All-Star Usasf Independence

tumbleyoda said:

Oh I have no problem personally signing it. I just don't want it to reflect on the gym or the owners, that's all.

Click to expand...

Then sign it as tumbleyoda

But it's already gone now.

I think I'm too late too

I asked BlueCat to add me as soon as I saw the post where he requested signatures. I should have finished reading the thread first.

ginasmom said:

Just looking at cheersport the revenue should have been close to $800,000 (give or take a few bucks). Just some things that make you go hmmmmm

Click to expand...

900 teams X an avg of 20 kids per team = 18,000 athletes. If each athlete brings just 2 spectators and they each pay $50 for the weekend that = $1,800,000

Just a quick bit of math for you using all low estimates.

CoachTamara said:

These competition companies are not working as non-profits... USASF is not the same as the competition companies like Cheersport which are for profit and where the money goes. The only competition put on by USASF is Worlds.

But yes, it's shady.

Click to expand...

I believe the competition has USASF's name on it, but I don't believe they have a staff that runs it. Just the advisory board. I may be wrong, but you can see my earlier post for the explanation why I think that's how it works.

No response yet. To be fair, I doubt that any USASF person is allowed to just type away and give a quick answer. When you are a part of a large conglomerate, there are probably procedures in place that involve running communications by lawyers and department heads within both the USASF and Varsity.

I can answer the questions posed to USASF about our company.

1. (relationship to Varsity) Several of us taught camps for NCA a long time ago. There are folks who were NCA full time employees, but I believe they were mostly before NCA was absorbed by Varsity. We do participate in the Varsity Family Plan, which is essentially a kick-back of money we gave them in the first place. That money is generally used to fund improvements for the gym. (As is generally the case for most prize money we receive.) We spend a massive amount of money annually for entry fees and uniforms, so this kick-back is fairly sizeable. We have a large, expensive gym, so this money gets used up quickly. We have no contracts with Varsity and refused to sign their exclusivity agreement.

2. (varsity loan) We have no debts to Varsity that I am aware of.

3. (intellectual property) Cheer Athletics, Inc. owns intellectual property rights to the name "Cheer Athletics" and our claw logo. Two main reasons for this: This is used to ensure that we have exclusive rights to the profit from those marks that we have spend 2 decades building up the value for. Also, we want to stop anyone else from using confusingly similar marks to start their own gym and diminish the value of the marks for us.

4. (executive selection). The three partners in the business are the executive members. We hand-pick the other positions in the company based on merit.

5. (corporate structure) We are an S-Corp. We may soon divide up parts of our business into sub-LLCs to more easily track how various departments are doing and perhaps set up some profit-sharing scenarios with key long-term employees in the future for some of our sub-divisions. None of that would affect anything from a customer point of view.

6. (bylaws) They are not public, but are pretty generic. The legal requirements of corporation paperwork are kept up with for legal purposes, but mostly we just decide to do something and do it. We are a for-profit company and we try to make money anyway we can. (I wouldn't really describe money as our main goal, but money is certainly a motivator. You don't stay in business and don't pay your coaches if you don't make money.)

7. (bylaws changed) We can change the by-laws any time we feel like it with a simple vote of the 3 owners.

8, 9. (public financials) We are a private, for-profit company, so we do not feel obligated to share financials with anyone.

10. (contracts) We are a private, for-profit company, so we do not feel obligated to share contracts with anyone.

No response yet . . .

BlueCat said:

No response yet . . .

Click to expand...

How were the questions presented? Electronically? Snail mail? And who did they go to? USASF? Varsity Brands? Both?

L5cheermom said:

How were the questions presented? Electronically? Snail mail? And who did they go to? USASF? Varsity Brands? Both?

Click to expand...

BlueCat gave the information on page 13

"FYI - I sent an email with what I thought to be the most important 10 questions on the list. If/when they answer, I will post those answers and send a new set of questions. The questions I asked are listed in green on the google doc.

I ended up deciding that sending 150 questions at once probably was not a fair or productive way to start.

Questions sent: 3/19/2013
Recipients: Jim Chadwick, Tegan Reeves, Mike Burgess"

I received an email from Jim Chadwick. I was not satisfied with the email and asked for some clarification. I told him that I would give them another opportunity to actually answer the questions before commenting on it publicly. I don't believe his email would be well received "as is" if I posted it here. It is my sincere hope that the original questions will be answered directly in a reasonable amount of time. If unwilling to answer, then hopefully we would be given an explanation of why the information should be kept from the membership. If not, I will post the entire correspondence.

He did correctly point out that some of the answers to my questions could be answered by looking at the USASF web site (Search Results for "usasf.org"). Technically true -approximately 3 of the 170 questions are directly addressed on usasf.org. I have posted those answers next to the questions on the google doc. If anyone sees any other question that is directly answered on their web site, please let me know and I will include it.

BlueCat said:

I received an email from Jim Chadwick. I was not satisfied with the email and asked for some clarification. I told him that I would give them another opportunity to actually answer the questions before commenting on it publicly. I don't believe his email would be well received "as is" if I posted it here. It is my sincere hope that the original questions will be answered directly in a reasonable amount of time. If unwilling to answer, then hopefully we would be given an explanation of why the information should be kept from the membership. If not, I will post the entire correspondence.

He did correctly point out that some of the answers to my questions could be answered by looking at the USASF web site (Search Results for "usasf.org"). Technically true -approximately 3 of the 170 questions are directly addressed on usasf.org. I have posted those answers next to the questions on the google doc. If anyone sees any other question that is directly answered on their web site, please let me know and I will include it.

Click to expand...

Smoke and mirrors…..Cat and mouse….Bait and wait……Loosing faith in the small shrewd of transparency that was possibly there….questions are not hard to answer, but the reluctance is choking...

BlueCat said:

He did correctly point out that some of the answers to my questions could be answered by looking at the USASF web site

Click to expand...

Correction: usasf.net

No follow up response as of yet. Here is the email and response that we have received thus far:

USASF Correspondence - Google Drive

Opinions?

Extremely weak. Dear Jim could you please answer the questions in order? Thank you!

Best regards
Voluntary Participant

I just don't see what the harm would be to answer the questions? I mean why no direct answers?


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

exactly what I expected - a canned response with no real answers.

yojaehs said:

I just don't see what the harm would be to answer the questions? I mean why no direct answers?


The Fierce Board App! || iPhone || Android

Click to expand...

Exactly! In my opinion, not answering or not giving a direct answer to the questions asked just makes things appear to be more shady.