# Why hardly any price money?



## carlosii (Feb 25, 2007)

Competitive archery is a niche sport with a limit appeal. Archery as a sport is limited in it's appeal to the masses.

Fifty K is small potatoes compared to say pro golf, but unless you have someone willing to put up the prize money, it will stay that way.

I will say that the ASA spreads the wealth around with many people winning some money, if not a king's ransom.


----------



## Rick! (Aug 10, 2008)

Perfect grades do not make you millions either. Neither will mis-spelling "prize" in a thread title.

Learning how to add value to a product or a company that you are passionate about could make you enough to be comfortable.

Only Vegas pays out $50K for the Male Pro winner as there are over 3500 participants plus sponsors contributing to the pot.

Competitive archery is a nice hobby...


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

Well, most of the top shooters can show up to every shoot they attend and put up a 5-spot 60x every single time on day one and then it comes down to shooting a 300 30x or 300 29x the second day to win the tournament. 

At vegas you have to stand on the line with hundreds of other shooters and crank out 300 vegas rounds for three stinking days like a robot, and then the whole weekend changes once you are in the shootdown and only a few shots and it is over. 

The problem with archery compared to other sports is that once you become a pro shooter you stop winning, very few of our pro shooters ever win a single tournament. Why? Because you are shooting against everyone at every tournament and the top 3 or so pro shooters that year win all of the tournaments. They take up all the spots in the shootdowns every week and don't leave much room for the mid pack pro shooter.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I personally wish that we had a stronger semi pro developmental class that you had to win out of to become a pro and once a pro you had to crank out scores to stay there. Then at all the national tournaments the pro shooters would be matched up and shoot against each other in match play so that the pro shooters could have a Record for that year such as 27 wins 5 losses. All of this would be done against other pro shooters. This way once you earn a pro card you could keep it as long as you win a certain percentage of your matches per year or you produce a certain level of scoring round average and either of these two things allows you to keep your pro card.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Padgett said:


> Well, most of the top shooters can show up to every shoot they attend and put up a 5-spot 60x every single time on day one and then it comes down to shooting a 300 30x or 300 29x the second day to win the tournament.
> 
> At vegas you have to stand on the line with hundreds of other shooters and crank out 300 vegas rounds for three stinking days like a robot, and then the whole weekend changes once you are in the shootdown and only a few shots and it is over.
> 
> The problem with archery compared to other sports is that once you become a pro shooter you stop winning, very few of our pro shooters ever win a single tournament. Why? Because you are shooting against everyone at every tournament and the top 3 or so pro shooters that year win all of the tournaments. They take up all the spots in the shootdowns every week and don't leave much room for the mid pack pro shooter.


This kind of makes pro archery a little boring to watch too, to be honest about it. At least for me, not speaking for anyone else. It's kind of like, yep its Mike Schlosser and Stephan Hanson in the gold final again.... yep seen this match 15 times already..... Ok, I'll fast forward to the end and see if SH punches the trigger and has to get out his hinge to finish the last 2 arrows.... 

And as an amateur shooter, it's disheartening to start getting close to your first 300 only to realize there are zillions of guys already shooting 300's, and in competition, and you basically won't even get noticed until you can grind 300's out like you said. And even then, you're still pretty much small fry... . 

I guess you just gotta love archery for archery and shoot it for that reason.... At least that;s why I do it.

lee.


----------



## Larry Nelson (Aug 22, 2017)

If you want prize money take up darts. The vegas tourny pays out half a million. And, the TOC pays out 3/4 of a million. There is also a million dollar bounty for an american to win the european championship. Most of us here shoot because we lovethe sport of archery. I am not doing it to get rich. If I was I would starve. And, I like to eat well. If you think it is hard to shoot a 300 60x just try tossing 9mark per round or a 50 point per dart average. And, darts are tossed at a distance of 8 feet.


----------



## aread (Dec 25, 2009)

Tournament archery is almost a zero sum game. The only sponsors are archery manufacturers and a few sponsors from related industries. They make their money mostly from archers/hunters. Golf & darts get sponsors from several deep pocket industries like beer, insurance, auto, etc. There is relatively less money from the golf and darts manufacturer industries. (but I bet it's more than from the archery manufacturers).

These sports appeal to people who don't golf or throw darts. Competitive archery appeals mostly to other archers. There is just not enough broad interest in archery to get the deep pocket sponsors. 

JMHO,
Allen


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

You'll have to get "into" archery farther than what you've heard and seen. Levi was making good, good money before his TV shows. His contract, his winnings at the ASA and IBO amount to big pile of change. A.N.N. (now gone for a good while) had a article where Levi told of knocking down $72,000 in 6 weeks. This article didn't seem to go over well as his picture remained the article removed. 
Jeff Hopkins was noted in 3D Times as being the first archer to winning over $1,000,000.00, but this back around 2002 or 2003 and there was a beer company with big contingency money 

Archery does not have big name sponsors and I can only guess why not. Who the hell drives a Buick? I don't, but Buick laid out millions to Tiger Woods. Do a vehicle head count at the top ASA or IBO tournament and you'll counting trucks, Dodge, Chevy, Ford and others. Why can't a archery organization pick up one of these big names? Either the organizations don't want told how to or what to do or the organizations can't comply with what the big names want > Just my opinion. 

Love of the sport is all that keeps archery going. Big name, don't really have to a big name, sponsors for archery is those that make archery products. Using some product, sign up at that booth and if you place you may pick up some change. Enough change can pay for your weekend. Bow companies seem to pay the most in contingency money, but being Pro gets you more, a lot more.


----------



## archerx454 (Sep 18, 2017)

Yeah i just love to shoot. shooting would get old fast at that level. Hopefully someday some big name corporations will start sponsoring archery events.


----------



## TNMAN (Oct 6, 2009)

https://www.facebook.com/BowJunky/videos/vb.205638652849724/1504974729582770/?type=2&theater

http://bowjunkymedia.libsyn.com/the-real-dave-cousins

Listen to Dave Cousins discuss the realities of pro archery. Strongly recommend getting as good an education as possible. That should be your Plan A right now.


----------



## huteson2us2 (Jun 22, 2005)

Hamm's beer sponsored a tournament years ago but archers felt that a beer company sent the wrong message to the young archers so they dropped the sponsorship and the prize money went to nothing. 

Years ago, I was asked to get some sponsorship for a big tournament at my club. I sent out multiple letters and the only response that I received was from Redman Tobacco. They were willing to give $5000 for prize money to start with and would pay all overhead including advertising. Sounded good to me as several archers chew tobacco anyway. But the club secided that they would rather have no sponsorship than take money from a tobacco company.

It doesn't seen to bother race car drivers or race boat drivers, golfers, or other major sports to advertise beer or tobacco. I have friends that quit archery to take up golf and won more money in one golf tournament than they would ever win in their life in archery. If you want money, take up golf now that you are young and you would be able to make a living and everyone you ever meet will understand what you mean and admire when you talk about your sport.


----------



## Bobmuley (Jan 14, 2004)

*Why hardly any prize money?*

The question really be:

* "Why should there be more prize money?"*

Just because it's difficult or that "we like it" doesn't mean that it's worth it to nonendemic sponsors.


----------



## Padgett (Feb 5, 2010)

I have a lot of respect for our mid pack pro shooters, they have a regular job and family to support and they find time to dedicate themselves to traveling expenses and training and all the things to stay competitive. They remind me of the Pro Football and Baseball players back when in the offseason they had regular jobs and served in the military, it is easy to be a pro baseball or football or basketball player right now with money being thrown at you from all directions.


----------



## archerx454 (Sep 18, 2017)

Well if they did have big sponsors and big money we would probably see twice the talent there is now. A pot for 300 grand would draw more attention to the sport. It would be great for the sport. Maybe the big bow companies should put up more money. They have it.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

I've noticed over the years when sponsorship is mentioned on archery forums the world over. 
The people who are absolutely furthest from knowing anything about sponsorhip are always the ones throwing suggestions around. 

Nobody bothers to look at things from a sponsors point of view and understand what would make someone want to throw money at someone else's activity. 

Find any other highly sponsored activity and compare it to archery. 

All of those differences are why archery has no major sponsors and most likely *never will*. 
Deal with it and get on with your life. 
If you want sponsorship money and prize money, go do the sports that have more of it. Remember to adjust your effort accordingly to compete at the same level with the people who are already there.


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

archerx454 said:


> Well if they did have big sponsors and big money we would probably see twice the talent there is now. A pot for 300 grand would draw more attention to the sport. It would be great for the sport. Maybe the big bow companies should put up more money. They have it.


One more time....Bow and archery tackle companies are the only ones offering contingency money...Multiple this by the number of events put on in a year by the ASA, IBO, NFAA and other organizations and these companies have been doing it since forever. Baseball, football, basketball, golf and stock cars all have at least three things in common...Action, TV coverage and room for bunches of spectators.

And maybe you're forgetting....Target bows are not the money makers. Hunting bows are.....


----------



## "TheBlindArcher" (Jan 27, 2015)

OOP, stay in school. Hundreds [thousands] of kids every year are told '"they have what it takes to be the best..." but in reality only a small few of them will ever win LAS or Vegas or Redding. Base your future on something you have control over, your education, and not something dependent on the performance of others because there is always someone out there who wants it more and is training harder than you.


----------



## mgwelder (May 4, 2014)

Too much money being wasted in the NFL to crybabies to spend on archery. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## brtesite (May 24, 2002)

archerx454 said:


> Well if they did have big sponsors and big money we would probably see twice the talent there is now. A pot for 300 grand would draw more attention to the sport. It would be great for the sport. Maybe the big bow companies should put up more money. They have it.


 You must be kidding


----------



## harley36 (Mar 4, 2013)

Actually the prize money versus the investment counting entry fee motels and equipment is pretty good as compared to say bad car where you spend 200k to try to make the race and if in fact you when your profit over what you spend might double where as in Asa you can spend a few hundred dollars to compete in pro and if you win your Asa check plus contengincy money could be in excess of 15-20k


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

harley36 said:


> Actually the prize money versus the investment counting entry fee motels and equipment is pretty good as compared to say bad car where you spend 200k to try to make the race and if in fact you when your profit over what you spend might double where as in Asa you can spend a few hundred dollars to compete in pro and if you win your Asa check plus contengincy money could be in excess of 15-20k


If you have the right bow....I'd suggest looking at those big checks and see who pays out what...and in some cases to who...


----------



## CO shootin (Jul 3, 2016)

Go back to JOAD... not to discourage you but your opinion is ridiculous. You obviously are money hungry so you should stay in school. Someday you will realize that $70k is a huge payday in ALOT of people's eyes. If you think it isn't step up and shoot the pro class and win then complain snowflake.


----------



## Lazarus (Sep 19, 2005)

CO shootin said:


> Go back to JOAD... not to discourage you but your opinion is ridiculous. You obviously are money hungry so you should stay in school. Someday you will realize that $70k is a huge payday in ALOT of people's eyes. If you think it isn't step up and shoot the pro class and win then complain snowflake.


That seemed somewhat harsh. 

Was kind of enjoying reading the discussion up to that point. Oh well. 

I find it interesting that many niche sports can come up with big dollars for sponsorships, sports with lower participant numbers than archery. I don't know what the real answer is, but I believe it's got to do with the mindset of the big archery organizations. Add to that the fragmentation of the sport due to it's many different "games." Until there is one governing body in archery with no goal except to better the sport I'd say archery will stay right where it's at. Maybe Levi is the guy that will be the game changer with the OPA. Time will tell.


----------



## brtesite (May 24, 2002)

I don't know for sure, but I bet that 1/2 the country is anti hunting . Archery is a killing sport . Sponsors don't put money where there customer are. Just my opinion


----------



## "TheBlindArcher" (Jan 27, 2015)

Korean archery has a strong business model for professionals, and actually making a living as an archer for more than just a few of the population. I don't know if it builds up from, or trickles down to, the grassroots programs, but Korean archers start very young in the schools, and develop into professional clubs with big corporate sponsors, massive TV coverage, and a fan base that the next generation of shooters look up to. I maybe wrong, but isn't Hyundai a Korean auto maker, and they sponsor the World Archery circuit; point being a major non-archery manufacturer sponsors the sport outside of the country. I don't know what the hunting culture in Korea is like, but I personally haven't heard of any major celebs heading there for the great opportunities, or of any Korean shooters who excel at 3D, or have televised hunting shows. My guess hunting for sport isn't as big as it is here, and yet their archery model thrives. 

Comentators and shooters often comment on how it is harder to make the Korean national team, or even some of the professional teams, than it is to make the Olympic team in most other countries.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Countries without a major hunting influence are far more likely to have a strong competitive archery spirit. Especially ones with a history of military archery.


----------



## Kstigall (Feb 24, 2004)

There is a very simple reason there isn't a strong "pro archery" circuit with many archers and a lot of money. Archery simply does not have a large enough and wealthy enough of a customer base to support big money. "Big time" archery tournaments aren't really all that big. It's really not very big when you narrow it down to spot shooting. It pains a lot of the white pants crowd but ASA 3D is the "biggest" archery game in this country. The structure and some leaders of certain archery organizations certainly are not doing all that they could to grow archery. 

It is NOT complicated. There might be a few thousand _dedicated _target archers in the entire country that spend say $1,500+ a year on target archery. That's a drop in the bucket when laid on the table as evidence that an entity should pony up serious sponsorship money. 

The size of the pot is a direct reflection of the value sponsors see in the game. I'm fairly certain some sponsors are putting a LOT more money into target archery in this country than what the "value" actually calls for. In other words, they spend a lot more money on our game than what they get in return. It wouldn't surprise me if LAS spends $3 for every $1 they get in return. The same probably could be said for _many _other major sponsors. They put a fair amount of money into archery games because they want to do so NOT because it's a good financial investment. In this country you can have a very successful business manufacturing bows _without _ any involvement in target archery. BowTech is a good example. For years they sold a ton of bows and did not have a factory sponsored team of 3d'ers or spot shooters. Some major bow manufacturers only put a fraction of the money into the game that other major manufacturers infuse. 

If you plan on earning "big money" doing anything you *will *face a ton of competition for it. It doesn't matter what it is, if there is a lot of money involved it will take great effort and hard work to get a chunk of it............unless of course you win the lottery or simply inherit it.

If it's something that is not all that hard to do OR the job is readily available then it is unlikely the job pays much. For example, school teachers aren't paid much and if they were then it would be much more difficult to get a job as a school teacher. Supply and demand...............


----------



## Arrowslinger15 (Mar 2, 2017)

These threads always make me chuckle and want to crack a beer. This is like all the people mesmorized by game shows. Everyone forgets all about that Fella in Washington. Uncle Sammy your lucky to bring home 1/2 of that little payout check presented by them cute vegas show girls.

Archery is nothing more then a hobby. dont see a change in this coming in the future.

Editors Note: 70+% of us shoot Compound When the true rewards are in Recurve. Scholarships and Money and maybe the biggest of all Olympic Gold for your country. (olympic comm voted compound out). the owner of LAS didnt give his daughter a compound


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Arrowslinger15 said:


> ditors Note: 70+% of us shoot Compound When the true rewards are in Recurve. Scholarships and Money and maybe the biggest of all Olympic Gold for your country. (olympic comm voted compound out). the owner of LAS didnt give his daughter a compound


I don't know if that's necessarily true anymore. Yes, 20+ years ago the compound was still a 2nd class citizen and the "true archers" were expected to shoot olympic style recurve. But nowadays the compound is being shot at the collegiate level and even JOAD, ironically, has compound classes. You're no longer run off the range at university if you show up with a compound bow as would have been the case even as late as into the 1990's. Even in Europe, the compound is approaching parity with the olympic recurve in terms of numbers of shooters showing up at tournaments (at least from a cursory look I took a year or two ago) and its importance and so on. 

So I think the situation today for compound is a lot different than it was when us old guys started shooting back in the 20th century. The achievements of archers like Terry and Michelle Ragsdale notwithstanding of course. It pays to shoot compound today much more than it used to.

As for compound in the olympics, that's a good subject to bring up for discussion, but an entirely different thread so won't go into it here...

lee.


----------



## archer_nm (Mar 29, 2004)

Arrow Slinger you will bring home all of the check then you can take it up with Uncle Sugar, if you are lucky to win money


----------

