Originally Posted by srqballa
is it cheaper?
Theres a wonderful thread in the Field Owners forum about this actually.
The issue is they say its going to be cheaper for the player, which they feel is good for the sport. The way they see it is less cost for the player = more paint the player will buy.
However field owners have found in the past that this isn't always the case, it is at times but with a pinched economy its only going to make things a bit more iffy.
My (and other fields) concerns is the margin for myself. They guy selling the paint. Yes it will come cheaper to the player, but is it coming cheaper to me? Players won't understand this but I need a margin, I need to make a profit, and I don't need to take a cut on what little margin we have on paint already. Don't give me the "But people will come and play more if its cheaper" routine as your mistaken with that. I have a set number for what the lowest profit per case I am willing to stomach. That number is after all things considered (shipping/tagging/stocking) if the .50 doesn't allow for it I will not support it, stock it, or promote it Period
The reality is I was around many many years ago before most of you were balling and many of you were born, around that time paintball went through another caliber change to the .68 you know and love today. Back then it wasn't so much a "end of the world" type concept as the sport wasn't as large but there was similar talk. The change wasn't sudden as it took a good deal of time for it to change over but in the end it was for the best.
.50 has the oppertunity to improve things if done correctly, however the pace its going isn't looking good. The caliber change over needs to be a 5 year ordeal...Yes I said FIVE years.
In those five years it gives the ability for players to update old equipment, for fields to gradually phase out .68 paint and for things to slowly adjust...But in those five years its going to be chaos.
As companies are pushing the paint they are forcing fields into a bad spot. Think about how many players rush to get the guns when they first come out...Now we need to start stocking paint for those kids, but at the same time we need to continue to stock .68 for our normal customers and rental fleet.
Why should we stock two calibers of paint? 90% of customers will be using .68 and the kids with the new markers account for such a slim chunk there isn't any point in pissing money away into stocking some paint thats going to sit for a long period of time before it sells.
As time progresses we're expected to upgrade rentals, which if .50 proves to be popular will occur around the 1-2 year point (and for many fields around the 3 year point). At around the 3 year point things will be fairly smooth as kids will be buying used markers in .50 which will be discounted bumping the percent of .50 players up to 45-65%, at the five year point nearly 90% will be using used or new .50 markers.
.50 isn't a bad idea, its just being rushed and pushed far to hard. Think about it if your behind the marker...Will your field be stocking .50 paint right off the bat? If they aren't how will you play with that new toy? BYOP?
What needs to be done is a slow process over the period of 5 years. In that time new markers need to be dual use, both .68 and .50 so fields and stores can adapt and have enough of a demand to justify the switch. If markers are dual use players won't suffer due to fields not being able to justify switching over or stocking .50, and fields won't lose customers. As the years progress and more and more players have the dual use markers then .50 will be more common and more accepted.
We don't need to ban .50, rather we need to rethink how its being handled.