In my experience, there are more 8-12 pitch venues with sufficient decent facilities than 12-20 pitch venues - venues with greater pitch space (e.g. over 10 pitches), don't have a corresponding increase in other facilities (changing rooms, social areas, etc).
We've regularly found that, at the big venues, when everyone at A & B & Womens Tour (400-450 people?) decides to eat or shower at pretty much the same time (esp. at the end of the day) neither the catering, bar or showers are really capable of dealing with the demand. It is also my opinion that very few venues fully understand quite how much food (and liquid refreshment) an Ultimate tournament will consume, given the opportunity. (As an example, for MT3, Swindon trebled their usual per head food estimate, and we still ate them out of stock!). Accommodation is also a major issue at tournaments, and the availability of an event organised accommodation option (I.e. more than just a list of local B&Bs/hotels) should, in my opinion, be high on the list of requirements. Some people are willing to pay ~35pppn for a hotel room and will always take that option, but many won't/can't, so a cheaper local camping option should always be counted as a bonus. Unfortunately, these days, venues are wiser to the potential profits and charge per tent, rather than for a field... FWIW, it's my understanding that discounts can be obtained in hotels for "bulk booking", and that some hotel chains consider 5 rooms to be a "bulk booking"! My personal opinions of 'historic' venues: * Exeter: the fields are great, but the other facilities (especially provision of water, food and shelter) require lots of effort (and additional cost - permission for and organisation of the hire of marquees, BBQs, temporary water main, portaloos...) on the part of the TD. I'd suspect that it would be possible to 'employ' a staff member full-time to shuttle back and forth refilling water containers! I'm also suspect that the Double Locks (superb place though it is!) wouldn't cope with a visitation from a full-size A & B & Women Tour. * Southampton: the fields are great, if and when they are available, but again the lack of sufficient facilities (esp. if the University have finally gotten around to selling the Wellington site, and all we have are the 4 portacabins at the Wide Lane site) could be perceived as a problem. For what it's worth, I believe that there was a Southampton bid for 2004, but that it didn't fit in with the desired dates and movement of the Tour around the country. It has been argued that we *could* visit the same venues, for events run by the same tournament directors, year in, year out. Whilst this may seem like a good idea and we'd hope that this would lead to increased quality of these events, the counter argument is that such a format may make us reliant on these venues, and we would struggle if/when they become unavailable (for whatever reasons). It also doesn't seem fair to prevent other 'new' venues/tournament directors from hosting events, and having the opportunity to make some money. There's lots more I could say, unfortunately, I've run out of time... --- Wayne Retter [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Statham, Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: 25 August 2004 12:27 Subject: RE:[BD] Tournament Bids 2004/5 >Consideration should also be given by the decision makers that a tournament is not just about the pitches. > >Small venues are likely to be poorly equipped in terms of facilities - bar, changing rooms, parking, camping, canteen, cover out of the rain etc etc. So by splitting the Tour "wherever possible" you may well get more bids in with smaller venues (like school fields etc) but the overall quality of the tournaments could reduce as all the venues are is a bunch of fields in the middle of nowhere. ... __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://zion.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
