Sportive entry fees - RIP OFF !

[Ron Keegan]

If people joining this discussion care to read the original post they will discover that I don't in fact have an aversion to sportive riding - I've done plenty of theme at home and abroad !

My aversion is to paying what amounts to extortionate and unsubstantiated amounts of money to be able to ride in SOME of the events on the calendar (That is of course my opinion, some might beg to differ.)

When all's said and done what is an acceptable fee to one person might not be to the next, it depends on so many factors.

However, what has not been explained to me (Ron are you listening ?) is just how those entry fees are justified, and I would like them to be.

Obviously there is a cost involved with staging any event of this nature, but are punters being forced to pay more to enter an event with a 'bigger name' than they would for an identical event, equipped with identical timing/ showers/ marshalling etc......... essentially, are we paying more for the name ?

Yes, ventoux50, I am listening.

This year, The Dartmoor Classic took £55k in entry fees.
Staging the event cost £40k.
The £15k surplus was shared by 4 charities and the Mid-Devon Cycling Club.
The club's share is ploughed back into the sport.
The riderswere all enthused by the whole experience.

Ron

 

[ventoux50]

Yes, ventoux50, I am listening.

This year, The Dartmoor Classic took £55k in entry fees.
Staging the event cost £40k.
The £15k surplus was shared by 4 charities and the Mid-Devon Cycling Club.
The club's share is ploughed back into the sport.
The riderswere all enthused by the whole experience.

Ron

Ron, that's commendable, and I probably would enter the event on the basis of those assertions.

Now, can you give us the breakdown for the Exmoor Beast ?

 

[Kestevan]

....but are punters being forced to pay more to enter an event with a 'bigger name' than they would for an identical event, equipped with identical timing/ showers/ marshalling etc......... essentially, are we paying more for the name ?

Of course you are - repeat after me supply and demand. It's not overly complicated. If you're running a commercial operation then you set your prices at whatever the market will bear, minus a small percentage to "keep em keen".

I get the definite impression you seem to think that making a profit is inherently evil or wrong.

As long as Sportive organisers are not holding a monopoly on either riding or organised events they should be free to set whatever damned price they want for their events - without having to justify it to you or anyone else.

If you dont like a particular price point then don't enter the event.
If you enter and dont receive the services advertised then feel free to complain, but simply whining "You're making lots of nasty cash and I dont like it" is a bit silly.

 

[Ron Keegan]

I'm not even going to bother researching.

Ron says his events are liked so much, any riders who are unhappy can sod off because there are plenty of applications beyond the numbers limit.
And it doesn't matter how bad the Sportives are, there will always be some suckers who will hand over their cash.

That's how I see it.... you've burned your bridges Ron. An attitude like that makes me for one, not want to ride anyone's Sportive.

Jimbo's final decision. Sportives ARE Rip Offs.

ps 7777

Good causes.. e.g. The Ron Keegan and Friends Appreciation Society.

We at the Dartmoor Classic certainly don't subscribe to your opinion jimboalee that "any riders who are unhappy can sod off because there are plenty of applications beyond the numbers limit." What we always try to do, if we can, is acoommodate late applications and, if we can't, we direct them to the FORCE Century Cycle Challenge. This is held on the same day as the D.C. and takes in Exmoor.

The FORCE cancer charity is just one of the beneficiaries of the D.C. Others, this year, were Bikes for Africa, Shelterbox and Devon Air Ambulance. "The Ron Keegan and Friends Appreciation Society." is not a cause, good or otherwise, we would ever support.

Those who "hand over their cash" to ride the D.C. are not "some suckers." Many have riden before and are happy to return, while others have heard about the event and are trying it for the first time. All enter because it's a good event and offers good value for the £27 entry fee.

I don't know what "bridges" I've "burned" or what "attitude" I'm now accused of but what I do knoe is this:-

At 72 years of age, I still put my heart and soul into this great sport of ours, as I have done for over half a century, and will continue to do so for as long as the great organiser in the sky allows me to pursue my passion.

What I also know is that, at 11 pages, this thread is becoming excessive. So, I'm going to sign-off now from this debate and concentrate my efforts on more productive issues.

Cheers all and enjoy the bike game, whatever you perceive it to be.

Ron Keegan

 

[Ron Keegan]

Ron, that's commendable, and I probably would enter the event on the basis of those assertions.

Now, can you give us the breakdown for the Exmoor Beast ?

My post of a couple of hours ago was to have been my last on this thread but I'll make an exception with this one.

I could give you a breakdown for the Exmoor Beast, but I won't. It's a commercial undertaking and few companies would divulge such information other than to the Inland Revenue. Sufice it to say on an income from entry fees of about £37k MIG Events make a fair and reasonable profit. The bill for staffing over the week-end of the event was over £4k alone. The fee for the hire of the H.Q. venue and other facilities at Butlins is quite costly as are the charges for timing - another £4k - the fleet of support vehicles, feeding station provisions, bike numbers, certificates, gift bags, signage, office overheads etc.,etc.,etc., It's not a rip-off.

 

[jimboalee]

Now class. Compare & contrast these two statements (& explain how one individual can voice these two opinions in the same thread & maintain any semblance of credibility.)

My opinion changed during the course of the thread.
One man's attitude toward what was being said and discussed here caused me to change my mind about sportive ORGANISERS.
There were things said and implications that weren't to my tastes for a 'fair do's' contract between organiser and cyclist.

 

[jimboalee]

We at the Dartmoor Classic certainly don't subscribe to your opinion jimboalee that "any riders who are unhappy can sod off because there are plenty of applications beyond the numbers limit." What we always try to do, if we can, is acoommodate late applications and, if we can't, we direct them to the FORCE Century Cycle Challenge. This is held on the same day as the D.C. and takes in Exmoor.

The FORCE cancer charity is just one of the beneficiaries of the D.C. Others, this year, were Bikes for Africa, Shelterbox and Devon Air Ambulance. "The Ron Keegan and Friends Appreciation Society." is not a cause, good or otherwise, we would ever support.

Those who "hand over their cash" to ride the D.C. are not "some suckers." Many have riden before and are happy to return, while others have heard about the event and are trying it for the first time. All enter because it's a good event and offers good value for the £27 entry fee.

I don't know what "bridges" I've "burned" or what "attitude" I'm now accused of but what I do knoe is this:-

At 72 years of age, I still put my heart and soul into this great sport of ours, as I have done for over half a century, and will continue to do so for as long as the great organiser in the sky allows me to pursue my passion.

What I also know is that, at 11 pages, this thread is becoming excessive. So, I'm going to sign-off now from this debate and concentrate my efforts on more productive issues.

Cheers all and enjoy the bike game, whatever you perceive it to be.

Ron Keegan

Cheers Ron. Still no freebie invite?

 

[Fran143]

My opinion changed during the course of the thread.
One man's attitude toward what was being said and discussed here caused me to change my mind about sportive ORGANISERS.
There were things said and implications that weren't to my tastes for a 'fair do's' contract between organiser and cyclist.

I can honestly say that no man's ever made me change my opinion about anything as quick as this threads been running. To have that sort of power over others.

 

[ventoux50]

Of course you are - repeat after me supply and demand. It's not overly complicated. If you're running a commercial operation then you set your prices at whatever the market will bear, minus a small percentage to "keep em keen".

I get the definite impression you seem to think that making a profit is inherently evil or wrong.

As long as Sportive organisers are not holding a monopoly on either riding or organised events they should be free to set whatever damned price they want for their events - without having to justify it to you or anyone else.

If you dont like a particular price point then don't enter the event.
If you enter and dont receive the services advertised then feel free to complain, but simply whining "You're making lots of nasty cash and I dont like it" is a bit silly.

I don't quite understand how any of my comments might imply that the making of a profit is evil or wrong, indeed I have stated that I expect a profit to be made.

What you clearly don't understand is the potential damage that greedy organisers may do to our sport.
Yes they can charge 'whatever damned price they want' of course, and yes a fair return on a commercial venture is to be expected, but surely there has to be a morally acceptable limit on the degree of profit ?

And yes, if people are daft enough to pay extortionate fees, then that's their choice, but how many people are stupid enough to enter a ride at say £20.00, and the following year enter the same ride, over the same roads, and with the same facilities - and be expected to pay almost double ?

Not everyone is that stupid, and if the organisers treat us as such then their events WILL fold - and that would be a shame and detrimental to our sport.

 

[jimboalee]

I can honestly say that no man's ever made me change my opinion about anything as quick as this threads been running. To have that sort of power over others.

To make someone change from a positive opinion to a negative opinion in just a few 'knee jerk' sentances, I don't call that power. I call that 'putting you size ten in it'.

 

[screenman]

What is a morally acceptable profit?I have to admit I am in business and have been for many years, so my opinion of a profit maybe different from people who do not have to work to them.

 

[ferret fur]

What you clearly don't understand is the potential damage that greedy organisers may do to our sport.

Judging by the growing number of sportives it doesn't seem to have had much effect: Sportives seem to have been far more successful in encouraging people to enter cycling events than some other types of event which may be much cheaper.

 

[jimboalee]

What is a morally acceptable profit?I have to admit I am in business and have been for many years, so my opinion of a profit maybe different from people who do not have to work to them.

What price 'reputation'?

A large chunk of Jaguar Cars Warranty expenditure goes out under the heading of "Goodwill" to owners who have a problem and the car is beyond its warranty period.
It dents profits, but hopefully ( its only 'hopefully' because word of mouth is a powerful advertisement ) the owner will be 'Surprised and delighted' by the level of service he/she receives.

At the moment, Jaguar and Land Rover are in a situation where both companies can't build enough vehicles to satisfy demand. Like the sportive organiser who can't create enough entry places to satisfy demand.

That doesn't stop JLR from being kind and giving to their customers and potential customers.

When you look at the price of a Jag XKR 5.0l supercharge, you will see it 'bloody reasonable' compared with its competition. Porsche, Merc and the Audi R8.
That doesn't say its 'Cheap', it says its priced at a level that is competative without the company being seen as 'money grabbers'.

Ventoux50's OP tells us the last Cheshire Cat was £18, and the next is £32.50. Does that sound like 'money grabbing'?

 

[yello]

What is a morally acceptable profit?

How long is a piece of string? I think it depends on perspective and factors.

There is a business perspective (and adopted by one enterprise I can think of) that says there is no morality involved. Pure, unfettered, market driven business. And it's a model that clearly works (if the recently released profit figures are anything to go by!) and is popular amongst consumers. That despite the forums full of complaints, people go back... because they're cheap and deliver most of the time.

And then there are other models. I think a business must attempt to balance factors, charge what the market will accept and/or tolerate. It's a sensitive area (as I'm sure you screenman or sportive Ron will testify, I'm sure).

I may not necessarily agree with any or all business models (or levels of profits, or moralities, etc etc etc) but what I think is irrelevant. I'm but one voice and recognise the popularity means mine is not a popular view, particularly in the area of such harmless enterprises like sportives!

 

[Granville Kuosonsavath]

What i would like to see is sportives adopt the ryanair business model
i.e.
allowing you to choose
YES to showers
YES to feed stations
YES to signage
but
NO to 'goody bags'
NO to medals
NO to photographers
NO to timing