be to make life long customers. By presenting players with few prizes and tough competition as they get older aren't they sending the opposite message?
psychup2034
New Member
You're right. Just because I disagree with you, it doesn't make your argument weak. The fact that you're resorting to semantic games to respond to JWittz's post, however, does make your argument weak. :nonono:
I, too, agree that it is very reasonable for a parent to want to put a travel award towards travel. I don't agree with what you said earlier about that money going "straight to the parent." If you're a parent, at least use that money for your kid to travel.
I've seen many MAs crash 6-8 to a room and eat steak and shake for 4 days.....it can be done cheaply.
Yes, you want to draw in life long players. My family has played for almost a decade and the prizes or lack thereof hasnt driven us away. If you love the game and the people in it, you will play it. It isnt a job you know.....
Keith
JWittz
New Member
I don't think it's ridiculous to assume that most late teen/early 20s masters are attending some sort of education.
"In its most recent survey of college pricing, the College Board reports that a "moderate" college budget for an in-state public college for the 2011–2012 academic year averaged $21,447. A moderate budget at a private college averaged $42,224".
"According to USA Today, in 2009, 63% of high school students went to college right after graduation."
Most Pokémon masters that I know spend an extremely high percentage of their disposable income on Pokémon. Because it's such a high cost of what few dollars you can earn while in school, competitive play becomes a very intimate and important part of most Master's lives. I don't see how this should be discredited for any reason.
"In its most recent survey of college pricing, the College Board reports that a "moderate" college budget for an in-state public college for the 2011–2012 academic year averaged $21,447. A moderate budget at a private college averaged $42,224".
"According to USA Today, in 2009, 63% of high school students went to college right after graduation."
Most Pokémon masters that I know spend an extremely high percentage of their disposable income on Pokémon. Because it's such a high cost of what few dollars you can earn while in school, competitive play becomes a very intimate and important part of most Master's lives. I don't see how this should be discredited for any reason.
Mystery Thing
Administrator
Pffft, now you're the one throwing semantics around. The parent pays for the flights. The parent takes money to help offset cost of flight they paid for. Ergo, the money is going to the parent. You know, since they can't get the money without doing the travelling.