I was poking around the NPPL website looking for info on the results of the KC event and came across this statistic that disturbs me:
61.2% of the Paintball participant household has annual income greater than $50,000 per year.
*Source: National Sporting Goods Association "Sports Participation in 2006 Series II" report.
Now, although $50,000 isnt a ridiculously high income for a household, I would still consider it "upper middle class". Maybe thats a lower figure than what is officially an upper middle class family, but I digress.
Why do you think that is? Is it directly correlated to income? (Paintball can be a very expensive sport) or is it some other connection? (Or none at all for that matter.)
This worries me because one of the greatest things about sports is the fact that, with some exceptions, a kid can go out and play them regardless of how much their parents make. I don't see paintball growing much more if we are limited to a rich kids sport.
61.2% of the Paintball participant household has annual income greater than $50,000 per year.
*Source: National Sporting Goods Association "Sports Participation in 2006 Series II" report.
Now, although $50,000 isnt a ridiculously high income for a household, I would still consider it "upper middle class". Maybe thats a lower figure than what is officially an upper middle class family, but I digress.
Why do you think that is? Is it directly correlated to income? (Paintball can be a very expensive sport) or is it some other connection? (Or none at all for that matter.)
This worries me because one of the greatest things about sports is the fact that, with some exceptions, a kid can go out and play them regardless of how much their parents make. I don't see paintball growing much more if we are limited to a rich kids sport.



Comment