BassFan's Kumar Answers Questions From BassFans

(Editor's note: This is part 1 of a 2-part Q&A with BassFan CEO Jay Kumar.)

BassFan asked for it, and BassFan got it. Readers from all over sent in the questions they most wanted to ask BassFan CEO Jay Kumar.

His answers to those questions are found below. Note that both parts 1 and 2 of this interview are long. It was Kumar's wish not to leave any BassFans out, so he answered as many questions as he could.

About Various Stuff

Bryan Klinger of Ponca City, OK writes:
Why is the growth of professional bass fishing into some NASCAR-like monster such a good thing? You have ESPN's BASS trying to become some advertising and commercialization cash cow, and FLW trying to put a Ranger in every garage. All the non-endemic money coming into the sport is great for the pros' bank accounts, but the push for larger payouts, new advertisers, etc. has created organizations that are alienating the very base that supports them. I know lots of people who love NASCAR, and none of them race. I do not know anyone who follows pro fishing that is not an angler. So is this growth sustainable, and what is it worth to the weekend angler or local bass club member?

Bryan, where's the growth? I only see growth in two areas. One is in payouts, and a lot of that is being funded by anglers. Long-term, the number of U.S. anglers is down, though it increased slightly in 2004. FLW Outdoors is growing – starting new tournament circuits – outside of bass fishing, but that business is directly related to Irwin Jacobs' boat companies. It isn't related to growth in fishing.

The other place I see growth is in BassFan.com users, which have been doubling year to year so far. That's one indicator that bass fishing is a healthy, vibrant industry.

Will everything that's happening lead to growth? I think so. Lots of publicity has a way of doing that. Will it be sustainable or good? I don't know. Will there be a trickle-down effect to weekend warriors and clubs? Don't know that either.

There are more legitimate tournament opportunities for club-level fishermen than ever before, which is good. But as companies have become smarter about reaching people, I think the clubs' best shot at seeing some of the money is by being part of a bigger group, like the Federation for example. That's the biggest umbrella group of clubs that I know of, and there's no tour level there to drain out money.

Justin Welker of Cochranton, PA writes:
How do you feel current changes in BASS and other fishing organizations will affect fishing in the future? I'm an avid bass angler at the age of 24 and have been since I was in a stroller. I want my kids to be able to grow up with heroes like Hank Parker and Bill Dance just as I did. Will our heroes be there in the future for us to watch and imitate?

Justin – absolutely. Whatever BASS or anyone else does in bass fishing will ultimately be shaped by the market, meaning fishermen like you. You can't sell if no one's buying. So whatever you want will be there. Someone will provide it. And if your kids are 2 years old now, they'll probably be able to still see Kevin VanDam, Jay Yelas, Mike Iaconelli, Mark Davis and other current top pros. That's one beauty of bass fishing.

Harold Coleman Jr. of Jackson, TN writes:
With the increasing entry fees in professional tournaments, what would be the best way for an amateur fisherman to move up to fishing with the "big boys?" Can fishing as a co-angler in professional tournaments benefit me more than fishing as a boater in lower-level tournaments?

Harold, I think you'd be better off asking someone who's been there, but here's my 2 cents: I think you need to do both. You need to make your own decisions (on the water) and do well by them before you can move up. But it's also probably worth a few trips as a co-angler at the tour or series level to see what it's like to fish the big-time – before you decide to spend all that money.

Steven Rockweiler of Luling, LA writes:
Kumar, I've been bass fishing for 45 years and have seen and experienced a lot. I've been a BASS life member in excess of 30 years. In the 1960s and early '70s, bass fishing was just a purely fun sport with your buddies. Then we all became engrossed in competitive bass fishing. Do you think that a lot of fishermen are giving this sport a bad name? Most bass fishermen have become extremely non-courteous, not knowing what it is to idle by a fellow fisherman. Competitive fishermen are not only in an extreme hurry, but it seems that we're entering an era where it's okay to win at all costs. I've noticed a definite increase in hole-jumping, following other fishermen who are catching bass, and other undesirable tactics. Your thoughts please.

Steve, you're right. It's sad, but also inevitable. It's inevitable because of everything from America's changing culture – the whole, 'I want it now, I don't want to work for it' thing – to more money in tournaments, inadequate rules and (inadequate) enforcement.

Tournament organizations have to have better rules. FLW's rules need a lot of improvement in some areas. BASS is leading the way there, but even those rules need to get better. I like BASS's 30-day off-limits rule, but not because it levels the playing field. I like it because it cuts down on potential cheating. I'd like to see them do more there, including with enforcement.

I think Harold Sharp said that tournament organizations need to press state fish and wildlife departments to have stricter penalties for cheating in tournaments. That's a great idea, and would be great PR too.

Jim Zane of Donnellson, IA writes:
Jay, you've been around the fishing industry for a while now and seen it from a few different angles. What job/jobs associated with it look most attractive to you?

Jim, that's a tough question. I think there's a lot of room in fishing for talented, good people, but the problem is some companies for some reason don't seem to want that. You need to really poke around to find a good fit. Also do some due diligence on the stability of the company. About the only job I would not recommend is being a pro angler right now. Wait until that scene levels out and gets stable.

Kelly Denham of Fort Worth, TX writes:
Obviously you started BassFan.com because you're a fan of fishing. Now that you've met so many of the pros, who are your Top 3 favorite pros?

Kelly, that's a good question but I can't answer it. You might not believe this but I can't limit it to three. I like all those guys, famous or not. You might too once you got to know them. After all, they love what you love.

Joe Zelienka from Walnutport, PA writes:
Jay, as of right now, of the following three choices, which do you view as the most harmful to happen to the bass-fishing industry and its impact in the short-term (particularly the next 3 years) and why? 1) The current BASS-Federation rift, with the FLW impact thrown in. 2) ESPN regaining much of the broadcast rights to NASCAR starting in 2007 and their agreement to provide expanded and related coverage (where does this leave BASS?). 3) Recent various state legislation negatively targeting fishing and particularly bass tournament fishermen.

Joe, I'd have to say the last one because I don't see the first two as harmful. The Bass Federation needs to find the best environment it can for itself and the best benefits for its members. The current rift is a process to do that. It was inevitable. If BASS didn't prompt it, something else would have.

I also see lots of potential for BASS with ESPN's NASCAR deal. I'm curious to see what happens there.

Number three is the biggest thing because of what it reflects. I don't know exactly what you're talking about, but I don't think the outdoors industry has been as good as it could be in educating governments and the mass media about what anglers and hunters do for America. I'd like to see that change.

Jason Howland of Albert Lea, MN writes:
Do you think the days of tournament bass fishing where anglers achieve success for their fishing ability will soon go by the wayside in favor of anglers who can best market themselves?

Jason, no, I don't. The people who care about tournament fishing are tournament fishermen. They care about success, not the other stuff. The anglers who naturally have more personality might be more famous because of it, but I don't think marketing will rule the day like it does in NASCAR. At least I hope not.

John Gorman of Bolivar, MO writes:
Jay, I was wondering if you think it is possible to be a full-time writer in the fishing industry and be a professional angler? Would someone with both abilities be in high demand in your opinion?

John – Easy answers: yes and no.

Ricky Shabazz of Rialto, CA writes:
Do you ever think there will come a time when FLW or BASS will ever host regular (annual) FLW Tour or Elite Series pro tournaments in the western U.S.? It seems that even though the West continues to send anglers into the national spotlight, both tours shy away from making eastern, northern and southern anglers come west on a regular basis. What gives? How is it fair for either tour to refer to themselves as national and totally ignore an entire region?

Ricky, I think the biggest thing is cost. Or logistics. It probably looks like a giant pain in the butt to send all their tournament staff, equipment and whatever else all the way out there just to make less money than they would if they stayed closer to home. Lots of pros feel that way about their own expenses (when going west).

As far as national vs. regional, I think you could make a case that both leagues have only regional tours, or series. But so what? They're the biggest games in town.

To answer your first question, yeah, I think there will be regular West Coast tournaments, maybe once a year, at some point – simply because I think ignoring California, in particular, is a mistake. It's a big fishing market with lots of bass fishermen.

Butch Tucker of Moultrie, GA writes:
Which organization, FLW or BASS/ESPN, currently offers the best long-term opportunity for an aspiring angler based on their business model?

Butch, BASS wins if the aspiring angler plans to make the majority of his income from sponsors, particularly Triton, Mercury and any of the other ones aligned with BASS. FLW wins if the angler wants smaller entry fees, and if he plans to make most of his living off winnings. And if he runs a Ranger or Stratos with a Yamaha or Evinrude on the back.

Aside from the sponsor stuff, long-term I think FLW has the edge right now just because it's a more stable environment. But what if Wal-Mart decides it wants out? What if ESPN or Disney decides the same thing? Tune in later for another episode of General Hospital.

Jamie Jones of Benton, AR writes:
Jay, I have nothing against any pro-fishing organizations. I think they are all doing what they need to do to help this sport grow. But isn't it time for the fishermen to stand up and start an organization that will benefit all anglers? An organization that will enable the fishermen to step beyond what is going on now? An organization that takes the best by a system such as the BassFan World Rankings? Do you think this is in the future, and do you think such an organization can be successful?

Jamie, good question. I'm glad you're not drinking either league's Kool-Aid. Do I think that the sport, the industry and the fanbase can benefit from such an organization? Yes, if it's done right. Do I think it will happen and be done right? I have no idea.

The PAA (Professional Anglers Association) is heading in that direction for at least some of the top pros in the sport. The Federation is doing it for bass clubs. Do I hope they get it right? Absolutely. But I can't predict if they will, even if the opportunity is there.

Rich Ison of North Vernon, IN writes:
Jay – It is obvious, and rightly so, that Ray Scott is viewed as the father of professional tournament bass fishing. However, do you feel that he is given too much credit for where the sport is today? As an example, Nick Creme's invention of the plastic worm and Andre Moore's 'Sweet Beaver' are light years apart.

Rich, that's an interesting way of looking at it. But in my opinion, the short answer is no. I don't think Ray Scott can get enough credit for being the founder of modern-day bass fishing – and even modern fishing in general. That's not just professional bass fishing either. That's bass clubs, bass media, bass tournaments, fisheries conservation, boating safety – a lot of things we all take for granted now. They all started somewhere, usually with one guy: Ray Scott.

If you're asking who I think has most influenced where the top level of the sport is right now, I'd say Irwin Jacobs. He upped the payouts and made them all-cash. He got non-fishing sponsors involved. He was the first to do wrapped boats. He got Jerry McKinnis' production company involved in professional bass fishing, and got that coverage on ESPN. In fact, I still feel that were it not for working with FLW, ESPN may never have gotten interested in BASS in the first place.

Dave Brucker of Atlanta, GA writes:
Do you think bass fishing might be a future summer Olympic sport?

Dave, it could be, but I'm pretty sure steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs are a requirement now in all Olympic sports. So bass fishing might not make it there.

About BASS

(Editor's note: Looks like BASS is on more people's minds than FLW Outdoors, about which Kumar received no standalone questions.)

Craig Butler of Grand Junction, CO writes:
Jay, I was wondering what your stance is on BASS seemingly giving the big thumbs down to fishing out West. As of now there are no Opens and it sounds as if BASS doesn't even care about us. We have just as big, if not bigger, bass out here than anything back east, especially if you hit California. Why do you think this is?

Craig, I'm just speculating – I have no special insight here – but I'd have to say that the current situation with BASS and the West is due to one big fact: BASS has never been successful with tournaments out west. So as they completely retool their tournament system – with the Weekend Series, the new regional Tours and the Elite Series – you'd expect them to start where they're strong, which is mostly in the Southeast and Southwest, the Texas and Oklahoma area.

Will BASS ever get serious about the West? California is a huge market, so you'd think so. And Don Rucks has said BASS has plans to go back out west. Let's see what happens.

Brian O'Donnell of Grand Blanc, MI writes:
Will there ever be a time when big corporations sponsor tournaments and we see the Elite Series without entry fees?

Brian, let me rephrase your question. How about: Will there ever be a time when so many big corporations sponsor the Elite Series that every competitor gets paid at every event and entry fees fall to zero?

Honestly, I don't know. Most of the money that sports leagues make comes from two things: TV rights fees, and advertising fees based on TV and onsite eyeballs. ESPN doesn't have to pay any rights fees to BASS, so anglers who fish BASS events don't get that money. And a couple-thousand fans is big for a bass tournament, but super-small for most sporting events. Tournament TV ratings are in the same boat. They're not big enough to capture big corporate dollars.

That doesn't mean that bass fishing isn't a good investment for corporate America. It just means that corporate dollars will probably be smaller, and business models might have to adjust accordingly. But maybe not. ESPN has gotten behind things before that have become huge. So who knows.

Terry Banks of Fountain Inn, SC writes:
Given all the problems BASS is currently having, is ESPN the best and worst thing to ever happen to them?

Terry, how can we tell? Some people hate the Federation situation while others love the Weekend Series. People hate some ESPN bass fishing shows and love other ones. In my opinion, it's way too early to draw any black-and-white conclusions about ESPN's legacy with BASS.

Doug Odom of Huntsville, TX writes:
Do you feel that BASS is moving away from the organization it once was, of promoting and recognizing the "average" fisherman, into an "elite"-only organization? I'm not just talking about the Elite Series of tournaments, but the entire organization. It seems that since ESPN bought BASS, the average member has been forgotten and pushed aside.

Doug, in terms of the Elite Series, yes. When you charge $5,000 a tournament to fish, you're limiting the pool of talent to those who can afford it. In that sense it is "elite," meaning small. And it's no longer an "everyman" sport as I believe bass fishing really is and always will be.

And should be. People, fishermen, should be able to move up to the top level based on talent and a reasonable financial risk, not by betting the farm or having a big bank account.

As far as the entire organization goes, I've said to many people that they have to let go of the old BASS. It doesn't exist anymore. It's ESPN's BASS now – just like the original IBM doesn't resemble the current IBM, or the old NFL isn't like the new NFL.

It's hard to tell whether this BASS is about the members or not. But to my knowledge ESPN has no track record of building or owning member-based businesses. Does that mean anything? It just means that they may not appreciate the members right now, but that might not mean never.

Brad Smith of Hartford, AR writes:
With all the changes in pro fishing, namely higher entry fees, how do you think BASS will be able to ensure that the pro fields will be full in the future? If Joe Fisherman is able to qualify for the bigs, how is he to compete for valuable sponsorship dollars with the biggest names?

Brad, first I think you need to define a full field. In the future, if ESPN follows its NASCAR model, a full field might be 35 guys. Could happen.

What if ESPN's Elite Series gets huge TV ratings and corporate dollars come in and make the purses huge? Fishermen will be banging the door down to get in and sponsorship dollars won't matter. They can make enough money off winnings.

If none of that happens and the Elite Series stays like it is now, I think a new guy will be in trouble. That only changes if he's really good right off the bat, like Kevin VanDam was. Or big sponsors, mostly boat and motor companies, change the way they hand out sponsorship money – meaning they give the most money to the fishermen who are the best performers. That might never happen though.

Chris Barnes of Lenexa, KS writes:
Jay, With ESPN'S recent acquisition of NASCAR broadcast rights, will ESPN tire of the BASS turmoil and reduce BASS's visibility on the network?

Chris, I don't know what ESPN will or won't do, but I've heard a lot of negative comments about the NASCAR TV rights being the beginning of the end of ESPN's ownership of BASS. Maybe those people are right, but there's a large demographic crossover between anglers and NASCAR fans, and I'd be pretty surprised if ESPN didn't try to make that work for them, and for BASS, in some way. In other words, I see it as a huge potential positive until we see otherwise.

– End of part 1 (of 2) –