N.Y.S.E. V?



  • I don't really want to get into a discussion about all the reasons why I'm not enthusiastic about the format, so please leave that aside as we discuss a potential future N.Y.S.E. Open.

    The N.Y.S.E. Open is a lot of work, isn't run as a profitable venture, and can be tremendously stressful at times. That said, I really enjoy what the event has become, and the opportunity that it represents to see the best of the Vintage community come together to battle for power nine and more.

    I've been on the fence about running another N.Y.S.E. Open for a lot of reasons. To name some of the most significant ones:

    1. The cost of the cards has gone up considerably in the last few years. Thankfully attendance has mostly offset this, but the potential for a tremendous blowout is there.

    2. The venue has been a continuous headache. The venues I want are generally unaffordable, which leads to other 'solutions'. If there's another N.Y.S.E. Open, A/C will never be a problem again, but the cost of the venue has to come from somewhere.

    3. The uncertainty regarding attendance has always left me wary. If 10-20 less guys show up one year, I take a big hit.

    So, I'm posting this to gauge interest. If there was an N.Y.S.E. V in June 2017, would you be likely to attend? If the entry fee had to go to $120, from $100, would that hold you back? What are the determining factors for you when deciding whether or not to attend the event?

    I believe that there is a certain integrity to the prize support that is of paramount importance for this event; I will never run an N.Y.S.E. Open that doesn't give out power to the top eight. That said, Bazaars were cut last year, and while I really, really, really don't want to cut Workshops from the support, they're significantly more expensive now than they were in 2012.

    Thoughts?

    Any feedback, even constructive negative feedback, is appreciated.

    Thank you.



  • Nick, thank you for allthat you do for this community. Without people like you, this community would not exist. I really hope that you will run another NYSE.

    If the cost is $100, $120, or $200 I would nit care. I trust that you would provide a worthwhile experience.


  • TMD Supporter

    @Prospero Could you make the prizes for 9-16 variable and dependent upon attendance?



  • You're a good man, Rich. Thank you for the kind words, but there are many, many people who contribute a lot to the community, and I'm just one of those people.

    Entry fees going up a little bit ($20 for pre-registration, maybe $40 for day-of registration?) are likely part of the solution, but I also don't want to hit a point where I'm pushing more people away with the higher entry fees.

    9-16 could definitely be specific to certain attendance brackets. Given the prominent place that Workshop has had in my life, my incorporation of Workshop as such a central part of this event, I really want to find a way to still give out Workshops. We'll see how it all works.

    Thank you both for the input. Hopefully many more will also give their input.



  • NYSE IV was my first major paper Vintage event, and I had a blast. The cost of entry likely doesn't mean much for me compared to the cost of getting to and staying in New York - I'll likely come regardless.

    Attendance based prizes do seem like a reasonable solution to help minimize the risk, if that's a big concern.



  • Not going to sit here and say the AC situation was optimal, but on some level it added to the commodore of those in attendance. Would moving the event to April, where we are out of snow range and oppressive heat is less likely kill your ability to make the event all you want it to be? Tacking $20 to the cost is not an issue for me personally, especially if it means maintaining prize structure that makes the cost worthwhile.



  • You could double the entry fee and as long as the value was still there I wouldnt have an issue. Ray did the last TMD Open at the VFW and I thought that was sweet, maybe that's an option?

    I feel like you have enough credibility to raise the fee and not suffer a backlash. We all know stuff is more expensive. As long as a proper portion of every entry is going to the pool its all good to me.



  • Hey Nick, Chris H here. As a person whom has attended the last three events, I plan on attending the any future events (if they happen) regardless of an increased cost or venue change. You have put together some of the most memorable events i have ever attended and i know how much time and effort it takes to put them together. The increased cost for prize support and bigger and better venues are real world problems. I think its normal that when your costs go up, that the entry fee would readjust to allow the event to continue.


  • TMD Supporter

    I think even power has been hard.

    1st: lotus
    2nd: recall
    3rd: Sapphire
    4th: Walk
    5th - 8th: Workshop.

    I'd be fine with this.



  • You keep putting 'em on, I'll keep coming. This is one of my favorite tournaments, and a perfect excuse to spend some time in NYC. I had an amazing time this year.


  • Administrators

    Personally I'd rather have lower entry fees and smaller prize support. The prizes don't bring me out to New York - the competition, community, and well run event does. That said, an extra $20 definitely wouldn't stop me from coming. The entry/payout ratio is not as important to me as a sustainable event is. Do what you have to do to provide the experience you've been providing.


  • TMD Supporter

    I agree with Steve and Andy. I missed NYSE the last two years due to finances, but since Vintage is officially dead now in Milwaukee/Chicago, I've already cleared it with my Fiance' to attend NYSE, EE, and Champs. i'll go to NYSE regardless.


  • TMD Supporter

    I would try to go, but I'm not sure if I'd be able to make it. None of the changes you mentioned seem like anything too bothersome, so I wouldn't worry about it too much (at least it's not a deal breaker for me).



  • @Brass-Man said:

    Personally I'd rather have lower entry fees and smaller prize support. The prizes don't bring me out to New York - the competition, community, and well run event does. That said, an extra $20 definitely wouldn't stop me from coming. The entry/payout ratio is not as important to me as a sustainable event is. Do what you have to do to provide the experience you've been providing.

    Definitely this. If people aren't going to play despite reasonable prize support, they are the kind of people I'd personally rather not have an event anyway.

    While I'd love to be able to guarantee that I could make it to the next one, June is a kind of rough month for me to engineer a family trip up. I'd definitely try though.



  • If the N.Y.S.E. Open were in the middle of July, instead of June, 2017, would this change anyone's willingness/ability to attend?



  • @Prospero Generally, the deeper you get into the summer, the more you get into vacation season. Kid's are home from school and lots of people take the opportunity to get away. I know you will be providing 9+months notice, for a single day event, but vacations get booked a comparable time in advance, and I know your break-even attendance estimates hinge upon "X" number of people flying in from out of state and basically making a weekend of it in NY.

    My 2cents, Perhaps this sentiment is the minority.



  • @Brass-Man said:

    Personally I'd rather have lower entry fees and smaller prize support. The prizes don't bring me out to New York - the competition, community, and well run event does. That said, an extra $20 definitely wouldn't stop me from coming. The entry/payout ratio is not as important to me as a sustainable event is. Do what you have to do to provide the experience you've been providing.

    I think that the juicier prize pool is an incentive to travel. I would play in the smaller entry/smaller prize pool event that you favor, but would as many people travel out for it? I think entry/payout ratio is pretty important though: if the ratio is too skewed in favor of the players, then Nick loses out and it makes it less likely that he would continue to do the event, if the payout is too skewed towards the host, it weakens the event, and also makes it less sustainable. Imagine if Nick had charged $100 per entrant, to 145 people, and first prize was a single revised underground sea, and there was nothing else you could point to that created value for the players (nice rented venue, Greg's play mat included, door prizes, etc.) Would you be thrilled with that arrangement? Striking that entry/payout balance is maybe the most important part of ensuring that the event continues, as it is the key to making sure Nick gets proper compensation for his time, and the players get a good value for their money. If those two things are happening, then the tournament should stay viable as long as Nick wants to continue hosting it.



  • If most of your entrants are flying, maybe a non-NY site makes more sense for cost reasons. At any rate, I can relate to OP as I have watched several chess communities die out over the years (the main culprit likely being internet gaming opportunities), now being largely unable to support seasonal events. I was a small-time organizer myself (over 100 events), but my conservative mindset would never let me take on the risk of large, guaranteed prizes. Good luck!



  • @BazaarOfBaghdad said:

    If most of your entrants are flying, maybe a non-NY site makes more sense for cost reasons. At any rate, I can relate to OP as I have watched several chess communities die out over the years (the main culprit likely being internet gaming opportunities), now being largely unable to support seasonal events. I was a small-time organizer myself (over 100 events), but my conservative mindset would never let me take on the risk of large, guaranteed prizes. Good luck!

    I think the vast majority of the entrants are coming from NY, NJ, CT, MA, PA, and that they are driving. I know we got some folks that flew in from the west coast, the midwest, and canada, but I'd say driving is the norm. I think hosting in NY makes it easier for the folks that want to fly out, because the area has better airport access than most.



  • I flew out because I won free entry and because I wanted to see what a big Vintage tournament was like. The tournament itself was good but I probably won't do it again. I was disappointed with the infrastructure in Long Island (housing, food, and transportation situations).

    That's just me though.



  • My two cents (as someone who moved to the US this year):

    • I do not mind travelling to play in a big vintage event
    • NY is not local, so travel would be required (I live in SF)
    • Given that there would be travel involved, entry cost, for the most part is moot. Sure, if the entry cost to the event was more than $200, that may raise questions from my wife. A bump from $100 to $120 is irrelevant
    • Quite truthfully, I do not care about prizes. The sentiment, experience, and memories of a big event are the primary takeaways. I feel like I have plenty of cards already
    • As to timing, I am for the most part ambivalent. One comment though, is that the further apart from EW it is, the better. For me, it is easier to justify travel for big events the further they are spread apart
    • This is a controversial point, but it reflects my reality. My wife will always ask me if an event allows proxies (or play-test cards) when we talk about travelling for magic. Regardless of the prestige, size, or quality of the event, my wife places events that allow proxies below those that do not. From a personal perspective, this makes it harder to argue the point for attending. The easier it is for me to sell the event to my wife, the easier it is to attend

    My caveat for this post is that this is purely based on my opinions and circumstances.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to The Mana Drain was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.