Would you Save the Industry if it Cost you a MILLION BUCKS?

[strongbadfan]

Who or what would I be throwing this million dollars at?

[yagrmiestr]

Can you write it off?? Let the government pay it.

[BeerSkunk]

It's not possible to rationally answer that question without first establishing some frame of reference.

The vast majority of us reading/posting on these forums don't even have a million dollars on hand with which to honestly consider that question. By default we have to imagine ourselves in a position where we have the money available to spend and possibly save the paintball industry from rabid, paint-eating gerbils. Being that we have to try and make a rational decision using imaginary money, we first need to at least establish some common ground from which to approach the question. So I have a few questions:

Am I a business owner involved with the industry, or am I just myself, except now with a million bucks in the bank?

What percentage of my total wealth does a million dollars represent? 5%(practically nothing), 25%, 90%?

Do I stand to gain anything financially if I save the industry?

Does this million dollars come from my own hard work, or is it a gift from a wealthy leprachaun who thought I had cool hair?

These are just a few questions I have, other readers will certainly have questions of their own. Tom, perhaps you could provide us with a few assumptions you'd like us to make so that we can all answer the question from some common ground?

[Duke Henry]

To be honest, the question doesn't make any sense.

The question assumes that the person paying (who we are assuming is each individual) has a million dollars. Obviously, such an assumption (the first one), is spurreous.

However, I believe the second one has SOME merit. I believe it is more likely that we should be asking, should WE as paintball players spend 1 MILLION dollars to save the sport?

Well, to answer that question I would have to ask - what does the sport need saving from? If it was simply, do you want to keep playing paintball? Well, of course. Would I pay to keep playing - well, on top of what I normally pay? Possibly. I would love to say "without a doubt, this is my biggest hobby, etc." but the fact is that even with this being the case, all good things come to an end and so maybe I wouldn't if the circumstances dictated non-action.

So, in the end I would have to say I could go either way. I would need more information before I could make an intelligent, informed decision.

Of course I would love to keep playing paintball, but if this means that I would have to pay for something that I felt was morally or otherwise wrong, I would cut my losses and move on.

[strongbadfan]

What if 100,000 people each paid 10 dollars? Could they then give out the million(neglecting taxes, etc.)?

[hitech]

Well, of course it depends. First of all, what would the real cost be? How much would it probably cost me in lost future profits if the industry folded? Take the million dollars minus the projected lost future profits and you get the real cost.

Assuming we are talking about the paintball industry, if I could easily afford a million dollars then I would do it because I love the sport; regardless of the real cost. It wouldn't matter if I wouldn't lose a million in future profits. If I could not easy afford to spend a million dollars it would matter how much the real cost was. If I could easily afford the real cost then I would. Actually, since I love paintball I would even do it if it were hard to afford the real cost. I would not do so at the expense of my family, however.

I hope that was at least semi-coherent.

So, the bottom line is what would be the real cost and how painful would it be?

[Mook564]

AS far as I am conserned, Finances is a large part of this. First question is do you have the money. Next, can you afford to pay it with out going broke. The last thing I would want to do is rob Peter to pay Paul. Then you have to ask how will it affect my company or myself for that matter. Would it be wage cuts to my employees, wage frezes, price increases on products, can this money be recovered quickly, ect........... For me $10 is a lot of money right now. $10 makes a differance on if I eat Ramen noodels for a week or if I can cook a burger on my grill.

[aaron_mag]

NO

It is no single persons responsibility to save the industry. We all play it. We all enjoy it. If there was a money solution to save the industry we should all participate in the solution. I buy AGD products because they are good. Not because Tom Kaye saved the paintball industry.

Whatever this hypothetical solution is it is not a wise move unless it is collectively taken.

[dave_p]

if i was in the position i would put up a mil to save the game.i love the game.
but not to save the industry. the industry kind of leaves something to be desired(no reflection on airgun designs, you have always come through for your customers so selflessly it is incredible and unheard of in todays world, i am a satisfied customer in every way). flame away if you must, i wont elaborate any furthur.

[Recon by Fire]

One million dollars to save paintball?

If the $1M would put risk to your personal well being and that of your family, NO. As an investment that would likely return that $1M and more, YES. As a payment that would not net a return of $1M, NO.

[CoFFeY[NiTrO]]

If I was able to spend 1 million bucks as a company, and still be able to keep a healthy business. Yes.

[Doc Nickel]

I'm in with the rest here TK. You haven't given us enough even hypothetical data.

I mean, for the majority- no, let's be truthful- for every poster so far, a cool million is impossible. I suspect it would be very difficult even for you and AGD's resources.

And "save" the industry? Save it from what? Or whom?

If it's a question of the infamous and shall-not-be-mentioned Suit, even a worst-case scenario (a win for SP, and the implementation of usurious, crushing royalties) will not spell the "end" of the sport.

There's still hundreds of thousands of electros out there, and the all-mechanical 'Cockers and RTs are still surprisingly popular even in the face of $175 E-guns.

Heck, there's big numbers of us that don't mind using seven-year-old Carbines or 12-gram pumps.

Sure, maybe the big-money, flashy airball DVDs won't be quite as interesting with a bunch of Phantoms, but the sport won't "die".

That's not to say the suit shouldn't be fought- it's too broad and will stifle development and sales. Similar hypothetical conditions should be fought similarly.

Short answer, and assuming a hypothetical situation similar to the SP suit, and assuming I, as a corporation head or lucky Powerball winner, had the million available without starving to death, yes, I'd spend that million.

Now, if your hypothetical means something more sinister- being shut down by the government, for example (though I can't see how, even if Hillary is elected) or having major restrictions imposed by an oversight organization (OSHA restricting velocities to 125 fps, maybe, or the CGA disallowing any tank over 800 psi, etc) then yes again, if it means fighting or losing the industry altogether, I'd spend the cash even if it could mean the crippling of my company.

You know none of us have that kind of coin, so I'm assuming you're asking something more along the lines of "Do you think [AGD] should spend possibly up to a million dollars on research, legal fees, court costs and attorney's fees, in order to maybe have an 80% chance of saving the Paintball Industry from major hardship or crushing legal restrictions, at the risk of crippling or possibly bankrupting [AGD] in the process?"

That's a question only you can answer. Me, I'd say "hell yes", if I had the cash.

Further, why would it be one company's responsibility? Do you mean you, personally, spending a mil, or A company spending a mil? Is there some reason several companies can't band together? Is there a reason a fundraiser- similar to Shatnerball, for example- couldn't be run? Is there a reason that donations from anyone and everyone can't be taken?

By "saving" the sport, we can assume that all or nearly all players would want to donate a couple of bucks here and there to keep the sport going. Would that be a bad thing? Or, in the hypotetical nameless Suit, would it mean company A with a popular history and loyal following trying to gather donations in order to fight Company B with a popular history and loyal following, leading to a further fragmenting of the industry?

Doc.

[rx2]

Are we taking this question too literally? Might there by an underlying question as to the worth of the industry?

I don't want to put words in Tom's mouth, but after analyzing the question, and the way in which it was asked, it seems like there might be some underlying question as to the worth of the current paintball industry; is the current state of the industry worth saving if the cost were so, not just "would you spend one-million dollars to keep it."

If this question in any way can be interpreted as such, then I am unsure. There are many people who enjoy the current style, and feel of the game. There are also many companies and employees that would stand to lose if the current industry was forced to shift, or collapse. To these people, the industry should be preserved, despite the cost. Paintball changes, but it is possible that too much change, too quickly, could seriously injure the sport.

What if the conditions were not met, and the industry that we know today ceased to exist in its current state, and this change occurred quickly?

Paintball has evolved greatly, and it is not inconceivable that it would continue to do so. If the paintball industry were forced to shift directions, it may not be a bad thing. Certainly, it would be more abrupt than the natural progression, and many would not be ready to embrace it. However, it might not be a "bad" thing. The current giants of the industry might fall, but there would be room for new, innovative companies, eager to take their place. One might even argue that this sort of thing is what might be needed to really fuel progress in what has been a slightly stagnant industry, focusing too much on cloning current electronic systems.

Perhaps I am being over-analyitcal. Even so, it seems to be at least a valid sub-argument, or ramification of the original question. Whatever the case may be, I don't think that one can put a value on the current state of the industry. It could be a very dangerous thing just to let go. On the other hand, many probably would not mind a change.

Now, if this is concretely a matter of paintball/no paintball, I would say one-million is worth it in order to preserve a sport that not only employs many, but also provides so much more for thousands upon thousands of people (or more).

If, however, it is just a matter of keeping the industry the same, or dealing with some major, but non-threatening changes, I could not say for certain. Although, I do think that it would be weak not to oppose such a force, especially considering that it could lead to and set precedent for other, possibly more damaging cases in the future. I must say, though that I probably would not be so concerned if the paintball industry changed, but still remained an industry.

If, and ONLY if it were the case that the paintball industry could still exist, but in another state, I would say that I would be willing to help, but my personal commitment would not be as great. If I had only backyard rec to play the rest of my life, it wouldn't be the end of the world for me.

As stated before, though, if it meant the possibility that the idustry would collapse, or dissolve into one or two monopolies, then it would be worth all the resources that supporters could realistically lend.

Lots of "ifs"...

[cockermongol]

I'd say save the million for a rainy day ( :cough: lawsuit :cough: )

[CameraGuy]

Hypothetical questions to answer a hypothetical question - only fair (keeping in mind that I believe the paintball industry as a whole may be drastically changed, for better or worse, but certainly not eliminated by any 'hypothetical' situations short of an outright ban of the sport):

Is it worth trying to save an industry that doesn't at least try to band together as a group to save itself?

Or, as your question is worded at the moment, wouldn't I be better off to spend at least a small portion of "my" million to try and raise capital by convincing other (and possibly larger/wealthier) members of the industry who have even more to lose to join me in trying to save them?

And just to play Devil's advocate, what would I stand to gain (if anything) if the industry as we know it were to disappear?