Cycling Clubs and Cyclists beware!!! The Hi jackers are here!

[ASG]

It has become almost impossible for us to reply to all the countless individual statements made on this thread. Below is a final statement from ASG on this matter – we would have preferred not to reveal this level of detail but under the circumstances it has become necessary. We stand by this and all of our previous posts and statements made regarding this matter as 100% factual and truthful despite the malicious accusations made. The matter is now with our legal team:

 

In its previous guise, the Telkom Satellite Classic was hosted by the Telkom Cycling Club, which is a different entity to the Jakaranda Cycling Club. Telkom demanded that the club disband following alleged financial irregularities and they withdrew their sponsorship of the club and the Telkom Satellite Classic.

 

The newly formed club approached us five weeks before the event was scheduled to take place in 2010. At that point entries hadn’t opened, there were no venue or route approvals in place, nor a sponsor. The club said that if we couldn’t help them the event would not take place.

 

And so the Bestmed Jacaranda Satellite Classic was born. The fact that Jacaranda was in the name had little to do with the club. It was an extension of the fact that most riders who took part came from Pretoria. We also had ideals of trying to emulate the erstwhile Jacaranda Traffic Classic and create a big deal feel around the event.

 

Following some negotiating Telkom allowed us to use “Satellite” in the name, albeit reluctantly so because of the question marks around the management of the previous event and club.

 

The club wanted an amount per rider in return for certain services. This per rider amount was increased every year as their service offering increased.

 

And so we managed to put on something on. Our long-time event partner Bestmed found some budget at the eleventh hour to help us. We also had to re-negotiate seeding with the Cycle Tour Trust, who at that point had already written off the event.

Approvals were hastily attained – in normal circumstances Metro and Saps approvals have to be applied for 6 months in advance - and the venue moved to Necsa and we managed to attract 1200 riders in the first year.

 

Since then the event has grown from strength to strength with more than 3000 riders taking part last year. Those that have taken part know what a logistical challenge the venue presents at Necsa, but we’ve managed to make it happen.

With the event established the club presented us with a contract, “employing” us for three years.

 

We believe in empowering the institutions that build the sport, but we also needed to make good on our initial investment in the event, so we responded to the club that we would enter into the contract, provided it renews automatically for a further three years if we meet certain entry milestones.

 

The club didn’t respond and have never responded to this and hence we didn’t enter into the contract. The club sent us a letter in mid December last year, “relieving” us of our duties as race organiser, stating that our 3-year tenure, according to the unsigned contract, was up.

 

This is when we declared a dispute and referred the matter to CSA. CSA ruled in our favour, but the club has still been relentless in their efforts, again presenting to CSA and subsequently forcing them to rule on the matter on two more occasions - every time in favour of ASG presenting the event.

 

We have published Cyclingnews Magazine for the past 15 years and presented races for almost as long. As race organiser we are bound to the decisions and rules of CSA.

Some of these decisions have gone against us in the past, and we have had to accept them – just as the club has to accept it this time. If they choose not to accept it, then they would also have to choose not to be affiliated to CSA.

 

With regards to the Jacaranda Children’s Home development initiative:

When CSA made a final ruling two weeks ago, we did request from the club to state what specific portion of the funds we paid them every year for their services in the Satellite Classic went to the development initiative, which they haven’t as yet.

 

We were instead accused of short-paying them last year because they had to “use” some of the money we paid them to pay over day license levies to GNC. The club sold day licenses at registration. The clubs are entitled to keep R5 per rider for their efforts in selling. The rest of the money is to be paid over to GNC for day licenses. If it wasn’t, ASG can’t be blamed for that.

 

Regarding the Emperors Palace Classic.

 

The Edenvale Cycling Club approached us through Len Kline 6 years ago, stating that their event – the Edenvale Classic - was dead in the water and asking us if we had any ideas for resurrection.

 

Thankfully Emperors agreed to get involved. We then stated to the club back then that should Emperors start an involvement, ownership of the event would inevitably end up being locked into the name – Emperors Palace Classic.

 

They went ahead with the idea – again knowing that in effect they didn’t have a race left anymore. Len had become a little fed-up – up to that point he handled just about the entire organisation of the event himself - the club had whittled down to 20 members. In the final year of their presentation of the Edenvale Classic it attracted less than 800 riders and it wasn’t well received with riders getting lost and the marshalling presence too low.

 

And so the Emperors Palace Classic was born, which attracted around 1400 riders in the first year. Five years down the line the race has gone from strength to strength.

 

Two years ago, the club wanted to claim ownership and (again) “relieve” us of our duties as race organiser. At that point the club still only had around 20 members - with the Emperors Classic requiring about 200 marshals and metro every year.

 

Problem was that the event in effect then “belonged” to Emperors, who had spent quite a bit of money re-establishing it.

 

Emperors elected to remain with us as event organiser.

The club made a case that they “owned” the traditional date in the first week of February, which we didn’t dispute (although nobody “owns” dates) – if they wanted to do their own thing we weren’t going to stand in their way. It is such a sought after date in the lead-up to the Argus and they had every chance of success if they put on a proper show.

 

And so the Emperors Palace Classic moved to mid April. It was a leap of faith for us, but as it turned out the event had established itself as more than just a training stop-over to the Argus and the race managed to once again grow.

 

Regarding the Jock.

 

The Jock club approached us 4 years ago to take over the hosting of the event. The club had essentially become a mountain bike club under George Bell and they weren’t interested in presenting the road race anymore. Egbert de Bruyn, who had been doing the job for them for many years, was left without enough resources to put it together.

 

He approached us and we went into a simple agreement with them for a set amount paid to the club ever year and to Egbert to help with the organisation.

 

In the last year of its one-stage format the Jock attracted less than 400 riders.

We took the decision, among quite a bit of criticism, to revert back to the 3-stage format. Four years later the Jock is well vested again with almost 1500 riders with strong sponsorship and all parties are happy.

 

A very similar scenario played itself off with the Berge en Dale Classic, which would have come to an end with Ds Wouter van Wyk being called up to do duty in Pretoria for the Dutch Reformed Church. His congregation didn’t want to continue with the event and approached me.

 

We took it over and in the first year of presentation received 1100 entries. Four years down the line the Berge en Dale receives 3000 entries and is a fully fledged Argus seeding event.

 

Is seems that what the two clubs in question might not quite comprehend, is that in essence we can never claim ownership of these events. We are merely the organisers/facilitators. And every event is only as strong as the organising committee and the cyclists that support them – usually as a result of a strong and familiar organising committee staying in tact year upon year.

 

These events certainly aren’t owned by individuals, corporates or clubs. They belong to the cyclists who support them and take part in them. As long as you support them, they will grow and the sport will grow provided the sponsors remain committed to the events.

 

None of these events turn a profit without sponsorship, and it’s in this department where ASG has had to put the financial guarantees in place where events don’t have sponsors, ensuring their continued existence.

 

Without ASG’s involvement events such as the Walkerville MTB Classic, the Bestmed Jock, the Tyger Valley MTB Classic and Val de Vie Classic, won’t take place. Without significant sponsorship, these events run at a loss year upon year.

[Skylark]

That is a rather fair reply.

 

Still a grey area over event ownership and maybe the reason this is dragging on and on?

That needs to be clarified because I'm sure events/race route, the general dates they are held on and the names and origins of the race hold some IP or value which is why the clubs are feeling like they are uncompensated and the matters are unresolved.

 

What ASG is saying is quite similar to someone stealing your copyrighted design and then saying "ja you weren't using it much anymore, so for the good of humanity I started using it, so you have no rights anymore to your the original design or any compensation from efforts you put in to develop it"

Edited September 17, 2013 by Skylark

[dracs]

That's it! My mind is made up!

 

Never again will I buy a Pinarello, Rudy Project helmet, or enter this road race!

 

Ok, I never did purchase or enter any of the above anyway, and never planned on starting...

 

but I am pretty tired of those "CHECK OUT THESE CLEARANCE ITEMS #37253" threads...

 

Each day I see a new one, I dunno why but I expect to see some sort of killer deal that I can't refuse... so I click... but nope... same poop, different day!

 

You sure about that? https://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/131130-17-sep-clearance-sale-1/?do=findComment&comment=2065790

 

[Shebeen]

Now I'm even more confused. If all of this is true, then why 'hide it' for so long? There's a claim that too much info has been revealed here, but it's all good news info so what's the deal?

[Oufy MTB (Roadie)]

So what I will like to take away from all of this is the original post made by OP. Bottom line, if your club have an event and you really like it, and you really wanna keep it, then do everything yourself and don't ask for third parties. The 3rd party might do a better job than you gaining the trust of the sponsors. I make no judgement on OP or ASG, just a bit of common sense

[Big H*]

I wonder who found the key to unlock this thread????????

[Bat]

This thread sounds a lot like our current economy. On the one side you have businesses who buy out non profitable or poorly run businesses. On the other side you have the disgruntled employees or unions who will agree to anything in the beginning. Then when these previously unprofitable companies start recovering and start making a profit, now is the time these unions and or employees regret their initial decision, and want to start Demanding more, or even everything back. Now if they don't get what they want, they start Toy-Toying, burn types, discredit these companies, and as often seen, intimidation.

 

This is really sad how unprofessional and childish grown ups can be, but what these same individuals don't understand because of their narrow minded thoughts, is things like this could effect our sport and passion in the long run.

 

Last word of advice. If there are problems, discuss it with the relevant party. Don't sink yourself to a low level and inform every Tom dick and Harry, as it might come back and bite you. (Yes I know my spelling is bad)

 

 

[HeyYou]

Thanks ASG. Seems to me a frank exposure of your side of the story.

 

But, I don't understand what is so sensitive in what you present, that it couldn't have been written upfront, on page 1, and the issue discussed openly.

 

Anyway, at least we have your side now. Would be nice to hear what the OP replies.

[Andyr249]

Seems like a fair response from ASG.

 

Regarding the Emperors race it seems like it is a totally different event from the one Edenvale Peddlers had. Don't they now have that Serengeti race?

 

Perhaps clubs in the future need to understand the legalities better. One thing which stands out for me from the thread seems to be that the various clubs don't seem to understand all the legal aspects and who has what status. Perhaps then the OP and others would have clearer views on what the actual legal positions are regarding ownership and who has what rights regarding events.