The Chronicle of the Horse
MagazineNewsHorse SportsHorse CareCOTH StoreVoicesThe Chronicle UntackedDirectoriesMarketplaceDates & Results
 
Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 135
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun. 11, 2001
    Location
    Costa Mesa, CA
    Posts
    2,903

    Default

    Here's the take....

    I will post a bit of a "report" on what the Retreat was all about. I will not go into intense detail with a play by play. It was imperative, IMHO, that the retreat was held and as many of the Committee Members be there is person as possible..

    There are a couple of main points/highlights:

    First, there is already a list of Requirements for shows. We started there and then went on to a separate list of Recommendations. There are Guidelines in the managers manual we also looked at and we ALL had items and suggestions from so many of the exhibitors who had contacted us.

    Our goal was not to restrict management in their efforts to have shows at the rating/level they wish to have. HOWEVER, it was imperative that we try to find a way to help Quality and not Quanity.

    Another lengthy discussion was a GIANT priority to help find a way for the current system "B" "C" "Local" shows to receive help and information so they can once again be a VERY important part of our Industry. Everyone on that Committee is committed to exploring all avenues to regain the prestige and importance of the "Lower-Mid Levels" !!!! It is a sadness for all of to have the shows SEEM to either be "AA" or nothing.

    It was also a VERY LONG discussion that the quality of shows should be a source of pride for our Federation, the exhibitors, trainers, owners and spectators....no matter the "Rating". We discussed at length the importance of GREAT "B" "C" shows again.

    We repeated OVER AND OVER AND OVER the importance of "meaningful feedback" from just about anyone we can get it from. We received a report regarding the number of "Evaluation Forms" turned in over the past year......IT WAS ALL BUT NON-EXISTENT considering there were approx 2400 shows that year. I think it was like 45-60 forms TOTAL.....NOT counting Stewards and officials.

    For all the negative conversations about how awful certain shows were.....there were simply NOT very many evaluation forms.... if everyone who complains out here were to simply fill out the form AT THE SHOWS THEY ATTEND AND COMPLAIN ABOUT.....it would be sooooooooooooo much easier to know what the complaints are for SPECIFIC shows and therefore what "Required Standards" are of the most important.

    There have been several LONG threads here complaining about specific shows and I can tell you that Evaluation Forms DO NOT get fill out. How can we expect change if all we want to do is complain on a BB????

    The separation of the Jumper "Ratings" vs the Hunter "Ratings. A show is now governed by the Rating for the Hunters...Jumpers are secondary. A really GREAT jumper show WITHOUT HUNTERS basically has no rating now.

    Shows could then present 2 ratings....

    For those of you who think the sky is falling and the Hunters are just about dead....I also have felt that way and I must tell you that is the belief I had!!! BUT the reality in print is different. We got a report of the numbers in the Hunter ring for the past 5 years so we could see just how much the hunters have "declined".

    THEY HAVEN'T!!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...s/icon_eek.gifCounting the number of horses that received ANY points in the following divisions, from 1999 to 2004, the growth..or shrinkage..is as follows:

    The ones that got smaller:
    Regular Working.... - 32
    Reg Conformation... - 3
    Small Pony Hunter.. - 19
    Large Pony Hunter.. - 38

    The ones that grew:
    Grn 1st Year....... + 175
    Grn 2nd Year....... + 30
    A/O 35 and under... + 21
    A/O 35 and over.... + 103
    Grn Conformation... + 57
    Sm Juniors 15/under + 7
    Lg Juniors 15/under + 162
    Sm Junior 16-17.... + 39
    Lg Junior 16-17.... + 166
    Med Ponys.......... + 7
    Sm Grn Ponys....... + 39
    Med Grn Ponys...... + 39
    Lg Grn Ponys....... + 30

    AMAZING!!!!! I was really surprised! So it brings up the question.....if there are more horses/ponys receiving points BUT there are more classes NOT FILLING....WHY???? we (the Committee) do not have the answer BUT at least it gave us some statistics to chew on!

    We accepted the fact that what we can EXPECT may be a little different that what we WANT!

    We also spent an immense amount of time discussing the managers keeping their shows and dates. This was a difficult time for all of us since we are aware that shows have grown and grown but the "mid" levels of shows are smaller. We CANNOT, however restrict the American system of entrepreneurs succeeding.

    The real bottom line is that if exhibitors don't like a show they can always not go....it is their own personal decision. IF they want to chase those points then they have to make decisions and we (the Committee) cannot make decisions for them.

    FOOTING took up a lot of time. Just about everyone in the industry has a different "definition" of what is "good footing". And each part of each discipline has it's own definition of what is "good footing". And each height of fence classes has a bit of a different "need".

    To end this first postup.....All Standards/Reccommendations/Quidelines......

    For standards to work and be fair AT ALL they have to meet the following: They must be definable, measurable and enforceable. If we cannot "define" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "measure" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "enforce" something it cannot go on the list of Standards.

    That was always the main conversation we came back to on each and every point of discussion.

    To wrap this up.......I would love your input, suggestions and ideas and questions...BUT BUT BUT..

    If you would PLEASE refrain from negative attacks or long rambling comparisions or woe is me theorys...I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.

    I am posting to get information out but I am not interested in this becomeing a slug fest..... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...on_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/cu...s/winkgrin.gif
    [url]http://www.horseshowbiz.com
    [url]http://www.ijumpsports.com



  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun. 11, 2001
    Location
    Costa Mesa, CA
    Posts
    2,903

    Default

    Here's the take....

    I will post a bit of a "report" on what the Retreat was all about. I will not go into intense detail with a play by play. It was imperative, IMHO, that the retreat was held and as many of the Committee Members be there is person as possible..

    There are a couple of main points/highlights:

    First, there is already a list of Requirements for shows. We started there and then went on to a separate list of Recommendations. There are Guidelines in the managers manual we also looked at and we ALL had items and suggestions from so many of the exhibitors who had contacted us.

    Our goal was not to restrict management in their efforts to have shows at the rating/level they wish to have. HOWEVER, it was imperative that we try to find a way to help Quality and not Quanity.

    Another lengthy discussion was a GIANT priority to help find a way for the current system "B" "C" "Local" shows to receive help and information so they can once again be a VERY important part of our Industry. Everyone on that Committee is committed to exploring all avenues to regain the prestige and importance of the "Lower-Mid Levels" !!!! It is a sadness for all of to have the shows SEEM to either be "AA" or nothing.

    It was also a VERY LONG discussion that the quality of shows should be a source of pride for our Federation, the exhibitors, trainers, owners and spectators....no matter the "Rating". We discussed at length the importance of GREAT "B" "C" shows again.

    We repeated OVER AND OVER AND OVER the importance of "meaningful feedback" from just about anyone we can get it from. We received a report regarding the number of "Evaluation Forms" turned in over the past year......IT WAS ALL BUT NON-EXISTENT considering there were approx 2400 shows that year. I think it was like 45-60 forms TOTAL.....NOT counting Stewards and officials.

    For all the negative conversations about how awful certain shows were.....there were simply NOT very many evaluation forms.... if everyone who complains out here were to simply fill out the form AT THE SHOWS THEY ATTEND AND COMPLAIN ABOUT.....it would be sooooooooooooo much easier to know what the complaints are for SPECIFIC shows and therefore what "Required Standards" are of the most important.

    There have been several LONG threads here complaining about specific shows and I can tell you that Evaluation Forms DO NOT get fill out. How can we expect change if all we want to do is complain on a BB????

    The separation of the Jumper "Ratings" vs the Hunter "Ratings. A show is now governed by the Rating for the Hunters...Jumpers are secondary. A really GREAT jumper show WITHOUT HUNTERS basically has no rating now.

    Shows could then present 2 ratings....

    For those of you who think the sky is falling and the Hunters are just about dead....I also have felt that way and I must tell you that is the belief I had!!! BUT the reality in print is different. We got a report of the numbers in the Hunter ring for the past 5 years so we could see just how much the hunters have "declined".

    THEY HAVEN'T!!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...s/icon_eek.gifCounting the number of horses that received ANY points in the following divisions, from 1999 to 2004, the growth..or shrinkage..is as follows:

    The ones that got smaller:
    Regular Working.... - 32
    Reg Conformation... - 3
    Small Pony Hunter.. - 19
    Large Pony Hunter.. - 38

    The ones that grew:
    Grn 1st Year....... + 175
    Grn 2nd Year....... + 30
    A/O 35 and under... + 21
    A/O 35 and over.... + 103
    Grn Conformation... + 57
    Sm Juniors 15/under + 7
    Lg Juniors 15/under + 162
    Sm Junior 16-17.... + 39
    Lg Junior 16-17.... + 166
    Med Ponys.......... + 7
    Sm Grn Ponys....... + 39
    Med Grn Ponys...... + 39
    Lg Grn Ponys....... + 30

    AMAZING!!!!! I was really surprised! So it brings up the question.....if there are more horses/ponys receiving points BUT there are more classes NOT FILLING....WHY???? we (the Committee) do not have the answer BUT at least it gave us some statistics to chew on!

    We accepted the fact that what we can EXPECT may be a little different that what we WANT!

    We also spent an immense amount of time discussing the managers keeping their shows and dates. This was a difficult time for all of us since we are aware that shows have grown and grown but the "mid" levels of shows are smaller. We CANNOT, however restrict the American system of entrepreneurs succeeding.

    The real bottom line is that if exhibitors don't like a show they can always not go....it is their own personal decision. IF they want to chase those points then they have to make decisions and we (the Committee) cannot make decisions for them.

    FOOTING took up a lot of time. Just about everyone in the industry has a different "definition" of what is "good footing". And each part of each discipline has it's own definition of what is "good footing". And each height of fence classes has a bit of a different "need".

    To end this first postup.....All Standards/Reccommendations/Quidelines......

    For standards to work and be fair AT ALL they have to meet the following: They must be definable, measurable and enforceable. If we cannot "define" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "measure" something it cannot go on the list of Standards. If we cannot "enforce" something it cannot go on the list of Standards.

    That was always the main conversation we came back to on each and every point of discussion.

    To wrap this up.......I would love your input, suggestions and ideas and questions...BUT BUT BUT..

    If you would PLEASE refrain from negative attacks or long rambling comparisions or woe is me theorys...I WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT.

    I am posting to get information out but I am not interested in this becomeing a slug fest..... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_c...on_biggrin.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/cu...s/winkgrin.gif
    [url]http://www.horseshowbiz.com
    [url]http://www.ijumpsports.com



  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan. 12, 2000
    Location
    southampton,ny
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Um I have filled out evaluation forms in the past in both ways .I.E. to commend a show for being so well run and also for poor qualities!
    However I did have an awful situation happen many years ago...I had filled out a show evaluation form given it to the steward which at the time was how those things were done.Two days later the manager accosts me at the ingate and wants me to explain to him why I said what I said.That was a really pretty 20 minutes let me tell you .After I told him why I felt the way I did.I complained to the steward and to the zone representative that happened to be on the showgrounds.
    If that has happened a few times it would keep exhibitors from filling those forms out .Also there is a continuing belief that no one reads the forms or does anything about what is brought up in them.
    Brilyntrip



  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan. 12, 2004
    Posts
    913

    Default

    Wow! Thanks for all the great info!
    At least the things that need to be discussed are being discussed!
    I look forward to the next installment....
    KD



  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov. 19, 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,962

    Default

    How many members were actually present???
    *************************
    Go, Baby, Go......
    Aefvue Farms Footing Inspector



  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan. 23, 2000
    Posts
    912

    Default

    khobstetter -
    You are to be commended for your efforts in letting us know what is going on. The USHJA is sadly lacking in disseminating information.
    Here's a thought for your group to work on in connection with the evaluation form situation. People generally won't pick one up and fill it out unless they have a complaint. So what the Fed receives are probably mostly complaints. Is there a way you can "choose"
    exhibitors to report to you on the show they have just attended? Randomly ask them to fill out an evaluation to help your committee. If it a positive thing to be asked to help, maybe you can get some unbiased answers as to the quality of the show. This idea could even be worked out to make the exibitor feel "important" in that their opinion was asked for. Just a thought.
    Interesd to know how many are on your committee and how many were present at the recent meeting.
    Keep up the good work and keep letting us know what's happening.



  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep. 1, 2003
    Location
    Fairfax, VA
    Posts
    486

    Default

    We repeated OVER AND OVER AND OVER the importance of "meaningful feedback" from just about anyone we can get it from. We received a report regarding the number of "Evaluation Forms" turned in over the past year......IT WAS ALL BUT NON-EXISTENT considering there were approx 2400 shows that year. I think it was like 45-60 forms TOTAL.....NOT counting Stewards and officials.

    There are several reasons for this:

    1. The evaluation forms are not confidentail. Anyone filling them out does not have any reasonable expectation of privacy.

    2. There are no standards for show managers actually turning them in.

    3. There is no easy or convenient way to get the forms and fill them out.

    So, from a former association exec, here's a suggestion: pick a random number of exhibitors from representative shows (like 1 HITS FL, 1 Culpepper, 2 WINS, 1 Lamplight, 1 Indio, a couple of B shows, a couple of C shows, etc.) and send the forms from USEF with a return enveloped TO USEF.

    If you rely on people filling out forms on-site, you will continue to get the poor response.

    Just my humble opinion.
    "Socrates was a very wise man who went around giving good advice. They poisoned him." Anonymous...



  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2001
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    I would be happy to fill out an evalution form at each show if I knew that I wasn't slitting my own throat with the respective show managers or judges.

    It feels like the risk of penalty to those who dare to criticize is just too high. I know that there are many good managers and judges that wouldn't be less than fair, but they probably won't be the ones being complained about anyway.

    If everyone involved is given the name of those complaining, only the powerful can afford to speak out. We "little people" will have to just suck up being stabled as far away as they can put us with no water supply, and just go into the ring for personl experience because there's no way to get a ribbon from a judge (or judge's friend) that you complained about.

    If we could send our evaluation forms to someone who collated the data and released it without names, I think many more exhibitors would take part. It would be fine with me to put my name and USEF # on the form if I needed to be contacted and to verify membership, but I don't want it handed to someone for their &#*! list.



  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan. 1, 2002
    Location
    Harford County, Maryland, USA
    Posts
    4,553

    Default

    ummm......what about online evaluations? I imagine a LOT of exhibitors bring laptops with them, and most probably have computer access SOMEWHERE. Why not offer an online evaluation form, request a USEF ID# for verification if necessary, but let people fill them out at their leisure AND with some expectation that the form will: a) reach something like the appropriate party and b) not be read by the show itself.

    Online forms could also allow for comments -- WITHOUT identifiers -- to be given back to the shows for their own improvements.

    Now...if this is being done and I just don't know, my bad. If it's not, maybe it's a thought......



  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug. 31, 2004
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,345

    Default

    I am starting the meaningful feadback right now. I am a card holding member of u the USHJA. I think that the B and C rated shows exist, they just don't bother getting rated with the USEF and USHJA. for example, or local association has shows that are run well, and could easily have a C rating, if not B. I'd go around to the local shows and engourage them to get themselves regognized. Look at some of the VHSA associate shows, they are all run better than most schooling shows, but they just don't bother to get the rating, IMO. Maybe I'm totally off the mark, though.
    -Grace



  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 1999
    Location
    Averill Park NY and Citra Fl
    Posts
    5,578

    Default

    What Kestral said..AND, do they really do any good at all...?? I feel like we are the pawns in the big game...No one listens to the silent majority.
    The thing about smart people, is they look like crazy people, to dumb people.



  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan. 1, 2002
    Location
    Harford County, Maryland, USA
    Posts
    4,553

    Default

    ah but OrangeHorse -- what would be the BENEFIT of those local shows getting rated?

    Our local circuits are quite competitive. Many of the judges are rated judges from the area. Right now, they are inexpensive and accessible. Now, the local associations have started using some show software, that has netted an office fee (typically $5) for many of the shows, but that's it. There are not tons of other fees, and it doesn't cost as much as a division to come and show if you're not a member.

    As to drugging.....many of the horses show both rated and local. If they've got a rated show next weekend, they aren't THAT likely to be drugging the horses, and honestly, the better horses and riders frankly do tend to win (with some longshots coming in sometimes). So if drug testing is the big bonus that may not be enough.

    I think that the VALUE of being rated needs to be examined, improved and communicated. Or....perhaps we do need to recognize that the value is at the top, and for the base and the middle, it's not there and change accordingly.



  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun. 11, 2001
    Location
    Costa Mesa, CA
    Posts
    2,903

    Default

    WOW WOW WOW...I went to the movie (Monster-in-Law..IT'S GREAT!!!) and I get back to wonderful information...let's see if I can answer some of it..

    Evaluation forms...they are completely private..used to give them to the Stewards, BUT they need to NOW come directly to the office!! We were not given any information about "who"..just what shows and what was said. There were quite a few positive forms also..

    Hopeful Hunter:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> ummm......what about online evaluations? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> This is the direction we really went. An online feedback form that is MAXIMUM of 2-3 minutes. We also went with a start to get Evaluations it be mandatory for ALL Licensed Officals and staff to fill out the form...and NOT give it to show management..directly to the offices in Lexington.

    Kestral..<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> If we could send our evaluation forms to someone who collated the data and released it without names, I think many more exhibitors would take part. It would be fine with me to put my name and USEF # on the form if I needed to be contacted and to verify membership, but I don't want it handed to someone for their &#*! list </div></BLOCKQUOTE> THAT is the way they are handled now. NO ONE is given the information about who is complaining...only the office person knows and it is typed into a report..sort of an Excell grid with the show name on the right and topics across the top..IE: Competition name, prize money, schedule, facility, footing (arenas), footing (warm-up), courses/equipment, Hospitality, overall, any additional comments.

    We did NOT get any information on who filled them out. We were ADAMENT that they need to be completely confidential. A manager will only know IF an exhibitor decides to file a protest!

    briylntrip...I am sooooo sorry that happened to you..it NEVER should have. That is an example of why the system is changing!!

    Doubleez<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> So what the Fed receives are probably mostly complaints. Is there a way you can "choose"
    exhibitors to report to you on the show they have just attended? Randomly ask them to fill out an evaluation to help your committee. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> That was a HUGE discussion, BUT not all were complaints. I personally am going to try to keep Evaluation forms and envelopes in my golf cart at the shows. I will try to pass them out randomly and when an exhibitor fills one out I will put it in the envelope and then BOTH of us will sign the back across the flap so anyone can tell if it is tampered with.

    I will then send them straight to the office in Lexington myself. I would suggest that for everyone. If you turn it in at the Horse Show office request that it not be opened and have someone else sign it with you. NOT because we don't trust anyone, simply for consumer confidence!!!!!!

    Orangehorse <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> think that the B and C rated shows exist, they just don't bother getting rated with the USEF and USHJA. for example, or local association has shows that are run well, and could easily have a C rating, if not B. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> We could not agree more with you!! It seems IMHO..IMHO, not the Committees...that shows are either "AA" "A" or NOTHING!!

    I find that soooooooooo sad..I remember Portugese Bend, Peacock Hill, some Santa Barbara, etc shows that were GIANT "B" shows and they were absolutely THE BEST!!!! I would love for us to get back to the place where the "MID" Levels are great, enjoyable and important again!!

    Jumphigh<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> No one listens to the silent majority </div></BLOCKQUOTE> BOY did you hit the nail on the head..."SILENT" was your key word. With such a small amount of Evaluation forms BUT so much complaining there is no way to be heard if MOST are "Silent".

    Hopeful Hunter <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> think that the VALUE of being rated needs to be examined, improved and communicated </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Agree, IMHO-and that of the Committee, all the Levels need to be really examined and evaluated!!
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> perhaps we do need to recognize that the value is at the top, and for the base and the middle, it's not there and change accordingly </div></BLOCKQUOTE> Here I respectfully COMPLETELY DISAGREE!! I think we have come to believe that but I don't for a minute think that should be the case. There is NO reason why we can't have quality and PRIDE at each and every level!!!!!

    You guys are great!!!!! I do plan on taking this thread to the next meeting and going over each and every point!!

    PLUS....you never know who else is reading here. We do have some super lurkers.

    AND Thank you for keeping it positive...even the complaints mentioned so far were done in a positive manner...I REALLY appreciate that.
    [url]http://www.horseshowbiz.com
    [url]http://www.ijumpsports.com



  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun. 19, 2001
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Posts
    3,788

    Default

    Kathy, I'm so happy to hear about how the evaluations are handled. It's very important for the exhibitors to know. Our state association will be putting the forms into our trainer hospitality baskets for use by the trainers and their clients at our WSHJA shows.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug. 10, 1999
    Location
    Ireland & sometimes the US ;)
    Posts
    11,073

    Default

    You need to see what the Eventers do differently on their evaluation forms - I know most of them DO turn them in, and when I did, I got immediate response from my zone chair!!
    co-author of 101 Jumping Exercises & The Rider's Fitness Program; Soon to come: Dead Ringer - a tale of equine mystery and intrique! Former Moderator!



  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov. 15, 1999
    Location
    Middleburg VA and Southampton NY
    Posts
    6,098

    Default

    &lt;&lt;The real bottom line is that if exhibitors don't like a show they can always not go....it is their own personal decision. IF they want to chase those points then they have to make decisions and we (the Committee) cannot make decisions for them.&gt;&gt;

    <span class="ev_code_BLUE">So if this is the conclusion the committee reached, what will change? This is the present state of affairs, is it not? Simply NOT attending or attending alternative circuits (eg those well run, grass-roots, unrated shows) is a decision that many have already made. Hence the disparity between the AA's and the pitiful renditions that some B and C shows have become. There WAS a day when the "big" exhibitors would come to the B's and C's to "pick up points," and that was when those shows had numbers and quality...but then the increment system kicked in, and the value of the B and C points dropped for all but the children's and adult divisions. These divisions, in our area at least (LI) are what keeps these shows "alive." Not many want to consider these consequenses of using the increment system, however, and it seems to be all but sacrosanct. But until there is a value IN attending the B/C's, as opposed to a LACK of value in a show becoming a B/C, what is the incentive for anyone to either run one, or go to one, other than the childrens/adults?

    BTW, I have a feeling that if your breakdown of entries per division was further broken down by show ratings, the numbers might be even more revealing.</span>


    FOOTING took up a lot of time. Just about everyone in the industry has a different "definition" of what is "good footing". And each part of each discipline has it's own definition of what is "good footing". And each height of fence classes has a bit of a different "need".&gt;&gt;


    <span class="ev_code_BLUE">I am at the point where I would settle for "no rocks." Honestly, footing is NOT as close to rocket science as you make it out to be. There is plenty of good footing around, but it can be expensive and time consuming to attain. More than one management has simply decided that footing is not their highest priority. I definitely vote with my entries on this one, but I'm only ONE picky person with ONE horse at the moment. Not much of a heavyweight in terms of effect on management's bottom line.</span>



  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb. 10, 2004
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Khobstetter, did you say how many people were at this meeting?



  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct. 29, 2000
    Location
    Southern Pines, N.C.
    Posts
    11,535

    Default

    Out of the loop once again. This is the first I have read about a retreat...

    In the 1980's when I was an AHSA Steward, I officiated at a couple of Arabian shows. Can we say culture shock?

    Anyway... The Arab world has a rule/policy of charging $5 when you pick up your number. This is a deposit that is returned when you hand in the show evaluation form that is contained in every exhibitor's packet (Yes, they are so organized that, even at shows with several thousand horses, each number comes in a manila envelope with a time schedule, the evaluation form and other greeting niceties.)

    One of the jobs I had (or took on -- I was never quite sure how obligated I was as an official) was to account for the total money v. forms at the end of the show.

    I asked management who determined the amount of the deposit and was told that it had been arrived at through trial and error. $1 was not enough of an incentive to have tired/hurried exhibitors return the forms, and everyone protested a $10 deposit.

    The system sure seems to work. Approximately 75% of the forms were returned. I think there were several reasons for this:

    1. It was part of the exhibitors' mindset to give feedback at every show. This is a learned habit and will have to be taught to H/J people.

    2. The forms were in their hands. They did not have to go searching for them. They could return them when they went to the office to settle their bill.

    3. The deposit gave the exhibitors an incentive to return the evaluation forms.

    -----

    Why not do the same thing in our discipline? This has been going on for decades in other disciplines. How much discussion has this idea gotten by the H/J people?
    "I used to have money, now I have horses."



  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb. 6, 2000
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    12,661

    Default

    Originally posted by Lord Helpus:
    Out of the loop once again. This is the first I have read about a retreat...

    In the 1980's when I was an AHSA Steward, I officiated at a couple of Arabian shows. Can we say culture shock?

    Anyway... The Arab world has a rule/policy of charging $5 when you pick up your number.

    <span class="ev_code_GREEN">Had. Those evaluation froms are a thing of the past. Part of the problem was that the Arab BNT's would collect the forms from their clients and fill them out with *their* opinions.</span>

    This is a deposit that is returned when you hand in the show evaluation form that is contained in every exhibitor's packet (Yes, they are so organized that, even at shows with several thousand horses, each number comes in a manila envelope with a time schedule, the evaluation form and other greeting niceties.)

    <span class="ev_code_GREEN">Things still tend to run like that, vis-a-vis the useful information packets.</span>
    "It's like a Russian nesting doll of train wrecks."--CaitlinandTheBay

    ...just settin' on the Group W bench.



  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb. 1, 2001
    Location
    Finally...back in civilization, more or less
    Posts
    11,479

    Default

    If the USEF is truly concerned about getting exhibitor feedback, then in my opinion, they need to be more proactive about it.

    There are many, many companies that specialize in surveying customers (and prospective customers) to obtain feedback for product improvement, customer satisfaction and competitive advantage. It would be a simple matter to hire this type of company to handle the survey and to provide the aggregate results (along with recommendations) to the USEF for action. This, in my opinion, would be a good use of membership dollars and would alleviate the concerns about confidentiality at the same time that it would solve the lack of data problem. Ideally you would have the third party survey company contact not only the actual exhibitors but also those that say, received a prize list but chose not to exhibit. This would give management an understanding of how their show (product) is perceived by the marketplace as well as a measure of how well they met their exhibitor (customers') expectations.

    It is also common practice across most service industries, and a pretty basic tenet of good customer service and product quality. *sigh*
    **********
    We move pretty fast for some rabid garden snails.
    -PaulaEdwina



Similar Threads

  1. Hasty Retreat - Am I Responsible for 30 Days?
    By Halter_Ego in forum Off Course
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: Oct. 27, 2012, 08:45 PM
  2. Your Dream Vacation/Retreat/Therapy
    By RPM in forum Equestrians with Disabilities
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Sep. 7, 2012, 12:12 AM
  3. Breed Show folks-how do you go low & slow?
    By HobbyHorse101 in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Feb. 17, 2012, 08:13 PM
  4. USHJA Retreat Notes are POSTED
    By jonesy in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: Sep. 2, 2011, 07:43 PM
  5. western pa area HJ show folks (and surrounding areas - OH, NY, WV, MD)
    By horsetackreview.com in forum Hunter/Jumper
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: Feb. 22, 2011, 08:03 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
randomness