Reply to Economics of club volleyball

Forum Index » Sports General Discussion

Reply to "Economics of club volleyball"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]You can find MVSA with a revenue of $0 if you search for "Montgomery Village." I would be surprised if they make any money, but that's not their goal. [/quote]
That's not MVSA volleyball.  Here's the link to MVSA VBC reporting history: [url]https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/811916976[/url]. And their 2023 return: [url]https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/811916976/202332439349301478/full[/url]

They didn't have any donations from the county or any other entity disclosed on their forms for 2023.

2023: Revenue: $455,915, Net Income: $73,106

[b]MVSA actually makes more income as a % of revenue than most of the other non-profits listed above. So consider the PP surprised. For comparison, MVSA income=16% of revenue, Md Juniors=13%, NVVA=8%[/b]

According to their filings, MVSA making a profit is a recent phenomenon, with total assets (think cash in an account) growing from $65K in 2020 to $248K in 2023.  Where does this profit come from? They aren't required to break out revenue based on team revenue (club fees) vs. tournament hosting revenue vs. rec league. But you can get a decent idea of where they make their money if you calculate their team revenue based on their published fees.  For their 2024 fees, they should earn ~$350K from their team fees.  They did raise prices this year, so that number was likely less last year.  A reasonable guess is that in 2023 70% of their revenue is team fees, 30% is all other. Most of the other is likely tournament hosting.

Earning revenue from tournaments is not a bad thing, and its a service the region absolutely needs. But MVSA does benefit from avoidance of the tournament fees ($350-$550/team per tournament) and collecting equivalent fees from other teams that attend their tournaments. If the situation was reversed, MVSA players would probably pay ~$200-$400 more for tournament costs on their top teams based on their typical MVSA tournament schedules. Regional team players would likely pay more because they do more local tournaments.  The other club hosting the tournament would have their players paying less. There are a limited number of tournament slots each weekend, and MVSA and MD Juniors have the vast majority of them, so no other clubs have the opportunity those two clubs have.  Even if there were a lot of interest from other clubs to host tournaments (most don't) there would likely be some pushback from the clubs that benefit the most from the current CHRVA system in this way, because every lost tournament means less profit or higher fees for their players.

Also, since their profit last year is less than their estimated tournament fee/other revenue, they may be also further subsidizing their team fees. Its impossible to know without more data, but another 100-200/player could come from this.

Putting this info together, a team at another club that doesn't host tournaments, has the same tournament schedule as an MVSA team and pays coaches could pay ~300 more in tournament fees, ~400 more in coaches salary and ~200 in coach travel/expenses. Add in higher facility costs, an extra practice each week, nationals costs for the team and coaches and then reduced the costs for a lower profit margin and carrying 1-2 more players and you get to a price point of ~3-4K for a travel team.  That's very close to the price points for some of the MD clubs that are generally seen as having reasonable prices, and its probably not a coincidence.

TLDR: MVSA has a unique model with volunteer coaches and low facility rates but they also make more profit than most clubs, at least the last two years. This could be a direct result of their tournament hosting along with a commendable desire to keep expenses low in other areas.  For other clubs that don't have the advantages of their model, they will have a higher price or lose a lot of money and disappear quickly.  But there is a reasonable limit to that fee. Based on the data it would be very hard to explain why a club needs to charge $4000+ for a player for a high performing travel team.[/quote]

I really appreciate you digging into this and I hope others do as well. I am the PP who you figured would be surprised, but I am not really. I prefer to compare $73,106 (MVSA income) with 383,074 (MD JRs income) rather than calculate it as a percentage of the revenue. Without implying that you lied or anything, someone once said "lies, damned lies, and statistics." I don't believe the income as a ratio of revenue is a meaningful way to compare clubs, especially when we are talking about $73k (which will benefit the MVSA players rather than make any of the MVSA volunteers rich). [/quote]

I think the assumption that MVSA made no profit was the point the PP was referencing.   They do make a profit.

MD Juniors is one the higher cost clubs in MD, with fees easily topping 5,000+ for their 1s teams and 4,000 for their 2s and 3/4 teams, so I’m not surprised they make so much. Seems like they could be much more affordable but choose not to be.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics