USFA considering forcing members to use THS

[teacup]

Well, was a contract with THS to implement this program signed or not?

[telkanuru]

No, what's been said is that we *are* trying out the system.

What has not been said is that we are committed to the system as it stands regardless. It has been made quite clear several times over that if things do not work/improve with respect to certain requirements, the system will not become mandatory.

[keith]

I guess I was still being hopeful since the first post on this thread was, "Starting on page 3 of the "Board of Directors Meeting" thread, there's been a discussion of a policy that the USFA is considering adopting -- which would force fencers to book their hotels through THS. If they don't, and fail to obtain a waiver (from THS), they would NOT BE ALLOWED TO COMPETE at that event, even if they registered for it. I am starting a new thread since I am surprised that more people are not commenting about this. An explanation that was posted goes as follows:....."

I think everyone knows that, of course the intelligence of fencers is often over rated.

As to whether the USFA is stuck with S&P I will predict that should the BoD (or even the EC) attempt to cancel S&P Kurt will threaten to tender his resignation.

This has admin ego written all over it.

[teacup]

Thanks, you are right. It is a trial period, softly rolled out, presumably with the October NAC.

But, has it been clarified that during the trial period people will definitely be denied the right to compete if they don't stay at THS hotels?

[flechewounds]

Well, was a contract with THS to implement this program signed or not?

I have heard that the contract with THS was not yet signed. However, that isn't the whole story... and that is part of the misinformation that we've been given. This is why:

First of all, THS is acting as the USFA's Agent (apparently with the permission of the ED and Associate ED - who have "apparent authority" to authorize this program). Their work on this program would be something we'd owe them for even if there is no contract. Note that "apparent authority" in this context does not mean that Kurt has the authority viz a vie the USFA, but instead that a vendor could act in reliance on Kurt's word and bind the organization, even if Kurt doesn't have the actual authority).

Second, as our agent, THS has the authority to bind the USFA to rooming commitments with host cities and hotels. THS has been our agent for this purpose in the past, and they continue to act as our agent currently. Simply increasing the rooming commitment doesn't change that. Thus, even if "Stay and Play" isn't ultimately contracted upon, any commitment that THS makes with regard to rooms, etc., it is making on behalf of the USFA and the USFA would be liable.

This is why it doesn't really matter if there is a contract in place with THS or not - and why I have continued to assert that this is a "done deal" over the objections of some people, including Mark Stasinos.

After all, they are acting at the direction of the ED (who has "apparent authority," even if he doesn't have "actual authority"), there has been, to my knowledge, no change in their status as "agent" for the USFA, thus granting them the right to obligate the organization to rooming commitments, and finally, they are apparently blocking large quantities of rooms for summer nationals.

That is also why this program needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. Time is of the essence with regard to rooming commitments, and the last thing that any of us want is having the USFA be obligated for 1,700 more rooms in Atlanta than it can fill (based on Kurt's own numbers). That could lead to a potential shortfall of $185,000 or so that the USFA may be obligated to pay to host hotels for rooms it doesn't fill. We don't need that kind of obligation laying around.

I would invite an attorney (USFA counsel or otherwise) to point out where this argument fails. I don't think it does - which is why this particular program is so very, very dangerous.

[FreedomAtRisk]

I thinkI will predict that should the BoD (or even the EC) attempt to cancel S&P Kurt will threaten to tender his resignation.

Boo Hoo. Waah.

[teacup]

Even in the best of times it is difficult to estimate the attendance for national events and therefore the number of rooms needed.

In addition to factors, that affected turn out last season, such as the poor economy, this upcoming season has some additional variables that may impact attendance.

How will the following impact attendance and therefore room reservations? Are Kurt's projections for attendance up or down from last season?

Increase in the number of SYC's
Increase in the number of NOC's.
Div I points not counting for Group II or at all for cadet points.
Requirement to stay at THS hotels
November NAC conflicting with SAT test dates (And the October and December NAC's)
Increased entry fees
Overall economy

[keith]

But, has it been clarified that during the trial period people will definitely be denied the right to compete if they don't stay at THS hotels?

Read the waiver.

Unless you can tick one of those two boxes.......

While soft roll out is a nice phrase I have yet to hear the reassurance, from anyone (EC or staff), that if a competitor has not booked via THS and has not filled out a waiver they will not be blocked from competing.

[teacup]

Read the waiver.

Unless you can tick one of those two boxes.......

While soft roll out is a nice phrase I have yet to hear the reassurance, from anyone (EC or staff), that if a competitor has not booked via THS and has not filled out a waiver they will not be blocked from competing.

Maybe I am naive but what is a "soft roll out" then? Either the program is implemented, rolled out, and all the rules are applied or it is a trial period, soft roll out, where future rules are preferred but not enforced?

[fencerX]

Folks, the BOD is not lying down on this one, or endeavoring to screw the fencers. This is a STAFF decision. However, there remains a considerable difference of opinion about what is appropriately a "staff decision" what is an "EC decision" and what is a "BOD decision." Expect some resolutions to be presented at the fall meeting regarding this.

So let's ask you and other Board members to share specifics of the "resolutions to be presented at the fall meeting regarding this".

The fall meeting is many weeks away. If people are convinced the BoD will probably never let the "waivers" and mandatory part of Stay and Pay see the light of day for USFencing, then the letters to consumer protection agencies, state AGs, THS' competitors, etc might be reduced (along with posts on fnet )

[telkanuru]

Thanks, you are right. It is a trial period, softly rolled out, presumably with the October NAC.

But, has it been clarified that during the trial period people will definitely be denied the right to compete if they don't stay at THS hotels?

No it hasn't. In fact, the opposite was said, and it was also very specifically stated that the existing waiver was in draft form and that it will be a fairly simple matter to get a waiver.

Which of course leads to the conclusion that THS is out to take your children and eat them.

[teacup]

No it hasn't. In fact, the opposite was said, and it was also very specifically stated that the existing waiver was in draft form and that it will be a fairly simple matter to get a waiver.

Then my interpretation of a soft roll out was correct.
Thanks

[gladius]

Then my interpretation of a soft roll out was correct.
Thanks

Actually, one interpretation is that during the soft roll period, you can use the escape of a very generous waiver (whose language is being hashed right now between lawyers, managers, EC, you name it). Then when the "hard" start will begin, it will be take it and use it (THS) or leave it (the chance to compete). At that point there may be another much more restrictive waiver in place just as a CYA proviso in case too many red flags come up.

[keith]

No it hasn't. In fact, the opposite was said, and it was also very specifically stated that the existing waiver was in draft form and that it will be a fairly simple matter to get a waiver.

... and if the draft is not changed?

Bearing in mind that someone has already forgotten to completely transcribe the list from the powerpoint presentation.

oh and things can be bad ideas without any baby eating.

[telkanuru]

Actually, one interpretation is that during the soft roll period, you can use the escape of a very generous waiver (whose language is being hashed right now between lawyers, managers, EC, you name it). Then when the "hard" start will begin, it will be take it and use it (THS) or leave it (the chance to compete). At that point there may be another much more restrictive waiver in place just as a CYA proviso in case too many red flags come up.

In which case your interpertation would be very evidently wrong.

[Inquartata]

What makes you think there wasn't any response?

Folks, the BOD is not lying down on this one, or endeavoring to screw the fencers. This is a STAFF decision. However, there remains a considerable difference of opinion about what is appropriately a "staff decision" what is an "EC decision" and what is a "BOD decision." Expect some resolutions to be presented at the fall meeting regarding this.

Passing good to hear! But isn't most of the real power in the hands of the EC?

Apparently, they blocked out all rooms in all nearby hotels, meaning that there are (a) not rooms available, generally, (b) no rooms for points utilization, and (c) few, if any, similarly-classed alternatives in the immediate vicinity.

If the finalize their rooming requirements 30 days out, but we're required to book with THS (This Hotel Sucks?) before then, they have effectively excluded competition for rooms that would otherwise be available to the great unwashed.

One wonders what will happen if they can't sell enough of them to keep the hotels from feeling burned---and whether the hotels will go along the next time...

Not suggesting anything, mind you. Just wondering.

[flechewounds]

Passing good to hear! But isn't most of the real power in the hands of the EC?

In this instance, the bylaws explicitly grant the power to the BoD, not the EC or ED.

[keith]

In which case your interpertation would be very evidently wrong.

No he would be very much right. Unless a stone tablet turns up the terms of the waiver are not fixed.


.... and, unless those posting here are remembering the BoD meeting wrong, the explicit statement was upon the hard roll, S&P or no fency. Which makes the waiver something other than a curious little detail.

[telkanuru]

.... and, unless those posting here are remembering the BoD meeting wrong, the explicit statement was upon the hard roll, S&P or no fency. Which makes the waiver something other than a curious little detail.

I think you've gotten very turned around, and should read the powerpoint presentation again.

Soft roll: Interacting with THS still optional, encouraged to provide feedback.

Hard roll: must have waiver or book through THS.

[Purple Fencer]

Have stayed out of this, but I will say that any policy that forces me to either take the booked hotel or get a waiver would make me stay away if I were still competing.

Adding the waiver requirement is an additional burden on the fencer, and an unnecessary one. if I wanna stay at a Motel 6 because it suits me better, I should not be punished by a threat of not being allowed to compete...nor should I be forced to complete and submit a waiver and pray to all the gods that the already overworked staff at USFA will get to it before the FOLLOWING season.

No matter how you parse this, it's a bad idea...bad, bad, bad. No hotel gulag for me, thank you very much.

I encourage everyone going to a NAC to make their own arrangements and demand the waiver....the resulting flood of paperwork should get the message across.

USFA should serve the FENCER....not a hotel chain.