10 questions to understand the IQA World Cup 2018 teams & players fees
- Published: 06 March 2018
- Written by Armand Cosseron
On late February 2018, the International Quidditch Association announced the IQA World Cup 2018 fees for teams ans players. In order to be very clear about the use of this money and the process behind this decision, the International Quidditch Association organized two Office Hours session by video conference with people from the quidditch community.
Trustees Luke Nickholds and Andy Marmer replied to the community questions, with Executive Director Rebecca Alley, Finance Director Vanessa Sliva and Head of Business Development Tom Ffiske.
You can find in this article the finance Q&A about the IQA World Cup 2018 teams & players fees.
If you are interested in the full record of the two sessions, please follow this link.
Fees are a lot higher than last time. Why is that?
This year, we’re trying a different approach. To minimize the risk of the IQA, we are matching the cost of the event with what we’re expecting to be a guaranteed income.
What’s a guaranteed income?
No matter if we get a lot of spectators or none, the IQA is covered by income we’re getting before the event even happens. Guaranteed income, in this case, is team and player fees. Team fees are 400EUR and player fees are 60EUR.
Woah – so you’re not even taking ticket revenue into account?
Because ticket revenue is not a guaranteed income stream, we’re not exactly sure how many tickets we’ll be able to sell. We have numbers from last World Cup, which would be very helpful if we were hosting the event in the same city, but because World Cup will be in Florence this year, the scene is different.
Sounds like you’re still going to make a lot of money. Where is that going?
Back into the community in the form of projects.
To fund these projects, there are upfront costs, ones the IQA must take a hit on. These projects vary from hosting events, providing funds to regions in needs, to helping the IQA’s members thrive in their communities.
Are you sure it’s not going into the abyss?
Wait – what about last World Cup? What happened to the profits from that event?
They’ve been put to a few uses. The IQA has operational expenses and tournaments that we need to cover and since our biggest event is the World Cup, we’ve had to rely on the profits from the last event to cover the past 2 years.
I’m sure those costs didn’t eat up the entire amount. Can’t you subsidize the World Cup instead of putting it on players?
Well we also need to hold a certain amount of money in the bank account in case of emergency. Not holding a certain amount would put us at risk of going bankrupt in the event of an emergency and that is would not be responsible of us to do.
I’m still not sold. The fees have tripled – what was the math behind this?
Well, we knew general numbers of teams who had showed up in the past and teams who would had confirmed/express interest, so that gave us an outline to go by.
Three scenarios were made – worst, moderate, and best case.
In the worst-case scenario, we expected the bare minimum, which included 25 teams. Of the mix, about 14 of the teams would be bringing an average of 7 players. This was our conservative model.
In this model, if no discount were to be extended to anyone, we would make roughly 4,000 EUR less than the budget and if a discount were to be extended to those 14 teams, we would be making about 6,000 EUR less than the budget.
Granted, this was a conservative model and the worst as well as unlikely case scenario.
In a moderate-case scenario, we expected any team who had confirmed for the 2018 World Cup or had attended the 2016 World Cup to go. In this scenario, about 15 of the teams were either developing or emerging, again, with an average of 7 players. We deemed this to be the most likely case scenario.
In this model, if no discount were to be extended to anyone, we would make an amount slightly higher than the cost of the budget excluding travel for volunteers and staff. If discounts were to be extended to all 15 teams, this would cause a decrease of about 2,000 EUR collected, we would be meeting the budget, again, excluding the travel of volunteer and staff.
In the best-case scenario, we expected any team who had showed interest, in general, to attend World Cup. This increased the number of developing and emerging areas to 22 with an average of 7 players per developing or emerging team, on average.
In this model, if no discount were to be extended to anyone, we would be able to cover the cover of volunteer travel. If we extend discounts to all of those interested, we would miss this amount by about 3,000 EUR.
In the end, we had an idea of where we wanted the prices to be and we compared our ideas with events that already exist and function on a similar level. When we came out with the player and team fees, the math made sense.
That’s a lot of explanation, but that doesn’t make me feel better about paying a lot. What about small teams who can’t pay?
Like I mentioned, we’ll be offering reduced team fees. If you’re a developing team, we will reduce your team fee to 300 EUR and for an emerging team, the fee will be reduced to 200 EUR.
We will be working with you, so come with suggestions on how you’d like to be charged differently and why and we can work something out. We’re open to payment extensions, setting up a plan, helping you fundraise, ect.
And what about teams traveling far? Can they get a reduce rate?
If they show they have a financial needs, sure. If not, there are always payment plans and other opportunities to make payment easier on the team.
So who do I contact with questions?
You’ll get a response within 2 days.