January 2019 Announcement Video

[Chris Nelson]

In regarding to judges and course design,  as a club we will pay the judge as usual correct?    The judge will then pay the course designer?
I am doing taxes and thinking about how this will work.   


In regards to the fee increase,  Is there going to be a change in the minimum daily run fee?

Yup you got it.   Nothing will change In how clubs pay judges except for the amount.

The minimums will have to be raised to reflect the increase, but we’re working on a way to mitigate that for the clubs so that they won’t be paying any more than they currently do on the small trials.   Most likely scenario is that the difference in cost between the current and future daily minimum can be taken out of the recording fees to nadac,  that way it isn’t costing the club extra to have the smaller trial.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KellyDittmar]

The minimums will have to be raised to reflect the increase, but we’re working on a way to mitigate that for the clubs so that they won’t be paying any more than they currently do on the small trials.   Most likely scenario is that the difference in cost between the current and future daily minimum can be taken out of the recording fees to nadac,  that way it isn’t costing the club extra to have the smaller trial.

Hi Chris -

I want to make sure I'm clear. Let's say we have a day with 150 runs and the min is 200.

In 2019 - I think that we would pay the judge $200 for the minimum, but NADAC still gets paid the $150 based on how many runs we have.

And in 2020 - I assumed the judge would get $300 and & NADAC would get $225? 

Is that correct?

Kelly

[Chris Nelson]

We're still working out exactly what we want to do for the smaller trials, so don't quote me on this until it actually goes into the trial secretaries handbook

But, what I want to do is have the judge get paid their $300, because they are the ones out there doing the work and small trials are typically harder for the judge then a large one.

Using your example of 150 runs NADAC would normally be getting 225 in run fees in 2020.

But, what we're proposing is to short change NADAC  the difference between the new and old fees to cover the judge.

So instead of sending NADAC 225 for that day, the club would only send 125.    That way the extra $100 to pay the judge doesn't affect the club.

[KellyDittmar]

Gotcha - thanks Chris!

Kelly

[Sheila & the Shelties]

I really think in looking at the entries for our last trials and looking at my budget for entering trials, that $1 a run will not be the problem.  The biggest problem that I see is the increased cost of lodging.  For two nights, at the last two trials I entered, the cost was $250-$330.  I would have entered another trial, but it was going to be about $500 for 2 nights.  Add that to the new pet fees that LQ is imposing in many of their hotels, I can see why folks are only doing one day or maybe 2 days at our March trial.  In the past, I could get by with $90-150 per weekend for lodging.  I am limiting overnight stays because I also have to pay a pet sitter for my other 2 dogs.
Rena

This has been my problem as well.  I no longer travel to trials as much as I would like to because of the cost of lodging.

[Audri, Cee Cee, Lily, Toto, and Calypso]

I completely understand that dilemma,  and I wouldn’t expect anyone to enter more runs than they can afford to.

We will still be the cheapest venue that I know of in regards to recording fees, or at the very least we’ll be a tie.   

It’s just one of those issues where in order for things to improve you need the capital to make that happen.   And I just don’t see 6 people working for nadac for free,  and I wouldn’t ask them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As many others have said, I have a limited amount of money to put into trials.  I trial 4 dogs, and I allow myself X amount of money per trial.  If I normally spend $360.00 and it is for 36 runs.  I am now only going to enter 32 runs, for a total of $352.00. So the club, the judge and NADAC actually loses $8.00 on me per weekend.  The trials around us are quite small.  So that could really be a factor.  Especially when there are several people who do this.  The club still has to pay for the venue, which I am sure increases, and the judges, so they end up losing a lot more.   I get that NADAC is the cheapest around per run, but we also have the most number of runs per day so it is actually the most expensive to run on a trial basis.     

[Marcy Matties]

I completely understand that dilemma,  and I wouldn’t expect anyone to enter more runs than they can afford to.

We will still be the cheapest venue that I know of in regards to recording fees, or at the very least we’ll be a tie.   

It’s just one of those issues where in order for things to improve you need the capital to make that happen.   And I just don’t see 6 people working for nadac for free,  and I wouldn’t ask them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As many others have said, I have a limited amount of money to put into trials.  I trial 4 dogs, and I allow myself X amount of money per trial.  If I normally spend $360.00 and it is for 36 runs.  I am now only going to enter 32 runs, for a total of $352.00. So the club, the judge and NADAC actually loses $8.00 on me per weekend.  The trials around us are quite small.  So that could really be a factor.  Especially when there are several people who do this.  The club still has to pay for the venue, which I am sure increases, and the judges, so they end up losing a lot more.   I get that NADAC is the cheapest around per run, but we also have the most number of runs per day so it is actually the most expensive to run on a trial basis. 

Not to argue any of your points about limited funds and NADAC having the most possible runs per day.  But the judge and NADAC will not be losing $8 per day.  Prior to the change, if you did 36 runs, the Judge got $36 and NADAC got $36.  If you do 32 runs under the new pricing schedule, the Judge will get $48 and NADAC will get $48.     Assuming the club raises their price to $11 per run (rather than the $10 you have been paying), it is the club that will collect $8 less.

[Vicki Storrs]

I completely understand that dilemma,  and I wouldn’t expect anyone to enter more runs than they can afford to.

We will still be the cheapest venue that I know of in regards to recording fees, or at the very least we’ll be a tie.   

It’s just one of those issues where in order for things to improve you need the capital to make that happen.   And I just don’t see 6 people working for nadac for free,  and I wouldn’t ask them to.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As many others have said, I have a limited amount of money to put into trials.  I trial 4 dogs, and I allow myself X amount of money per trial.  If I normally spend $360.00 and it is for 36 runs.  I am now only going to enter 32 runs, for a total of $352.00. So the club, the judge and NADAC actually loses $8.00 on me per weekend.  The trials around us are quite small.  So that could really be a factor.  Especially when there are several people who do this.  The club still has to pay for the venue, which I am sure increases, and the judges, so they end up losing a lot more.   I get that NADAC is the cheapest around per run, but we also have the most number of runs per day so it is actually the most expensive to run on a trial basis. 

Not to argue any of your points about limited funds and NADAC having the most possible runs per day.  But the judge and NADAC will not be losing $8 per day.  Prior to the change, if you did 36 runs, the Judge got $36 and NADAC got $36.  If you do 32 runs under the new pricing schedule, the Judge will get $48 and NADAC will get $48.     Assuming the club raises their price to $11 per run (rather than the $10 you have been paying), it is the club that will collect $8 less.

I have been reading this thread, but, truthfully, not paying that much attention to the details. I had the vague thought that, yes, I understand that everyone’s expenses have gone up, I agree that NADAC deserves to have a profit or at least pay for enough employees to do the work involved, the clubs need to At the VERY least break even and should turn some profit for long range equipment expenses, etc, and totally understand that no one that I know has unlimited funds. All valid points.

But just reading Marcie’s post, if those numbers are accurate, was an eye opener. So if 36 runs/$10 a run brings in $360 to the club, and they paid $36 to the judge and $36 to NADAC that left them with $288 for the rest of their expenses and, hopefully, some profit. In the new scenario of 32runs/$11 a run, the club takes in $352, pays the judge $48 and NADAC $48 leaving them with $256 or the rest of their expenses...a loss NOT of $8 but of $32. The club is receiving $8 less but it’s expenses have gone up $24, for a net loss of $32.

I now realize what a dilemma this poses for clubs!!  I don’t know what the easy, or even hard, answer is ...
Vicki

[Chris Nelson]

I think it's a little known fact that NADAC does a LOT for clubs that can't make ends meet.

Maybe we should make those facts clearer in the trial secretaries handbook.

But we have consistently waived recording fees for clubs over the past 25+ when they didn't make money on their trial.

There are some strict guidelines,   You can't spend $1500 on a workers raffle and have your trial count as a loss.
But if your expenses are legitimate we waive the recording fees so clubs don't lose money.

I will go ahead and make up a sheet to have in the trial secretaries handbook as an update that lists our criteria, that way it's a little clearer for everyone.

The waiving of the fees really takes the increased fees out of the equation for small trials.    Judges deserve the pay raise, nobody should go 25 years without a raise

[Lois Mierau]

I have been hosting Nadac trials first as WAGS and now as Sondog Agility for 20 years and have never heard that we we didn't have to pay recording fees if we lose money, which we do fairly consistently because we have very small trials.  Our smallest was 17 dogs. If it is in the  handbook then it is my own fault for not seeing it. Every year we wonder if we should continue to offer trials when my husband's salary subsidizes them  And now we are looking at retiring so really won't be able to afford to lose money. 

[Chris Nelson]

I’ve honestly never checked for it as we do it a few times each year for various clubs,  so definitely my bad if it’s not listed!  Or It was listed and got removed somewhere along the line.

I also believe we emailed clubs about this last year reminding them,  I’ll have to find the specific email date,  but I pretty vividly remember reminding everyone since we had a club who hadn’t known about it at that time.

We’ll get it into the trial secretaries handbook.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cheryl/Manny]

Hi Chris, We have a trial coming up in August and would maybe like to add the Gamblers course to our trial if possible.  When will you be putting it on the Trial Application?  Thanks

[Chris Nelson]

Hi Chris, We have a trial coming up in August and would maybe like to add the Gamblers course to our trial if possible.  When will you be putting it on the Trial Application?  Thanks

Hopefully within the next week.

We need to get the info video made first, that way clubs know what they're offering, then we can get the applications updated.

All of that is slated for this coming week though, so it shouldn't be a long wait