[Peter Matteson]

Originally Posted by SciBorg Dave

To balance the playing field for all team what do you think of a limit of say $50,000 to run a team. This would keep all teams working hard to keep within the limit ( what ever it set at). I find that there is a big difference rural teams who struggle to raise $10,000 for the season and urban teams that have better sources to raise funds ( I know some who raise $100,000) for the season.

So theoretical team XXXX has who raise $50,000 every year has an unfair advantage even through we don'tknow how they spend that money?

I know of teams that spend most of their budget subsidising students to travel to events. Does that really contribute to their competitiveness?

What about teams that run multiple FTC and VEX programs from their single 501?

How about teams that use the money they raise for community programs?

Most of the highly competitive teams spend way less than you insinuate in your post. Yes there are outlier exceptions but most of the top tier teams aren't even close to the $50K number.

There is a way to get further with your money by spending it wisely to get the right tools and make the right connections so that you can increase your capability.

You really need to talk to more people on the teams that you want to emulate. You will find that your conceptions of them are wrong.