Archive for the ‘discussion’ Category

h1

Strategic Plan/Budget for AWA

April 4, 2009

AWA LogoAt last months Annual General Meeting, Western Australia requested that:
“Affiliation fees be reduced from $3 to $1 per member with a maximum of $200, to allow the states to put more back into the sport at a state level.”

The members at the meeting felt that this change wasn’t appropriate. The ongoing funds surplus is chiefly generated by insurance payments for more members than quoted for the policy. We need to keep that surplus in case the insurer decides to recover an additional levy for that insurance period.

But, there are some surplus funds and they will be re-distributed in the form of a grant for national events.

Strategic Plan/Budget for AWA Expenditure
the AWA Committee generally agreed that

  • the AWA was more involved/effective at improvements driven from top (National) down, and that efforts /expenditure direct from AWA was similarly more effective focused on these Top and middle level activities
  • grass roots/entry level activities and expenditure were more effectively/efficiently handled at state and local level
  • the AWA should target/budget/plan for some modest income (either fee or insurance based) ~ around $3,000/year at current rates/levels
  • this money should be re-used to develop/improve the “National” impetus, through support of supplementary funding to (certain specified) expenses within a defined range of National Championships (etc)

General discussion on that was 3-4 classes or disciplines per year, with a general cap on funding of (say) $1,000 per event/discipline, which in turn would be made up of (capped) funding of certain specified individual sub expenses (eg : race officer or director travel expenses, say capped to $300 per event). General underlying principle being this AWA funding to ONLY be available for use in defined expenses aimed at the goal of ongoing improvement in a National event quality (etc) – rather than simply provided as “general expenses” income to local organisers of National events.

Based on this discussion and WA’s question re expenditure or cost cutting to improve entry level activity by state/s

  • AWA revenue NOT allocated under the Nationals allocations could be made available (perhaps on an annual end of year basis or similar) for States to apply to AWA for funding for use (by states) in State driven “development of sport program/s”.
  • That’s to say, a national pool of “surplus” income may exist at the end of each AWA year. Rather than simply continue to stockpile further “profits”, that revenue is made available for EQUITABLE distribution to those states who wish to commit to structured “development of sport” program/s – and are prepared to commit to match the AWA funding with funding from within their home state/s.

A very simple definition/qualification/application/approval process would suffice, and the key factor would/could be that any AWA funding to the states under this program MUST be matched by the (applying) state/s on (say ) a ” 1 for 1 ” basis.

  • i.e. $1 from AWA towards program MUST be matched by $1 contributed by state to same program/event
  • a $1 AWA contribution : $2 State contribution might be even better ratio This initiative may be much easier in practice than it may sound at first. It clears the way to reasonable (re) use of funding in all respects, removes (implied) stigma of AWA “profiteering”. Most importantly, opens the resource for (equitable) use by those States WHO ACTUALLY WANT TO DO SOMETHING.

Constructive feedback welcome…

Full Minutes of AWA Annual General Meeting 2009

h1

Sail number cull

November 25, 2008

Stage #1 of the AUS sail number list cull has been completed
see http://www.windsurfing.org/sailnumbers.htm 
all numbers belonging to sailors who have been unfinancial for a few years, have been removed from the list. Removed numbers may be available for reallocation.

Stage #2 is the retirement of all non AUS numbers
- KA numbers
- Other non AUS numbers

Are you for/against Stage 2 going ahead. Please leave a comment (mentioning your number too).

h1

RSX retained for 2012

November 16, 2008

It’s very hard to change the status quo. So, despite the intense lobbying of the Formula Windsurfing Org (and IWA) for the Formula One Design, the RSX will be sailed at the 2012 Olympics.

It’s not a time for the RSX fraternity to gloat, but to put more effort into growing the class. Does it exist only because it is the “Olympic Windsurfer”?

The FOD/FWOD is not dead-in-the-water, but needs the momentum of numbers, ISAF international class status and a strong following to be built ready for the next round of decision making.

The final decision for the 2016 Olympics is likely to be made in 2012, but FOD will need to have a noticable presence by late 2010 to be considered a serious contender. To be a serious contender, formula fleets should be mostly “One Design” (FOD) – state and national windsurfing bodies should encourage that scenario.

Or is a longboard still the best option??

Last minute lobbying with comments (Nov 2008):
Why FOD is right for 2012 (Ceri Williams)
Fact not Fiction (Allison Shreeve)

The longboard view:
The Longboard Windsurfing Journal

h1

Not time to change Olympic board

November 4, 2008

Says Neil Pryde.

At this weeks ISAF meeting amongst the agenda items is a proposal to switch windsurfing boards for the 2012 London Olympic Games from the existing Neil Pryde RS:X to a new Starboard built Formula board.

Read more:
http://www.sail-world.com/Australia/Not-time-to-change-Olympic-windsurfer-says-Pryde/50457 

h1

Olympic Board – Debate Continues

September 27, 2008

Whilst I (Rory Ramsden) admire Svein’s zeal for promoting Olympic windsurfing, I have 16 years of experience in managing both IMCO and now the RS:X classes. This has lead me to the following conclusions.

See more @ http://windsurfingnz.org/node/1796

Previous Posts on this subject:
2008/09/15: Press release: Formula OD
2008/06/05: 2012 Olympic board – RSX or FWOD

h1

What does AWA do?

June 15, 2008

There seems to be some confusion of what the AWA does…

Check out this discussion