Charity Sportives

Gazzaputt

Noticed most charity sportives are asking for an entry fee plus a minimum donation this year.

Think the Castle 100 ride worked out £40-45 and the Orchid Essex rides is £23 entry plus minimum £15 donation.

IMO you aren't telling me they aren't making profits out the entry fee alone. Greedy?

Cleat Eastwood

If its a charity close to your heart then its not much of a problem I guess but I was going to ride a MAG ride till I saw that it required 100£ minimum sponsorship.....and the rides only 50 miles.

I think the long standing charities that have organised sportives normally give the option to raise money or not. See what you mean though, they see a willing audience keen to part with the readies.

Simontheintrepid

I think there has been a move towards sportives providing more and charging more. I did the Castle Ride and it was pretty well organised (except they need more mechanics, I think they were a bit overwhelmed) but the info, signage, band, massages, food etc available seemed good for the price. I certainly consumed close to the entry fee in food and energy drinks alone so I don't think the profit margins on that are very big.

I think the sponsorship thing is only a pain when the scene is dominated by charities and you want to ride events regularly, you can't go back to the same people again and again for more cash. It's cynical but it makes me inclined to raise only the minimum amount each time.

However, I do on the whole think it's great fundraising and you can be fairly sure of a quality event so I'm all for it. It's easy to forget how lucky you are.

So, anyone doing the Surrey 100? I have the bug now.

rolf_f

I won't be doing any of the '100's - I raised over £800 last year for Wateraid so I think it is fair enough that I don't go and bother my friends and colleagues for more donations (particularly for something as trivial as a Sportive - it's not as though it is a real challenge anymore) and I'll only pay £40 to enter something really good - eg Fred Whitton. As far as I am concerned, those that require compulsory donations can stuff off!

Cipodog

Over the last 10yrs I've organised 17 Sportives & ALL the surplus money from entry fees has gone to Charity---total to date £70,000---Whilst I didn't organise the first one (or in fact any of them) for charity, after the first event our club was left with a sack full of money!! As my Brother( who had got me & lots of other people from our area involved in cycling in the 1950's) had died from Cancer & been well cared for at Christies in Manchester we decided to give it to them--& so its continued that way since. Back in 2002 the first entry fee was £5 & since its increased to last years fee of £20---this year its gone to £25 but this is solely to pay for electronic timing & "on line" entry costs. IMO people can't be bothered with getting sponsorship as a seperate item --its much simpler to take the excess from entries & donate to the charity. COSTS--For 500 riders approx £2000---£2500 (HQ hire/ Food & drinks/ free food & hot &cold drinks at HQ/ 2 feeding stations/ insurance/---All help from Club members including Petrol costs & Website etc is given Free---nobody takes a penny from it!! --Dave Riley

Teddy Westside

I think if all charity ride organisers provided the level of transparency on their websites that you have Cipodog, it would enable riders to determine the "value" of entering a particular sportive. Maybe there are some who are turning in large profits (after all, some are being organised by professional events companies who are unlikely to do it on a non-profit basis) and they would be worried of losing entries (and profits) by announcing where all the money goes.

Certainly, I want the majority of my money to go to the charities involved whilst realising there are associated costs which may be hard to have covered by sponsorship or goodwill from outside sources.

I've only done one sportive so far (Pedal for Scotland 2010) and have absolutely no idea exactly where all my money went, which is a bit ridiculous when you think of it, but true of so many charitable donations when you think of it. And stories of poorly-run or even dishonest charities in the news certainly won't help. PfS cost me £46.50 including transport for me and bike. I would estimate I consumed around £8 or less of the nutritional offerings at the feedstops (at retail prices), though that would have been higher if I hadn't bought a lot of gels in advance, not knowing exactly what would be on offer at my first event.

Personally, I don't think achieving sponsorship should be mandatory if the charity is making money from the entry fee, though I am in favour of reduced entry fees for those achieving a certain level of sponsorship as that's an incentive for people to raise more money.

As a general rule, I think I would have a bigger problem with expensive sportives taking place over routes closer to home (which I could therefore normally do as a solo ride anyway) as opposed to those I maybe couldn't manage without at least overnight accommodation or use of public transport (as I don't drive). Then again, it depends what those two ancillary costs would be, but that's a different discussion.

morley

Heaven forbid that they should try and make a bit more money for the causes they espouse. I had no idea that they would even think of doing such a dastardly trick, because any reasonable person would clearly be shocked and then moan about it on a forum.

Teddy Westside

morely, I only see one person complaining about a sportive trying to raise more money for charity and even that it the more understandable reason of being required to raise sponsorship after having already tapped friends and colleagues for donations on several occasions. By and large, people's concern is over whether organisers are making a profit on the event and whether that's justified. Very different.