[eDebate] And the Elephant In the Corner Is...

[Ken DeLaughder]

We held our banquet for $12 a person, and didn't really need to increase 
fees at all.  We just found a better deal on some interesting trophies.  I 
think tournaments need to think abotu decreasing costs.  Maybe we can also 
negotiate with a national chain to get group discounts... I dunno.. I'm just 
brainstorming.

I like eating... at nice places ;)  and I think debaters work hard and 
deserve some nice things (over 60 days a year in hotel rooms eats on them).  
But I agree, lots of times we do more with less, but sometimes we need some 
help.

Ken


>Speaking of entry fees.....

>

>My wife believes I live a double life in a financial sense. During the 

>week, we scrimp and save. On weekends, I eat out with the team, sometimes 

>at nice places. Prices occasionally have a nails-on-chalkboard effect on 

>me. Nowhere is this greater than during banquets. Prices vary, but $35-$50 

>per plate is not uncommon. I could provide my team a much nicer meal for 

>1/3 of that price. I would really like to see tournaments move away from 

>banquets as a practice.

>

>Of course, many of the tournaments with expensive banquets are essential if 

>one's program is to be competitive. Thus, the banquets are functionally a 

>forced expense. It does not have to be that way.

>

>Dr. Eric Morris

>Asst Prof of Communication

>Director of Forensics

>Craig Hall 363A

>Missouri State University

>Springfield, MO 65897

>(O) 417-836-7636

>(H) 417-865-6866

>(C) 417-496-7141

>

>________________________________

>

>From: edebate-bounces at ndtceda.com on behalf of Michael Eber

>Sent: Mon 4/17/06 5:20 PM

>To: 'Omar G Guevara'; edebate at ndtceda.com

>Subject: [eDebate] And the Elephant In the Corner Is...

>

>

>

>

>

>...the outrageous cost of modern tournament travel. These costs are shared 

>by everyone---big and small school, public and private---and they have gone 

>way up in recent years due to more centralized travel schedules, post-9/11 

>airline price hikes, gas costs, and our addiction to expensive hotels. I 

>agree here with Omar's sentiment: let's stop acting like programs are dying 

>primarily because of speed/style/topics and face the real issue of 

>Economics. The simple fact is that if NDT/CEDA policy debate were cheaper, 

>the cost per student would be more reasonable to administrators, overall 

>participation levels could be higher, and the temptation to leave for Parli 

>would be reduced.

>

>

>

>Let's restart the discussion about how the community can best deal with the 

>budget crunch that we ALL face. Here are some practical suggestions I 

>mentioned in an email long ignored from December 2004 about some 

>Non-Competitive Counterplans 

>(http://www.ndtceda.com/archives/200412/0036.html)

>

>

>

>1) KICK OUR COLLECTIVE HABIT OF USING EXPENSIVE MEGA-HOTELS. This is the 

>single greatest thing we could do as a community to save money. Some of the 

>places we travel might be inevitably pricey (I'm thinking Los Angeles 

>around New Years, for example). But most of them have plenty of hotels in 

>the $50-$70 per night range rather than the present $70-100 per night 

>standard. We CHOOSE to stay at the expensive places because we are spoiled 

>- we could easily choose the Red Roof Inn as a tournament hotel over the 

>Marriott if we genuinely wanted to minimize collective expense. It may be 

>true that we would need multiple tournament hotels to execute this strategy 

>(especially at the larger tournaments like Wake) but the benefits are worth 

>it. Program directors know just how great a percentage of their budget goes 

>to hotel room nights. If we could trim that cost by 20% we are literally 

>talking about tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars in savings over the 

>course of a season for our community as a whole. Some might argue that we 

>would have to sacrifice the community bonding and social aspects associated 

>with all staying in a single hotel. I doubt this is true in the extreme; 

>social events will inevitably spring up to accommodate people's desire to 

>hang out. Eliminating centralized mega-parties may also be good - it has 

>the add-on advantage of helping to control some of the extreme drinking 

>habits that are socialized in our community. Lastly, it may have been true 

>in the past that bigger hotels were more accommodating with our research 

>needs, but these days some of the mid-range hotels have been the most 

>aggressive in upgrading to high-speed internet access.

>

>2) HOLD ELIM ROUNDS ON CAMPUS. Having elim rounds off campus is the big 

>reason for hotel consolidation. I will try to address the primary 

>justifications. First, it is hard to secure access to on campus rooms on 

>Mondays. This is true to an extent, but I think that most campuses have 

>some type of Student Union with conference rooms available. Second, it 

>would cost money to get rooms on campus during the week. This is probably 

>true, although not unique because most schools pay for the hotel rooms they 

>are using on Monday anyway. Maybe some of the rooms are comp'ed but the 

>added cost can't be that much. On campus rooms may even be cheaper. And 

>even if they are not, the cost will be small relative to the number of 

>teams at the tournament. A full double requires 16 rooms. If those average 

>even $100 per day more on campus, that is $1600, but this amount would be 

>distributed in entry fees amongst the schools in attendance. For a 

>tournament with enough schools to have a double, the cost per school would 

>be small and FAR outweighed by the cost savings of a cheaper hotel for 

>everyone. Third, parking would be harder to secure. This may also be true, 

>but is a small price to pay.

>

>3) USE OUR COLLECTIVE BUYING HABITS TO NEGOTIATE DISCOUNTS. I have no idea 

>if this has been tried before, but with the amount of money that our 

>community spends on rental cars, hotels, and even particular airline 

>companies, it seems at least possible for us to negotiate discount 

>contracts with some of the major companies that we already use anyway. 

>Michigan State, for example, has a contract with National Rental Car, and 

>we get 10% off plus some free insurance. Why couldn't a representative of 

>the National Debate Tournament negotiate collective discounts for its 

>members? If we brought an estimate of the annual community-wide expenses in 

>some of these categories to the appropriate people, I wouldn't be surprised 

>if a few companies we may be already even using didn't jump at the chance 

>to get more business from us. Although these discounts by themselves will 

>not exactly save an under-supported budget, they can help us stretch our 

>resources and would add up over time to significant amounts. Even if we 

>couldn't create new discounts, it would be useful CEDA or NDT to simply 

>create a forum for directors to share discounts and travel tips they 

>already use with one another.

>

>These are just some initial ideas. I am sure that some collective 

>brainstorming could yield plenty of innovative ideas for cutting costs 

>across the board. Making travel more affordable for everyone enhances 

>overall participation and would make it more palatable to adjust our travel 

>schedules to costlier areas for the sake of equity.

>

>

>

>Thanks,

>

>Mike

>

>

>

>

>

>________________________________

>

>From: edebate-bounces at ndtceda.com [mailto:edebate-bounces at ndtceda.com] On 

>Behalf Of Omar G Guevara

>Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 5:43 PM

>To: edebate at ndtceda.com

>Subject: Re: [eDebate] Reconnecting debate to the academy-the case of UMKC

>

>

>

>So, um, I have been spending time away from debate in an effort to balance 

>my perspective on coaching, teaching, advising, and scholarship.  I have 

>not been reading too many edebate posts, not even the ones on Roe v. Wade 

>(1973), which normally would get me all worked up.

>

>

>

>But the post from Malcom is devastating (as was the news from Alabama and 

>Oregon). I mean really, really, REALLY devastating. I never knew Linda 

>while I debated, but I had gotten to know her as a colleague when I began 

>directing. Aside from the wonderful NDT she hosted for us, she was always 

>there when I needed to give her ring. She always had time for debate; and 

>her debaters always had time for success :).

>

>

>

>I fear the future, and it angers me: NDT will continue to shrink to less 

>that 50 institutions ( mostly private, wealthy, and East-coast) while the 

>public, financially strapped, and non-East-coast school will be expected to 

>participate in parli, IEs, or nothing at all. Increasingly, I suspect that 

>there is no longer a seat at the table for state universities in the NDT, 

>despite the couple of really good counter-examples that come to mind.

>

>

>

>Now of course there will be a litany of folks with funny pen names who will 

>tell you that there really is a pulse underneath the corpse cover, but 

>those are folks at the top of the hierarchy who live in a world of elite 

>round robin competition, fancy hotels, and ubber budgets.  They are out of 

>touch with the central tendency* and drift* of what is left of the "great 

>middle" of the NDT.  In fact it may be the worst type of trained 

>incapacity* for the elites to judge the viability of our community based 

>the success of their unattainable organizational model.  Their voice should 

>be considered, but it should not be allowed to drown out the conversation.

>

>

>

>So while our activity burns down, we continue to turn the fire hoses on 

>each other: Endless discussion about identity politics, pointless 

>clash-of-civilization divisions, and national organizations that are 

>sabotaged by the same cancer eating away at constantly shrinking number of 

>participants.  Everyone gets so worked up about a topic about debate, but 

>what is the point of debating a deceased historical oddity?

>

>

>

>There is only major political issue on the table folks: What are we going 

>to do to survive?  Everything else is secondary.  We need a structural 

>approach to our crisis that levels the playing field, genuinely includes 

>and awards the participation of lesser funded programs, encourages 

>transparecny in recruiting, and reaffirms our intellectual and academic 

>identity.  Given the backlash from even the mildest of reforms adopted by 

>the NDT committee, maybe it is even time to think beyond the 

>NDT...(although I will say that there are some folks on the Committee who 

>understand the crisis is boiling over, but it is naive to believe that they 

>alone can speak truth to power.)

>

>

>

>Good luck UMKC, Oregon, and Alabama.  I know from personal experience how 

>painful it is to watch a debate team die. I hope that a last minute 

>administrative miracle will extend the lives of your debate program.

>

>

>

>All my best,

>

>

>

>Omar

>

>

>

>*Thank you Dr. Bernard Brock for teaching me the concepts of "central 

>tendency," "drift," "trained incapacity." I miss you already.

>




>_______________________________________________

>eDebate mailing list

>eDebate at ndtceda.com

>http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/edebate


_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/