February 28, 2019
Burnside Park Tennis Club favours a per-head affiliation fee collection model.
It is of the view the current 6/7 banded model is inequitable and unnecessarily complicated and argues a per-head model, based on the number of registered members a club has, is the fairest.
Further, we suggest TCRI should do away with its unnecessarily complicated multiple-category membership structure, in favour of just two categories; juniors (11 and under) and the rest, thus mirroring exactly how TNZ levies its regions.
Without going into the reasons for rejecting the current banded model (these have been extensively and adequately canvassed over the past few years) we submit per-head is best, not only on the grounds of fairness and equity, but also because it would be better for the game.
Under a per-head model TCRI would simply invoice clubs based on the number of reported members.
It is how Tennis New Zealand collects fees from the regions, so it makes perfect sense the same methodology is used by TCRI to collect fees from its members.
The level at which these fees are set will depend on what total revenue TCRI wishes to collect but Burnside submits fees (inclusive of TNZ’s share and GST) should be set at:
Junior 11 and under $10.00
All other members $25.00
This, we calculate would return more than $117,000 to TCRI, assuming current membership levels.
In Sept 2017, Hagley/Te Kura also proposed a per-head model which proposed fees at: Junior 11 and under $12.50
All other members $25.50
That, at the time, would have collected $126,000, the same as the then-current 6-band model, but today there is room for lower fees than that.
Per-head is the most popular method used by New Zealand sports clubs for collecting fees and for a multitude of good reasons.
In favour of per-head
A club only pays for members it has, unlike the current banded model.
Any fees reduction or fees increases are distributed fairly, unlike the current banded model
Per-head restores, to some extent, the relativity that should exist between what a club pays in fees and the number of TCRI votes it is entitled to.
It removes the need to offer fees concessions to some club as is required under the current model.
It neither discourages nor encourages growth. In that respect it is neutral, leaving TCRI and the clubs to employ other tactics (e.g. fee reductions) to encourage growth and investment.
It does not require a cap limiting what a club should pay, unlike the current model.
It does not prevent clubs from introducing their own membership categories to suit their own needs.
It is consistent with the methodology employed by Tennis New Zealand
The administration costs associated with administering a per-head model are no more than under the current model. Both require clubs to report membership numbers.
Per-head is simple, easy to understand and easy to transfer
It is a traditional familiar methodology
Being aligned to actual membership size it is useful for analysis, database updating and reporting
Against per-head
It relies on disclosure, but so does the current model
There is no direct incentive to grow membership but neither is there a disincentive
The following NZ sporting organisations use the per-head model
• NZ Axemen’s Association
• Basketball New Zealand
• Bowls New Zealand
• Cycling New Zealand
• Diving New Zealand
• New Zealand Equestrian Federation
• Girl Guiding New Zealand
• New Zealand Golf Association
• Women’s Golf New Zealand
• New Zealand Indoor Bowls Federation
• New Zealand Luge Association
• Marching New Zealand
• New Zealand Orienteering Federation
• New Zealand Pony Clubs Association
• New Zealand Rugby Football League
• Scout Association of New Zealand
• New Zealand Speleological Society
• New Zealand Swimming Federation
• Tenpin Bowling New Zealand
Our committee acknowledges valuable information provided in the Tennis 2020 Report to TCRI which has helped inform this submission.