| Pages:
1
2
3 |
KarenMartin
Regional Finalist Champeen
Posts: 256
Registered: 12/3/06
Location: California
Member Is Offline
Mood: TBD
|
|
PRCA Lost Stockton, CA Rodeo To IPRA
Upon information and belief the Stockton, CA rodeo:
- WAS one of the last nine rodeos to qualify for the NFR
- WAS a PRCA $40,000 added money rodeo
- HAD the funds to pay the PRCA in an account but asked for an extension of time of just a few weeks so that they would not be PENALIZED for early
withdrawal of said funds
- PRCA said NO to an extension of time and pulled their rodeo approval
- Is now an IPRA Rodeo rodeo (the information is below)
Please Note: the WPRA said OK to an extension of time so they did not pull their approval -- this is why there will be a WPRA *and* an IPRA barrel
race
On the PRCA's web site I just read in the news section their version as to what happened in regards to this matter.
I am posting the above information because in my opinion PRCA members have the right to hear the other side -- Stockton did not ask for an extension
of time to gather the money but to avoid a financial penalty for early withdrawal of the funds.
Something that every PRCA member should think about : a rodeo is over 60 days away, if the committee could prove to you that they had the funds
sitting in a dedicated account, would you grant them an extension of time or just jerk their approval?
Best wishes to the Stockton Rodeo!
SEP 30, OCT 1-3-4
STOCKTON, CA[A] IPRA*
The Stockton Rodeo
PERFS: Five: Sep 30, Oct 1-3-4 7:30 pm; Oct 4 1pm BB, BR, SB, CR, SW, CBR $25,000. adm - $250. EF - TR $50,000. adm - $250. EF - Total $200,000.ś
HQ INFO:
Phone: 800-639-9002
Books open Wed., Sept. 10 8 a.m. CST
Books close Thurs., Sept. 11 5 p.m. CALL BACKS: Fri., Sept. 12 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Permits & youth cards accepted-CES $8.00-Tradeouts-All events draw for
perf. IPRA entries will be taken as follows: BB, SB, BR Top 30 - CR, SW, CBR, TR Top 40 as of Sept. 8, 2008. TR ENTER ONCE
Indoor arena
LOCATION: Stockton Arena 248 W. Fremont.
AWARDS: Trophy Buckles to event winners Long Go - Short Go (top 10) - Short will be Oct. 4th at 7:30 p.m.
CBR will run in Oct.1 perf. - Short go will be on Oct. 4th at 1:00 p.m.
DES SLACK: CBR-Wed., Oct. 1 at 9 a.m. CR, SW, TR-Thurs., Oct. 2 9 a.m.
STK CONT: Four Star Rodeo Co
Best way to reach me is via email: MizKMart@aol.com
PRCA Member since 1987
WPRA Member since 2007
\"She who is silent is deemed to consent.\"
|
|
|
Talbot
Rookie
Posts: 37
Registered: 1/21/07
Member Is Offline
|
|
Karen Martin:
Somewhere along the road you picked up the pretentious habit of starting every post with "upon information and belief"
For those readers who are not lawyers, this is a fancy way of saying she is just repeating something she heard and has no proof or facts to back it
up.
If you really want to be honest, Karen Martin, you should start your posts with: "Hey guys, I have no clue if this is true or not, but I heard this
somewhere so I am just going to throw it out and see what happens".
Karen Martin, its time for you to grow up.
Bob Talbot
PS. Here is the honest legal definition of "information and belief
information and belief n. a phrase often used in legal pleadings (complaints and answers in a lawsuit), declarations under penalty of perjury, and
affidavits under oath, in which the person making the statement or allegation qualifies it. In effect, he/she says: "I am only stating what I have
been told, and I believe it." This makes clear about which statements he/she does not have sure-fire, personal knowledge (perhaps it is just hearsay
or surmise), and protects the maker of the statement from claims of outright falsehood or perjury. The typical phraseology is: "Plaintiff is informed
and believes, and upon such information and belief alleges that defendant diverted the funds to his own use." (See: declaration, affidavit, complaint,
answer, perjury)
Copyright © 1981-2005 by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen T. Hill. All Right reserved.
|
|
|
KarenMartin
Regional Finalist Champeen
Posts: 256
Registered: 12/3/06
Location: California
Member Is Offline
Mood: TBD
|
|
Talbot:
Talk about a lot of mumbo jumbo ... and yet at no time did you address the issue of this thread which is that the PRCA choose to pull the approval of
a $40,000 added rodeo to the IPRA because someone at HQ did not want to grant an extension of time.
I wonder WHO?
After all, upon information and belief, it was just a SHORT extension of time requested and yet the answer was still NO ... surely a little SLACK
could have been given if it would benefit the members of the PRCA in the long run.
For the record I got a call from a concerned member with this tidbit on August 8th and I checked the PRCA web site to see if Stockton was still listed
as an upcoming rodeo (it was and still is as of the time I posted this response). Then I went to the IPRA web site and when I did not see Stockton
listed, I picked up the telephone and called the IPRA office to confirm. The person who answered the phone said, "nothing is official yet".
I decided to wait to start this thread because I knew that any information that I posted here on Rodeoboards might be questioned since Stockton is
still showing as an upcoming rodeo per the PRCA's web site. So I elected to wait until something was officially posted on the IPRA's web site --
ammunition for when you slam me for not having proof to back it up.
Yet even with confirmation from the IPRA as well as the PRCA's version of what happened (which after reading I could not post this thread fast
enough), you have chosen to blow a lot of smoke to cloud the issue of this thread.
Now since you obviously did not like my "upon information and belief" how about :
FACT or FICTION? -- Did the PRCA pull the approval of a $40,000 added rodeo because someone at HQ did not want to grant an extension for short period
of time so that the rodeo committee would not suffer a financial penalty for early withdrawal of the funds?
FACT or FICTION? -- Because the Stockton Rodeo is now IPRA, will they have a $25,000 added IPRA barrel race as well as a $25,000 added WPRA barrel
race?
FACT or FICTION? -- Were any of the PRCA Board of Directors advised of the request for an extension of time, or was it only after the "executive
decision" was made by someone at HQ before Stockton went IPRA?
FACT or FICTION? -- Is there is a PBR Wednesday night in Stockton?
All things considering Talbot, specifically since there are two barrel races and a PBR scheduled, there is no doubt in my mind that Stockton had the
money required for their PRCA sanctioning.
Yeppers, common sense tells me that the committee was simply being very diligent about not incurring a financial penalty due to early withdrawal of
funds prior to their rodeo. Fact is, I bet that if it was your money sitting in an account, you would not want to be hit with an early withdrawal
penalty either if it was only a matter of a little delay in withdrawing the funds.
I started this thread so the PRCA members could make up their minds as to what happened to the Stockton rodeo -- once again I figure it is best to let
each member figure out what makes more sense as to why we lost one more rodeo.
Again, best wishes to the Stockton Rodeo! I checked out their schedule and they obviously believe in "For Kicks See A Rodeo". For more information
regarding their events, as well as where to buy tickets, please go to http://www.stocktonrodeo.com
Best way to reach me is via email: MizKMart@aol.com
PRCA Member since 1987
WPRA Member since 2007
\"She who is silent is deemed to consent.\"
|
|
|
lippee
Rookie
Posts: 6
Registered: 1/21/08
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hey guys I have no clue if this is true or not because who can keep up with PRCA's indecisions. According to the WPRA website there will be a
$40,000 added WPRA barrel race. (the committee contracted with the WPRA when they thought it would be a PRCA rodeo). It was posted that points would
count for the 2008 NFR, and the 2009 Ca. circuit finals. That has since been deleted from the WPRA website.
|
|
|
Talbot
Rookie
Posts: 37
Registered: 1/21/07
Member Is Offline
|
|
lippee,
Thank you for the clear and informative post.
The PRCA certainly needs to clean up its disgraceful inability to present the straight truth.
Bob
|
|
|
lippee
Rookie
Posts: 6
Registered: 1/21/08
Member Is Offline
|
|
I wonder if any of this has anything to do with Omaha. I also understand that Stockton will have a $25,000 added IPRA barrel race as well as the
$40,000 WPRA barrel race.
|
|
|
BuckEm
Rookie
Posts: 19
Registered: 12/20/05
Member Is Offline
|
|
Some people that post on here need to get a clue.
From PRCA:
Recently on Jim Warren’s website, a for-profit entity, a claim was made that the PRCA “lost Stockton to the IPRA.” The facts of the matter have been
distorted and the following is the actual account of the situation:
The Stockton, CA rodeo committee submitted a rodeo approval application for professional sanctioning through the PRCA. PRCA accepted the application
in good faith and the rodeo was approved with the knowledge, by all involved parties, that the rodeo committee would submit escrow, as required by all
new rodeos per the PRCA Bylaw B15.1.15.2: Any Rodeo Committee may be required to put all purse money in escrow with the PRCA. Additionally, when a
Rodeo Committee is required by the PRCA to place guaranteed purse money in escrow, the PRCA may also require that Rodeo Committee to place in escrow a
sum of money equal to the value of any contract signed with a PRCA Member.
This requirement has been in place for years and is for the protection of our members. The PRCA fights to protect the contestants, contract personnel
and all involved in the production of every rodeo. With a new entity that does not carry a financial history with the PRCA, we must ensure that the
contestants and contract members be rightfully paid, particularly with such a large sum of committee purse money.
The date of deposit of escrow that Stockton had to the PRCA passed. The PRCA made every effort to work with the Stockton rodeo committee, including
extending the deadline and allowing for alternate submission of funds. The Stockton, CA rodeo committee CHOSE NOT TO SUBMIT THE PAYMENT OF ESCROW
FUNDS by the agreed upon deadline, of which they were fully aware of months in advance. Thus, the PRCA applied the rules and the Stockton rodeo was
not sanctioned. PRCA members were alerted of the cancellation through our publication, the ProRodeo Sports News.
The deadline of submission of funds for all new rodeos is set early enough to ensure public notification of any cancellation. Our contestants need
advance notice of a cancelled rodeo, so they can make knowledgeable decisions on their official rodeo count for World Standings purposes.
The PRCA was unable to continue the sanctioning of the Stockton CA rodeo for the 2008 rodeo year, by the rodeo committee’s choice of actions.
|
|
|
KarenMartin
Regional Finalist Champeen
Posts: 256
Registered: 12/3/06
Location: California
Member Is Offline
Mood: TBD
|
|
Some people that post on here need to get a clue that not everything you read on the PRCA's web site is the truth and nothing but the truth.
As is noted in my first post above, what prompted me to start this thread was reading the PRCA's version of things, specifically
The facts of the matter have been distorted and the following is the actual account of the situation: ..."
Bottom Line: Jim Warren's claim -- that the PRCA "lost the Stockton Rodeo to the IPRA" -- is true.
Again, I started this thread because in my opinion PRCA members have the right to hear the other side -- Stockton did not ask for an extension of time
to gather the money but to avoid a financial penalty for early withdrawal of the funds. The PRCA said NO.
Now while I'm at it there is something that I wrote above that has been brought to my attention that needs to be corrected:
The Stockton rodeo committee did not need an extension of time from the WPRA as their date for escrowing the purse money is different than the PRCA's
escrow date.
Best way to reach me is via email: MizKMart@aol.com
PRCA Member since 1987
WPRA Member since 2007
\"She who is silent is deemed to consent.\"
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
Good Morning Fellow Rodeo Dogs,
I have read alot about what is going on out in Stockton, and I have spent some time sorting out what has happen to the guys and girls out there in
Stockton who are trying to put a quality show on for the Rodeo Fans as well as a show that our contestants can start to feel like they matter as a
professional sport. Ms. Martin is right, the PRCA hid behind their Bylaws and said that the Stockton Group (SRA) did not meet there deadlines, but the
SRA asked them to produce some information in regard to a escow account and the PRCA failed to do that also. The SRA did ask for a extension and the
PRCA did say, No! Really the bottm line is the SRA is going forward with the event regardless of the PRCA, and the IPRA should be commended on their
efforts that they are doing to allow all contestants to enter. Bravo to the WPRA for working with that group. At least we didn't lose a show totally.
The real bs is the gold card member who is behind the scenes trying to blow the whole show. Beware of old Jack Roddy and his mafia of morrons via the
way of Oakdale and our members there we have been told from them, as true and staight as a crow fly's old Jack Roddy is being a backstabber, he must
be conferrence calling with T.E. in the Big House, None the less he should just retire from it all and stay away from messing around with the group at
Stockton. Private agendas should be left aside and our members shouldn't suffer because J.R. thinks he can destroy a event because he or someone in
his group doesn't like someone. All we know is that J.R. and the PRCA were doing some talking.
Ms. Martin, you should be commended at getting the facts out to everyone. Thank you, it made it easier for me to look at the facts I have obtained. I
spoke to one of the SRA people and asked them some questions, they just want to provide a good show to our contestants.
I will tell you, and this is fact:
The SRA has recently called the PRCA to remove all the printed material on pro.com and material going out to members that the Stockton Rodeo is
cancelled, the PRCA told them they would not, unless they submit this in writing. hmm the PRCA is asking for another law suit I guess. SO, TO CLEAR
THIS UP THE STOCKTON RODEO IS NOT CANCELLED! APPROVED BY THE IPRA & WPRA.
See you at the show I hope everyone goes and supports Pro Rodeo, I was told by the SRA group that in the Timed Events there are 20 Invitations sent to
our members 40 entry in all events 60 total. Rough Stock Events there 10 Invitations sent to our members 30 entry in all events 40 total.
Looks like we are going to have our top cowboys and cowgirls in the world anyway. Who's going to pass up their Invitation.
Going to It!
|
|
|
KarenMartin
Regional Finalist Champeen
Posts: 256
Registered: 12/3/06
Location: California
Member Is Offline
Mood: TBD
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by Talbot
lippee,
Thank you for the clear and informative post.
The PRCA certainly needs to clean up its disgraceful inability to present the straight truth.
Bob |
Yo Talbot!
Now that TuffRide has put it out there as to who was the WHO that pushed the issue so the PRCA did NOT extend the deadline to the Stockton Rodeo
Association, do you have any comments?
From my point of view, not only is the PRCA not presenting the straight truth to its members, but I find it unsettling to hear that a gold card member
with a personal agenda can have input in regards to PRCA's way of doing business on a daily basis.
Talbot, is this the best way to run the PRCA?
Best way to reach me is via email: MizKMart@aol.com
PRCA Member since 1987
WPRA Member since 2007
\"She who is silent is deemed to consent.\"
|
|
|
Talbot
Rookie
Posts: 37
Registered: 1/21/07
Member Is Offline
|
|
Karen Martin,
1. Hearsay is not proof re: Jack Roddy, though it may turn out to be true. Try presenting some factual proof.
2. Perhaps you did not understand what I said in my last post. Please read it again ... slowly.
"The PRCA certainly needs to clean up its disgraceful inability to present the straight truth."
Seems pretty clear.
Bob Talbot
|
|
|
KarenMartin
Regional Finalist Champeen
Posts: 256
Registered: 12/3/06
Location: California
Member Is Offline
Mood: TBD
|
|
Bob Talbot,
It is clear to me ... as well as others.
Ya know, perhaps you should read what you wrote ... sloooowly.
As for hearsay, I wonder how many readers/members on this very web site have figured out that even though I hear a lot of things that I feel that the
PRCA membership has the right and should know, until I can PROVE IT somehow, I do not POST IT.
See even before I started this very thread, I had to WAIT over a week until it could be verified by the IPRA website. If not, I knew that good folks
such as yourself will come out of the Internet woodwork and do their best to slam me for "my inability to present the straight truth".
But let's get back to the subject of this thread.
C'mon Talbot, hypothetically speaking: Should a gold card member who may have a personal agenda have input in regards to PRCA's way of doing
business on a daily basis if such input could or would impact the PRCA membership NEGATIVELY in the long run?
Is this the best way to run the PRCA?
Best way to reach me is via email: MizKMart@aol.com
PRCA Member since 1987
WPRA Member since 2007
\"She who is silent is deemed to consent.\"
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
Well, well,
Who's going to be first to say that the PRCA is dirty again! OK I will! I has come to my attention that the PRCA is contending that they have no
wrong doing in the non-sanctioning of the Stockton Rodeo... Well they sure didn't help it either... I learned minutes ago that there has been some
dirty play again against the Stockton Rodeo Group. Their CFO should get a big time pat on the back on saving their organization from ruin from the
PRCA. The PRCA apparently asked the SRA CFO to put funds into escrow additional to the prize money, when asked what the money was for the PRCA told
them this was the money that the Stock Contractor was requesting for compensation. The SRA CFO told the PRCA that the Stock Contractor had not
finished or produced a contract to the SRA yet. THe SRA spoke to the contractor who apparently told them that their contract was not ready and he
would speak to the PRCA, the SRA was told their contract was still on scratch paper. Where does the PRCA get off doing things like this, it's no
wonder.
So, this conversation took place on the friday, deadline. and yes the SRA had to get their funds out of their financial banking center the PRCA
granted them thru the weekend.. uh hmm what banking center works on the weekend wth these types of money market accounts. The SRA told the PRCA that
this was impossible with their time frame and th PRCA told them tooo BAD!
I was told that the PRCA is in some big financial problems. We are talking bankrupt, Start looking for a job folks!
I'm not dropping the heavy hand on the PRCA, but what the .... Are they thinking!
Going to it!
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
Look what was just sent to myself and other members! what did I SAY! Big Problems for the PRCA. See we should be smart and invest in the IPRA like
Stockton!
Going to IT!
Fellow PRCA Members:
There is no way I can sit idly by and remain silent while we watch the shameless pirating of our Association; which I sincerely believe could
lead to the ultimate sinking of the greatest organization in the sport of rodeo. Just as when I was a council representative on the Contract
Personnel Executive Council, a member of the Board of Directors and even when later voted off the Board by my peers on the Executive Council, I have
felt compelled to communicate with all of you, sharing my thoughts and providing another perspective to the stories being told among us.
The inspiration to write to you comes from taking advantage of the opportunity as an active PRCA member to participate in the on-going conference
calls mono-moderated by the leadership of Cowboys, Inc. A great forum...for telling only one side of the story.
My initial thought was a flash back to one of my conversations with Jim Warren back in early September 2006, which Mr. Warren was requesting the
scheduling of what I understood would be a "General Membership" meeting. I (as Board Chairman) remember telling him that we would work with him in
that effort and that my thoughts were if we were going to have a true "General Membership" meeting we should do it in a place like Waco, Texas where
two days of slack were scheduled in just a few weeks. That would give a significant portion of the membership an opportunity to attend a meeting
within the time line Mr. Warren described to me. Unfortunately, Mr. Warren was not at all interested in taking his issues to the membership in an
open forum where every side of all issues could be represented.
Rather, Mr. Warren's stated intention was to go to Colorado Springs and present the Board with his ideas for change using the power of the
proxies he had secured. These proxies, at the time still being verified as I recall, were to be Mr. Warren's authorization to speak on the
membership's behalf (after all, he represented that he had authorization from 10% of our membership to speak on everyone's behalf). Further, the way
Mr. Warren interpreted the Rule Book, the proxies gave him the power to take over the Association on behalf of those who signed the proxies, whether
or not the signer knew anything at all about Mr. Warren's actual plans.
That really scared me and it scared others on the Board, as well as other Event Reps; some of whom had even signed proxies without fully
understanding the potential consequences of their actions. That is when and why the Board took the action it did with regard to changing the bylaw
dealing with proxies. The action was not taken against Mr. Warren or against his ideas (although those had yet to be defined). The action was taken
to guard against any person and/or entity having the potentially subversive power to pirate the Association away from its membership.
Yes we made mistakes in the way the matter was handled. And you will likely hear that from me again. I am neither afraid of change (for the
betterment of the Association), nor afraid to admit I have made mistakes and have tried to correct them.
Following the conclusion of the 2006 Wrangler National Finals Rodeo, a meeting open to all PRCA members was held Sunday morning, Dec. 10. It was
called a "General Membership" meeting because that is the language we all tend to understand in our industry. However, lawyers have since pointed out
my error in describing it thusly. During the meeting Jimmie Cooper read a list of mandates/resolutions for immediate changes to be made in the
Association, including reading a roster of new directors and administrators to be appointed; not elected in any shape, form or fashion by our
membership.
At that moment, as Mr. Cooper was reading the list of pre-selected appointees to lead the new regime, I knew I had done the right thing for the
PRCA and our membership by voting to change the proxy bylaw. In the Court's view a valid, acceptable decision was made by the Board in 2006; however,
the Court ruled that decision was not executed properly. Thankfully, under strict guidelines from the Court, we all now have the opportunity to make a
more informed, independent and personal choice as to our own destinies and the future of the PRCA and proxies will be both properly solicited and
credited.
This is actually "old" news. Since the Warren vs. PRCA trial, the direction and tone of conversations from the Cowboys, Inc. camp about no one in
the new regime seeking any paid positions and/or power has definitely been altered as a result of the Court's action. If the Court had not struck
down their attempt to appoint themselves into positions of power, as was their intention at the December 10 meeting, their proposed B1.12 Member's
Advocacy Council would not be an elected position. In fact, one member of their proposed council is still appointed.
In this presidential election year in our United States, we hear a lot about "CHANGE", but no where do we hear talk about changing the structure of
our government. And while I may agree in principle with some of the issues that have been presented by the players in Cowboys, Inc., and while I do
believe in accountability, I could never agree with their methods or what I believe their motives to be.
During one of the recent Cowboys, Inc. one-way teleconferences moderator, J.D. Crouse took the opportunity to vent his frustrations about the
extension of the Wrangler NFR contract between the PRCA and Las Vegas Events back in 2005. I too had some frustrations about the agreement.
Frustrations because I was unable to negotiate a more lucrative agreement for my contract personnel constituents, my contestant constituents, my stock
contractor constituents or my rodeo committee constituents (who wanted more tickets). We truly represented all members in the negotiation.
When I say we, I mean a team appointed by the Board to handle the negotiations, consisting of: Leon Vick, Casey Beard and myself representing the
Board and working closely with then commissioner Troy Ellerman; then treasurer, Keith Martin and then vice president of Properties, Mr. Crouse.
Everyone had input. Everyone had a voice. When all the dust settled from the negotiations, we all presented the Board with an agreement that was
approved.
Ideas were born out of those negotiations for spreading the wealth of the Wrangler NFR agreement to an even broader scope of our membership and,
in particular, the Circuit system. Although it took much too long to accomplish, a June 10, 2008 PRCA press release demonstrated yet another way the
PRCA serves its entire membership.
This is the course of business. We all did the best we could in the negotiations, which is just another form of competition. It is done. It is
over. Prepare for the next opportunity and try to outperform the last.
I admire bright young guys like Mr. Crouse. We have had some good conversations about our industry. However, when he chooses to cast shadows of
doubt over issues that are moot, I tend to wonder. Mr. Crouse had input on the Wrangler NFR contract, he was heavily involved in the Grit Rock and
Winnercomm television contract negotiations. In fact, he was the first person I ever heard make mention of a move to New Mexico.
Mr. Crouse was on board with the PRCA then. He was on board with the PRCA when, as Vice President of PRCA Properties, he went to the 2006 Tour
Finale in Omaha and made a blanket announcement to the effect that all members there with a "Patch" sponsorship had to pay PRCA Properties $1,000. I
don't believe that had EVER been approved by the Board. Now don't get me wrong, I had several conversations with Mr. Crouse about this very matter
and I have had subsequent conversations with his successors about the same thing. I DO believe outside sponsors should pay some sort of fee to the
PRCA for all of the television exposure they gain via PRCA televised events.
But, guess what: that is my opinion. One I have long held. In fact, along with Bryan McDonald and a couple of others, we wrote it into the
original Patch guidelines back in 1989-90.
The point is:
· PRCA administration(s) past and present have made mistakes
· In the future, PRCA administrations will make mistakes
· Are we willing to jeopardize all that is good with our Association for the bullying tactics of "Your Last Chance?"
I will be the first to empathize with issues of high fuel prices and the cost of travel affecting us all. Sponsors are also affected by that
problem and are faced with the rising costs of shipping and receiving raw materials and finished goods rapidly eating into many advertising/marketing
budgets.
There are answers, but they do not lie in the wholesale change of a system that is not broken. Rather, we have system which is underutilized by
the membership. This is not the time to start from scratch, and that is a likely prospect with a take-over. There are solutions, but it takes
structure, a democratic structure, like we already have in place to achieve them. Not all solutions will be popular or hold purely to tradition.
STEP UP and PARTICIPATE! The true "Root Problem" with our Association is we members too often fail to work within the very system designed to serve
us.
Sincerely Yours,
Tom Feller
C13550
|
|
|
announcer
Rookie
Posts: 6
Registered: 2/18/07
Member Is Offline
|
|
Is there problems with the PRCA, you bet. Is there problems in our US Government, you bet. Is there problems at your place of work, probably. Here
is an idea if you dont like what is going on QUIT. We need things to change but Cowboyinc is not the answer.
As far as Stockton, yes it seems dumb to not aprove a rodeo that big. But everyone constantly gripes that we don't follow the rules and now that the
PRCA followed there approval guidlines, your mad about that as well.
Hey again if you don't like the PRCA, get out I hear the IPRA is looking for members.
|
|
|
D.Rogers
|
|
I got the letter as well and I for one was impressed with it. I know that the PRCA has made some HUGE mistakes in the past but I feel in no way that
Jim Warren and Cowboys Inc are the answer to our problems.
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
Announcer,
We don't Quit, we get to the bottom of the mis-lead, do you get me or is this to much for you to handle?! We have a group of people, NOT,
representing the membership of the PRCA. They have there own agendas and probally letting Ellerman run the scenes thru his rodeo mafia at the Admin
office at HQ while he plays SECRETARY for the Warden!
And, when the PRCA doesn't have a show for you to "Spout off at" are you going to join the IPRA or be homeless! Give me a break Announcer Pop Off,
look at the real underlying problem here our memberships are going to pay for inflated salaries and defending the stupid decision making going on in
the same offices. hmm is that what you want your funds that are put into this organization going to. Get it straight THIS ISN'T A "GRIPE" this is cold
fact and if it doesn't change and change quick I will site a bylaw on open net that will allow our members to make their own decision to what
financial settlement they want to make with our association for breech!
I agree there are problems in every organization, business, relationships, but lets not muddy the water with the PRCA these are the same problems
that are happening. Hey this is a membership, anyone thought about a re-election.........? It is election year.... Oh there you go you've done pissed
me off, oh wait one minute...................................................... no you just sharpened my pen!
Look forward to you next Pop Off, Announcer Spout Off.
Going to It!
|
|
|
D.Rogers
|
|
What about the $500,000 that Jim is demanding for his organization plus 5% to be spent however he and his constiuents see fit with no checks and
balances from the organization?
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
D. Rogers,
I too was impressed with the letter. We as a organization need to be informed about what is happening daily these are funds that will directly affect
the organization should this go badly. Jim Warren is not going to solve the problems with how they exist at this point, and the happening with his
group are not helping them either. I just think that when I hear the Stockton Rodeo mis-hap being link to the Jim Warren vs. the PRCA it makes me
think why are they bringing this rodeo into their already existing issues to bring it down with them. That is wrong for both sides.......! The PRCA
posted on pro.com the info as a direct blast at Jim Warren, then Jim Warren and Cowboys Inc. did the same.
Either way not a good for Stockton to be caught in the middle. I hope our Cowboys and Cowgirls go to it.
Going to It!
|
|
|
Lost
Rookie
Posts: 24
Registered: 12/13/07
Member Is Offline
|
|
Yeah I hope they go to it to. That shows how much they care about the business of the PRCA. What a joke. You people want the PRCA to do your bidding
and then you make statements like the one above and go to non approved events. Oh yeah and you only want the rules enforced when they suit you. and
the IPRA are very good at doing that.
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
LOST,
Yes, you are lost! Get with the program! Do you need to be explained the general concept of being a Professional Cowboy or Cowgirl? The PRCA, IPRA,
WHATEVERPRA is a avenue for the professional to go to and win a pay check, for people who punch a clock everday it called work! You go where the work
is, you know the money!!!!
As long as there is a governing body of rules, go and get the job done. Lets not split hairs, let just not loose rodeo period. Take a good look the
PRCA had 750+ Rodeo's in 2004 and now there are about 430 not all were lost because stupid crap by the PRCA, but some were. None the less we as
members should always help get shows where ever we are!
Going to it!
|
|
|
D.Rogers
|
|
The whole point is if you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem. If Jim Warren is not willing to work within the system, then
he does'nt need to address the problem. I am by no means 100% pro PRCA but I do not believe that Mr. Warren is the solution to our problems. In my
opinion, we have many members who disatissified with our leadership and sometimes rightfully so but they are not willing to get involved to solve the
problems and they see someone like Jim Warren and they think he is the saviour or the PRCA. The fact is that Jim Warren sees the PRCA for the cash
cow that is or can be and is willing to be the flag bearer for change. But the change that he represents is not in the best interest of our
organization in the long run. Yes there are "flies in the butter" in the PRCA but Jim is not the Orkin Man by any means. Do the due diligence that
any decision of this magnitude constitutes and you will see.
[Edited on 8/28/08 by D.Rogers]
|
|
|
Lost
Rookie
Posts: 24
Registered: 12/13/07
Member Is Offline
|
|
No tuffy you are lost because its people like you who gripe about not making money in the PRCA and dont see how hard it is to explain to the sponsors
why they get the same name contestants at a little open rodeo that only cost a little to sponsor. Compared to what they have to pay to sponsor a PRCA
rodeo. I dont see Dale Earnhardt. going to dirt tracks but boy its dosnt matter to some cowboys. They want to be able to go wherever they want but
still gripe about the outcome. So if you read what happened in Stockton was just a rule call. What if the PRCA sponsors got involved and because the
commitee hadnt put up the money they backed then backed out. The sponsors would then be asking the PRCA why we dont have rules to stop this kind of
thing.
|
|
|
KarenMartin
Regional Finalist Champeen
Posts: 256
Registered: 12/3/06
Location: California
Member Is Offline
Mood: TBD
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by D.Rogers
I got the letter as well and I for one was impressed with it. I know that the PRCA has made some HUGE mistakes in the past but I feel in no way that
Jim Warren and Cowboys Inc are the answer to our problems. |
The following comments were sent to me via email, so I thought I would share them:
Perhaps Jim and JD ought to send an email to the PRCA and see if it is forwarded to all the PRCA members in the same way?
Perhaps they should invite Mr. Feller to come onto the conference call and openly debate the issues?
Mr. Feller certainly doesn't seem to have any remorse over spending ~$1.3M of the members money on the WPRA lawsuit and the damage done there, as well
as being the one who put forth the motion to give TE a severance package of over $200,000 when he pled guilty and stepped down as commissioner!!!!!!
Best way to reach me is via email: MizKMart@aol.com
PRCA Member since 1987
WPRA Member since 2007
\"She who is silent is deemed to consent.\"
|
|
|
TuffRide
Rookie
Posts: 33
Registered: 8/25/08
Location: Nevada, California, Washington, Oregon
Member Is Offline
Mood: All About Pro Rodeo
|
|
LOST & The Rest of the Group,
Sorry, for be such a TUFFY, but the boys and I feel very strongly about the loss of Stockton. We need shows like this and I'm sorry, but we know more
about it than most. Go to the show and support all of rodeo. As you are probally aware most of us have both cards so we plan to go to a show where
ever and when ever we can. And we plan on always supporting our boys who cross over to promote. Just know those good dudes in Norcal are hard core
rodeo IPRA, PRCA, CCPRA, ect. they just want the show for us, you know the contestants.
Going to it!
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3 |
|
![[*]](images/xp/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
