Charity cycle rides (your experience)

[Martin]

there's quite a lot of heated debate about these; and how much of the proceeds go to a good cause, and also the question of how much the rider is expected to front up to join the trip and also how much sponsorship.

They are obviously a good idea for the charitees concerned (I've lost count of the number of London to Paris / Amsterdam and other oversees rides I've seen publicised in the paper recently) but does anyone have any actual experience of any of these? (one day rides like London Brighton and other sportive events are well discussed elsewhere)

I personally have no experience; have got sponsorship a couple of times for rides I was doing anyway but generally I find it hard to ask people to sponsor me for something I enjoy so much although they readily do.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

I volunteered on L2P24 last year, London to Paris in 24 hours. It was just as a ride leader though, not really representative of the whole experience IMHO.
Centenaire du Tourmalet 1000 + London2Paris in 24 hrs

[FatBloke]

I did London to Paris for the British Legion in 1999 and 2005. The riders pay for the cost of staging ( about £450 a head in 2005), all sponsorship monies go to the RBL.

Absolutely cracking experience. Would love to do it again. Nothing can beat riding onto the Place Charles de Gaulle with all the traffic stopped to allow you to do so!   

[Quisling]

The Charity Commission publishes details for each registered charity about the proportion of total income that is spent on the good cause, marketing, admin etc.


 The Charity Commission for England and Wales
then search on your charity name, then the page that comes up should give a breakdown of their accounts with helpful pie charts.  e.g. MS Society of GB and NI
http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/SHOWCHARITY/RegisterOfCharities/CharityWithPartB.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=207495&SubsidiaryNumber=0

It doesn't tell you how much of the charity bike ride cash goes to the good cause and how much is admin, but it will show fundraising costs as a proportion of total expenditure so is a good overall estimation of how spendy the charity is.

[robgul]

I have some experience of charity rides - both at a locally organised level and knowledge of "big challenge" rides.

The "London to Paris" or "Ride across Vietnam" type rides are invariably sub-contracted by the charity to organising companies for a management fee + a cost per rider.  There is then the fund-raising aspect ... which is what it's all about.

The real issue to me is how the money bit is positioned/marketed to both prospective riders and to their potential sponsors/donors. 

Many of the rides are confusing in this respect. There is an ad at the moment in the cycling press "Ride for free in New York" ... read the small print.

My own view is that the numbers should be transparent, separate and not "bundled" - so should be :

a) the cost of staging the ride (organiser contract cost, promotion etc) (To be covered by the riders personally as an entry fee, up front)

b) the amount required as a minimum to be raised for the charity  - and that to be a value that must be GUARANTEED before the rider is allowed to start.

That may seem harsh and blunt .... but sponsors should not be asked to fund the costs of the rider's "holiday jaunt" - however much of a challenge that may be.

What the ratio of cost : funds raised is set as is obviously important too ... I have my own views on this.


At a local event level, again the entry fee should be paid by the rider, not as part of a "raise £x bundle" - for the same reasoning.   

That entry fee will cover costs and, hopefully, also be a contribution to the fundraising too (that's local flavour thing where a lot of cost can be covered by blagging support from local companies .. e.g. paying for medals, supplying printing and other goods)

Stories abound of (especially local) charity rides that "raise a fantastic £15,000" ..... but in reality cost >60% of that to stage ... and that probably doesn't account for the wooden dollar costs of the charity's fundraising employees working on the event.


On a slightly different tack ... I'm amazed by the number of enquiries I get via my Cycle : End-to-End website  (Cycle : End-to-End ) from people asking for "tips on getting sponsors" .. with the expectation of getting companies to pay all their ride costs (trains, accommodation ... even buying the bike and calling at supermarket branches to pick up free food) ..... to me, for a "sponsor" to fund a few jerseys, or loan a support vehicle would seem reasonable ... but not to "fund the holiday" - that's the bit the rider should be doing.

What people also don't seem to see is the "So what?" question in respect to a lot of these rides ... the E2E especially .. unless you are riding it naked on a Penny Farthing playing a banjo at the same time ... not sure where I got that notion  ... there's no real differentiation or USP.


This may provoke discussion . . . 

Rob

[Honest John]

Hmmmm.... Charideee.

If I want to go for a bike ride, I don't need to collect money.

If I want to collect money, I don't need to go on a bike ride.

Charideee rides give the message that cycling anywhere is a massive feat of endurance/courage/madness that you have to be rewarded for.

It's not. It's fun. As all those present will no doubt already know.

And just don't get me started on my opinion of organised charideeee as a concept....

[Julian]

Dunno.  I've only done one sponsored cycle ride and it was a massive feat of endurance / courage / madness.  I wouldn't have done it if it weren't for the charity end of things.  And you lovely people all sponsored me lots. 

I'm not planning to do another one though.

[Si]

From the charity point of view I suppose you have to ask: if the ride didn't take place, would the charity have more or less money?  Even if a fair bit of the money goes to organisation costs or to pay third parties for their services, I'd say that if the charity still gets money out of it that it wouldn't otherwise have got, then fair enough.

But, the next question is: would the rider have chosen to do a different charity ride if this particular one didn't exist?  IN which case we have a competitive market for charity riders and it beholds any charity to get its costs down as much as possible if the percentage of money not going to the good cause puts prospective riders off.

From the cycling POV, do charity rides harm cycling?  As above, there is the argument that they make cycling seem like a one-off arduous event. But on the other hand, these rides might encourage a lot of people to try cycling who'd not considered it before (there's always something in my local rag about some hitherto non-cyclists going off to do an organised E2E for charity or some such).  And after trying it, and really enjoying the charity ride, they might stick at it, thus increasing the number of cyclists out there and giving us more of a voice.

Does the heavily hyped charity aspect of the London Marathon put people off jogging/running?

[Si_Co]

I find it hard to ask people to sponsor me for something I enjoy so much

This.
I have a mate who's into running, now he does a 10 mile run at least once a week, on a regular basis he does half marathons and seeks sponsorship, now I know it's for a good cause but it does kind of p*ss you off after a while. So I have a big problem asking folk to put their hand in their pocket to pay me to enjoy myself.

I think it depends really on the scale challenge for the individual.

[Honest John]

Dunno.  I've only done one sponsored cycle ride and it was a massive feat of endurance / courage / madness.  

Not London-Brighton, then  

[Julian]

Dunno.  I've only done one sponsored cycle ride and it was a massive feat of endurance / courage / madness. 

Not London-Brighton, then   

Not quite.

[robgul]

Charideee rides give the message that cycling anywhere is a massive feat of endurance/courage/madness that you have to be rewarded for.

It's not. It's fun. As all those present will no doubt already know.

I think it's worse than that - only this week a big corporate sponsor of an event I'm helping with (not MacRide !) was planning a video and one of the suggestions was that the final shot should show "... an exhausted rider lying on the ground at the end of the ride..." - it's a 10 mile ride.

... and when the Beeb filmed a local ride of about 12 miles they thought it was hilarious to show the reporter (riding a bike borrowed from me" getting off and walking up a slope where even the most novice of cyclist wouldn't have bothered to change gear.

The charity rides we do are promoted as " . . .a pleasant way to have a fun day out and help a deserving cause ... and for those wanting a bit more of a challenge you can ride 100 miles ... "

Perception ....

Rob

[Polar Bear]

I consider doing these rides form time to time but have yet to commit.   If I do I'd have to pay the fees myself so every penny of sponsorship was a direct donation.  

[vorsprung]

istr that Bowthorpe aimed to raise £1.8 million with his record breaking round the world trip

The amount raised was more like £100,000

At the time I got shot down in flames for saying "[what] I have never understood about cycling of this sort is how it is supposed to raise money for a charity".  Here's the comments on the Guardian website

Around the world in less than 194 days and 17 hours | Life and style | guardian.co.uk

Last year Bowthorpe organised a mass participation End to End.  He was hoping to get 100 riders and raise £100,000.  This seemed like a slightly better idea but I can't find any measure of how many people did accompany him ( I count 14 on the blog ) or what he actually raised with this project

Please don't feel I am picking on Bowthorpe, I think he is a truely remarkable cyclist.  It's just that if even his incredible achievements and drive to organise stuff can't do much for a charity, what chance for the rest of us?

[Julian]

@robgul - 10 miles is a long way for some people.  I can cycle a long way but I was hobbling for a week after a 10k run, which some people dash off in an evening without even thinking about it.

[robgul]

@robgul - 10 miles is a long way for some people.  I can cycle a long way but I was hobbling for a week after a 10k run, which some people dash off in an evening without even thinking about it.

... I agree BUT the point I was making was that the film/TV was making a big drama out of it . . .  which would/could make other people then think that 10 miles was beyond reality and out of their reach - which then detracts from all the good reasons to cycle.

Rob


... just as an afterthought - the MacRide used to have 3 distances 10, 25 or 60 miles (plus a sister event of 100 miles) - BUT feedback told us to drop the 10 miler as not being worth doing .... the people that did enter the 10 miler usually did two laps of the course, or changed to the 25 on the day - and year-on-year there's a very noticeable progression from 25 mile riders doing the 60 the following year.   
Not sure what that says - perhaps we have fit(ter) riders here at Stratford-upon_Avon!

[phil d]

I've done three multi-day charity rides, and the reason I did each was totally different.

The first was a 5-day Bike Events ride in SW Ireland in aid of NSPCC.  I entered it mainly because I was fairly recently returned to cycling at that time, and wanted to visit Ireland (I'd never been before, but was so inspired I've been every year since).  So the organised ride with pre-planned accomodation seemed a good way to do it.  Was well organised, and a great success.  On the way back to the ferry home I was offered back my entry money (which paid for the ferry, and support on the ride, etc) as I had raised above a certain minimum sponsorship.  This did not fit with my view of such rides, so I declined and the full amount of my sponsorship went to NSPCC.

The second was a London to Brussels ride (three days) organised for the Lord Mayor's Charity when our chairman was the Lord Mayor of London (the City of, not Ken or Boris).  I supported this because it was organised within the firm, though the riders came from many firms throughout the city.  Because of the business connection I only tapped clients for sponsorship, which went 100% to the charity (which was supporting the women's unit at St Bartholemews Hospital).  We all paid our own expenses.

The third was a London to Paris ride (actually Hampton Court to Verseilles), again organised through City connections.  The attraction of this one was that it was organised in a Tour de France style, three 200km-ish stages, with rolling road closures for the two French days.  I paid an entry fee that covered the organisation of the event, paid my own expenses during the event, and made a personal contribution to the charity which if I recall correctly was a Vietnamese Educational charity (I did not obtain sponsorship).

So in all three cases the Charity received all of the money I had raised from sponsors or personally contributed.  I don't know how typical these were.  But none of them were ridden because I was actively seeking to raise money for the specific charity.

[mattc]

Great comments from Robgul. Nice to hear an honest view from the organiser side of these things.

@robgul - 10 miles is a long way for some people.  I can cycle a long way but I was hobbling for a week after a 10k run, which some people dash off in an evening without even thinking about it.

... I agree BUT the point I was making was that the film/TV was making a big drama out of it . . .  which would/could make other people then think that 10 miles was beyond reality and out of their reach - which then detracts from all the good reasons to cycle.

Given that complete novices mostly complete the 56miles LtoB, the number that struggle to ride 10 miles would be really tiny (basically the very sick or infirm).

This seems to highlight the different motivations behind these things:
- In Rob's example, the Beeb wanted good telly. If it made cycling look like a torture, all the better;
- If a cycling club runs an event, it is generally to promote cycling.

I'm pretty uncomfortable in the overlap area; money is raised for charidee, but cycling is made to look like torture. I would rather donate cash to charity as I see fit than be pestered to contribute to this sort of thing.

The TRAT thing seems to sit in a separate niche: noone riding that is pretending to be a novice, or indeed to find riding 100 miles a challenge. They even seem to be mostly enjoying themselves! So we have capable cyclists seeing just how far they can push themselves. I'm not sure I'd ride such a thing, but it sits much more easily with me than the more common event styles.

[robgul]

Great comments from Robgul. Nice to hear an honest view from the organiser side of these things.

@robgul - 10 miles is a long way for some people.  I can cycle a long way but I was hobbling for a week after a 10k run, which some people dash off in an evening without even thinking about it.

... I agree BUT the point I was making was that the film/TV was making a big drama out of it . . .  which would/could make other people then think that 10 miles was beyond reality and out of their reach - which then detracts from all the good reasons to cycle.

Given that complete novices mostly complete the 56miles LtoB, the number that struggle to ride 10 miles would be really tiny (basically the very sick or infirm).

This seems to highlight the different motivations behind these things:
- In Rob's example, the Beeb wanted good telly. If it made cycling look like a torture, all the better;
- If a cycling club runs an event, it is generally to promote cycling.

I'm pretty uncomfortable in the overlap area; money is raised for charidee, but cycling is made to look like torture. I would rather donate cash to charity as I see fit than be pestered to contribute to this sort of thing.

The TRAT thing seems to sit in a separate niche: noone riding that is pretending to be a novice, or indeed to find riding 100 miles a challenge. They even seem to be mostly enjoying themselves! So we have capable cyclists seeing just how far they can push themselves. I'm not sure I'd ride such a thing, but it sits much more easily with me than the more common event styles.

Thanks for the comment - I didn't want to be trumpet blowing BUT the two events in here in Stratford each year (MacRide & Shakespeare 100) raised a NET amount of close to £60,000 in 2010 for Macmillan Cancer Support (that's after actual, cash money paid out in costs - and lots of in-kind support)

The other BIG NUMBER which we used in the press was that "1,077 riders rode 70,000 miles on a Sunday"

Rob

[mrcharly-YHT]

I used to do several 'sponsored' somethings every year, ranging from personal challenge stuff to personal humiliation stuff.
   
The best return for least outlay was the humiliation/looking stupid; I bleached my hair blond and got £250 (which built a schoolhouse in a village in africa).

The most money raised in one shot was doing the Great North Run - £600. Everyone knew I would complete the run, they liked that I was doing something different (I ran it barefoot) and like the charity. I didn't take funraising very seriously, just got sponsorship from people at work.

Personnally I wouldn't do a sponsored event where part of the money went to my costs or to the organisers.

[Martin]

the last time I looked into one (Stansted to Amsterdam) you needed to raise £1000 to be included. Of that £400 went into the costs, so the more you raised the more the charity got. There did not seem to be a "pay the £400 yourself" option.

whatever; I thought £400 for a 3 day tour camping and returning by coach was too steep; I'm doing it myself for half the cost by plane and staying in YHs next month.

whatever the morals of "paying for peoples' jollies" the sad fact is that like chuggers the charity would rather get a 50-60% cut of the donations than no donations, I think it's called Charity Fatigue

[teethgrinder]

I think it's worse than that - only this week a big corporate sponsor of an event I'm helping with (not MacRide !) was planning a video and one of the suggestions was that the final shot should show "... an exhausted rider lying on the ground at the end of the ride..." - it's a 10 mile ride.

As Matt said, that says more about the media than the charity.
I don't know where the idea that it had to be a challenge ride to earn the big bucks either.
Comic Relief didn't seem to be about tough challenges, but it made lots of money.
People do all kinds of things for charidee, the media will put whatever spin they like to make a story out of it.
Celebrity status make a big difference. Remember those comedians doing JOG to LE as a relay team a year or so ago?
I could have kept pace with them solo, but even if I did that alongside them, I doubt I'd have made anything like the money they did.

I also agree with Martin, even the rides that do appeal, the minimum level of sponsorship turns it into a very expensive holiday. I don't have enough cheek to ask other people to fund my holidays, especially when they can barely afford their own.

[mattc]

Remember those comedians doing JOG to LE as a relay team a year or so ago?
I could have kept pace with them solo, but even if I did that alongside them, I doubt I'd have made anything like the money they did.

That was actually a pretty decent challenge, given that all but 1 rider didn't have the years of training behind them that TG has. They were crossing scottish passes in freezing temperatures thru the night, and (partly due to bad planning) got f-all sleep over the week.

But sure, celeb status made a big difference!

(there was a thread about it at the time if anyone is interested.)

[EMnut]

I did the charidee thing a few years back (L-P). At the time I was smug about it, but as time has gone feel less happy. I got money off friends, family and complete strangers. The Charity (a local one), got a couple of grand, I had fun... But the charity paid the private company running the event 25% of the sponsorship. So all my fun was paid for, and I was not that upfront about it. A Bad Thing...

OK it, got me back into riding and was the first time I had been over 100 miles in one day, But I could have done that without fleecing anyone for cash...

Part of the problem is that charities have to be pretty ruthless to raise cash. I work with one very decent charity and they are sponsored by a lap dancing club. The charity feels very uncomfortable about it, but they get about 100 grand from it. The lap dancing club then tells the world how wonderful they are as they do their bit. There were some pretty seedy people involved

I think as long as individuals stump up the costs, and the challenge is decent enough then I have no problem.

My penance is that I now run an annual 100 mile ride for my local bike club, where no one has to raise a penny for anyone, so no problems with undeserved moral superiority

[robgul]

    SNIP  ... But the charity paid the private company running the event 25% of the sponsorship. So all my fun was paid for, and I was not that upfront about it. A Bad Thing...
 SNIP

ONLY 25% - that's seen as a very good deal by a lot of charities !!!   (Not un-typical is a budget of 40 - 45% of the total raised being taken in costs) 

Rob