ASG - An open letter, a good response, insights about race situation in SA

[Skubarra]

I suggested the same to ASG, run a poll on it. See what is important to us as cyclists and then adjust.

 

Just out of interest - there was a poll in full sus mag where something like 85% of people said they don't care about medals at funrides.

 

Based on that poll an event organiser decided to to give something else instead, got ripped apart here on thehub for not giving medals (and basing his decisions on unscientific polls), this year he gave medals again - not a single complaint. 

[Patchelicious]

Just out of interest - there was a poll in full sus mag where something like 85% of people said they don't care about medals at funrides.

 

Based on that poll an event organiser decided to to give something else instead, got ripped apart here on thehub for not giving medals (and basing his decisions on unscientific polls), this year he gave medals again - not a single complaint. 

Thats natural. 5 people ranting hard does not represent all.

 

People don't post if they are satisfied or relatively happy. People will however post if they are slightly upset or upset.

 

So just because the some people on the Hub moaned, it does not mean everybody on the Hun agrees.

 

If the Poll says that 79% of Hubbers dont care about medals, the organisers can then post that in response. "79% of Hubbers didnt want medals, and we said on our flyer that there will be no medals", I find it hard to argue with that.

[Ryinc]

 

If the Poll says that 79% of Hubbers dont care about medals, the organisers can then post that in response. "79% of Hubbers didnt want medals, and we said on our flyer that there will be no medals", I find it hard to argue with that.

Agreed Patch and it would actually be an even stronger response if there was opt-in option. 

 

The response would be "From previous polls 79% of the community did not want medals. By cutting out medals we were able to make the race 5-10% cheaper for all participants. We think it does not make sense to force everybody to pay for something that about only 1 in 5 participants value. We still offered the minority who do value the medals the option to include a medal as part of their package at a small additional charge to cover this expense."

 

I don't think there is any logical argument against that.

[HOEKVLAG]

Whilst you're debating the value of medals, also remember that they have to be ordered weeks before the race - and economies of scale play a role. Currently, a race organizer needs to predict how many people he's expecting and it is a really murky science. It is not possible to have another 10 or 20 quickly made and any extras is unnecessary expenditure.

 

If you make the medals a voluntary thing you might find that your cost actually increases as it is possible that the additional "wastage" is not covered by the people actually paying for medals.

[Ryinc]

Whilst you're debating the value of medals, also remember that they have to be ordered weeks before the race - and economies of scale play a role. Currently, a race organizer needs to predict how many people he's expecting and it is a really murky science. It is not possible to have another 10 or 20 quickly made and any extras is unnecessary expenditure.

 

If you make the medals a voluntary thing you might find that your cost actually increases as it is possible that the additional "wastage" is not covered by the people actually paying for medals.

Good points but there are possible (not perfect but viable) solutions

1. You dont change the medal each year

2. You increase the price you charge e.g from R20 to R30 to cover the additional medals that are safety net for numbers.

3. Final order for medal run happens day after or not long before online entries close, normally 10 days before event -surely enough time to do the production run if all that is outstanding is the number (i.e design etc sorted)

[Patchelicious]

Agreed Patch and it would actually be an even stronger response if there was opt-in option. 

 

The response would be "From previous polls 79% of the community did not want medals. By cutting out medals we were able to make the race 5-10% cheaper for all participants. We think it does not make sense to force everybody to pay for something that about only 1 in 5 participants value. We still offered the minority who do value the medals the option to include a medal as part of their package at a small additional charge to cover this expense."

 

I don't think there is any logical argument against that.

I think we could start charging Wynand consultation fees

[Frosty]

The 7.2% quoted by gerald would depend on the size of the race, some costs are fixed some are per rider.

 

Medals are not as expensive as you might think, probably between R10 - R20 a medal if you order in bulk.  And there is a vocal minority of riders that will complain loudly if you don't hand them out

 

That is why I say there is limited upside in trying to go all creative on medals.

 

Edit - sorry, maybe your rant is not the best example of not giving organisers the benefit of the doubt - but the point is still valid, you see this every day on thehub, something goes wrong = organisers are incompetent & greedy.

Medals are ordered ahead of the time, not after entries have closed and the numbers known - at least not from my experience.

 

So, IF the entries the previous year were X, then you order X-y or X+y (where y is the amount you either over/under cater for). If the year-on-year trend is declining, then you adjust accordingly. Similarly to the upward trend.

• Over order - advantage: you can use it the following year. Disadvantage: people complain that they received a medal from the previous year. One solution: don't print a date on it.
• Under order - disadvantage: you run out of medals and people complain. Advantage: costs are less, and you end up with less excess.
• Medal costs are too high - people complain. How many complain? Probably less than more, a lot less. Is a medal really that important? A few years ago, the first 1000 over the line received a chain wear gauge - many comments were "what is this used for?"

As for the Hub, very few people from the race are present here, so this is not the best place to get representative feedback. However, I provide the race committee with every single suggestion/complaint that is posted and we decide if it's valid and worthy of consideration. the same goes for feedback by email, sms, social media, etc.

 

And it's not only for the race(s) I'm involved with, but also races that we (club members) take part in. Look for the good and bad from each race and try to improve on it. Some things are out of our control, and it's not always possible.

[HOEKVLAG]

Good points but there are possible (not perfect but viable) solutions

1. You dont change the medal each year

2. You increase the price you charge e.g from R20 to R30 to cover the additional medals that are safety net for numbers.

3. Final order for medal run happens day after or not long before online entries close, normally 10 days before event -surely enough time to do the production run if all that is outstanding is the number (i.e design etc sorted)

I've been involved with a small (around 300 entrants) MTB race on the East rand that raises money for one of the local schools, hence this my perspective and it will be different for other races. Just i.t.o. your points.

1) That's what you'd try and do, but sometimes the sponsor changes or the sponsor changes it's logo and expect the medal to change (as they are paying you for the privilege - although they don't pay for the medals directly).

2) People might quickly think that you are trying to rip them off by charging a seemingly exorbitant amount for a medal.

3) In most cases the on-line entries closes only a couple of days before the race - in ours it was 2 days. Additionally, on-line entries make up just over half of our total entries so you would have to estimate anyway. Also, generally the lead time for the making of the medals is at least three weeks - 10 days might be possible depending on your relationship with the caster (and how busy his plant is), but it will still be seen as an urgent/rush job.

 

As has been said before, there are various costs and the medals contributes, but the point I'm trying to make is that you might be running into various kinds of problems (ever heard people complain if they finish and don't receive a medal!) without realizing a sizable saving.

[Skubarra]

you might be running into various kinds of problems  without realizing a sizable saving.

 

THIS

 

is the point I was trying to make but failing terribly...

[TALUS]

I think that there is a major difference between what the front third and the back third of riders expect from a race:

 

At the front nobody uses anything from the water tables. The back uses lots.

 

Most frontrunners don't care about medals because they do many races.

 

Seeding, timing and safety is important to everyone.

 

Personally my biggest differentiator is Bike Marshals and not having to bribe someone to collect my number - for some people it is impossible to travel during work hours.

 

Ease of entry and proper profiles and maps online adds class and value.

[ewep]

At biker day jols there is the same conundrum when dishing out the "badges".  A suggestion might be to make x medals and then, when the last one is handed out, start using the race number etc to (1) contact the rider and find out whether they do want the medal and (2) if yes maybe post/arrange for the collection (e.g. other race entries).  The onus will however rest on the organizer to ensure that the extra medals are made and delivered.

[Patchelicious]

Dear ASG

 

Let me start by noting that I am a loyal customer for your races in the past few years. Amongst others, In the past 3 years, I have consistently cycled the Jock, Satellite Classic, Lost City Classic, Emperors, Capital Classic, Berg en Dale, Tour of Good Hope/Tour de Boland and for the first time this weekend the Sondela race. My wife has done some of the races too, and I have bought the odd cycling kit from your company.

 

Your company runs many of the road races and your involvement in the races is helpful as if you didn't run them i am not sure who would. Some will argue how you came to run them is ethically questionable, but i don't know and couldn't care for the full story. In general i enjoy the races that you arrange and I don't begrudge you making a healthy profit - if it was so easy to make money others would be doing it as well. Introducing a series of races and some tours is exciting too. However, i really get the sense that all your company cares about is making money. Examples of how this has manifested in my personal experience of my experiences at your races are as follows:

• Your races in my view are really very expensive. They are nearly as expensive as mass events that provide a completely more attractive value proposition of full road closure and other perks not offered by your races. You will no doubt argue that the reason it is expensive is because the scale is much smaller and so fixed costs need to be spread over a smaller number of riders and to keep races sustainable the costs are what they are etc, etc. There are two counters to this. 1. Other smaller races such as Race for Victory and Carnival City Classic are small and sustainable, but provide overall value and organisation that is on par and many will argue better than your races. They manage this despite that they don't have economies of scale due to arranging multiple events 2. It is a chicken and egg situation where you are causing volumes to be lower because your prices are high, lower prices would increase volumes.  
• There seem to be clear instances of trying to take short-cuts to save money. Manual timing at the Tour de Boland this year resulting in a total balls up. I have no doubt that the decision to suddenly cancel Racetec timing and let riders know on the evening before the Sondela race this past weekend was a purely economic one too - not enough riders to make it a viable solution to do electronic timing. If it was not an economic related decision , then i challenge ASG to refund riders the money that would otherwise of been paid to Racetec (or donate it to charity). It's pretty disgraceful to clearly advertise one thing and deliver something totally different, with no form of apology - just a sort of "by the way you paid for this we giving you something else." There are a number of hubbers that chose to do the Sondela race on the basis that it was racetec timed. 
• You have a brilliantly efficient system to get in riders money but can't get results up on your website within two days after the race (despite you setting your own deadlines about when race results will be up in the case of the Sondela race).
• At every opportunity it feels as though you are trying to market, cross-sell and bundle products at every interaction. 

 

Unfortunately we are not spoilt for choice in terms of road races, and in all likelihood I and others will continue to ride your races simply because we enjoy riding more than we like the sour taste that your overly strong commercial flavour on the events that you arrange often seems to leave in our mouths. However, the way you are treating your customers is doing nothing to create loyalty with them  so please do not feel surprised when they stop supporting you at the very first opportunity they get.

 

It would be great if you could take an honest look at yourself as a company and ask whether you think you would be a satisfied customer paying premium prices for sub-standard product.

 

I am not one of the "haters" on the hub, but i sheesh enough is enough, you can do better than this.

Still one of the best responses to ASG, and still very valid.