Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Line
Probably my biggest gripe is something we've run into the last two years. When we started raising our entry fee I've heard a number of comments about how "pay to play" sports don't cost as much as robotics.
Schools think nothing of building a track, a soccer field, a baseball field, and a football field. Bleachers, lights, and then maintaining all that year round. In addition they eat a huge chunk of teams expenses (travel, equipment). Schools are the "Angel" investor in terms of sports. That's why so-called "pay to play" is still so inexpensive. Selling this sport to the schools and getting their decision-makers (the union leadership and the administration) to buy-in should be a huge focus.
|
One thing I have to ask, why the willingness to be the "Angel" investor for sports but, in many cases, not for robotics? What do sports provide that FIRST doesn't and how do we need to change to provide that.