 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Topic: Warrior Table |
| ||
|
I've received the following email from Mary Moore (who runs the largest non Valley-run foosball tour in the states (Kentucky State Championships, and many more). She is switching from Tornado tables to Warrior tables, and they are looking to get Warrior sanctioned as an ITSF official table - so that her tour events can remain ITSF sanctioned event (she has many pro and master series events scheduled this year): Here's the email: Dear Eric, Hello, I hope all is well with you. I am writing to ask if you could make the time to come out to California to see our new Warrior table. I have switched my tour to this table and want to get it recognized by the ITSF. We have to have two federations approve the table and submit it to ITSF. Boris Atha is then going to come and give it an inspection and then they will vote on its approval. We would take care of all your expenses and will work around your schedule. I have close to 20 tables already ordered by players in your country. I all so have many players around the world wanting to buy the Warrior. Please let me know what you think about you coming out ASAP Thank you so much for your time, Mary Have a Great Day! Mary Moore Independent Foosball Promotions |
Posted: May 14 2008 12:00AM
| ||
|
To which i replied: Hi Mary, First off, I need to ask you if it's ok if I share our conversation in our TSAC (Table Soccer Association of Canada) public message boards, found here: http://www.tablesoccer.ca/message_list.asp?domain=exro One of our most important principles is our need to act in an open and transparent manner, so that we never appear to be making 'behind closed doors' deals or conversations - as occurred in the past when Adam Imanpoor, and the CTSF ran things - and gave them selves a free trip to germany for the World Cup - they lost the trust of the Canadian player base by acting in this manner. We conduct all our TSAC 'business' on those message boards. But there are reasonable times that we do keep things private (as outlined in our constitution) - so let me know, and we can continue in whatever way you'd like. Now that that is out of the way... TSAC is run almost in an over-demographic way, that my personal opinion about a table is irrelevant and it would have to come down to a vote of the TSAC executive members. Each executive member is a representative for a given region playing on a given table (tornado, fabi, bonzini, and garlando), so for warrior to be sanctioned as an official table in Canada there would likely have to be some active promotion on that table, and a executive position would have to be created to represent the regions/table. Just to give you an idea, here's our current executive member breakdown, and the region/table they represent: 1 representative: Quebec & Maritimes - Garlando 1 representative: Quebec & Maritimes - Tornado 1 representative: Quebec & Maritimes - Bonzini 1 representative: Ontario - Tornado 1 representative: Ontario - FABI 2 representatives: Saskatchewan - Tornado 2 representatives: Alberta - Tornado 1 representative: BC - Tornado You'll notice that there's one FABI representative in Ontario, due to a rather large player base there - even though that is not an official ITSF table - so warrior even if not an official ITSF table can be included. But despite the political complications of what I said above, it could just come down a simple vote, and if more of the exec think that Warrior should be an official ITSF table, then TSAC will request it. So politically it makes sense that warrior be an TSAC sanctioned table if there were active promotions in Canada on that table - and we hope to work closely with you/warrior on such things in the future. But internationally, we recognize the 'weight' of your tour on North American foosball, and if you're switching to Warrior, well that means a great deal to Canada. So what I propose is this, if you allow me bring your offer of flying me down to California to check out the table first hand to the TSAC executive, and see if they feel it's warranted. (all hell would break loose if I got 'a free trip' out of something like this and people find out about it after the fact) and I can draft a report, and propose it to the exec and allow them to vote on it. As for timing of when I can come down, weekends is best for me, unless you're thinking I leave right after work during the week, get a few hours on the table, fly back up that night. Or were you think I would drive - you never mentioned 'fly' below. How ASAP are we talking here? In the next few days, or the next few weeks? Sorry for the length of the email. B-). Talk to you soon. |
| ||
|
Mary replied back saying: Hi Eric, yes keep everything in the open, find out if you can approve the table, we will take care of airfare we can make it a one, two, or three day trip for you, California is nice this time of year. We will take care of all expenses, let me know what we need to do next, thanks Mary |
| ||
|
My thoughts: This is an excellent opportunity to get hands on knowledge of the table and possibly have some face to face time with either Mary and/or the owner of Warrior (Brendan Flaherty) where I/we can hopefully arrange for some active promotions of Warrior tables here in Canada. For those that do not know, Tornado/Valley/USTSA has been shrinking their major tour promotions over the years, and Mary and IFP have been pikcing up the slack, and even doing things better than Tornado. To many Mary and IFP are Tornado foosball in the USA. A few things stick out in my mind why we should seriously consider this: 1. Mary is switching her tour to Warrior - and her tour stops count for more than %75 of major tour stops in the states - where our best Canadian Tornado players travel to play agaisnt the best. 2. They are serious enough to pay for a TSAC representative to fly down and check out the table first hand, means they are serious about aligning with the ITSF. 3. The USTSF is going to sanction this table - and request it be an official table. There are some concerns about Warrior, and 'what's different than last time', again, for those that don't know, Warrior came out with a table a couple of years back, ran a big tournament - the table had some quality issues and then they dissapeared - what is different this time? The way i see it, Warrior now has Mary to run the tour part of it, and if she is switching over to Warrior for ALL her tour events, well now Warrior has more than 70% of the major tour stops in the USA (a pretty smart move by Warrior IMHO). When Warrior first came out they tried to add to an already existing busy tour schedule - now Mary is replacing her tour stops with Warrior. I know i'm repeating myself here, but the simple fact that Mary is switching to this table speaks volumnes. Other concerns are about Warrior and their business being focused on Warrior Custom golf - the owner is a foosball player, and a pro one at that. Yes he's not your normal business type guy, but he's a good business man after all - he wouldnt be doing this if it didnt make financial sense for him and his company's bottom line - but if its not working out, he won't hesitate to pull the plug either - but with Mary running the tour side of things, i simply do not see that being a problem in the near term. There's many video's out about the table, and how it compares to Tornado: http://www.youtube.com/user/ThisWeekInFoosball I tried my best to be impartial here, but as you can see the facts stack up on the positive side pretty heavily. |
| ||
|
Tim has this to say in email (but cannot post): Howdy All, I apologize for the length of this but as I am fond of saying, never say with 50 words what one can use 500 for. My concerns regarding Warrior are the following: 1) I've seen a few tables come and go over the years. Here in the NorthWest and in California (must be the Pacific Ocean air) we seem to get lots of these promoters starting something up and then never seemingly finishing. We've had the ProSoccer tables of Mike Dickinson, there were the Stryker tables for a while, then Warrior came, went and has come again, there are the two variants of the Legend, one run by the promoter whose name escapes me and the other by the champion of failed tables Johnny Lott - those tables have come and have seemingly gone. By investing in Warrior, by having Canadian foosers push for it to be an ITSF table, we risk losing face when and if it disappears yet again. As a corrolary (never could spell that word), what if the Legend table starts to become big and spread beyond the occasional event in Seattle? Do we endorse it too? 2) Who owns Warrior? The same person who promoted it last time? If so, have they followed through on past obligations like delivering tables to those players who won them at the big Warrior tournament so many years ago? I know Moya won one, don't think she ever got it. This speaks to the moral integrity of the owner and, by association, to the ethics of the corporation itself. What harm could be done to foosball across Canada and North America if this company goes south with the prize money after some big tournament? I realize their primary business is golf clubs but is Warrior Foosball really part of that golfing equipment company and will the golf company honour the foosball related obligations or is Warrior Foosball a legally separate entity sharing only a name and a director or two? 3) What is the quality of the table like? Imagine our TSAC website with the statement: "We, the TSAC, recommend that you purchase this Warrior table soccer product. It is a good quality table offering high value for every dollar spent". Can we stand by that statement? Can we sleep at night? I never can but those of you who do sleep can ask yourself that. 4) I'm not sure about the potential for controversy if Eric (or any TSAC executive) flies down to California. Given that the offer was put forward by Mary Moore, it might be OK but we need to carefully consider how the cynical fringe amongst us will interpret that action? What might Adam Imanpoor start spouting off about, assuming he actually cares enough anymore to pay attention? Would he start claiming that this justified his actions with the World Cup? Have we considered what bitter old men like Brian Loeppky and Tim Dudra might say? Might it make more sense (both financially and from an optics point of view) for Mary to ship a table up here and let the denizens of some Canadian city see it and play on it? Anyway, those seem to be my worries. Personally, I think something has to happen in North American foosball. Tornado tables seem to be getting poorer and poorer and it will be years before I trust them to put together a table whose goal posts don't chip after 3 months of Tuan's weak rollover hammering into it. Mary Moore's actions may be the pepper spray in the eyes of Tornado to make them shape up or ship out. Tim Dudra Person with some strange title like President's Delegate and with some negligible responsibility that is still more than I had hoped for. |
| ||
|
To respond to some of Tim's questions / concerns: 1) like i said in my first thoughts post, the biggest difference here is Mary.. If she was not switching her entire tour over to this table, you're right it would be just like every popup-table we've seen over the years. 2) Its the same owner (Brendan Flaherty). As far as i've seen, anyone who didnt get their table is being told to contact Mary / Warrior - i'm not sure what they're being told, but they seem to stop complaining. 3) Quality - yea this one is a question mark, but from what i've seen on the video's, etc. no one has anything bad to say - but once they go in manufacturing - who knows. Can it be any worse than Tornado has been the last few years? 4) Interesting idea about them shipping a table up here if they had tables to ship. Which i think they don't - They have the prototype in Brenden's house right now, and that's where they've invited me to come to check out the table. so not sure how feasible this idea is in the short term. I understand that the first batch of tables that come out will be the ones at Kentuky States (and even possibly a major event before that - Texas State i think) The Warrior table appears very similar a deal to the TecBall table. That was a new table that really not many had played on. Two federations requested it, and now its one of the 5 official tables. Not sure where Warrior would show up. |
| ||
|
I am curious to see how the Warrior table pans out. I will probably purchase one myself as the cost is so low as may a few other Calgary players. As for it being approved by TSAC for ITSF I think we would be being a bit premature to do this. The only tables out right now are the prototypes. I would like to see the new shipment and get feedback for a while on them before making any decision. As Tim mentioned Warrior presently does not have a stellar record of following through based on the previous tourny they had. Mary Moore with her endorcement gives much more credibility but I think we need to see some sort of track record. Even if Eric goes and views the table and gives it a stellar review I think we would need additional time before making any prudent decision. I would not suggest that Eric goes down to California as I feel it is too soon in the process. These tables need to pass the acid test of a few tournaments which will take some time. Eric mentioned the Tecball table. I believe this table had been around for years prior to it being approved as an ITSF table. |
| ||
|
Continuing the email thread between Mary and I. I wrote back to Mary: Ok, I've started a thread in our executive message boards, bringing our discussion into the open. It's here: http://www.tablesoccer.ca/view_topic.asp?ParentID=43021&x=3&domain=EXRO What's next? Well that depends on the urgency of when this needs to happen. How soon do you want to get the ITSF sanction? Are you attempting to get it in time for your upcoming ITSF sanctioned events (Colorado state, and Kentuky States)? To keep the sanctioning? How soon would you need me to come out to Cali. This weekend is not the best (it’s a long weekend, so lots of family stuff going on). Next weekend, you're in Denver I assume. So if you need this to proceed ASAP, then maybe it's best I come out during the week next week sometime, and I can take a day off work or something. Let me know what you're thinking.. |
| ||
|
To which she replied: Hi Eric, we had USTSF come out tonight to look at the table, and Jim Approved. Now we need to get you out asap, when is the best time? I need to know from what airport and your name as on your pass port. Let me know how long you want to stay and any other information. Thanks |
| ||
|
I dont like the fact she's not answering some of my questions, but either way, it appears they are looking to get this done as soon as possible. I'll let her know that sometime next week is best for me, and if i end up going then, i'll come back with a report on the table, and hopefully some of Mary's and Warrior's plans wrt to Canada as well. Then we can vote on it. |
| ||
|
here's my reply: Name on my passport is __________ I'd be leaving from the _________ Airport. If it needs to happen real soon, like within the next week, then the length of the visit would have to be very short - probably just an over-nighter type thing. I'll have to talk to my wife, but leaving Sunday night, and returning Monday night, or early Tuesday is a possibility. Other than that, it would have to wait until Thursday, 22nd - as there's major stuff at work I simply cannot skip out on until Thursday. Are you still around the weekend of the 24-26th? Plus I just want to make it perfectly clear, that if I do come out, and even if I think the table is great, there is no guarantee that the TSAC exec will vote to seek sanctioning by the ITSF. It's not just up to me, like I said, the entire executive would have to vote on it, and I only vote in the case of a tie-breaker. Current indications from most of the exec are positive, but there are some that want to take a wait-and-see approach. Talk to you soon. |
| ||
|
Due to a possible conflict of interest here, i'm going to stop leading the discussion, and leave that up to Taha (VP). Taha should post something here soon. I'll still post what has been said between Mary and myself. |
| ||
|
Please read Tim Dudra's comments below... ---- I thought I would include all of you in this email discussion I was having with Eric. First and foremost, I don't believe a free trip to California for a few days to try out a table is a particularly desireable perquisite - personally, it seems to me like it would be an odious task unless I could spend a few extra days of fun in the sun. However, as I seldom seem to have the same perceptions as those around me, I was trying to look at this situation from the point of view of the cynical and paranoid (skills I have some familiarity with). This is what I was going to say to Eric regarding his last email: "I just tend to look at things as a real skeptic would. At this point, if I wanted to see evil in your actions, I could probably come up with an argument that you are pushing for this trip which you are only being offered as TSAC head. Consquently, to play it safe, I figure you should distance yourself from the discussions. If that means Taha takes over moderating the discussions then that should be the case." Now, back to general discussion to all the email recipients. What I would suggest is that the TSAC executive make a motion along the following lines: MOVED: Given that Warrior and/or Mary Moore will be providing the airfare and accomodations for Eric Dunn, as President of the TSAC, to travel to California to assess the quality and suitability of the Warrior table and to discuss with those parties their plans for the table and tournaments operating upon those tables and given that Eric will clearly indicate to Warrior and Mary Moore that he will personally abstain from voting on whether TSAC endorses the Warrior table or not, and given that this trip will be at no cost to TSAC or any TSAC members, with the possible exception of Eric himself, it is moved that the TSAC recommend Eric avail himself of this opportunity and provide an assessment of the Warrior table, the strategy and plans of Warrior foosball and the plans of Mary Moore with respect to the Warrior table and present his findings and opinions to the TSAC upon his return from said trip. If we can pass such a motion, then we take the potential conflict of interest taint off of the discussion. We can provide Eric with a list of concerns such as: How durable does the table appear to be? Will Warrior be competing with other foosball tables on quality or on cost? If cost, what guarantees do purchasers of Warrior tables have that the products will be consistent, playable and have a reasonable life expectancy? If quality, what guarantees are there that Warrior will not, like Tornado, start to cut corners in the attempt to reduce their costs with the resulting consequence of reduced quality, reduced consistency, etc. I, like the rest of you, can probably come up with some more questoins - we can give Eric a checklist to guide his interviews with the owners. If Eric simply presents his findings to us and declines to vote on whether or not TSAC will endorse the Warrior table (giving Taha any tiebreaker vote), then it would seem that any COI concerns would be alleviated. I'm sending this by email since a) I can't post to the TSAC board and b) this seems like something we can keep behind closed doors for a short time. Ideally, Taha will post the above motion or something to that effect and we can conduct a vote on it. Tim |
| ||
|
As per Tim's suggestion, TSAC will be having a vote on the motion mentioned below. MOVED: Given that Warrior and/or Mary Moore will be providing the airfare and accomodations for Eric Dunn, as President of the TSAC, to travel to California to assess the quality and suitability of the Warrior table and to discuss with those parties their plans for the table and tournaments operating upon those tables and given that Eric will clearly indicate to Warrior and Mary Moore that he will personally abstain from voting on whether TSAC endorses the Warrior table or not, and given that this trip will be at no cost to TSAC or any TSAC members, with the possible exception of Eric himself, it is moved that the TSAC recommend Eric avail himself of this opportunity and provide an assessment of the Warrior table, the strategy and plans of Warrior foosball and the plans of Mary Moore with respect to the Warrior table and present his findings and opinions to the TSAC upon his return from said trip. ---- Members of the executive: Voting will take place for 5 days (due to tight time constraints).. from 12am EST May 17th to 12am EST May 22nd. Email your votes to Eric Dunn at the usual address (check your email). If the voting is tied after 7 days, note that due to a COI situation, I will be making the tie-breaking vote and not Eric. Thanks Taha |
| ||
|
update, i've recieved this email from mary: Hi, I am waiting for a letter from ITSF, then we will finalize your travel plans, I will be in touch, thanks Mary |
| ||
|
Sorry, i forgot to post the results of the vote: Yes votes: Tim, Taha, Julien, Brian, and Jose No votes: none So when Mary gets back me, we'll go from there. |
This thread is a TSAC Exec thread that is displayed here as Read-Only.