Idea's to improve the NFFC experience - for little expense.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 4:46 am

Billy, what we know is the 12-team format for our Online Championship event last year was an unbridled success. We planned for 300 teams and ended up with more than 500. So the decision to go to a 12-team format for that event was clearly correct on our part.

What the future holds remains to be seen. You're correct about the increased competition. No one at this time knows how all of that will shake out. But I think it would have been foolish on our part to disband the 12-team format for the Online Championship due to competition when you consider how successful it was for us last year. Why should we be the ones to buckle when a competitor enters the landscape with a similar game? Should events occur that lead us to re-consider the 12-team format for the Online Championship going forward we'll do that but at this time it makes no sense in my opinion (and I'm not speaking for Greg or Ryan) to make a severe change to our event merely because a competitor has chosen to duplicate what we offer.

Should the 12-team format remain successful for us with the Online Championship then the questions become - 1) Can we also offer a 14-team format that will make business sense and 2) If we do offer a 14-team format, will we be able to introduce a successful second format or will that merely take participants from the 12-team format and essentially split the numbers?

If it's the latter, then it wouldn't make good business sense for us and I think you would agree with that. So right now, we have a successful event with the Online Championship. There's no reason at this time to make radical changes to it. What we need to discuss is whether a 14-team format can run alongside that and not rob from its strength. That's what you need to tell us. We don't want to create a 14-team event, only to have it just take our signups from the 12-team event. What you need to tell us is you're interested in the 14-team event but either in addition to the 12-team event or because you're someone who isn't playing the 12-team Online Championship but like that format.

Make sense?

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:04 am

Makes total sense.

I can tell you that if you offered a 14 and a 12 teamer, then yes, I would play the 14 teamer and not the 12. So yes, you would be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

If money was tight, I can tell you that for me the 12 team events (all of them in EVERY contest) would be the first to go. The 14 teamer is just a better game with far more strategy and less luck IMO.

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:24 am

How do you know that a 14 team event wouldn't have been an "unbridled success"? Your statement that this was "clearly correct" is subject to dispute as your players were first loyal to the 14 team event. I would suggest that your signups would have been the same had you built on what you started and launched this under the NFFC flagship event but we'll never know.

You could have created the event that could have been the "feeder" event for YOUR MAIN EVENT. The 14 team Live Classic. It could have been the stepping stone to growing that challenge as it would have introduced players to the concept at a lower price point. Instead you launched a mainstream product that already had competition and one that was sure to increase in competition.

If it makes you money, great, but it is not what your core players wanted. That's all were saying. In our eyes, it was a missed opportunity to grow the product that got you here and the one we enjoy the most.

Long Live THE CLASSIC!

BillyWaz · Post by **BillyWaz** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:32 am

Originally posted by Rob B:

Long Live THE CLASSIC! Amen my brother!!!

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:32 am

You're right, Rob. We don't know if the 14-team format would have been a huge success. Maybe it would have. However, with more than 500 teams competing, there's no question the decision to go the 12-team format was a correct one. And again, I don't recall a large outcry against the decision when we introduced it last year. Maybe I missed it during one of Billy and Snake's debates.

But we did introduce a successful event. That's a fact. It went way beyond what Greg and I envisioned in terms of signups. So it makes no sense in my opinion to radically change something that worked as well as the Online Championship did last year. The 12-team format was a huge success for us last year with the Online Championship. Will it continue to be going forward? That's what we need to find out.

Eddiejag · Post by **Eddiejag** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:33 am

Originally posted by BillyWaz:
Makes total sense.

I can tell you that if you offered a 14 and a 12 teamer, then yes, I would play the 14 teamer and not the 12. So yes, you would be robbing Peter to pay Paul.

If money was tight, I can tell you that for me the 12 team events (all of them in EVERY contest) would be the first to go. The 14 teamer is just a better game with far more strategy and less luck IMO. Im with many others who would rather do a 14 on line league as the 12 team just arent as fun.You can play in a 12 team league anywhere and who's to say you wouldnt have gotten 400 or 500 teams with 14 teamers.Money is tight and ild probably pass on the 12 team online this year and just stick with the main and primetime.Im also considering a draftmasters if they have one in Boston but that will it.If there was a 14 team on line i would be in with out a thought.

Ted's Cracked Head · Post by **Ted's Cracked Head** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:34 am

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't recall this sentiment being expressed when we introduced the Online Championship last year with its 12-team format and we had more than 500 teams participating. So it would appear that quite a few people liked the 12-team format we offered. It was most definitely expressed as everything I have said here, was said by me and numerous others last year.

You had lots of signups because of the price point and not the necessarily the concept. I think you would have had the same or more if it was launched with 14 teams but again, we'll NEVER know because you guys went mainstream.

[ June 06, 2010, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: Rob B ]

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:51 am

Originally posted by Rob B:
How do you know that a 14 team event wouldn't have been an "unbridled success"? Your statement that this was "clearly correct" is subject to dispute as your players were first loyal to the 14 team event. I would suggest that your signups would have been the same had you built on what you started and launched this under the NFFC flagship event but we'll never know.

You could have created the event that could have been the "feeder" event for YOUR MAIN EVENT. The 14 team Live Classic. It could have been the stepping stone to growing that challenge as it would have introduced players to the concept at a lower price point. Instead you launched a mainstream product that already had competition and one that was sure to increase in competition.

If it makes you money, great, but it is not what your core players wanted. That's all were saying. In our eyes, it was a missed opportunity to grow the product that got you here and the one we enjoy the most.

Long Live THE CLASSIC! I think it's time I chime in on this one and save Tom!!

Rob, the core group we have here who love the 14-team Classic are people we love and can't afford to lose, but anyone who has seen the NFFC over the last six years knows that we haven't grown by leaps and bounds in this format. We all know the 14-team format is tough and it's possible that after a few years of not cashing folks move out of this format. Heck, I just got an email from a long-time NFFC veteran who almost admitted as much that he needs to get out of an NFFC event he signed up for because he hasn't cashed yet and he's moving to a new 12-team format. 0-for-6 in many NFFC events leads folks to move beyond the 14-team format.

We had 294 Classic teams last year and had 280 in 2005. We hit 350 at one point. The 14-team format is tough and it's not growing as much as we'd like. I LOVE IT TOO!!! So does Tom. But it's a tougher game to grow and that's why we introduced the 12-team format, and honestly, the main event doubleheader is an awesome day for anyone who can afford them both and loves to draft. I agree, many of you wouldn't do the Primetime alone, but having like-minded folks together for back-to-back big money drafts is a cool trip and fun to participate in.

Now, could we have gotten 400 or 500 teams as Eddie and you say for a 14-team NFFC Online Championship? Maybe because you guys are so dedicated. But our goal is to bring in new players -- we all said that for years -- and last year 200+ new members played in the NFFC Online Championship. That was a 12-team format that had 512 teams in it. Now others have copied our format and price point and people are saying that these are a dime a dozen. Ah, yeah. And so we should switch because we proved that a 12-team online format at $350 per team was a success? No way.

The 12-team online format has a better chance to grow to very big numbers moreso than a 14-teamer. I know all of you view the NFFC as a 14-team contest and that's what you love, but we can't die holding onto a niche. More people play 12 team formats than 14 team formats and while we believe our signature event can hold its own in today's market, we also believe that expanding beyond that format makes sense. A 12-team online championship at $350 per team with 3RR and KDS and the biggest league prizes ($2100 per league) and a $50,000 grand prize can be very successful and I think it will be.

Trust me, these aren't easy decisions because Tom and I love the 14-team format too. We need it to sell out one of these days to keep that format going, as you can imagine. If we can't increase those numbers then it will be a niche game that doesn't appeal to the masses and I don't believe that's true. So we're hopeful that the new members who competed in the 12-team NFFC Online Championship last year had so much fun that they will join the NFFC Classic this year as well. If they don't, that tells us something about our core game. But this 12-team online game is a double-edged plan for this contest, as it is for others.

Hopefully that makes sense. We're shooting for 600 teams and we believe the 12-team format will get us there, especially with the increased prizes. You all might be right that we could have reached the same numbers with 14-team leagues, but I'm not sure of that. And that's why we went with the 12-team online format.

renman · Post by **renman** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:51 am

I want to see some ideas of things that can be addressed or changed to improve the NFFC DRAFT DAY EXPERIENCE.

Any thoughts?

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Sun Jun 06, 2010 5:56 am

By the way, I think we hijacked this thread!!

But as Wayne said, the football discussions have been good on our boards lately so keep them coming. Even this is a good one, if frustrating for some of you and Tom right now.

We need to hear from you folks on all of these new contests because without the support of our core players the NFFC doesn't survive. It's important that we continue to grow and add new games that are appealing to our current members and to new players. We can retain 75-80% of our players each year, but without new players the math doesn't work. So keep the ideas coming and we'll keep explaining why we do what we do, even if you don't agree with the answers.