Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

We're drifting off-topic here, but I'll state that I'm not in favor of eliminating the second trophy.

FIRST's intent is for the team to present this trophy to their primary sponsor. If your sponsor is in attendance at the event in which you win an award, that's a good time to present them with the trophy. It's "instant gratification" for their contribution to your team and the program. Alternatively, the team should arrange a presentation with the sponsor (i.e. invite the sponsor to a team banquet, or ask for an invitation for a tour, etc.). Your sponsor deserves (and will certainly appreciate) the award and recognition!

BTW, the incremental cost to FIRST for shipping these trophies to regionals and Championship is very low: they travel in the trucks along with the field.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

If this was an option I don't think a single team would not request a second trophy. So now you are making teams that are successful have to pay extra because they are successful.


I don't care either way about pins vs metals. My question echos some others wondering how much they spend on these metals anyway? Over the past year or so there seems to be an effort to cut costs, but without knowing how much of an impact or savings these items are giving it seems silly to get all worked up over it.

For example How much do the metals cost to make (probably not the $12 they charge for extra ones)? How much would a custom made pin cost? A new pin would have to be redesigned every year, what does that cost? what tooling is associated with it. And most importantly what is the total being saved?

I honestly think that there are bigger items which FIRST can cut/change which will have a bigger impact on the bottom line. For example is it necessary to have a ~$50k fireworks display at the wrap party (estimate from what I know about fireworks) Why do we need the curtains in the pits in Atlanta when tape on the floor would be just fine, how much does it cost in rentals and manual labor to set them up?

Ultimately for me it comes down to this; saving money is good but unless you are going to pass along the savings to the teams, don't cheapen the student experience. The largest chunk of FIRST's operating budget is from team registration (14.4million) so in my mind customer satisfaction should be their highest priority, I didn't hear people complaining about getting a free metals but I am sure I will if they go away.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

Granted this has been my first season (hah hah pun ^_-), but I have mixed feelings. I have a feeling that especially to the rookie teams a medal would appear to be a far greater award than another pin (which quite frankly you have hundreds of by the end of the competition). On the other hand the more medals you get the less interesting they would become. Personally I would stick with the medals as I (and I may be very alone in this) get so many pins that an extra one would probably just end up swept in with the rest and end up in some bag or box while I try to find a better place to put them. At least for now I have so few medals that that isn't likely.

Maybe I'm alone in this aspect too (or I just need to go to a few more competitions), but I never really pay attention to the pins everyone else is wearing. Typically the people wearing pins tend to be wearing so many that it would take you until next kick-off to identify them all or the people are wearing so few that you wouldn't even notice.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

First, I think it's great that FIRST is open to our input on this. There are many organizations out there that really just believe that "They should be happy with whatever they get." I'm sure that is how many of us feel regardless of their decision.

I certainly believe that a small pin, designed along the lines of the chairman's pin, would be fine. From year to year, the only thing that should really need to be updated with the design might be the year and the game name (which isn't even included on any medal). I believe it was mentioned in a prior post that the medals are shipped with the fields, so leave shipping out. If they're only considering the cost of producing the medal then I'm all about having them.

The idea of a pin would really be cool. I think it would be pretty cool to see people wearing their pins back to competitions and getting some extra use out of them. I really don't ever remember any student wearing their medallions after having received them. It might be easier (and much more safe) to sport a pin at a competition rather than a medal.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

A couple of reactions:
1) I think it depends on what type of pin; Bill's posting is the first I heard of this idea, so I'm not sure what FIRST has in mind. A very nice, stamped/die cut metal pin I think could still hold a lot of significance. I hope FIRST doesn't think it can get away with the mass produced plastic pins that the teams give out. This distinction alone I think would help to set them apart.
2) At least for me, it's less about the physical significance than the memories and emotional weight that the medals carry. I have several FIRST participation medals, a regional champion, and a regional finalist medals at home, but to me, the most cherished of all my memorabilia from FIRST is the small pin I was given by Woodie Flowers when I met him in Atlanta last year. I think it's possible for a pin to carry the same weight to you as a medal, and how many people really pass through your room anyway?
3) From the standpoint of FIRST's mission to change a culture, I think the medallions have some significance. If we're trying to say to kids, "Hey, you can be just as successful and win just as much recognition from your peers by being on the robotics team as you can on the football team," there could be a lot of difference between "I got quarter kilo medal," and "I got a lapel pin." (perhaps some exaggeration present)

--Ryan

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

I guess how you feel about this is sort of based on the value that you put behind the medallion and what you do with it.

On our team, I take the box of medallions and squirrel them away until our school's end of year awards ceremonies. Then, each student who participated on the team is called up on stage to receive their medallion.

Should we receive a gold or silver medallion, well, I'll happily rethink our plans, but this works great with the bronze medallions. I don't see them as representative of our placing in any one tournament, but rather as representing a YEAR's worth of work... from summer car washes through public presentations to build and finally competition. The kids that are getting a medal have earned it by the time the awards ceremonies roll around.

Yeah, we could do the same thing with a pin, but really... it wouldn't be as impressive or as meaningful. There is some weight and solidity behind a medallion... a symbolisim that just isn't quite matched by a pin.

So count me solidly in the "Medal" camp, even if it means raising an extra $5 per kid relative to a pin, I think they're worth it.

Jason

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

I made a comment on the blogspot thread to similar effect, but I don't think it's fair to ask teams to weigh in on this without further explaining why the cost-reduction is necessary and what its impact will be.

There have been a number of changes in the past year that point to reduced costs for FIRST, but teams have yet to see those savings passed on the them; at least, outside of Michigan, perhaps.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

Agree totally. FIRST needs to more elaborately explain what the new design would be, along with the real cost savings to teams. Only then can they expect meaningful feedback.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

I have to ask, is FIRST trying to save us money or save money themselves? What if the money from sponser is dropping and prices increasing? Is this to save us money or prevent the cost from going up?

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

In Billfred's initial post that began this discussion is the quote asking for input about participation medals and pins. In that quote is also an email address that has been provided, FRCteams@usfirst.org. That may be a good place to make further suggestions and present opinions or voice concerns.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

Couldn't the savings be no, or reduced, fee incresases year over year?

I'm as cynical and and jaded as they come with organizations and large group decision making with the deaf leading the blind et all, but I can't see how at least reducing the brozne metals they give wouldn't help. Make them optional, make it so only those who didn't win a silver or gold get them, make them smaller, whatever. Even when my team never won an award we found it hilarious FIRST would just give us bronze metals in a box, we probably have enough for a small regional in the back room.

I think the pins are a cooler idea, I'd rather show I was part of xxx Regional 20xx than a giant generic medal. But that's just me. Being jaded. And cynical. And liking pins.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

Something I forgot to mention is that the pins would actually be cool and stuff, but not in the way medals are now; they're not a suitable replacement. Being able to have a row of pins on your shirt for all of the games you've been involved in would be really neat. Almost enough that I would be dissapointed in winning to not add to the collection! o_o

However, this is completely different than what a medal does, so I'm mostly saying if it changes, things won't be the same, and people like the same. What an insightful statement.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

That would be fine and, in such a case, I don't think it's too much to expect that FIRST or Bill added, "Savings here will offset escalating costs elsewhere." More detail would be nice, but it's certainly not necessary.

I'm long over receiving the participation medals, but they're not meant for me. My kids think they're pretty cool, though, and are pretty proud to wear them around sometimes. Medals capture the attention of others and they want to know why you've earned them. Pins, while perhaps more interesting to an insular FIRST culture, will not generate the same interest among outsiders. It's a bad change unless the cost saving is tremendously justified elsewhere.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

Indeed, some measure of scale would be beneficial. If FIRST paid the price we pay ($12, as I recall from the order form that seems to have been taken offline) for each of those medals, and each of the 1,677 teams that competed received a box of 25, we're into a half-million dollars in medals ignoring the cost of trucking all of those boxes all over the continent (and beyond, in a few cases). That said, I would be shocked if FIRST was paying that (read on).

Now, since I don't know FIRST's medal supplier, we'll have to approximate. A bit of Google work seems to indicate that custom medals of the size (3", by my measurement) and quantity FRC used this year would run anywhere from $2 to $4. Similar Googling suggests that really nice pins in similar quantity come in around $0.75 to $1, depending on the size FIRST settled on.

If FIRST had ordered for 1,700 teams, a $1 drop in unit price would be a $42,500 swing. Total FRC operating expenses for FY08 (according to their financials (PDF link)) were $20,558,122. Cutting $42,500 out of that would be approximately a 0.2% reduction in expenses.

To emphasize, every figure other than the one taken from FIRST's financial statement is an educated guess on my part. Draw from this what you will.

Re: From Bill's Blog: Merits of replacing bronze participation medals
 

I disagree with this statement. I was lucky enough to start my FIRST career with Team Hammond, and have had the honor of accumulating several medals throughout my time on that team. No matter how many medals I have, each one stands for something different; a different moment in my FIRST career. I could pick up a medal and tell you exactly what event it came from, what year I was on the team, and everything about the game itself. More than that, I could give you the countless memories and stories behind those medals without any hesitation.

I'm now a mentor for Team 1720, who have yet to win a regional or place as finalists. I've seen kids go through the entire program and graduate, without winning that elusive regional. The pins seem like a good idea, until I think about those kids. I would hate to see them go through the entire program and not get some kind of reward for all their hard work. And, while a pin is easier to "show off" than a medal, it cannot replace the accomplishment one feels when he/she has that ribbon wrapped around their neck. I understand that people who have a lot of medals might think the medals are mundane after a while, but to some, medals are fairly rare and give a sense of accomplishment after a hard season.