I just read at" swiminfo.com" that the USMS board of directors voted to start "our" own magazine and no longer affiliate with SWIM. Their article presents the SWIM point of veiw,but it is a compelling argument against this action.What is the other side & what does everyone think?
Based, solely on the article on swiminfo.com (which as disclosed in the article, is owned by SPI, which also owns Swim) I can see how some would rush to judgment and condemn the actions of USMS. However, as a member of the USMS House of Delegates, I was thankfully provided additional information upon which to base my vote.
For instance, I didn’t see anywhere in the swiminfo article that the total anticipated subscription cost of Swim would exceed $5.3 Million, over the life of the contract, assuming a 2% membership growth. While the Douglas Murphy proposal has the upside potential of being a revenue generating vehicle for USMS. So why is it ridiculous to generate revenue instead of spending $5.3 Million?
And before people start blasting me for inaccurate reporting… While I relatively sure my numbers are accurate, they are also misleading. My point it that while we are all entitled to our opinions about decisions made, it wouldn’t hurt to have more facts in hand before rushing to judgment.
Also, before we accuse our representatives of being apparently clueless, wouldn’t it have been nice to contact them and ask why they voted as they did. You may find that some were actually well informed, basing their decisions on the information presented from both sides of this issue.
With all that said, my real reason for posting is to encourage all of us to continue to support Phil, Brent and the entire SPI family by continuing to subscribe to Swim Magazine “The World’s Foremost Authority on Adult Swimming”!
Based, solely on the article on swiminfo.com (which as disclosed in the article, is owned by SPI, which also owns Swim) I can see how some would rush to judgment and condemn the actions of USMS. However, as a member of the USMS House of Delegates, I was thankfully provided additional information upon which to base my vote.
For instance, I didn’t see anywhere in the swiminfo article that the total anticipated subscription cost of Swim would exceed $5.3 Million, over the life of the contract, assuming a 2% membership growth. While the Douglas Murphy proposal has the upside potential of being a revenue generating vehicle for USMS. So why is it ridiculous to generate revenue instead of spending $5.3 Million?
And before people start blasting me for inaccurate reporting… While I relatively sure my numbers are accurate, they are also misleading. My point it that while we are all entitled to our opinions about decisions made, it wouldn’t hurt to have more facts in hand before rushing to judgment.
Also, before we accuse our representatives of being apparently clueless, wouldn’t it have been nice to contact them and ask why they voted as they did. You may find that some were actually well informed, basing their decisions on the information presented from both sides of this issue.
With all that said, my real reason for posting is to encourage all of us to continue to support Phil, Brent and the entire SPI family by continuing to subscribe to Swim Magazine “The World’s Foremost Authority on Adult Swimming”!
