All-Star An Article About Varsity Brands...

[randomactsofcheer]

The agenda isn't from the journalist, it is from the corporation or person paying for the advertising. If you are a journalist then you know most of our media is owned by large corporations that have their own agenda which is why our news sources are skewed to extremes based on their corporate interests. This journalist probably has no idea what deals were made behind the scenes for advertising dollars, his boss probably just came in and said do an article on WE and add this twist about Varsity to it, here's some information.

Playing devil's advocate: The WE parts and the Varsity parts read like two separate articles. The person/people who asked for the article could have had a pro-Varsity agenda. Because the journalist had no idea what deals were made behind closed doors, the journalist could have been asked to do a story on WE and was told to or decided own his own to call Varsity for background information. Something didn't sit right with him after talking to Varsity so he did some more digging.The article could have unfolded either way.

I had done some research on cheer becoming a sport in my state prior to reading this article. I was surprised to see Varsity pop up as an advocate against it. My daughter came into cheer from gymnastics, so I am fairly new to cheer. With my limited background knowledge, it seemed strange to me that the leading corporation in cheer would be advocating against cheer becoming a sport. Because this information prompted me to do more research, I can see why it would prompt a journalist to do the same...

 

[stuntjumptumble]

So what is wrong exactly with varsity monopolizing? Maybe I'm missing something but I really like varsity. Love their unis/practice clothes and their comps are run much better than IEP's in my opinion. Maybe cheer being under one "umbrella" as mentioned before can be positive for the sport so it can be more regulated. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't quite understand


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ashley]

So what is wrong exactly with varsity monopolizing? Maybe I'm missing something but I really like varsity. Love their unis/practice clothes and their comps are run much better than IEP's in my opinion. Maybe cheer being under one "umbrella" as mentioned before can be positive for the sport so it can be more regulated. Maybe I'm wrong but I don't quite understand


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think Varsity is great and has done a lot for this sport. When they get so big that no one else can compete then they can become complacent. They can raise prices because there's no real competition and they can stop innovating. They basically become Comcast.

My real issue is how they've testified against things that could hurt their bottom line. They created STUNT to interfere with NCATA and testified against cheer being a sport in California.

Also, a sport shouldn't be regulated by a private corporation. It should be regulated by a non-profit.

 

[stuntjumptumble]

I think Varsity is great and has done a lot for this sport. When they get so big that no one else can compete then they can become complacent. They can raise prices because there's no real competition and they can stop innovating. They basically become Comcast.

My real issue is how they've testified against things that could hurt their bottom line. They created STUNT to interfere with NCATA and testified against cheer being a sport in California

Yeah see those last two point are definitely an issue. NCATA could definitely be a lot bigger in fact I'd love to see it grow


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Michael White]

Also, a sport shouldn't be regulated by a private corporation. It should be regulated by a non-profit.

This is probably the truest thing I've read in this whole thread.

 

[piglet]

Also, a sport shouldn't be regulated by a private corporation. It should be regulated by a non-profit.

Yeah, like FIFA ;)

 

[Just-a-Mom]

So what is wrong exactly with varsity monopolizing?

Well for one, monopolies violate antitrust laws, which exist for a reason.

Companies with a monopoly control pricing (meaning they can charge whatever they want for their "product" because no one else is making it), and therefore also control supply. Companies with a monopoly generally have a lot of economic power, and therefore have large amount of control over the people who make regulations for their industry (eg whether cheer is a sport). I could go on for days.

I actually like varsity and some of their products. I think they do a lot for cheer. What I don't like is monopolies. I like when companies have to compete for business, because it forces them to put out superior products at competitive prices. A monopoly does the opposite.

I think Varsity is great and has done a lot for this sport. When they get so big that no one else can compete then they can become complacent. They can raise prices because there's no real competition and they can stop innovating. They basically become Comcast.

My real issue is how they've testified against things that could hurt their bottom line. They created STUNT to interfere with NCATA and testified against cheer being a sport in California.

Also, a sport shouldn't be regulated by a private corporation. It should be regulated by a non-profit.

This. All of this.

But the last paragraph... YES.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[uhhlyssa01]

This is probably the truest thing I've read in this whole thread.

I believe USASF is technically a non-profit, but I'm not 100% positive. If they are, and they can fully separate themselves from Varsity (which we've already seen a lot of), then I think we'll start seeing this industry go in a much more desirable direction.

 

[Michael White]

Yeah, like FIFA ;)

There's always an exception to the rule. FIFA is one of them.

 

[Ashley]

I believe USASF is technically a non-profit, but I'm not 100% positive. If they are, and they can fully separate themselves from Varsity (which we've already seen a lot of), then I think we'll start seeing this industry go in a much more desirable direction.

Yeah, I wasn't necessarily talking about USASF. But Varsity created the organization that recommends high school (and college?) rules, and Varsity created USA Cheer, and Varsity more or less runs ICU.

There's always an exception to the rule. FIFA is one of them.

And most professional sports - NFL, MLB, etc. They might technically be a non-profit, but they're raking in the dough. But that's professional sports, not youth, and I can't imagine that FIFA is the governing body for youth soccer.

 

[uhhlyssa01]

Yeah, I wasn't necessarily talking about USASF. But Varsity created the organization that recommends high school (and college?) rules, and Varsity created USA Cheer, and Varsity more or less runs ICU.

Yup, that's exactly where I was getting at. The USASF being a non-profit is a good thing, the part where a monopolizing for-profit company created it and ran it for many years...not so much. Baby steps.

 

[BlueCat]

(General statement) The type of corporation (501 C3, for-profit, etc) does make some difference, but it doesn't automatically make everything function efficiently, transparently, or without corruption. Money, power, and politics don't magically go away when you change your corporate status.

For that matter, labelling something a sport doesn't automatically make it safer. There would be positives and negatives. It sounds really cool to be "at the same level" as football, basketball, etc, but the issue is grayer than people give it credit for. Falling under the states' interscholastic bureaucracies has its drawbacks.

 

[catlady]

Playing devil's advocate: The WE parts and the Varsity parts read like two separate articles. The person/people who asked for the article could have had a pro-Varsity agenda. Because the journalist had no idea what deals were made behind closed doors, the journalist could have been asked to do a story on WE and was told to or decided own his own to call Varsity for background information. Something didn't sit right with him after talking to Varsity so he did some more digging.The article could have unfolded either way.

Alternative newspapers are known for their anti large corporation stance so, while I would love to believe this is just a very good journalist who really spent time investigating an article about WE after he interviewed them, I'm still very much a skeptic. An article about the big, bad corporation fits the standard of that type of publication.

As far as, monopolies, Varsity knows they aren't a necessity in the family budget. If they price out parents, they are out of business. If they were a utility, gasoline, drug, or food corp, I'd definitely be singing a different tune but, it's neither here nor there since Varsity still has competition out there.

Gym owners/parents going anti-Varsity? Then be prepared for the gym owners that will open up nearby that will be pro-Varsity. Yes, us parents whine and moan about travel costs, STP and big 'ol bad Mickey on the boards while we are reserving our travel. But, be honest, when we are in the heart of the comp season, we are talking about how much we want our kids to get a bid, how awesome the experience was while all the kids proudly wear their "I'm going to the Summit shirt", then the official "Summit" shirt, then some the "Summit Finalist Shirt", then some the "Summit Champion Shirt", along with the Summit trading pin and string bag, then we go home and stuff it into one of the many drawers full of gym, NCA, Cheersport, and UCA shirts, proudly hang the banners or medals, talk about how we can't wait to go next year, I can't believe the season is over, can't we go to one more comp, while we are all printing off the new tryout packets. The bottom line always speaks louder and more truthful than the consumer. Walmart anyone?

 

[Official OWECheer]

"Look at that b*tch eating those crackers"...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

LMAO!

 

[Official OWECheer]

It sounds really cool to be "at the same level" as football, basketball, etc, but the issue is grayer than people give it credit for. Falling under the states' interscholastic bureaucracies has its drawbacks.

Bingo. So many states have had their cheer seasons jacked up because of the sport ruling. But how do we force people to give cheerleaders the same basic necessities guaranteed to other athletes?