[BJC]

Personally, I have always thought of it like this:

HAVE NOTs: Teams that have trouble finding the money to compete at all.

Have Nots: Teams that have enough money to compete once but not enought for a second time.

Haves: Teams that have the money to go to more than one compitition.

HAVEs: Teams that not only have the money to go to more than one compitition but also have access to other expensive fabrication methods and extra nicities (water jeting, CNCing, powercoating, ionizing, ect.

It should be noted that the difference between all of these really comes down to the effort teams put in and the difference between Have and Have Not is really one big sponser (like NASA) away.

One other thing I should note, The biggest difference I can see between the "Have" side and the "Have Not" side is that the Haves all have sponsers (almost always more than one). If they need more money they go and pitch their team to a potential sponser. The Have Nots seem to rely more on team fund raisers. This is why they are where they are on the spectrum. They basically have to start from scratch moniarily every year as opposed to Haves which have a set income. This allows Have teams to concern themselves with being competitive as opposed to Have nots who must put all their efforts into simply being able to compete.

My 2 cents