Post by mchales_army on Nov 6, 2013 14:07:21 GMT -5
Answer from ADMIN:
Dave,
Our apologies for mishandling your ticket. We had a glut regarding that world merger and treated them with the same response.
Creating a new world with the leftovers while we have so many openings now would not be a wise move, so we have to decline what is otherwise a fine idea. As an option, could you try this with one of the existing worlds that has the largest number of openings? Say a world has 16 openings, pull in 16 new owners and convince the existing 16 to go along with the idea?
Thanks
My reply:
Thanks for the reply.
That was the first thing I tried, and in fact that was the driving force behind the inception of the idea. I thought of this as the perfect way to help re-balance a world who couldn't fill any more, because it had gotten so far out of whack. I then approached 5 worlds (Evangeline; Joey Belle; Regulars; Here I Go Again; and More Cowbell) back when they were all sitting at 10-13 openings. They were all very much against the idea, and are not wanting to break up their "super teams", even though it is obvious that it would be the best thing for the world moving forward.
Believe me, I have even tried convincing "Parks" world which is at 13 openings now and has been losing owners for a few weeks now. 5 or 6 owners in that world are even "in" my tournament world, and there was at least one of THEM who declined my offer to assume control of that world.
My pitch has always been, let's try this, and we'll be full tomorrow. They just don't want to let go of their juggernaut...
In regards to the number of openings and this world being in conflict, I have to disagree. Those worlds are in the shape they are in because of various self-inflicted issues. They will be in that shape with or without my tourney world. You have just closed two bad worlds, and merged them into (hopefully) one better world. So by adding my Tourney World, you are at the same amount of worlds, only you have improved overall, because Joey Belle Regulars should be better, and my world will have extremely little turnover. As mentioned I have a lengthy waitlist, which when combined with owners who have indicated they would likely play in more than just one 4 season installment probably equates to at least 16 seasons worth of owners (so basically no openings for a really long time), who are ready to pay the extra buy in, and who are NEVER going to join one of these worlds that cannot fill. So in reality there is no conflict.
Dave,
Our apologies for mishandling your ticket. We had a glut regarding that world merger and treated them with the same response.
Creating a new world with the leftovers while we have so many openings now would not be a wise move, so we have to decline what is otherwise a fine idea. As an option, could you try this with one of the existing worlds that has the largest number of openings? Say a world has 16 openings, pull in 16 new owners and convince the existing 16 to go along with the idea?
Thanks
My reply:
Thanks for the reply.
That was the first thing I tried, and in fact that was the driving force behind the inception of the idea. I thought of this as the perfect way to help re-balance a world who couldn't fill any more, because it had gotten so far out of whack. I then approached 5 worlds (Evangeline; Joey Belle; Regulars; Here I Go Again; and More Cowbell) back when they were all sitting at 10-13 openings. They were all very much against the idea, and are not wanting to break up their "super teams", even though it is obvious that it would be the best thing for the world moving forward.
Believe me, I have even tried convincing "Parks" world which is at 13 openings now and has been losing owners for a few weeks now. 5 or 6 owners in that world are even "in" my tournament world, and there was at least one of THEM who declined my offer to assume control of that world.
My pitch has always been, let's try this, and we'll be full tomorrow. They just don't want to let go of their juggernaut...
In regards to the number of openings and this world being in conflict, I have to disagree. Those worlds are in the shape they are in because of various self-inflicted issues. They will be in that shape with or without my tourney world. You have just closed two bad worlds, and merged them into (hopefully) one better world. So by adding my Tourney World, you are at the same amount of worlds, only you have improved overall, because Joey Belle Regulars should be better, and my world will have extremely little turnover. As mentioned I have a lengthy waitlist, which when combined with owners who have indicated they would likely play in more than just one 4 season installment probably equates to at least 16 seasons worth of owners (so basically no openings for a really long time), who are ready to pay the extra buy in, and who are NEVER going to join one of these worlds that cannot fill. So in reality there is no conflict.