It doesn’t make it true, either. I would like to encourage anyone who thinks FIRST is ripping them off to start their own youth competition robotics program.
As much as I agree with what you say, I feel that the cost of registration may be a little too pricey. Our school administrators, team parents, other random teachers and of course, the membership could not believe how expensive this program was…until I told them about NASA 
I wish that registration for a second event would be half the cost of registration for the first event…but I guess I better just get working on a marketing strategy
Anyways, 8 Million Dollars is not an exorbitant amount of money to have in reserve…
-Just a Rookie’s Two Cents
I gotta ask this question - business and economics 101.
Some have asserted the $ 6,000 fee is too pricey.
What price level would be acceptable ?
$ 6, or $ 600 or $ 6000 or $ 60,000 ?
Try football and band if you want to spend some real money. It will blow the doors off FRC.
To Rick, Wilson and others - wasn’t Amanda one of the people who ran the FTC program? Seems like she already confirmed the post you are questioning is true. Also, I see another person posting in the thread was the Director of the FTC program, so he could also refute that information, but he hasn’t. As a parent looking into starting a Vex or FTC team, I am very troubled to hear that FIRST would be letting Lego dictate what what fee they charge FTC teams. I think FIRST owes the teams an answer and explanation.
Amanda deleted her post in this thread. I have no idea what she posted. I don’t know who used to be director of FTC, and have no insight into why he or she may or may not have denied or confirmed anything. I’m just skeptical, not intransigent. I don’t think it’s impossible that FIRST was cooperating with their number one corporate partner, I just don’t see the evidence here.
There have been rumors that IFI and FIRST were in some sort of fundamental disagreement about strategy (or a really nasty personality conflict) and that’s why Vex is no longer part of FTC. Again, I wouldn’t have any particular problem accepting it, I just haven’t seen any evidence of it. The truth is that FIRST has made their decision on the FTC program and we can love it or leave it. I don’t remember anyone at FIRST asking my opinion, which would, by the way, have been to stick with Vex.
I have to disagree. I have kids in band, choir, soccer, and dance. Robotics costs much more to run. (and as team mom I know what it cost to run our team.) While football and band may have a larger budget…they traditionally have at least three times as many kids participating. The cost per student in Robotics is higher.
FRC is not a cheap robotics competition. For those who want cheap competitions there are plenty of options available.
But there is a big difference between cheap and good value. I think FRC offers good value. Consider:
The quality KOP
The donated software
The venues
The production values at the venues
The consistancy of product across the continent and around the world
And the community:
Chief Delphi
The Blue Alliance
Mentor Teams
“Behind the design” books
And being able to say that you compete “In the Big Leagues”. Honestly… I doubt there is any other competition… anywhere… where I would see one of my students get cheered on by thousands of people for being able to recite Pi to 120 decimal places, let alone for doing some good driving with a solid machine!
So is FRC cheap? NO… and please never let it be so.
Yeah, that is easier for me to say when our team has had the very generous backing of a major corporate sponsor for the past four years… but this is our fifth year in the game… and that first year the entry fee was something like $8,000 CDN after exchange. So I know how hard it is to find $6k, but I also know it can be done.
Jason
That’s not true everywhere though. I paid much more to be in band than I did to be in robotics. Travel was essentially the same for both, but the equipment and participation fees for band where much worse (even after negating much of it via fundraising).
Wilson, I completely understand and don’t blame you at all. I will most likely stop volunteering for FIRST after this year, but I currently help run an FLL and FTC tournament and won’t step away until I know someone is taking over. I’m not a Woodie Flowers winner, but I am known in the FIRST community around here and most would be very surprised to see me question or challenge FIRST. I never do in front of the kids and I have been biting my tongue a long time.
I can assure you, the Lego FIRST agreement is real and has surprised many. I was just as surprised as you when I learned of it, and I was at the meeting where some others very directly questioned FIRST management about it. They weren’t eager to disclose it, but to their credit they did not want to lie to us. The FIRST Director of Programs and another staff member both admitted to us that the deal with Lego was in fact real and the fees for FTC(FVC then) could not be lowered to a more reasonable rate because of that agreement. I was as stunned as it seems you will feel when you learn FIRST will not deny they made such a deal with Lego. I felt FIRST had betrayed the FVC schools and, to be honest, the mission of FIRST.
Wow – exactly the opposite of my experience. My son just went on a big trip with the band and it cost us nearly $1,000. He’s acted in two plays and that has been more than $500. Even Little League cost more than $250 a season. If you take the cost of a single-regional FRC team (which is what the majority of FRC teams get to do) at about $10,000 for 25 students, that’s $400 per student. The first play my son was in cost us nearly $300 (costumes, “participation fee,” “voluntary donation”). His trumpet cost nearly $1,000 (rental costs over four years – we finally just bought it). FRC isn’t cheap, but it is not, in my experience, substantially more expensive than other youth programs. Corporate sponsorship can also be much more generous for robotics than other events. GM isn’t likely to give a high school theater program $25,000 a year, for example.
The real bargain is FTC – we fielded three teams of a total of 20 students for about $3,500, not counting travel to Championships. A cost of $175 per student made it cheaper than Little League.
Answer to your question - Amanda said I was not alone and was not the only one to be upset about what I posted.
I know many don’t want to believe Lego and Pitsco are driving the FIRST program decisions, and I know many will want to remain in denial about it. Because I still respect some of the management at FIRST, while I do not agree with how they are running FIRST right now, I do not think they would lie to you or any team directly. I will guarantee you this - FIRST will not deny what is being discussed. They have acknowledged it to many people when pressed, even though we could tell they were not proud of what they were telling us. I’m sorry to be the bearer of bad news, I thought many more were aware of it than I guess are.
Also, Lego is not FIRSTs number one partner. They are the FLL partner, but the growth of FRC and FIRST in general are due much more to the support of NASA, GM, and others. However, you may now be right, it does look like Lego and Pitsco are gaining access to 3 of the 4 FIRST programs now - programs to us, profit making markets to Lego.
You can tell how I feel about the Lego/Pitsco/FIRST arrangements, so it’s clear I should not be helping run FLL or FTC events anymore. I’ll still work with local teams, but I will not help raise funds to build Lego and FIRSTs revenue stream. I did and do this to help schools and students. I’ve been a strong supporter and defender of FIRST for a number of years, so stepping away is not easy for me.
You can repeat that all you want, but you haven’t explained what is so sinister about FIRST working with parts manufacturers, and you have entirely failed to document this ulterior motives of this alleged conspiracy. Do you expect FIRST to go into the manufacturing business themselves? Should they only work with companies that AREN’T trying to sell into the youth robotics market? Are you sure that the break with IFI was FIRST’s idea, and not IFI being intransigent in negotiations (I have no idea, and I’m betting you don’t either)? I hear emotions, but I don’t see facts.
You would have more credibility if you weren’t posting from what amounts to an anonymous account, by the way.
A) Credit to FIRST head office… they do give us a heads up on changes and strive to practice GP in their dealings with the FIRST community. Sometimes they make decisions for reasons that are debatable, or at least not immediately obvious, to teams. Sometimes they need to keep certain information quiet as part of a contract or communications plan. Even when I don’t like the decision, however, or want the information NOW, I am confident that they are making the decision for good reasons. I can trust someone even if I don’t agree with them all the time. (And thankfully my wife can do the same!)
B) Downside to this agreement (and I have no problem believing it exists… I had wondered why FTC entry fees were so high when the cost of running the program appears so low)… I had three teams building three VEX robots at school, but could only justify one FTC entry fee. A neighbouring school built ten robots, but had to whittle it down to four because they couldn’t afford a fifth entry fee. In both cases we could build up the equipment over time as a slow-depreciating capital expense, but the annual entry fees are an on-going operating expense. A lower entry fee (or reduced entry fees for multiple teams from one school or district) would have seen more kids and more teams competing and aided the growth of FTC and FIRST. Perhaps if extra money was generated by FTC this year it will be returned to teams next year in the way of subsidized equipment sales. I’ve heard of worse plans…
Jason
P.S. I do find the posts describing the existence of a pricing agreement between FIRST and Lego credible, even though I do not have any independent or official confirmation. I do not, however, have enough information to form an opinion on whether or not such an agreement was wise, as I can only see the “costs” of the agreement (FTC fees being, perhaps, higher than needed) and not any benefits that the agreement brought, or was intended to bring, to the FIRST community.
I’ve been googling other programs the past couple weeks, and I dont think your assumption is correct Rick. There are other robotics programs that seem to be very popular if you look at the forums, blogs and other info about them. BEST is free, Botball is around $2k, FLL and Vex are both $500-$1000. FRC is substantially more expensive than those programs. My question has been answered in this thread, and it seems clear FRC does not need to cost as much as it does. It does seem that FTC or Vex are still quality programs which require much less money and time.
The Lego FTC price thing is a different issue which sounds very bad to me. In these times of corporate greed, unethical deals and dirty politics on all sides, I would hope that organizations like FIRST would be above such behavior. If FIRST has let Lego or Pitsco force FTC to be more expensive than FLL, then shame on FIRST for not sticking up for the best interest of the students. Unless FIRST states this is 100% untrue, I will not start an FTC team. I like the FIRST mission, but Im not doing this to help Lego, IFI, Autodesk, or other stockholders. The kids need FIRSTs help, not those companies. If FIRST lowers the FRC price, I’d still like to do that. If not, I think I’m going to start looking at BEST, VEX or BOTBALL.
Rick, like you I expect FIRST to work with partners and manufacturers who can deliver quality products, we agree on that. I think what you are missing is the timing. This agreement wasn’t made for the upcoming FTC platform and season. It was made years ago when Lego had absolutely nothing to do with the FVC program. It was made to keep middle schools from doing Vex instead of Lego and it was made to drive up the cost of fielding FVC teams to make FLL seem like a better deal. I have no problem with FIRST working with their partners in each program. But I find it hard to believe that you think it’s ok for FIRST to sell out one group of teams to benefit a corporate partner, for a FIRST partner to mandate and force schools not using their product to have to pay more to do other options. I’ll use your words - I find that type of deal to be sinister, to be an ulterior motive and to be deplorable.
You don’t have to believe me or any of the other people FIRST has disclosed this to - ask FIRST management directly like those on our committee did. When put on the spot, they did not lie about it, they admitted it (and one apologized and said they were ashamed and embarrassed to admit it). It sounds like you will also be disappointed to learn Lego and FIRST drove up the cost of one FIRST program to benefit FLL. If that doesn’t bother you and you can still support what they are doing, that is fine. I’m just saying I am very conflicted and troubled by what they have done. All of us in FIRST should have heard this directly from FIRST months ago, not through rumors, in committee meetings and on public forums, I agree with you on that also.
FIRST has helped a number of companies make profits… or at least break even… over the years. There is nothing wrong with that… those companies have helped provide a great program to some great kids. Profits are not evil or unethical… they are required. Even for companies that deal with kids.
Right now we have information that FIRST has signed a pricing agreement. We can see some potential downsides from our perspective on teams, but don’t have any information on the potential upsides. The people I have met from FIRST head office are not incompetent or unethical… quite the contrary. I am confident they would not intentionally sign a deal that was not in the interest of the overall FIRST community from their analysis and perspective.
As for the cost/benefit analysis of FRC, I would stick to my previous comments that it is an expensive robotics program but that I wouldn’t want it to be “cheap”. I also support Rick’s comments that it is not out of line with other opportunities for young people. Some things are less expensive and some are more… but if you have 20 kids on an FRC team, the entry fees break down to about $300/kid… add some parts and a bit of travel and you are looking at around $500/head. About the cost of a PS3 and a couple games. Can you do basketball for less? Sure! Soccer, sure! Hockey, competitive swimming or skiing?? Not a chance.
Jason
Well the Championships are in 2d 03h 57m according to my clock. I’m fairly sure FIRST will be fully explaining details of its program to everyone. In previous posts, I have highly critisized FIRST’s approach of not discloing full information to teams. However, in terms of its cash budget, from the looks of it, FIRST is rather reasonable (yes I am a business student). If I have some time after championships I will post a full ratio analysis for FIRST’s budget sheets.
In terms of FIRST’s deal with lego, I don’t like it too much but thats capitalism for you. Unless FIRST produces parts for itself and becomes a for-profit business, there’s not much they can do to prevent this from happenning.
I don’t know Jason. Pricing agreements within a program are one thing. If FIRST does that with partners for a particular program, fine. But making a pricing agreement to raise the price on one group of schools because it would help a corporate partner control a market? That does not seem right or ethical. If Vex asked FIRST to raise the price of FLL to help Vex, I would expect FIRST to say no. If Lego wanted to raise or lower the cost of FLL, they should have that discussion with FIRST. But Lego should have nothing to do with pricing discussions for FTC or FRC, or at least FIRST shouldn’t let them have anything to do with it.
I agree 100%, at least in the context that the motivation for making the deal is the key point. While I do not know, at present, what the motivation FIRST may have had for signing such a deal was, I am not prepared to assume that this means that they did it simply to “help a corporate partner control a market.”
When I find out more about the “why” and hear more than one side of the story, then if I disagree I will be more than willing to say so. Until then, I am quite comfortable in believing that FIRST would not intentionally or inadvertently sign a deal with no long-term upside for the greater FIRST community. The fact that we don’t see that upside immediately from our perspective does not mean that it doesn’t exist.* The FIRST executive and senior leadership (GDC, etc.) have earned my trust and respect over the past five years… even if I do disagree with their decisions from time to time.
Jason
- Hmmm… next thing you know I’ll be saying “FIRST works in mysterious ways” or something like that… :]
As has been pointed out in a few posts in this thread, having ~30% of the annual operating budget on hand is “safe and sane”. The $1M excess revenue for FIRST last year is <5% of its operating costs. Bloated? I think not.
If you think the teams are being gouged for registration fees, then consider that lowering them by only 10% makes FIRST financially “neutral” (based on the reported 2007 revenues and expenses). A team participating in two regionals and the Championship would save $1500 on registration fees. Is this a really a budget issue? Comparing those “savings” to the total budget for such a team doesn’t seem like something to get too worked up about. Is this too much for a team to pay for some insurance that an unfortunate incident (tornado, accident, platform change, etc.) doesn’t cripple the entire program?
I’m not a business man, but I think the return on investment in this program is fantastic. Yes, FRC is an expensive program, but the products (inspired students and entertaining, competitive events) are well worth those dollars.