[BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

FRIDAY, JULY 8, 2011

It’s all fun and games
Good Morning Teams,

This time of year I think wistfully of summer vacations and long days spent by the water. In reality I’m besieged by decisions about the 2012 season that have to be made soon in order for the staff to get to work making the next season a reality.

Everything is up in the air (as usual) but we do have a big picture plan.
TIMS will open for team profile information in late August.
Registration for FRC events is scheduled to begin in late September.
We have several additional new Regionals planned.
FIRST staff and key volunteers are working to contract venues at all event locations.
When we have a firm competition schedule, I will share it right away.
We’re also discussing:
We need to find ways to reduce trophy costs. Here, the cost cutting discussion includes weighing the benefits of eliminating the second trophy vs. downsizing the two trophies currently awarded to winners.
We have to plan for the future of Championship. When the number of Regionals x6 exceeds the number of berths at CMP, how should we determine which teams should be invited to participate?
We’re looking closely at the volunteer model in FRC as compared to the rest of FIRST and other youth centric programs. Should we be background checking every volunteer who comes in contact with students?
We continue to look for ways to reduce Regional expenses, examining everything from venues and dates to equipment rental and contracted services.
In other news:

My congratulations to the FRC Teams in Mexico who attracted the attention and interest of President Calderon this year. The forum “Foro Mexico FIRST” is a direct result of their conversation with the President and provides all FRC teams an opportunity to make suggestions and offer support to the growing FIRST community in Mexico. Please visit the website and share your tips for success and lessons learned in bringing FIRST to your community. Go Mexico Teams!

Dean Kamen and several FIRST teams are featured in Time Warner Cable’s newest Connect a Million Minds TV special called “It Ain’t Rocket Science” which is now available for viewing on line. http://www.connectamillionminds.com/videos.php#79
http://www.connectamillionminds.com/videos.php#80
http://www.connectamillionminds.com/videos.php#81

183 days until kickoff
See you then!

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Smaller trophies? Yeah, that will really catch people's attention sitting in the display case next to the trophies of sports teams.... :rolleyes:

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Not a fan of downsizing trophies again....

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Well, they can't make them (the trophies) too small, so I bet it isn't a major reduction.

I find it interesting that they mentioned more regionals, but nothing about districts. Is it still happening?

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Me neither. I understand the need to cut costs, but I find it hard to believe that cutting trophy size will really take any significant chunk out of the amount of money they spend. For $4,000 a regional, I think they can afford a small trophy.

I'm curious to know what there solution is for championship bids. I would really like a to see a system similar to districts, but it doesn't seem that they're moving in that direction quite yet (nor can they until FRC team become more densely populated some areas).

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I'm pretty sure we haven't done anything with our second trophies, so I would prefer only giving out one trophy instead of downsizing them.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Frankly, I'm a bit surprised nothing like this has been happening. I know with our team, there's a background check done on all new mentors/volunteers with the team, and then it's repeated every few years.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

For us, one trophy goes to each of our two primary sponsors. I really hope reducing it to one trophy isn't the solution chosen.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

This does happen already.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I really really hope they don't downsize the trophies again. It's still weird looking at regional win trophies from this year the size of regional finalist trophies from years past.

-Nick

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I don't really want them to downsize them or only give us one. We have a 2007 Regional Winner trophy that is large and 2010/2011 RCA trophies that are smaller. People think that means that the Regional Winner one is more important. No. Chairmans in the highest award FIRST gives. The trophies should reflect that by not getting smaller.
FIRST did a background check on me both times I volunteered at CMP but never at the regional level.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

The downsizing of awards in general over the years is annoying when compared to the high cost for each event. Having our Smokey Mountain Regional Championship trophy sitting next to the larger finalist trophy from a couple of years ago is sad. Try explaining that this award is just as important or moreso than the one from a few years ago to a new student. They've already gone from participation medals to pins (really guys...hat pins?!?) and charging for medals, now further downsizing? What next...will they be downsizing the Woodie Flowers trophy as well (they better not!)? Smaller banners? District-level Lego League trophies are bigger than many of this years' FRC awards!

I don't want to sound ungrateful, but what's happening to the "Recognition" in FIRST? Recognizing our champions and those teams who others aspire to become is just as important as recognizing our students, mentors, or volunteers. The truth of the matter is that those trophies are important to a lot of people.

Perhaps give out only one trophy but give the option of a receiving a second one after the event, but enough already.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

We supposedly ran background checks on each mentor involved with 3553.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

So I haven't posted it but I have a picture of showing that the Championship finalist trophy is significantly smaller than the divisional champion or regional champion trophies and frankly this is comical when you see the two side by side. We thought the greater achievment would mean a bigger or at least comparable trophy.

Or second trophies always go to our primary sponsor. We think that this is an important part of recognizing the sponsor.

Also we have noticed the change in the trophies over the years. At some point I will take a few pictures of the really old trophies just to show how cool some of the awards used to be when they were unique to the game or sponsor in the pre 2001 era of FRC.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

The trophies should instead be restored back to their original sizes.

When we ordered our extra CMP CA trophy, it was $700.
When it arrived, it was broken and I had to take it to a local plastic shop to get it fixed. When I mentioned the price, they were shocked! They could make the equivalent for less than half the price.
Somebody is making money........that's for sure.

Trophy size DOES matter. When you attend outreach events, try to gain sponsorships, or display them at school functions, it emphasizes just how hard it was to earn any trophy at all.

Sure, its not all about winning..............but when you accomplish something and get recognized for it, you want it to represent all the hard work that the students and team put into it.
Personally, I always order extras to give to team member(s) who were directly responsible for the achievement, such as the website award.

I dont work for FIRST, so I cant comment on just how difficult it is to overcome trophy expenses......however, for the price tag of each event teams (sponsors) pay for, its the one thing that shouldn't be cut first.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Soon t-ball participation awards will be bigger than the FRC World Championship winner award :rolleyes:

My understanding is that FIRST only actually pays for awards for the championship event and each regional is left to pay for their own awards. Someone feel free to correct me if that's wrong.

If that is the case, FIRST would be saving what, maybe $2,000 by chintzing out even more than they already have over the last 3 years? In the process they piss off nearly everyone. That makes perfect sense.

Sponsors, school administrators, etc all want to see the accomplishments of a team to justify giving them more money and support. The unfortunate reality is that the number one way of doing this is to show them a bunch of big old trophies. Every year the trophies get smaller it becomes less impressive to outsiders and those who only have a cursory knowledge of the program.

Yet again FIRST presents us with a "would you rather we poke you in the eye or kick you in the shins, and then charge you $6,000" scenario. Every year it costs more and more to get the same amount of value the kit/event contained 5 years ago (though we have gotten more matches, which is fantastic).

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

How about only one trophy of the current size for winning team and giving them the option of buying more to be sent via mail?

Cuts cost, keeps trophy size, and still allows teams to get extra trophies to give to sponsors/ schools/etc if they so choose.

Edit: trophies bought for manufacturing and shipping cost: no mark-up.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Trophy sizes should remain the same (or be enlarged). Like mentioned before, the size of a robotics trophy should be the same as for football and other major sports.

On another note, did anyone else catch the possible game clue?
The possibility of an aerial game is interesting.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

What about the 6 times the number of regional's as spots for championships?
352 at championship this year
minus 25(founding teams, chairman award winners, last years winners, and last years engineering inspiration winner)
divide by 6(winners, rookie allstars, inspiration, chairman award winners)
= about 55 regionals(not taking off for districts)
meaning FIRST is looking at having about 330 regionals!
that is a ridiculous amount of teams.
but we only had 27 regional in 2004, and next year we will put a strain on championship with all the new regionals.
At that number of teams districts wiil be able to be in every region

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

What he is saying is that that they are worried about the point in time where the number of spots at championships is lower than the number of teams that directly qualify. The number of teams with a guaranteed spot is equal to 6 times the number of regionals because the winning alliance (3 teams), Chairmains winner, Engineering Inspiration winner, and rookie all-start are all auto-qualified for championships.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

No offense, but NO.

FIRST has continued to cut costs and that has directly impacted the value that the teams receive. I think it's time they start taking a VERY VERY close look at their own organization, and looking at efficiencies, or lack thereof, before they go after one of the primary reasons (and reminders) of why so many teams compete.

Hey, you could move on to what Ford does now, and is roundly ridiculed. Email us digitally-signed certificates because paper, nevermind an actual award, is just far to expensive.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

It's time to consider removing the ability to attend championship without having qualified through some means.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Maybe a 2006 style high goal, or maybe taller robots:p

I hope they don't make the trophies smaller, maybe they could redesign it to be more impressive (possibly), larger (or at least the same size), and within their budget, whatever that happens to be.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I've been thinking about Champs.

Assume a 360 team maximum capacity. Subtract the World Champions (3), HoF (15), and Sustaining teams (6) and you get 336 spots.

Let's be conservative and reserve 6 spots for special additions to the Championship (i.e. the rare 4th regional winner), to round to an even 330.

Michigan has just under 180 teams in their district, and they get 18 spots at the Championship. Right now, all of FRC could fit in just 12 districts of that size. Account for a few years of growth and some odd-sized districts and say that we plan for 16 districts of 180 teams each. That's enough for 2880 teams, and at our rate of growth that will last us quite awhile.

If the only things that qualify you for the championship are those 16 districts, you only need 288 spots reserved. This leaves 42 spots for open registration, even assuming an ideal FRC that has 2,880 teams!

Not only that, but well over half of the event will be there based on their robot's performance, making the Championship more competitive AND more accessible.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Exactly. Whats the point of competing if you get nothing to bring home lauding your success? I thought the kids came first? Just being there isnt enough. Schools recognize coming home with a trophy.
When they shrunk the trophies a few years ago it was a mistake. I cant believe that for all the registration money collected this is the best way they can find to cut costs.

Maybe FIRST should look into better trophy suppliers than taking this direction.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

This is really making me begin to wonder where the moneys flowing.

Look I get it, this is not a cheap program, and it requires money. However, something just doesn't add up to me. We're paying about $5000 an event per team, there's thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) of dollars rolling in with sponsorship, a decent amount of the KOP is donated, and yet we're still getting less?

I really don't think the issue here is the money coming in. I think FIRST needs to take a big look at their budget and take a look at what there spending their money on and who there spending it with.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

If we are talking about efficiencies, giving out two trophies is NOT efficient as some (most?) teams won't 'use' both trophies. Perhaps FIRST should give out 1 trophy at the event but allow teams to order the second one at a discounted price or free. This way teams that want the second trophy (to give to sponsors) can still get it while FIRST doesn't have to pay for the second trophy if its just going to sit in a box.

FIRST does already allow teams to purchase additional medals, trophies and banners here: http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles...order_Form.pdf

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

If that is the chosen route, I'd like to see the full size trophies come back.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I understand how a team gets a spot at championships. What I was trying to illustrate is that in a world where championships is 6 times overflowing with teams will also be a world where we are having 330 regionals/events. Most of the problems I hear about districts for now is getting to an event that is close to outlier teams in a district(upper peninsula for Michigan, upstate new york when thinking a possible NYC district). Even if 30 regional are outside the U.S., that still allows for 6 regional a state. For this size having a district in your back yard and one you could get to easily would seem possible for every team

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Maybe FIRST just needs to contract with AndyMark for the trophies. I'm sure Andy would somehow be able to supply really cool big trophies for a fraction of whatever FIRST is paying whoever for them currently. :D

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I am completely up for FIRST trying to watch its money, and I do recognize that the number of teams that don't maximize use of the second trophy for whatever reason is non-zero. If it absolutely had to be an either/or situation, I'd say cut the second trophy.

That said, and I'm commenting to this effect on Bill's Blog directly, why not re-examine the design of the trophy from top to bottom? The current design is definitely not the original, and I imagine we as a community can come up with a set of trophies that improves upon the current in cost, weight, and/or durability without making them less visually appealing. (How many freshmen have not held it by the base?)

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

It'd be nice if members of the off season committees would provide an idea of what percentage of their budget they allot for trophies/awards or recognition certificates for the events. It's frustrating to see this concern/complaint arise consistently without understanding why it impacts the budget so drastically that it is a top priority consideration for cutbacks. It is my belief that the sponsors who receive the trophies are very appreciative and some create beautiful showcases for them. I know that N.I. has a beautiful showcase that houses our trophies that we've given to them. It's always a pleasure to see that and to share it with our guests and new parents and team members. Very special.

I'd love to see AndyMark create a design... goosebumps just thinking about it.

Jane

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

If they aren't already, how would we feel about trophies made in China? That would spark a rather interesting discussion.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

How big/nice are the Vex trophies?

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Probably relative to the size of their robots :P

Edit: I'm wrong. The only Vex trophy I had ever seen was smaller than the standard trophy. I was not implying that Vex robots are inferior.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

2ft tall by 1ft wide or so

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Is the cost to compete relative to the size of the robot too? How about the quality of learning?

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Many companies lend their namesake to awards. (Autodesk, Motorola, Delphi, etc.)

Do these companies pay to have their company mentioned during award ceremonies or is it because of the other sponsorships they offer (Kit parts)?

If it is a paid sponsorship, has inflation (or any other price raises I can't think of*) changed the price so drastically that FIRST has to face this ultimatum?

If the naming in by paid sponsorship, could the price be raised? If the company doesn't want to pay, offer it publicly. (I am already eyeing the Andy Baker *something technical* Award)

Speaking of Andy... Doesn't he make great IRI trophies? Maybe source the trophies from inside FIRST?

*Edit: After some more thinking, I suppose the increase event number calls for an increase of trophies needed.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

You're on, Bill.

I'll start a new thread, linking back here, and see how many ideas can be collected for such an idea. I've got one idea already.

Edit: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh....php?p=1068506 is the thread.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I can't wait until IFI starts their FRC sized competition and quickly overtakes FRC.

I know many have pointed out (even Dave Lavery) that competition among programs is a lost cause with each having such small overall marketshare, but some motivation for FIRST would be nice.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Uhh, not really.


//Aside: For those who aren't familiar with the VRC, Team 44 is basically the Beatty of VEX. Right there is one of the most dominant robots in VEX history.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I guess its time to start aerial game hype.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Well if we all want to look at FIRST's financial history, here is the 2010 annual report. The fact that we STILL pay $5000 and seem to be getting less and less is ridiculous. In the tough financial times we are in, the teams have to look for more sponsorships. Is it too much to ask FIRST to do the same?

EDIT: That is a list of sponsors, not any financial report i've ever seen before. Let's try this.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Edit: I clearly stepped on some toes with my original response, hence taking it down.

I didn't mean to disrespect Vex or Karthik of Jack Jones. I apologize.

However I'm not quite comfortable comparing trophies. FIRST and Vex, although similar, are still very different. Vex is controlled by a company that exists outside of the competition, and existed before the competition (IFI). FIRST is a company created solely to do FIRST. While Vex may do somethings "better", they also operate differently. Stemming off a company means that Vex is already directed by individuals who understand efficient use of funds and materials. FIRST is in a different situation, although by no means am I saying they're incompetent.

$.02

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Is it just me or do those Vex awards look freaking awesome! They look so mechanical and yet they are so simplistic.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Holy Expensive Batman!

Raw Materials, Fabrication machines/tools, Shipping, Labor & Profit = $700 per trophy!??? :ahh:

If I could sell a few hundred at that price (>50 Regionals + Champs), I could invest in the tools and raw materials, work for 2-3 months (or weeks?) per year, and make more money than I am now.:cool:

Separate Topic:
First - No one needs to consider this statement to be a reason to try to re-emphasize to me how important some folks believe trophy size is; that has already been pointed out. However ...

There are at least two kinds of people in the world, and I am the kind that thinks large gaudy trophies are absurd.

I would rather have a small, tasteful Nobel Prize medal hanging in my trophy case than any of the cheesy, over-the-top, towers of inexpensive plastic, sawdust, pot metal, and glue that crowd most school trophy cases.

Display a modest-size, well-made, and elegant trophy in a large, well-lit, and otherwise empty space that matches its importance; and I predict it will get noticed and appreciated.

Blake

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Seeing that water (as fun as it would be) has been more than likely ruled out, it makes sense.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Since I'm not a sponsor who ostensibly receives the 2^nd trophy, I'm all for just handing out one (full-sized one), and offering duplicates for sale.

Who owns the IP rights for the trophies? Could FIRST just bid them out to some place that is less expensive?


Actually, I thought the background check question was more interesting. It seems like an overreaction to a non-issue. FIRST's event volunteers generally interact with students in public places at the events, and are in contact with them for such a short period that the actual risk of harm is minimal. You might as well demand a background check of everybody waiting at the bus stop.

Besides, background checks only identify previous offenders—so they're by definition a half-measure.

And once a background check comes up positive, now FIRST is in the even more difficult position of having to justify why that particular offence makes that person unsuitable for the job. It would, for example, be unconscionable to reject someone convicted only of sodomy (under consensual circumstances, among adults, in the Lawrence v. Texas sense) on the pretense that they might be an ephebophile and therefore a threat to FIRST's students. But someone is going to scream "sex offender" (as if they were all the same), and raise a panic. FIRST should not put itself in a position where its policies, combined with misplaced societal fears, force it to suborn that reprehensible witch-hunting behaviour.

To use a less inflammatory example: can someone convicted of tax evasion still function as a safety glasses dispenser? Would FIRST's background check policy exclude such a person, and if so, how isn't that a mockery of that person's civil rights? They were convicted, paid their restitution or were incarcerated and released, and their offence has no reasonable connection to their volunteer position. Although in most jurisdictions, and especially given that it's a volunteer position, FIRST couldn't be held liable under employment law, that doesn't absolve them of a moral duty to avoid stigmatizing someone who has no obvious reason to do FIRST or its participants any harm.

What's more, now FIRST and the volunteer co-ordinator are responsible for safeguarding sensitive information. Although convictions are generally a matter of public record, FIRST shouldn't put itself in a position where the release of this data, and a subsequent overreaction could devolve into defamation or some other tort.

So save some money, and let the teams set their own policies for background checks. After all, it's the teams that are bringing the largest number of strange adults to any given event, many of whom will have a much greater opportunity to be present with minors in compromising circumstances.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I have heard multiple complaints in this thread alone that FRC has been costing the same and quality has been going down. On the surface this seems true. As far as I know, most teams have been paying $6000 per year in registration costs. And we also know that apparent quality has also been going down.

However, I'm not sure that teams have really been paying the same. The reason: inflation. That said, courtesy of Wolfram Alpha, in today's dollars, teams in 1995 would have paid $8702.72 in registration costs compared to the flatline $6000 today. Which is about a 30% decrease in real costs. And, well, you get what you pay for. Also, for anyone who was wondering, I input "$6000 (1995 dollars)" into Wolfram Alpha.

And to anyone who wants to put forth alternative ideas on this topic. Please tell me. I am interested in hearing them.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

No offense, but I just went through two years of furloughs (coming in every single one of those days for robotics) and now our State mandated pay cuts, increased health care costs....i.e. our portion, and continued furloughs when our current governor did the George Bush "Read my Lips," No More Furloughs.
Our pay has NOT kept up with inflation.

Instead, the attitude is to do MORE with less to allow our students the same, if not more, opportunities with participation in FIRST. :)

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Really to me, as long as they dont take away or change the blue banner, IDC. Every major sports team wins their respective championship even all the way down to high school sports, they get a banner. Our school actually put our blue banners up in the school gym next to the 3 football state championships and the basketball championship banners. All of those being recognized as equals means more to me than adding some trophy to the trophy case at the school.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Sorry for the off-topic response, but I wanted to comment on this. This statement isn't really correct. FRC/FTC are very similar to VRC. Let's take a look:

- FRC/FTC are run by FIRST, a non-profit organization promoting STEM education goals.
- VRC is run by the RECF, a non-profit organization promoting STEM education goals.

- FRC/FTC rules limit components you can use in their programs. Specifically, control systems are limited to a single supplier. FTC further restricts you to official TETRIX parts only (with a few additional materials allowed).
- VRC rules limit components you can use in their program. It requires you to use a control system from a single supplier. However, non-electronic parts are not restricted to the VEX brand (equivalent non-VEX brand parts are allowed, as well as a few additional materials).

- The suppliers of the control systems for FRC and FTC are for-profit companies. It is a reasonable assumption that these for-profit companies are able to exert some measure of influence on the FRC and FTC in exchange for their support & donations.
- The suppliers of the control system for VRC is a for-profit company. It is a reasonable assumption that this for-profit company is able to exert some measure of influence on the VRC in exchange for its support.

I think FRC/FTC/VRC are a lot more similar than many people believe.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

In our society... smaller seems to mean cheaper, less valuable...etc etc.
Downsizing trophies is definitely a negative.

I suggest, respectfully, that FIRST comes up with an engineering activity.
Have teams submit ideas and fully fleshed out business plans for making new trophies for FIRST. This plan would take into consideration a number of factors including aesthetic appeal, shipping costs, cost to manufacture and the use of environmentally friendly materials.

In my opinion... it is much easier to explain to trophy viewers that there was a design change...than to explain why the "new" awards are smaller versions of the older ones.

The time has come for a design change in the trophies... a design specifically made to be able to be made less expensively, transported easily and cheaper and yet still look great.

I am sure we are up for the challenge.... and the best thing is that it is just another way to bring mentors, students and manufacturers together for more opportunity for inspiration of students.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Two steps ahead of you. :)

(Anyone else of the mindset, throw in a comment on Bill's Blog directly. Considering the relative officialness of BB compared to CD, a group of respectful opinions there will likely have more effect than a bunch of discussion over here.)

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I agree with you on the sentiment of trying to do more with less. However, as the real price drops and FIRST is receiving less revenue per team in registration costs, if FIRST tries to account for that through cuts, quality is going to inevitably drop over time. The drop for one year may not be noticeable but over a period of years it is going to start to stand out.

Granted, maybe there are some things should've been cut a long time ago, but once all of those have been cut, the only things left are those that really affect the core experience of FIRST. Then if further cuts are made the quality will go down. I think we are really starting to see that now.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I certainly bet they cost less than $600 too!

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

In all fairness to FIRST, the number of trophies whose cost exceeds $115 is extremely limited:

Championship Chairman's Award ($650, 1 team)
Championship Winner ($500, 3 teams)
Division Winner ($485, 12 teams)

All the other awards run from $60 (the standard regional awards) to $115 (RCA, CMP Finalist, CMP Engineering Inspiration).

I imagine it's more than possible for FIRST to lower these costs further using a different design, but it's not $600 bad for everyone.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

Thanks Billfred.

Re: [BB] Bills Blog 07/08/11
 

I was very honored to set off TSA alarms with this trophy in my suitcase. I have big feet. It is big!