RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

The letter regarding for profits making money from out sport?

16K views 117 replies 37 participants last post by  twall 
#1 · (Edited)
[B said:
tshuntin][/B]
Are you serious? They sent out a letter like that? Who cares about addressing costs or anything else or if EE made $100 or $1 million. That is just flat out tacky and low class for a competitor to send out a letter discussing their competitions financials in any capacity, especially with details (positive or negative). I would love to see that letter...:mad::rolleyes:

One more reason my club and I will continue to use EE.


What's tacky is that the letter, which stresses how it is wrong for a for-profit company to profit from our sport, was written and distributed by a person who makes a living building dog boxes for our sport. LOL

The National clubs are getting in the porta-potty business next regards,

SM
OK so if you weren't making catalogs then Kinko's is making profit off of it right?
 
#2 ·
Can someone post more specific on where this letter came from, who it went to, and/or where a response can be made?

The people in this sport are not stupid. They know what the real reason behind this kind of stuff is.
 
#3 · (Edited)
It was a very tactful letter written by the President of the Nat'l Am Club and sent to all Field Trial Secretaries that don't use thier service.

I'll also say that though they have dropped all the service fees, I still see no reason to drop a service that we are happy with. Selling on a position of "cheaper" is not something that appeals to me.

Again, I appriciate not only ee.net service because, I can be a big pain in the rump to do business with and I will never forget what they did for many after Katrina and Rita!
 
#6 ·
I'll also say that though they have dropped all the service fees, I still see no reason to drop a service that we are happy with. Selling on a position of "cheaper" is not something that appeals to me.
They only dropped the online entry service fees. They charge the club for catalogs, postcards, etc...

Their catalogs are more expensive than ours and they do not offer discount ribbons or discounted poppers/equipment. So using RFTentry is MORE EXPENSIVE to the club than using EE.

They also charge $5 per entry to mail in an entry if the entry form is mailed by someone other than the actual owner of the dog. (which is completely contrary to the AKC rulebook)

The letter explains how they put money back into the sport by donating to canine health foundation and the bird dog hall of fame... we, on the other hand, choose to give our club customers a free case of poppers, established our giveback fund, provide discounted ribbons and equipment, and give every user Dogs Afield Dollars as our way of putting money back into the sport.

While they are publishing the VERY INCORRECT math on how much money EE makes, I wish they would also publish the math on how much they have contributed to the sport vs how much they have contributed to a for-profit, non-dog related, software vendor to build their first system, and a completely different company to build their second system. The only people making any real money in the entry business is the various software companies they keep hiring.

I suppose there is a fundamental difference of opinion between the two companies as to what is considered putting money back into the sport. We will continue to do so by contributing directly to the clubs.

The letter also has no mention of hunt tests or their significance to our sport.

Again, i think it is ironic that the author of the letter owns a for-profit company and makes money off our sport.... and his letter speaks directly against that very thing.

I'm off my soapbox regards,

SM
 
#4 ·
Am not sure what letter you are talking about, but we got a letter asking us to go with RFTentry. It explained how we would be contributing our entry money to back into the sport since the national clubs own the entry system. So instead of EE making money, the money would be put back into the sport supposedly.

Anyhow, we like EE and are sticking with them.

Mary O.........
www.alaskaworkingretriever.com
 
#5 ·
If EE were to go out of business tomorrow, I'd still have to think long and hard about doing business with RFTentry. They might be a good alternative now, but if they were the only entry service how would RFTentry act in the future based on what we know about their business ethics now? Obama must be one of their consultants since they certainly don't want anyone to make any profit from a job well done.
 
#9 ·
I would also like to add that we truly appreciate the continued support we have received from the retriever community since 2003. It could not have happened without RTF, many friends and clubs who believed in the concept, and a ton of great feedback that we have incorporated over the years to continually improve our product and services. I don't care what any National officer says about rftentry being your entry service, EE is YOUR entry service and we will continue to bust our butts to prove it everyday.

We also welcome back with open arms the various clubs that tried RFTentry and have returned to EE for their entry service and catalog needs. Its good to have you back...

Happy Easter!

SM
 
#15 ·
Shayne

Whose Wheatie's did you whizz in????

I remember the days before EE or any other service. I remember the phone calls at 2 AM or 5 AM from someone wanting to enter the trail who had no idea what time time we were on or plain didn't care. I remember the days of chasing down bad checks. I remember all the complaining about the draw.

I am grateful for EE as are many others and to be honest I am not sure I would even enter a trial hosted by the another. I feel EE is worthy of my respect. EE has given back to this sport as much as it has received. Maybe not in $$$ but the relief it took off the shoulders of event secretaries has saved a lot of burn out! In my book that is worth ALOT.

Just my 2 cents
KC OWENS
 
#24 ·
All of this makes me proud to be a hunt tester and glad not to be involved with the national FT clubs in any way. We get enough of this kind of shi'ite in our government. I don't need it in my hobbies.
 
#27 ·
We get enough of this kind of shi'ite in our government. I don't need it in my hobbies.
Isn't the AKC a branch of our government????? I thought Cheny was going to head it up soon. :p:p Bud
 
#36 ·
Does anyone else feel like RFTN's personal seems rude or is that just me?
 
#40 ·
Anyone can build a dog box. but......
When I'm in the market for a used chassis mount a Burns box is the one I will be looking for, Hands down the best there is.

john
 
#42 · (Edited)
I was told by a National club officer late last fall that if this incarnation of their entry service didn't make a profit, he'd be the first one in line to start the move to pull the plug on it.

Looking at the list of events they have scheduled this year, seems like the end may be inevitable. I agree with /Paul: that letter had a tone of desperation to it....

kg
 
#48 ·
I am disappointed with how often subjects which could and should be discussed instead degenerate into name calling, ... or worse.

I have friends on both sides of this debate. Ron Ainley, Shayne Mehringer, and Mark Rosenblum are all friends of mine.

I helped Shayne develop his product and the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club - of which I am a member was the first club in the country to use Entry Express. The Rocky Mountain Retriever Club has been very pleased with the quality of the product and service that we have received from Entry Express.

When the new entry service first started, Ron Ainley called me and asked if the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club to use it, I told him: "Ron, I have stood by you, because Ainley makes a high quality dog box at a good price and because you provide great service. Until your product is as good or better as Entry Express, and at a better price, we are staying with Entry Express."

At the 2007 National Amateur in Stowe, Vermont, I asked Mark for an explanation of how much money was invested in the new entry service and what the return on investment was. Mark said that he was not authorized to release that information. I was later told by an officer of the National Club that the information would soon be forthcoming. To date, I have not seen it.

That being said, I think that new edition of Retriever Entry is huge improvement over the initial product. I am surprised that people are so reluctant to acknowledge how much better and easier to use than the old product. I am even more surprised at how many people denigrate it. Nevertheless, I still think that EE is a better product.

However, I do not think that the fact that no service is imposed by the new product is insignificant. For 150 dog field trial - at $3 per entry - with the new entry service $450 that goes back to the contestants. That is no small matter, when you consider the number of field trials that are held across the country every year.

Similarly, if the profits from catalogs were invested into activities or items for the benefit of the sport, I think that would be a worthwhile endeavor.

I have no quarrel with Shayne making money. However, if that money went back to the contestants and to the sport, I think that would be a very good thing.

So, IF
-The new product was as good as EE
-The service at the new product was as good as EE
-The proceeds from the new product used for the benefit of the sport

And - perhaps the biggest IF -

IF the people who pay entry fees for their dogs actually had some say in how those proceeds were used to the "benefit" of the sport

Then maybe I would push for adoption of the new product.

For now, I am still sitting on the fence ... and given the nature and number of my concerns, I may be sitting there for a while.

But, I think it is a mistake for people to cavalierly dismiss the efforts of the Retriever News to make a better product.

And I think it is wrong for people to attack Ron and Mark personally. Anyone who knows either of them personally knows that they are good and decent men who want to do what is best for the sport. I may disagree - and I have disagreed - with some of their decisions, but I have never questioned their commitment to the sport.

I wish that we could discuss this topic - so many others - without the invective that so often spews forth.
 
#49 ·
I am disappointed with how often subjects which could and should be discussed instead degenerate into name calling, ... or worse.

I have friends on both sides of this debate. Ron Ainley, Shayne Mehringer, and Mark Rosenblum are all friends of mine.

I helped Shayne develop his product and the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club - of which I am a member was the first club in the country to use Entry Express. The Rocky Mountain Retriever Club has been very pleased with the quality of the product and service that we have received from Entry Express.

When the new entry service first started, Ron Ainley called me and asked if the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club to use it, I told him: "Ron, I have stood by you, because Ainley makes a high quality dog box at a good price and because you provide great service. Until your product is as good or better as Entry Express, and at a better price, we are staying with Entry Express."

At the 2007 National Amateur in Stowe, Vermont, I asked Mark for an explanation of how much money was invested in the new entry service and what the return on investment was. Mark said that he was not authorized to release that information. I was later told by an officer of the National Club that the information would soon be forthcoming. To date, I have not seen it.

That being said, I think that new edition of Retriever Entry is huge improvement over the initial product. I am surprised that people are so reluctant to acknowledge how much better and easier to use than the old product. I am even more surprised at how many people denigrate it. Nevertheless, I still think that EE is a better product.

However, I do not think that the fact that no service is imposed by the new product is insignificant. For 150 dog field trial - at $3 per entry - with the new entry service $450 that goes back to the contestants. That is no small matter, when you consider the number of field trials that are held across the country every year.

Similarly, if the profits from catalogs were invested into activities or items for the benefit of the sport, I think that would be a worthwhile endeavor.

I have no quarrel with Shayne making money. However, if that money went back to the contestants and to the sport, I think that would be a very good thing.

So, IF
-The new product was as good as EE
-The service at the new product was as good as EE
-The proceeds from the new product used for the benefit of the sport

And - perhaps the biggest IF -

IF the people who pay entry fees for their dogs actually had some say in how those proceeds were used to the "benefit" of the sport

Then maybe I would push for adoption of the new product.

For now, I am still sitting on the fence ... and given the nature and number of my concerns, I may be sitting there for a while.

But, I think it is a mistake for people to cavalierly dismiss the efforts of the Retriever News to make a better product.

And I think it is wrong for people to attack Ron and Mark personally. Anyone who knows either of them personally knows that they are good and decent men who want to do what is best for the sport. I may disagree - and I have disagreed - with some of their decisions, but I have never questioned their commitment to the sport.

I wish that we could discuss this topic - so many others - without the invective that so often spews forth.
Well said.

What I have never understood though...

If the National Clubs really want to force their hand on this issue...

Why not mandate all qualifications and points earned towards qualifying be gained from trials using their entry service?

Simply saying, if you want to play in our "championship" you must play in our league.
 
#61 ·
I don't currently run field trials, but the grounds we run our hunt test on belong to someone who stated we must use RTFN for our entry service or we couldn't use the grounds. Well, they are his grounds so after years of using and loving EE, we tried to go with RTFN this year. Big surprise - no HT tab, no way to list HT or to find HT to enter. With our HT less than 2 months away, we were in a bind. Fortunately the land owner saw the problem and relented, but it put a lot of work and pressure on the HT secretary to try and set up with RTFN, then finding out it wasn't working, then having to do it all over again with EE.
On a personal level, I had a GREAT deal of difficulty trying to get my dog's information on RFTN. It kept bumping me out when I tried to enter stud dog info. Finally gave up. Hopefully it will be working if we have to use it again for another test. Not a computer person, don't know one program from another, just know what is easy for me to use and what is not.
Dawn
 
#62 ·
Rft Entry has improved, no doubt about that but......you see this in business all the time: A company comes to market with a product that tries to compete with an established company and product that are outstanding. They realize that they can't compete on their own merits so the resort to price cutting. People start buying the cheaper product for a while then realize that the small premium they had to pay for the superior product was well worth it.

Why do you think everything we buy today is made in China?

I agree with Ted's analysis in general but if you drill down into the numbers that $3/dog savings isn't that impressive nor do I think it will benefit the sport.

If you own 3 dogs that run 25 events per year and you save $3.00 per event that turns into $225 a year.....if that is the difference to you between running trials or not then you are in the wrong game. Plus those savings are a lot like the extra $8 per week some folks are getting in their paycheck thanks to Obama.....you really think that is stimulating the economy like they said it would:rolleyes: Most folks have fewer than 3 dogs so their "savings" would be considerably less.

We have multiple suppliers of dog boxes, etc in this game.....why can't we have multiple entry services?
 
#64 · (Edited)
Looks like more socialism to me. EE found a niche in the entry process and applied year 2000 technology to the entry process. I myself appreciate the ease of use vs. how the process worked in the past with snail mail. EE was the innovator and brought on a tool that took off, they should make money this is capitalism at work. Find an area in the market not served, target it with a superior and cost effective product and you benefit. EE took the risk of it not taking off and look, its the best. If the RTF.entry now wants to play, they must compete and they should not mandate a certain products use. They should compete for the service anyway they can, its up to them to be creative and win over the entry process.

Its good to have two or more players now, the end user will benefit in the long-run.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top