AUK Event Logistics was Re: AUK AGM

[Somnolent]

A quick random thought .. IF we have a problem that some new organisers are put off by the thought that they could lose money .. thru up front costs not covered by the riders entry fees .. then AUK could easily take and publish a Board decision .. that any new calendar organiser will be supported by a single donation of say £100.( and given the hours that have to be put in to get an event running for the first time, minimal reward for their efforts  if the event is a financial success anyway )  ...... Peanuts to AUK given the £300,000 sitting in the bank doing nothing.

Or how about rewarding all our calendar organisers by having a "Thank You Pot" each year .. say £20,000 in it .. so still leaving AUK an annual surplus .. to be divided between calendar organisers at year end based on number of events they put on .. so with about 500 rides that is an extra £40 per ride as a thank you for their efforts.

there must be lots of ways of using some of the massive lump of cash doing nothing to recognise the efforts of the volunteer organisers with out whom calendar rides just would not happen.... needs somebody to think constructively  . rather than continuing to do the same this year as we did last year.

£20K to share?    I've just this morning sent in an application form to become an organiser and run one of my perms as a calendar event......

Seriously though....

As someone who has had to spend a number of hours dealing with the blow-back from events that have been put on by new organisers who are
   a) not experienced in the ways of audax and
   b) incapable of reading/following written instructions
I'd be very unwilling to support direct financial 'incentives' to encourage newcomers to take up the challenge of organising.

But yes, greater publicity on the commitment for underwriting potential losses might indeed help.

[Fidgetbuzz]

Not sure whether I made myself clear .. shared across ALL calendar events in the year .. so about £40 per calendar event .. it is the organisers who are the backbone of AUK .. surely with the large cash balance which is ever increasing .. with AUK itself in a NO RISK position because it is a licensing body not an organising body .. recognising the efforts that make AUK the success that it is by saying thank you to all organisers .. seems a no  brainer to me .... but maybe I am the one with no brain !!

[telstarbox]

I don't know if this is a problem specific to AUK. I'm in another cycling group (not AUK/CTC affiliated) and getting people to step forward and organise events, even casual pub rides, is very hard so it ends up being the same three or four people who organise everything...

[whosatthewheel]

My understanding is that brevet cards, being that a perm or a calendar event need to be paid in advance by the organiser. So, realistically, unless one closes the registration early, one needs to fork out for the maximum capacity of the event. So if I decide to cap at 100 entrants, that is 100 cards, which I believe is 100 quid (perm cards are a quid each... is it the same for events cards?).
Apart from the fact that it is quite a steep fee AUK charges organisers to print some cards, it would obviously be helpful if AUK paid for the cards in advance and then retained a pound for each card actually sold.

Even worse for perms... should I invest in 100 cards and maybe nobody will ever ride it, or should I pay for 10 and then I'd be out of cards... or maybe just not bother with cards at all and just do GPS validation

Then of course hiring of the venues... in an ideal world I would propose a calendar event with a breakdown of the costs, AUK would accept it or bin it. If they accept it, then they should contribute with an advance payment to cover the bigger expenses (hiring of a venue, brevet cards) and retain part of the entry fees to cover for that. The organiser would then have some extra money as entries roll in to buy some food or else. Basically sharing the risk. As events get more established, the risk becomes zero.

Even if taking some risk meant losing a couple of thousand pounds per year in hopeless events, with 300k in the bank (losing 10k worth of inflation per year) who cares?

[jsabine]

I don't know if this is a problem specific to AUK. I'm in another cycling group (not AUK/CTC affiliated) and getting people to step forward and organise events, even casual pub rides, is very hard so it ends up being the same three or four people who organise everything...

I don’t think it’s an AUK problem or a cycling group problem, more a ‘something needs to be organised’ problem. In almost everything I’ve ever been involved with, there’s a small number who are proactive about organising and helping, a bigger number who will very willingly help when asked, and a majority who simply take part (that split is among active members, of course - sometimes there’s a large group of inactive supporters too).

As long as activities are continuing to happen, the reactive helpers and participants don’t necessarily see a need to do more, so the burden continues to fall on a disproportionately small number.

[psyclist]

For the issue of attracting new organisers, could gamification help in a similar way that is used to entice riders to ride more? Riders earn points for various awards. Could an equivalent breadth of award be available for organisers, so we could have things like an Organiser SR for an organiser who runs a 200, 300, 400 and 600 in a season? A number of lower level awards would be needed, as organising an SR series of rides would be something to build up to over time.

With a suitable trophy cabinet display on the new website, riders could see their own achievements and those of other riders. The trophy cabinet would have space for both rider and organiser achievements to be displayed, so non-organisers would clearly see that there are non-riding achievements that can be sought.

Just some thoughts.

[whosatthewheel]

For the issue of attracting new organisers, could gamification help in a similar way that is used to entice riders to ride more? Riders earn points for various awards. Could an equivalent breadth of award be available for organisers, so we could have things like an Organiser SR for an organiser who runs a 200, 300, 400 and 600 in a season? A number of lower level awards would be needed, as organising an SR series of rides would be something to build up to over time.

With a suitable trophy cabinet display on the new website, riders could see their own achievements and those of other riders. The trophy cabinet would have space for both rider and organiser achievements to be displayed, so non-organisers would clearly see that there are non-riding achievements that can be sought.

Just some thoughts.

Nice!

[Charlie Polecat]

So if I decide to cap at 100 entrants, that is 100 cards, which I believe is 100 quid (perm cards are a quid each... is it the same for events cards?).

This is curious, I print my own cards for RUSA events, don't AUK allow that? More often though, for perms, I send an email attachment to the rider; cost zero.

Also, I wonder why AUK insists on sitting on so much money; a lack of fiduciary responsibility comes to mind. Can the membership force a disbursement?

[Si S]

For the issue of attracting new organisers, could gamification help in a similar way that is used to entice riders to ride more? Riders earn points for various awards. Could an equivalent breadth of award be available for organisers, so we could have things like an Organiser SR for an organiser who runs a 200, 300, 400 and 600 in a season? A number of lower level awards would be needed, as organising an SR series of rides would be something to build up to over time.

With a suitable trophy cabinet display on the new website, riders could see their own achievements and those of other riders. The trophy cabinet would have space for both rider and organiser achievements to be displayed, so non-organisers would clearly see that there are non-riding achievements that can be sought.

Just some thoughts.

The mechanism exists to some degree as the Randonnée Organiser Award and is displayed on event pages as ROA, there's also the organiser of the year award. I guess you're talking about expanding the ROA, the discussion around it could be interesting, would there be a championship? 

[Manotea]

For the issue of attracting new organisers, could gamification help in a similar way that is used to entice riders to ride more?....

As it happens Willesden C.C picked up the trophy last year, which was nice (and very unexpected... I suspect Blacksheep was having a quiet year and next year, the new boyz at Kingston Wheelers who are launching an SR series may be in with a shout*).

There may well be room for a 'Volunteers' SR though, as this would encourage vols to support different types of event, including possibly events run by different clubs so as to collect the set.

*Edit: And ACME of course, 1000km counts, er, 5 

[psyclist]

The mechanism exists to some degree as the Randonnée Organiser Award and is displayed on event pages as ROA, there's also the organiser of the year award. I guess you're talking about expanding the ROA, the discussion around it could be interesting, would there be a championship? 

I wasn't aware of the ROA, but had heard about the Organiser of the Year award. I don't know about the criteria for the Organiser of the Year award, but is sounds as though it is quite narrow in its focus and only has a few potential winning candidates each year. I was thinking of something more embracing, like having an Organiser SR that can be achieved by a number of organisers each year, and having the added kudos when achieving multiple years of the award.

There may well be room for a 'Volunteers' SR though, as this would encourage vols to support different types of event, including possibly events run by different clubs so as to collect the set.

I like that idea, and can see mileage in using this as an incentive to volunteer, over and above the usual satisfaction that volunteering provides. It wont be for everybody, but having targets to achieve can help folk to think about contributing more.

[mattc]

There was a discussion a while back about capturing those who were happy to volunteer for the occasional event.

There are a couple of notions floating around about how to do this, whether through the new website or separately, but nothing concrete yet. I think at the moment it tends to be managed either by organisers asking existing contacts or through, say, club mailing lists, which doesn't really bring in new folk.

It has been discussed quite often, and seems a very useful thing to me. More importantly, it seems very very easy to do. And very cheap - social media already exists to solve 90% of the "challenge".

I would really really like AUK to get behind this, it would be soooo much quicker-n-easier to get something off the ground than the main website, and would have tangible benefits to a lot of people.

(e.g. my enjoyment of a recent event was almost ruined because the org got let down fairly late on by some volunteers, who could almost certainly have been replaced from the AUK pool, if there had been a simple mechanism. That's quite a selfish example, but it's just to demonstrate that it's not just about getting events off the ground )

[phil d]

My understanding is that brevet cards, being that a perm or a calendar event need to be paid in advance by the organiser. So, realistically, unless one closes the registration early, one needs to fork out for the maximum capacity of the event. So if I decide to cap at 100 entrants, that is 100 cards, which I believe is 100 quid (perm cards are a quid each... is it the same for events cards?).
Apart from the fact that it is quite a steep fee AUK charges organisers to print some cards, it would obviously be helpful if AUK paid for the cards in advance and then retained a pound for each card actually sold.

While Wilkyboy has answered much of this "question", I should add that brevet cards (for calendar events) cost 35p, not £1.  £7 has to be paid to register an event, payable before the event is published.  That covers the cost of the first 20 cards.  Cards have to be ordered at least a week before the event, by which time the organiser should have a reasonable idea of the number of entrants (and entries can be closed at that point if it's a real concern). 

As Wilkyboy says, all other AUK costs (the 35p card fee for > 20 cards, 20p validation fee per finisher and the £2 temp membership fee where applicable) are payable after the event has completed.  As has also been mentioned up-thread, costs of halls are usually payable only a few days before an event at worst.  There are some other (mostly stationery-related, and not large) costs, but becoming an organiser is NOT a large financial commitment.

All new organisers are required (among other things, like being an AUK member) to have a mentor; an experienced organiser who is available to advise on any aspect of the organisation process, and hopefully share experience to make the process as easy as possible.  Edited to add - if a potential organiser does not have a suitable mentor in mind, one will be found and allocated by the regional event co-ordinator.  It's not a barrier to organising

BTW, this has little to do with the forthcoming AGM, and is cluttering the topic.  Could the posts about becoming an organiser be split into a new topic?

[Manotea]

A better anaology is going to a meeting billed as a discussion on, say,  Arc Welding and discovering the main topic of discussion was Crochet...

But PhilD has it right:there is no reason for event organisers to expose themselves to financial risk and the whole system mitigates against such loses.

Now some might say, that is the problem, that there is not enough risk taking, and they might well have a case. Where we are though is that if an event organiser (aspiring or established) has a proposal for a larger, high profile event for which they require financial or other forms of support  it would be pretty silly if they didn't consider approaching AUK for advice. It is not rocket science.

My hope for the new website is that it will help orgs deliver larger and higher profile events by promoting AUK generally and by providing marketing and administration functions appropriate for the age in which we live.

Its very noticeable that events that receive even a modicum of marketing effort do very well, London-Wales-London being the worked example of an event that has gone from a so-so field to become a regular sell-out (there is already an extensive waiting list for 2018 - and some would say, THAT, is a problem). As is there may well be scope to develop the event further though that's for the future and the organiser to decide.

But generally, get the marketing right and most other areas will take care of themselves, and that is the area where AUK can most help organisers overall.

[frankly frankie]

Not sure whether I made myself clear .. shared across ALL calendar events in the year .. so about £40 per calendar event .. it is the organisers who are the backbone of AUK ..

Eliminate the charges for event brevet cards, would be my suggestion.  Possibly up to a limit of say 100.
Not only because this would give a little something back to the organisers, but it might help solve what I see as a common problem, which is a tendency among organisers to under-order, in turn leading to some riders getting shabby re-purposed cards or photocopies.

It's not difficult to imagine a set of circumstances where the surplus could be eaten up in a very small number of years, but that is perhaps more properly a subject for discussion in the member's forum.

A big ^^^ PLUS ONE ^^^ to both these points.

[frankly frankie]

So reduce income .. ...  charge less for brevet cards , reduce validation fees , reduce the price for Arrivee for a year or two, provide existing members  with a free membership year .. 1 year free for annual members , 1 extra year for 5 year members.
plenty of ways to  reduce income.......  but actually benefiting members or riders

If you end up subsidising members (as has happened over short periods in the past, until fees could be adjusted) where is the incentive to increase membership?

Without looking at the figures, I would suggest that none of the above is actually AUK's biggest source of net income.  That is non-member entry surcharges.  I think if you wanted to reduce income these could be reduced by half to £1 - or, the present £2 could very easily be split 50-50 between AUK and the Organiser.
The irony is that converting non-members to members is bad business, from AUK's point of view.

But, as hinted above, £300,000 (if that's what it is) doesn't go far these days - the real problem is the total imbalance in scale between AUK's possible future expenses and outgoings, and the micro- nature of AUK's sources of income, some of which itemise at under £1.

[Somnolent]

ISTR to recall there is at least one organiser whose events regularly sell out and who would like the option to have a greater non-member surcharges temporary member fees so as to be able preserve more places on his events for members.

[hellymedic]

ISTR to recall there is at least one organiser whose events regularly sell out and who would like the option to have a greater non-member surcharges temporary member fees so as to be able preserve more places on his events for members.

Given that the sums involved are on the scale of Bank of Toytown, I doubt that would have much effect.

AIUI Temporary AUK membership is £2. Doubling this might encourage potential riders to join AUK for better VFM but I don't think it would seriously impact on the entry numbers.

[Redlight]

ISTR to recall there is at least one organiser whose events regularly sell out and who would like the option to have a greater non-member surcharges temporary member fees so as to be able preserve more places on his events for members.

If that's a problem*, how about having staggered entry dates?  Members only until, say, a month before the event. Then open up for non-members if places are available. A little more welcoming, I think, than having members-only events.

*And what a great problem to have!

[Veloman]

I know 3 folks who joined AUK specifically to get preferential entry in order to ride an event.  Previously they had ridden events as non-members and were well known on some events. Having different conditions for member/non-member would no doubt increase membership.

[frankly frankie]

But would be against the spirit of Regulation 9.2  "AUK events are open to all cyclists ... "

[Revellinho]

Re. Money.  I run my events on a shoestring and was forced to up the price when the hall cost was raised (fair enough - not much can be done about that) but also because I was subsidising the purchase of the food with the insurance money from the DNS non-members.  This now goes into the AUK coffers.  Perhaps that could be reversed?  I've lost money on some iterations but overall reckon to be on evens, so I have never got to the stage of saying 'Oi - I've put an event on and lost £50, can I be subsidised so I'm not out of pocket?' but I think there should be a procedure for this eventuality.  It's all a bit vague at the moment, you get a few re-assuring nods when the matter is raised, but to my knowledge there is nothing written down about it.

Anyway, if you want to help the events thrive, come up to The Lakes in May.  You could not park your car for a day and get a cup of tea for less than the entry fee (which gets you 2 nights in the hall and plenty to eat at HQ).

[Zed43]

But would be against the spirit of Regulation 9.2  "AUK events are open to all cyclists ... "

From the Bryan Chapman aukweb page: "Event will be oversubscribed so entry open exclusively to full AUK members." Same last year, partly the reason I became a member of AUK.

Personally I think it's not unreasonable to give AUK members the opportunity to register before opening the registration for the public at large, but I may be biased now  . LEL had this AFAIK (not a member back then, will be the next time)

[Veloman]

^^^^^^
Hence the reason why the folk I know joined AUK just to ride BCM.

[slohill]

My understanding is that brevet cards, being that a perm or a calendar event need to be paid in advance by the organiser. So, realistically, unless one closes the registration early, one needs to fork out for the maximum capacity of the event. So if I decide to cap at 100 entrants, that is 100 cards, which I believe is 100 quid (perm cards are a quid each... is it the same for events cards?).
Apart from the fact that it is quite a steep fee AUK charges organisers to print some cards, it would obviously be helpful if AUK paid for the cards in advance and then retained a pound for each card actually sold.

While Wilkyboy has answered much of this "question", I should add that brevet cards (for calendar events) cost 35p, not £1.  £7 has to be paid to register an event, payable before the event is published.  That covers the cost of the first 20 cards.  Cards have to be ordered at least a week before the event, by which time the organiser should have a reasonable idea of the number of entrants (and entries can be closed at that point if it's a real concern). 

As Wilkyboy says, all other AUK costs (the 35p card fee for > 20 cards, 20p validation fee per finisher and the £2 temp membership fee where applicable) are payable after the event has completed.  As has also been mentioned up-thread, costs of halls are usually payable only a few days before an event at worst.  There are some other (mostly stationery-related, and not large) costs, but becoming an organiser is NOT a large financial commitment.

All new organisers are required (among other things, like being an AUK member) to have a mentor; an experienced organiser who is available to advise on any aspect of the organisation process, and hopefully share experience to make the process as easy as possible.  Edited to add - if a potential organiser does not have a suitable mentor in mind, one will be found and allocated by the regional event co-ordinator.  It's not a barrier to organising

BTW, this has little to do with the forthcoming AGM, and is cluttering the topic.  Could the posts about becoming an organiser be split into a new topic?

+1 on all counts for Phil D's comments