£10 registration fee per event for organisers

[Ian H]

...I charged £6 for a 200k yesterday and used the bigger than expected field to fund an extra manned intermediate control...

Here's a sensible approach. Charge what will cover coats on minimum entry numbers, then (if you wish) spend any excess on food and drink at controls (which of course saves the riders money).

[Billy Weir]

...I charged £6 for a 200k yesterday and used the bigger than expected field to fund an extra manned intermediate control...

Here's a sensible approach. Charge what will cover coats on minimum entry numbers, then (if you wish) spend any excess on food and drink at controls (which of course saves the riders money).

I was lucky (and it was luck) enough to be able to do this on my upcoming calendar event.  I budgeted for 25 entries and ended up getting more than twice that.  This funded a hall start, refreshments, manned controls and a £1 token towards a drink at the finish (all for £4).

Would I have put the event on if I expected less than 25 entries?  Probably not, but only because my area is well served by Dave Hudson, Kent DA and a smattering of other organisers.  But, if I lived in West Scotland etc. then I suspect I would have gone ahead.  It would disappoint me if AUK hasn't gone through a similar thought process of "why it has a small field", rather than simply stopping discussion at the much easier "it has a small field".

[BlackSheep]

...I charged £6 for a 200k yesterday and used the bigger than expected field to fund an extra manned intermediate control...

Here's a sensible approach. Charge what will cover coats on minimum entry numbers, then (if you wish) spend any excess on food and drink at controls (which of course saves the riders money).

I was lucky (and it was luck) enough to be able to do this on my upcoming calendar event.  I budgeted for 25 entries and ended up getting more than twice that.  This funded a hall start, refreshments, manned controls and a £1 token towards a drink at the finish (all for £4).

Would I have put the event on if I expected less than 25 entries?  Probably not, but only because my area is well served by Dave Hudson, Kent DA and a smattering of other organisers.  But, if I lived in West Scotland etc. then I suspect I would have gone ahead.  It would disappoint me if AUK hasn't gone through a similar thought process of "why it has a small field", rather than simply stopping discussion at the much easier "it has a small field".

Well done Billy  , I wish we had halls around here thacould hired for £75.

[Martin]

Would I have put the event on if I expected less than 25 entries?  Probably not, but only because my area is well served by Dave Hudson, Kent DA and a smattering of other organisers.  

Dave is catering on another excellent and popular event the Worthing Winter Warmer on the same day; the fact that you've managed to get this many entries on the same day speaks volumes  

(Blacksheep; £70-80 for a hall round here is par for the course; you obviously have too many Antiques Fairs in your area  )

[damerell]

Looking at the event numbers, it may be that the bar hasn't been set in the best place. I've analysed last years results and just over 40% of events have less than 20 finishers (obviously we know nothing about number of entries). Personally I find that a very depressing statistic.

Is it? It seems to me it could reflect either a shortage of riders or enthusiasm on the part of organisers. So is it good or bad?

The first audax I finished was a 100. It was the first year for the event, which may have contributed to there being 12 entries. The horrible weather certainly contributed to 5 DNSes and may well have helped the 2 DNFs. One of the synchronisation chainrings fell off near Pangbourne (luckily, there's a bike shop there) and we limped in drenched as the lanterne rouge - but by then we were 40% of the field. Was that a bad event? To me, it was a triumph that erased the misery of packing from the Start of Summertime at 170km.

Big fields can be fun (ahem, if you like audax at all); but so can small ones - on one of Liz Creese's 50s the whole field just rode around together like a CTC ride. It's obvious that small ones are more work per brevet card than large ones, but is the amount of work becoming prohibitive, and more importantly will hitting up organisers up for a tenner actually make a significant number of them not put events in the calendar?

If not, all this is doing is causing aggro and not fixing the problem... if it _is_ a real problem. After all, the small events are a lot of work per brevet card for organisers too; the issue should be self-limiting.

[Philip Whiteman]

"Would electronic brevet cards remove the transaction costs of production and the requirement for a registration fee?" Discuss.









.......Now where did I leave that wooden spoon?

[Martin]

"Would electronic brevet cards remove the transaction costs of production and the requirement for a registration fee?" Discuss.
.......Now where did I leave that wooden spoon?

Validation fees are the same for paper or electronic cards so no,

but IIRC there is going to be a trial of paperless perms; presumably only by gps initially

[Billy Weir]

"Would electronic brevet cards remove the transaction costs of production and the requirement for a registration fee?" Discuss.

Probably, but that is a question that better minds than mine will tackle when looking to do this.  I think the days of electronic brevet cards for calendar events are several years away though, as the logistics aren't there for organisers.

AUK has many sensible initiatives that will help organisers and the validation team (e.g. organisers donig validation rather than sending to the validation team).

But I think the burden that falls on Pam (and John) won't ease in the near future (which is why I have some sympathy with the registration fee).  Which is why it disappoints me when I read reports of organisers who put extra demands on the brevet card production team by pissing about asking for additional cards close to event deadlines.  The committee are volunteers who don't deserve additional hassle.

[Martin]

"Would electronic brevet cards remove the transaction costs of production and the requirement for a registration fee?" Discuss.

Probably, but that is a question that better minds than mine will tackle when looking to do this.  I think the days of electronic brevet cards for calendar events are several years away though, as the logistics aren't there for organisers.

there is no problem at all with the current calendar system. if it an't broke....

plus most organisers become 100% paper based from the minute they leave the front door until they get back from the event. Perms however (especially ECE's) I'd like to see become 100% electronic someday

[Panoramix]

Can't small events be run with permanent cards to sort the admin issue?

[frankly frankie]

I think Pam does offer undated cards, which allows them to be held over to next year - but they'd still be messy with info questions overwritten etc - as an entrant I'd feel entitled to a proper, unpatched, unscribbled Event Brevet Card.

I can see the Scotland issue (shall I call it the East Lothian question) is something that genuinely has to be accommodated.  Official group perms perhaps, as a last resort - but it should be possible to do better than that.

Oh and BTW, one man’s “subsistence culture” is another’s “not ripping off your cycling mates”.

I completely understand that.  Completely.  But whatever name you like to give it, it seems to me to be at the root of many of these circular discussions that are trying to tinker at the margins.
And it leads directly to -

every BlackSheep event has to pay it's own way.

With all due respect to Blacksheep and his very successful and popular events, that just seems a naive approach to me.

[LittleWheelsandBig]

After all, the small events are a lot of work per brevet card for organisers too; the issue should be self-limiting.

Self-limiting to approximately 40% of the calendar perhaps. AUK's organisers seem to be keen to do a fair amount of work for not many riders.

[Billy Weir]

After all, the small events are a lot of work per brevet card for organisers too; the issue should be self-limiting.

Self-limiting to approximately 40% of the calendar perhaps. AUK's organisers seem to be keen to do a fair amount of work for not many riders.

And it is a lot of work.  I reckon I have spent around 50 hours putting on the Redhill Beach Trip, all told.  I'm sure I'm not unique in that regard (at least for putting on a new event).

[mmmmartin]

AUK's organisers seem to be keen to do a fair amount of work

Can I, as a rider not organiser, point out that Orgs are held in extremely high regard by the vast majority of riders, and if they needed a hand they need merely ask?
It seems to me that t'committee is vastly underestimating the appreciation felt by riders for the effort that goes into making these events happen.

[simonp]

I think if I included the cost of transport of stuff to/from my start/finish control I'd have made a £100 loss rather than a £40 profit.

[Ian H]

I think if I included the cost of transport of stuff to/from my start/finish control I'd have made a £100 loss rather than a £40 profit.

Few, if any, audax events make a profit in real terms.

[cyclone]

Few, if any organisers set out to make a profit!

In my short audax history (4yrs) the events in Wales (that I have done) with more than 20 riders can be counted on one hand we often need a healthy number of non-local riders......I try and do a few rides across the border and the first busy event I rode was a bit of a  .

From my standpoint as a newbie organiser I can say that the amount of sheer graft for a calendar event is the same for 5 riders as for 50...In my case I'm checking numbers daily as although the card numbers are set 7 days from the start it feels that it might all happen at the last minute....To pay upfront for the cards should mean at least there is some chance for EOL's - I take on board comments by the more experienced orgs that they have cards left over...

FWIW there's no way I'd class my rides as making a profit (for me) the fuel cost alone to get to the start kills that off directly. I'm just welcoming the chance to put something back into a great series of rides 

It would be a tremendous loss to the audax community if the smaller events weren't put on anymore (and thereby reducing numbers as the travel costs spiral upwards). I dont really think a group perm has the same feel as a calendar event but then I havent done too many group perms......

Just my 2p worth........

[simonp]

Any profit goes to the local CTC DA.

If I put the rides in the DATC then more surplus would be made. However large numbers of riders make for a harder day for organiser and helpers, so I'm not too bothered by smallish fields.

[AndyH]

Self-limiting to approximately 40% of the calendar perhaps. AUK's organisers seem to be keen to do a fair amount of work for not many riders.

And put on some cracking events in the process.

My 2 most memorable 200s last year both had fewer than 20 finish. I'd be particularly keen to have a go at the "Tregaron Dragon" in the future, which had something like 12 IIRC. Having said that the costs associated with events like those (travel, food, accommodation) are far in excess of the entry fee. If it went up a few quid to cover the fact that it is a small event it wouldn't really bother me.

[BlackSheep]

With all due respect to Blacksheep and his very successful and popular events, that just seems a naive approach to me.

Why is it naive, Every event has a finite income (a) and costs (b). For me (b) has to be less than or equal to (a), or I may as well go and stand at the bottom of garden and help fill the stream. I've never had any financial support, so that's the way it has to be. If you or anyone else wants to meet any short-fall then I'm happy to run the events differently. The tax man has allowed me a small ammount to carry-over each year to pay up-front for some deposits, but (his words) is unlikely to increase this ammount for 2011/12.
I only have a financial history to two of my events, and they are costed to break even - and then the entry fee reflects that.
Of the other dozen or so events, four were new for the 2010/11 calendar, and the others are only in their second season.
The entry fees were initially set to reflect the facilities ofered on the ride. Many of the cafes I use, Audax is completely new to them in terms of handling "slugs" of  customers wanting a faster than average service turnaround. So to show good faith with controls on the ride, I gave/give them an ammount to cover the costs of a waitress for the time AUKs use the control. In return the control gives that back to the riders in the form of "money-off" the riders' bills. So everyone gets a good deal.

The Bryan Chapman Scenic 600 and Mr. Pickwick's Tour of the Cotswolds 300 are not likely to feature in any future events calendar, as neither covers it's own costs under the proposed £10 registration scheme.

[Ian H]

I think if I included the cost of transport of stuff to/from my start/finish control I'd have made a £100 loss rather than a £40 profit.

                                                   break even
Few, if any, audax events make a profit in real terms.
                                                    /\

[saturn]

Not so much recently, but when I first started doing audaxes, in deciding which to do I'd pay attention to number of finishers last year as if being popular was a sign of a good ride. Reading this thread made me resolve to actively target some smaller events so I've just been through my highlighted arrivee calendar. It was beginning to look like I'd only picked popular events (coincidence because I haven't done them before or checked last years entry) but eventually I got to one with 6 last year and one with 16 so I'll double my efforts to do those this year.

[Ian H]

As an example of how price-sensitive most riders are: I put a £1 extra on online entries to cover P&P costs. Most of my entries pay the extra. I don't think that a small increase to cover a registration fee would have any effect on numbers. Fees have gone up over the last few years for all kinds of reasons.

[Philip Whiteman]

As an example of how price-sensitive most riders are: I put a £1 extra on online entries to cover P&P costs. Most of my entries pay the extra. I don't think that a small increase to cover a registration fee would have any effect on numbers. Fees have gone up over the last few years for all kinds of reasons.

Especially when you consider the price comparison with sportive events which charge treble.  My BP was oversubscribed a month ago and it is probably one of the more expensive audax events. I charge a base fee of £5 but when you take into account Paypal charges and day membership fees which accounts for the majority of entries; there are plenty of people prepared to pay £8.   Saying that, the registration of 2x£10 could easily  be absorbed amongst the 240 entries.

[mattc]

Just because X,000 people pay £25+ to ride sportives, does not mean that everyone with a bike finds £7 a trivial sum for a day's cycling.

AUK has been a broad church - some organisers/riders want small events, some want luxury ones, some want cheap short ones, some want long arduous ones. Some want weekday GPS perms.

I'm not keen to make audax more like sportives without good reason.