Nick

He had a position carried over from the 2021 cancelled event. So his name was in a database somewhere for the event. But he did not end up taking the spot.

This person should not be on the results. They didn't pay the entry fee.

Who's getting their fines delivered today? I hear that people who didn't enter the event are receiving fine notices. CSA has retracted the case that I know of. CSA admitted to being provided a list that is inaccurate. Any idea who provided them with a list? Would POPI come into play with list sharing?

Glad they have a shorter distance to get the boyfriends into the sport while they wait for their partners to finish the main event. EDIT: Facts getting in the way here. Tiffany raced the day before.

It's been a few years but isn't that trail a no-go area for bikes? Probably wise for the event organisers to avoid it?

I wasn't around in those early days but if I were, I'm sure I could have helped Matt secure a couple million quid deal too. Even for the yellow message board it was then 😆

Sorry if I missed a step but how is this relevant for the website today? Or are we specifically discussing its value in the 2007 market? That's the same year the first iPhone came out and Blackberry was probably still considered a good investment too.

The one's a media publication, the other tracks personal fitness. They are very different businesses with very different value offerings and very different customers who use each in very different ways. Strava's free service is subsidised by venture capital and paying subscribers. CyclingNews's free service leverages advertising. Again, very different. All I'm trying to do is point out that there are real world challenges in this space that may explain why CyclingNews has made this decision.

I was specifically referring to Strava in my comment. As Matt explained above, they had not succeeded in finding a revenue model for free users. In this case, servicing free users is likely a cost to the company, not a gain. As you say, CyclingNews has existing methods to try to monetise non-paying customers; advertising, affiliate links, advertorials, etc. To assume that an unchanging business model will continue to be fruitful forever is risky, in any industry. 28 years is a long time on the internet. Matt went into a bit more detail about some of these changes above. But in essence, it is far harder to make an income from advertising now than previously. For example, there is more competition for ad spend (e.g. social media) and advertising rates have plummeted. It's not a case of figuring it out after 28 years, it's about evolving a model over 28 years to the challenges of the present. But yeah, this doesn't necessarily mean it's the correct or best decision. Unless necessity is forcing their hand.

He speaks from experience 😉

They lose the users that cost them money and time for no return. And gain a few more paying subscribers. Lower costs, more profit. Might not be all bad.

A more interesting fact about Froome, in this context, is that he's an investor in Factor Bikes. He's on the board.

You sound defeated. This isn't just about cyclists being entitled to things. The negative consequences, if we don't drastically change the way we move are huge (regardless of the mode, include walking, skating, public transport, scooter, and cycling as some examples). Those kiddies might not even have a beach to park at if we don't. And I'm sure they'd have far more fun and be healthier catching the train or riding their bicycle for part of that journey. The reaction by some to the promenade ban is a reaction to this and the City's lack of meaningful change in transport, than it is to the actual luxury of using the space. The ban includes more than bicycles too.

The parking between Kalk Bay and Clovelly, that is only ever used over New Year, is a painful reminder. But we did get a frequently used by cyclists sign, I suppose we should be grateful 😕

It's two people wide. I support that too. Still puzzled by why they didn't build the planned bike lane on the parallel Main Road when they renovated it, however. An opportunity lost. Perhaps why I'm so prickly about losing cycling space, when the City has said that they're cycling friendly.

Yes, it does get stupidly busy. But when? I'd wager that the area is busy less often than most people think. I'm idealistic but I like data-based decision making rather than presumptions. One of my suggestions was to collect this information and potentially implement a 'busy times' restriction of sorts depending on the findings. For instance, it was largely deserted when I last rode there (a Saturday afternoon, nogal). I was a menace to very few people that day. A blanket ban is lazy and doesn't engage the issue in an equitable manner. Why not try some measures to reduce the risks/frustrations before going full ban?

Today is the last day to vote and have your say on this matter: https://www.capetown.gov.za/_layouts/15/WebFeedback.SharePoint/webfeedback.aspx?id= c6f5d2aa-b77a-44c6-a131-c05ccfd2971e

16:00 Women 19:15 Men https://www.redbull.com/za-en/events/uci-mountain-bike-world-cup-petropolis

YOU has the scoop: https://www.news24.com/you/news/local/this-cat-survived-a-700km-journey-after-being-stuck-inside-the-neighbours-car-20220401 Turns out it had nothing to do with the CTCT 😉

Not sure if applicable here but something I've noticed while trying to populate the new Events Calendar for dates beyond June. Smaller events are not committing details too far ahead of time. I'm assuming because of Covid uncertainties. I recall EWC generally being in the second half of the year?

I suspect you're right but it'd be interesting to see the DSQ list. I don't think they had the time rule for 2021 or they didn't apply it as strictly. UPDATE: There were only around 40 e-bike registered riders who rode sub 3:50 in 2021. Good to see the normies proving that they're still hard 😉

Did all who doped piss in a tube at the end? What's the solution for these types? Stricter checking? Complete ban? Are ebike numbers different? Maybe a further self-checking by riders on route reporting those incorrectly classified. Is it significant problem that needs addressing? Did it even occur? If so, was it meaningful to anyone else's ride? Or should we just laugh at their pettiness and move on? I'm going with this one.

It looks that the provisional ebike results are simple. Less than 3:50 = disqualified and no result on the time sheet. As it stands, the category 'winner' rode a 3:50:25.

It's mostly a shame because it's one of very few places for people to have their first SAFE interaction with a bicycle. Be it a kid learning to ride or that Aha! moment where someone realises that bikes are fun or a useful transport tool. There's a shortage of such venues especially places supported by the likes of Up Cycles. Riding along the road side just isn't as appealing. Yeah, there are a few who are hazards but the majority are not. There are workable solutions other than a total ban to everything not on foot. More broadly, there's clearly a demand for a scarce resource here, why not make more of it? There could be many more 'promenades' (even extending the existing one) around Cape Town.