- Feb 4, 2010
- 5,486
- 19,660
Does anyone else see a problem with a governing body having preferred/official private vendor providers and advertising for them? Is there any other governing body that operates this way?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
there is a big difference between companies paying to sponsor a tournament and the governing body stating they are preferred providers.I'm sure they would prefer to have Coke, Capital One, AT&T, etc. like the NCAA and most other governing bodies. Everyone would probably prefer them to stay away from private related businesses, but being they lack huge, outside spectatorship, that's about all they have.
They currently have partner/affiliate memberships with many small private cheer related businesses <click here>. You can click on the individual categories and see many apparel businesses (including GK and Rebel), bow makers, choreographers, photographers, media, etc. Under the circumstances, "no" it doesn't bother me, it's open to all, including competitors of Varsity.
Where does it state they're a "preferred provider?" "Preferred provider" is actually a healthcare term. "Official provider," which is used above, means nothing more than that's who the USASF uses for their music. Again, do I think people would prefer they not advertise their official businesses? "Sure." Do I, also, realize a simple tweet can save them money that is otherwise passed onto parents? "Sure."there is a big difference between companies paying to sponsor a tournament and the governing body stating they are preferred providers.