Hello all:
I'm sorry for bringing this topic out, and I know we play our sport for fun, although it is a touchy issue, but How are the any monetary prizes disbursed, say if you bring back (to the US) an Olympic medal or National/world championship.
I'm talking about ISSF pistol specifically.anyone with that kind of experience?? thanks Kiko.
Monetary prizes???.
Moderators: pilkguns, m1963, David Levene, Spencer, Richard H
Forum rules
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
If you wish to make a donation to this forum's operation , it would be greatly appreciated.
https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/targettalk?yours=true
-
David Levene
- Posts: 5617
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 12:49 pm
- Location: Ruislip, UK
-
Fortitudo Dei
- Posts: 256
- Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2004 8:30 pm
- Location: New Zealand
-
Guest
I found this answer on another site:
Headline Central August 31, 2004
Is it time for America to pay Olympic winners Jimmy Pedro won a bronze medal in judo at the Olympics earlier this week, along with a $10,000 prize from the U.S. Olympic Committee. That and this report from CNNmoney.com's Chris Isidore He shared the bronze with Leandro Guilhiero of Brazil, who got no prize money. Nor did the Korean athlete who won the gold, nor the Russian who took home the silver.
The USOC has paid prize money to its winning Olympians since 1984, this year giving out $25,000 to gold medal winners, $15,000 to those who take home a silver and $10,000 for a bronze. Some of the richer U.S. sport federations give additional prize money to their winners as well.
Sponsors sometimes give bonuses for wins, too. Swimmer Michael Phelps, for example, would have gotten a $1 million bonus from his sponsor Speedo if he had met Mark Spitz's record of seven gold medals.
Some of the U.S. athletes who are already raking in big endorsement deals, or professional salaries, may not need the USOC prize money.
American men's basketball players, for example, have pledged to donate their prize money to youth basketball programs in the United States. (Given the team's performance in Athens, let's hope those groups haven't yet spent the money earmarked for them.)
Imagine the outrage if the Yankees had each received their $180,889 share for losing the World Series last year, while the upstart Florida Marlins had not gotten any money from World Series ticket revenues for beating them.
Worse than that, imagine if the Marlins players had been forced to go home from the World Series and work full-time jobs for the next 11 months. What if every team but the Yankees had to squeeze in baseball and training when they could, while the New Yorkers could train full-time?
That's the case in many of the high profile sports in the Olympics. It's a reason why two economists have found that gross domestic product is almost as important to predicting a nation's Olympic success as the size of the population base from which to chose athletes.
It's long past time for the International Olympics Committee, which disperses most of the billions in broadcast and international sponsorship dollars that the games bring in, to make sure that some of this money can go directly to the athletes.
The new television contracts the IOC has negotiated include enough money to fund such a prize pool easily. NBC alone will pay $614 million for the U.S. rights to the 2006 Winter Games, or about $64 million more than it paid in Salt Lake City in 2002.
It will pay $894 million for the 2008 games in Beijing, or about $100 million more. Overseas broadcast rights and sponsorship dollars are also rising. And the money will rise even more in 2010 and 2012.
Some IOC money is distributed to some of the poorer national teams. But it's not clear how many athletes directly benefit from the $3.7 billion that the IOC received in broadcast rights, sponsor dollars and licensing fees over the last four years.
The IOC could fund a pool paying the same $25,000/$15,000/$10,000 prize distribution from just the increase in the U.S. TV deal. There will be just under 3,000 medals awarded in Athens. Paying at that rate that the USOC pays would cost the IOC about $49.5 million total. In some of these countries, a prize of $25,000 could allow the athlete not to have to worry about anything but training until the next Olympics rolled around.
Yes, the U.S. athletes would still have tremendous financial advantages. But IOC prizes would at least provide a minimum level of support for those who need the help the most.
More than 20 years ago, the Olympics dropped the charade that it was a celebration of amateur sports. It's well past time that it drop of the amateurish policy of not paying the prize money to the athletes who make the games the financial success they have become. That and this report from CNNmoney.com's Chris Isidore
Headline Central August 31, 2004
Is it time for America to pay Olympic winners Jimmy Pedro won a bronze medal in judo at the Olympics earlier this week, along with a $10,000 prize from the U.S. Olympic Committee. That and this report from CNNmoney.com's Chris Isidore He shared the bronze with Leandro Guilhiero of Brazil, who got no prize money. Nor did the Korean athlete who won the gold, nor the Russian who took home the silver.
The USOC has paid prize money to its winning Olympians since 1984, this year giving out $25,000 to gold medal winners, $15,000 to those who take home a silver and $10,000 for a bronze. Some of the richer U.S. sport federations give additional prize money to their winners as well.
Sponsors sometimes give bonuses for wins, too. Swimmer Michael Phelps, for example, would have gotten a $1 million bonus from his sponsor Speedo if he had met Mark Spitz's record of seven gold medals.
Some of the U.S. athletes who are already raking in big endorsement deals, or professional salaries, may not need the USOC prize money.
American men's basketball players, for example, have pledged to donate their prize money to youth basketball programs in the United States. (Given the team's performance in Athens, let's hope those groups haven't yet spent the money earmarked for them.)
Imagine the outrage if the Yankees had each received their $180,889 share for losing the World Series last year, while the upstart Florida Marlins had not gotten any money from World Series ticket revenues for beating them.
Worse than that, imagine if the Marlins players had been forced to go home from the World Series and work full-time jobs for the next 11 months. What if every team but the Yankees had to squeeze in baseball and training when they could, while the New Yorkers could train full-time?
That's the case in many of the high profile sports in the Olympics. It's a reason why two economists have found that gross domestic product is almost as important to predicting a nation's Olympic success as the size of the population base from which to chose athletes.
It's long past time for the International Olympics Committee, which disperses most of the billions in broadcast and international sponsorship dollars that the games bring in, to make sure that some of this money can go directly to the athletes.
The new television contracts the IOC has negotiated include enough money to fund such a prize pool easily. NBC alone will pay $614 million for the U.S. rights to the 2006 Winter Games, or about $64 million more than it paid in Salt Lake City in 2002.
It will pay $894 million for the 2008 games in Beijing, or about $100 million more. Overseas broadcast rights and sponsorship dollars are also rising. And the money will rise even more in 2010 and 2012.
Some IOC money is distributed to some of the poorer national teams. But it's not clear how many athletes directly benefit from the $3.7 billion that the IOC received in broadcast rights, sponsor dollars and licensing fees over the last four years.
The IOC could fund a pool paying the same $25,000/$15,000/$10,000 prize distribution from just the increase in the U.S. TV deal. There will be just under 3,000 medals awarded in Athens. Paying at that rate that the USOC pays would cost the IOC about $49.5 million total. In some of these countries, a prize of $25,000 could allow the athlete not to have to worry about anything but training until the next Olympics rolled around.
Yes, the U.S. athletes would still have tremendous financial advantages. But IOC prizes would at least provide a minimum level of support for those who need the help the most.
More than 20 years ago, the Olympics dropped the charade that it was a celebration of amateur sports. It's well past time that it drop of the amateurish policy of not paying the prize money to the athletes who make the games the financial success they have become. That and this report from CNNmoney.com's Chris Isidore
Thanks Paul.
Finances apart, I just wanted some intelligent responses to my initial post, despite the fun some people have made of it.
Keep training, and eventhough we are lucky enough to live in a rich country, lets focus on sportmanship,,,, but a nice $ price is always a plus, at least to justify with your wife the money you spend on pellets.
.....baby... if I win the Gold,, I'll give you the money. ,,, that way we can keep shooting in our basements.."peacefully".
now how's that,,,,as an inspiration... for wives I mean.
kiko.
Finances apart, I just wanted some intelligent responses to my initial post, despite the fun some people have made of it.
Keep training, and eventhough we are lucky enough to live in a rich country, lets focus on sportmanship,,,, but a nice $ price is always a plus, at least to justify with your wife the money you spend on pellets.
.....baby... if I win the Gold,, I'll give you the money. ,,, that way we can keep shooting in our basements.."peacefully".
now how's that,,,,as an inspiration... for wives I mean.
kiko.
Like your style Kiko.
See you at the Olympics. Might not make Beijing but will be attending London.
M
M
-
bluechucky
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 9:13 am
- Location: Victoria, Australia
-
Mark Briggs
- Posts: 583
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 8:35 am
- Location: The Frigid North - Ottawa, Canada
OK, here's the other end of the spectrum. I just received a cheque for $20 (yeah, that's 20 canuck bucks so something like $17US) as prize money for shooting reasonably well in a provincial competition. This is my first prize money, and in fact the first compensation of any sort other than medals. It has left me feeling a little strange. I like the fact the money offset my costs of attending the match (which were about $250 for the weekend), but feel the thrill of victory may have been tainted by the money. Like I said, this is a first for me, and as somebody who is attracted to the sport by its spirit of honourable competition I have to admit that I have conflicting feelings over cash awards.
(Just as an aside, my family accompanied me to the first big shooting match I attended. Luck was with me and I was awarded two medals, which were presented in a formal awards ceremony which my kids attended. While the awards are special to me as a mark of personal achievement, they're virtually meaningless in comparison to the feeling that came as a result of my kids thinking their dad is a superman for having won them. In reality I have to admit that I'm really not superman, but to have my kids respect and admire me for having honestly won medals in a sporting competition is, well... priceless.)
(Just as an aside, my family accompanied me to the first big shooting match I attended. Luck was with me and I was awarded two medals, which were presented in a formal awards ceremony which my kids attended. While the awards are special to me as a mark of personal achievement, they're virtually meaningless in comparison to the feeling that came as a result of my kids thinking their dad is a superman for having won them. In reality I have to admit that I'm really not superman, but to have my kids respect and admire me for having honestly won medals in a sporting competition is, well... priceless.)
-
Bill Poole
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:50 pm
- Location: Scottsdale, AZ
- Contact:
I don't like winning money either. I'd much rather get a plaque, trophy or medal. Here in AZ (in fact probably all over the US) the Service Rifle, High Power Rifle and Bullseye Pistol groups give money prizes to several winners (match winner, High expert, SS, MK etc) at almost every match.
This doesn't amount to more than $5 or $10 except at state champs where it would be more, but it NEVER amounts to the cost of gas, ammo, entry fee, barrel wear (its a high power thing, you wouldn't understand) etc, however entry fees are basically DOUBLE what they should be because half the income goes out as prizes. (Some big IPSC type matches are sponsored and have big money prizes and prize tables... I don't like that either)
When I won money, I'd always give it to my wife, she liked that.
It also caused a disagreement about "what if a junior win, do we give her money?" With some arguing, they get free entry fees they should not get cash prizes, others saying the junior team provides all their equipment and ammo, anything they win goes back to the team, others argue, "until we understand NCAA rules about money prizes in any sport we should not give $ to juniors", of course a 16-year old would gladly give up his right years in the future to participate in any college sport in exchange for $5 right now. So we "don't" award money to juniors until that is cleared up.
of course when I win MY olympic Gold medal, I'll take the $25000, BUT, its going to cost me that much to try, I don't think that goal will make me shoot better, but the thought that one poor shot on my part, or a coupla good one's on the part of some chinese or German guy will deny me that chunk of money is a lot of pressure that should not exist. So I'd really prefer that we NOT give out cash prizes.
Winning or not winning $5 at a local match is insignificant to me so that adds no pressure, but it somehow seems to taint the sport.
Part of my personal reason for feeling so uncomfortable about linking sport and money is that my first hobby was Amateur Radio which is steeped in a traditiion of being not professional but purely amateur, hence the name, that is codified into law and so strongly held that they subject of whether calling your buddy on the radio and telling hiim to buy the pizza's for the club meeting (which would result in the pizza joint making money) had been debated in ethics discussions.
shoot good
Poole
http://arizona.rifleshooting.com/
AA4Q
This doesn't amount to more than $5 or $10 except at state champs where it would be more, but it NEVER amounts to the cost of gas, ammo, entry fee, barrel wear (its a high power thing, you wouldn't understand) etc, however entry fees are basically DOUBLE what they should be because half the income goes out as prizes. (Some big IPSC type matches are sponsored and have big money prizes and prize tables... I don't like that either)
When I won money, I'd always give it to my wife, she liked that.
It also caused a disagreement about "what if a junior win, do we give her money?" With some arguing, they get free entry fees they should not get cash prizes, others saying the junior team provides all their equipment and ammo, anything they win goes back to the team, others argue, "until we understand NCAA rules about money prizes in any sport we should not give $ to juniors", of course a 16-year old would gladly give up his right years in the future to participate in any college sport in exchange for $5 right now. So we "don't" award money to juniors until that is cleared up.
of course when I win MY olympic Gold medal, I'll take the $25000, BUT, its going to cost me that much to try, I don't think that goal will make me shoot better, but the thought that one poor shot on my part, or a coupla good one's on the part of some chinese or German guy will deny me that chunk of money is a lot of pressure that should not exist. So I'd really prefer that we NOT give out cash prizes.
Winning or not winning $5 at a local match is insignificant to me so that adds no pressure, but it somehow seems to taint the sport.
Part of my personal reason for feeling so uncomfortable about linking sport and money is that my first hobby was Amateur Radio which is steeped in a traditiion of being not professional but purely amateur, hence the name, that is codified into law and so strongly held that they subject of whether calling your buddy on the radio and telling hiim to buy the pizza's for the club meeting (which would result in the pizza joint making money) had been debated in ethics discussions.
shoot good
Poole
http://arizona.rifleshooting.com/
AA4Q
I actually wrote to some match organisers to 'comment' on monetary prizes which I had won. I won something like 5 or 10 pounds at a match which is far less than my match costs.
I wrote to them suggesting a medal, trophy or whatever would be far better even if it cost less to produce. They did actually change for subsequent competitions and now give out medals as prizes.
Rob.
I wrote to them suggesting a medal, trophy or whatever would be far better even if it cost less to produce. They did actually change for subsequent competitions and now give out medals as prizes.
Rob.
-
sdesrocher
- Posts: 20
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 8:05 pm
Mark - I also received my cheque for $20 Canadian from that same competition. I had the same feelings about it - the notion of a cash prize didn't sit well with me. I'm not trying to pat myself on the back here, but I don't really like the idea of a cash prize, so I'm planning to send the money back as a donation to our provincial governing body come membership renewal time.
My two cents - if organizers are going to give out cash prizes, why don't they give us the option of requesting that the money be donated in the winner's name to the association/club of our choice (e.g. SFC or CSSA in Canada, NRA or USAS in the USA, other national or state associations, or what have you)? Saves us having to write and mail out another cheque...
Steve
My two cents - if organizers are going to give out cash prizes, why don't they give us the option of requesting that the money be donated in the winner's name to the association/club of our choice (e.g. SFC or CSSA in Canada, NRA or USAS in the USA, other national or state associations, or what have you)? Saves us having to write and mail out another cheque...
Steve