The running club I am a member of seems to have a thing of going to different Parkruns.
Some folks are collectors, I guess. It's the only explanation for the existence of Hard Rock Cafes as far as I can see...
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Leisure
"Bristol ParkRun joggers face being charged to use paths"
(109 posts)-
Posted 8 years ago #
-
PS, I initially thought you meant people only go to them to say they've been there and buy the t-shirt to prove it. Then I remembered the decor.
I have a friend who keeps visiting new parkruns and refuses to run anyone twice. He's done somewhere about 60 so far. To his due he does train several times a week with his club and posts some impressively fast times.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I don't think I've been to a Hard Rock Café. What's special about the décor?
Someone 'collects' Wetherspoons carpets. It turns out that Wetherspoons carpets are quite interesting but I don't think I've been to one to check since reading the article.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/shortcuts/2016/jan/10/wetherspoons-carpet-tumblr-blog
Posted 8 years ago # -
They are basically decorated with momentos from the music world. Often along the lines of a guitar that a semi-famous person used to play a gig that no one remembers but mixed in with items which major stars played during famous gigs. Plenty other photographic memorabilia too.
Posted 8 years ago # -
PS, I initially thought you meant people only go to them to say they've been there and buy the t-shirt to prove it. Then I remembered the decor.
No, acsimpson, you were right first time. :-)
Posted 8 years ago # -
There were thousands of examples across the world where people had got together to manage common pool resources themselves. Close-knit webs of social ties meant that people trusted each other to use just enough of the resource. It also meant people were aware of the needs of others, so that if they over-used the resource then other people would suffer.
If only the 'common pool resource' known as the road network could be managed in this way...
Posted 8 years ago # -
Close-knit webs of social ties meant that people trusted each other to use just enough of the resource. It also meant people were aware of the needs of others, so that if they over-used the resource then other people would suffer.
"Across the world", societies are not in the deathgrip of narcissism the way ours is. It is hard to imagine that being aware of the needs of others could work on any large scale here.
This has been a really interesting thread but on the whole I think I am leaning towards the councils point of view on this. The Park Run sounds like a great initiative but it sounds as if it has become very huge, is every single week and is rather disruptive to those living close to the parks. I think that this fits the description above of over-using the resource.
Posted 8 years ago # -
It's interesting especially because park run is a non-profit that basically just co-ordinates people getting together at a certain time of week. It's not at all similar to professionals like BMF etc.
Hopefully they will hold their line and cancel this event, let the bad feeling undermine the council's position for a while. They are really going to have to watch their step because how many councils will be able to resist the windfall (BBC are quoting a potential profit of almost £1k/month for this small park)
Posted 8 years ago # -
"BBC are quoting a potential profit of almost £1k/month for this small park"
Paid by?
The 'key idea' is that runners go free.
That's fine - and worthy. Having an an organisation that pays people to organise things is fine.
But seems a bit much to raise the sponsorship for this without raising more to pay a contribution towards the primary resource - somewhere for people to run.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Am I right in thinking that the reason it's 'non-profit' is cos the few founders / directors / employees draw salaries that eats up all the income? Though looking at the accounts their P&L seems to go up slightly every year... I'm not an accountant, but that seems reasonably profitable to me?
Posted 8 years ago # -
"Am I right in thinking that the reason it's 'non-profit' is cos the few founders / directors / employees draw salaries that eats up all the income?"
Well the directors and staff do get paid. The question I guess is whether this pay is reasonable, or if they're all taking home hundreds of thousands of pounds.
Is there any way of finding this out? Did you manage to find the total annual paid in salaries WC? This would be interesting. I found some accounts but they weren't very illuminating...
Posted 8 years ago # -
No, I just viewed through the link posted above. I suspect the salaries are on the 'reasonable' side, but as you say, it would be interesting to see.
I do actually agree with the aims of ParkRun, and would rather see people being active - but from experience, and from hearing experiences of others, they can be a very difficult organisation to engage with, and can be very short.
It turns out it was actually mooted when it started in Edinburgh that ParkRun should be charged for use of the areas they were to be held. That garnered a single word rebuttal.
At the Figgate we have asked before (I think I mentioned above) that we've asked if it would be okay to shake some tins after one run every 6 months or so, to help raise funds for park upkeep. The genuine one-line response was:
"No, we won't allow that."
No dialogue at all. We're planning on doing it again, but this time addressing the runners themselves, and actually there's no reason we can't just turn up with tins - it doesn't need 'permission' from ParkRun in a public space, we were just trying to be friendly...
Posted 8 years ago # -
But seems a bit much to raise the sponsorship for this without raising more to pay a contribution towards the primary resource - somewhere for people to run.
I don't agree, because the venue is publicly owned and attendees have already paid for it through taxation. IMO the council are trying to double-charge people to use a facility they already pay for.
It would be different if people had to pay to run in the park normally, but are freeloading through park run. However, any number of people can turn up and run at any time for free.
People are being given the choice of turning up to Park Run and paying, or coincidentally turning up at the same time, logging their run on Strava to compare with everyone else, for free. Since it merely co-ordinates time and place to get a posse together, it's hard to see how park run could survive that?
Posted 8 years ago # -
On the non-profit side, IANAL but I thought that was an actual thing, in terms of how you are incorporated and so on. If it's being run for profit on the sly then it's certainly the worst ever attempt at doing so, since they completely fail to monetize the enormous number of people who attend.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Since it merely co-ordinates time and place to get a posse together
Then why does it need all that sponsorship money?
"No, we won't allow that."
Haha, lovely bit of hypocrisy there!
Posted 8 years ago # -
"... since they completely fail to monetize the enormous number of people who attend."
The ParkRun accounts showed assets of something like £300k, so it's monetising something somewhere...
Posted 8 years ago # -
"To grow the parkrun family, we need additional income. We call this the NEW EVENT fund. Sometimes we are able to get councils to contribute to this fund however, there are still many events that can't afford the start up costs. We do not want to turn any new event away and this is why this fund has been created.
All donations to parkrun made here are deposited in the NEW EVENT fund."
I wonder which councils have contributed....
Posted 8 years ago # -
"On the non-profit side, IANAL but I thought that was an actual thing, in terms of how you are incorporated and so on"
They're incorporated as a company limited by guarantee. That means there aren't 'shareholders', but rather 'members' who guarantee a certain amount in case of winding up.
Often used for societies and clubs, a route for non-profit organisations. But also used by:
The England and Wales Cricket Board;
Network Rail; and
BUPA."I don't agree, because the venue is publicly owned and attendees have already paid for it through taxation"
What about council owned swimming pools with admission fees?
Posted 8 years ago # -
Being not-for-profit doesn't make what an organisation does good or bad. Clearly, mass participation runs are different from random joggers plodding round a park at a time of their choosing. Most park paths were never designed for hundreds of runners and I imagine that park runs produce a lot more damage to verges and soft surfaces than individual joggers - as faster runners pass their slower counterparts or groups run alongside each other. There are also parking, litter and associated issues.
9.30 on a Saturday might sound early, but anyone with young children (or dogs) will have been at the park at that time (or much, much earlier). Large crowds of people will have some impact on these people's enjoyment of a park.
It's a tricky situation for a cash-strapped local authority - which is charged with managing the park in the public interest.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Okay, last one for a while....
There are actually 3 Parkrun companies.
As well as Parkrun Limited, there is Parkrun Global Limited (also limited by guarantee), and Parkun Trading Limited, which at the last annual return was wholly owned by Parkrun Global Limited. That's a bog standard limited company.
It's all quite interesting, and I suspect allows quite an influx of revenue...
Posted 8 years ago # -
WC - Network Rail was quietly nationalised 2014, it's now an arms length body of the UK Department for Transport. All due to a decision by Eurostat and the ONS about the classification of debt and Government control of the organisation.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"I don't agree, because the venue is publicly owned and attendees have already paid for it through taxation. IMO the council are trying to double-charge people to use a facility they already pay for."
Yes and no.
As someone has pointed out above, not all council facilities are free - though obviously running through a park is.
The point here is scale, (possibly) causing extra damage, really not helped by an organisation that had a good idea and now seems to think that gives them a bizarre level of proprietorial 'rights'.
They might get some support against 'spoilsport councils', but they might find that this attitude ultimately backfires...
Posted 8 years ago # -
To me, there are two credible complaints against parkrun. The first is that it causes damage to the park in a way that 250 runners running by themselves wouldn't. This is possibly true, but I've not noticed it at Figgate. Mainly because the verge is already churned up by the council vans that drive on it, and so attempting to overtake by using the verge is a really stupid idea and you'll just fall over. And if that was the problem then there are ways it could be addressed (a bit of tape on the inside corner for the first 100m).
The second problem some people have is that a park which people are used to enjoying as a quiet and solitary place suddenly gets filled with people spoiling the atmosphere. I have less sympathy with this, I don't know if parks have statements of purpose, but I'd have thought that getting hundreds of people who aren't your normal athletic types to regularly exercise together would tick a lot of boxes.
Posted 8 years ago # -
The park I have participated in park run in has wide paths. Apart from at the start there is no impact on other users of the park. The run spreads out. After the first flat 500 yards. They can accommodate a big group. The end is staggered dependent on the speed people take t run the 5k. I cannot imagine there is any grief.
However, in line with the common pool phenomenon described in the link up thread, there is a transfer issue. Park run in a wee park with narrow paths will be more problematic? The argument that park A does park run without any bother so it is not a problem in Park B, Does not hold up.
Park run has encouraged lots of people to exercise and take part in a communal event. These are good things. Anything that dominates a shared amenity will be potentially problematic but it is never easy to figure out the real issues from the hype. So roseburn cycle lane is about shopkeeper free parking and local resident being anti council not congestion and this Bristol park run is not I think about maintenance- not sure what it is about but I note I was in the right area with naming the custodians of the park as the cash strapped parish council. Sending a warden to enforce parking charges should be a winner as local dog walkers I imagine would just walk? Could be wrong.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I do find myself wondering to what extent this was all driven by the Bristol equivalent of Anth's tree-cutting local homeowner with political influence...
Posted 8 years ago # -
@srd that sounds likely, local mayor can't get walking his or maybe her dog on a Saturday 8.30-10.30 without bumping in to joggers. Instructs parish council to charge for upkeep.
Posted 8 years ago # -
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. A cursory glance at the accounts would show that the assets of £351,721 are Current Assets, and matched by liabilities of £334,144, also described as Current. This is a simple cash in/cash out entity.
A moment's thought will explain why it is a company limited by guarantee. Nothing sinister, merely nothing to provide collateral.
Judicial explanation for this structure in sporting bodies is in IRC vs. City of Glasgow Police Sports Association.
The sub structure is also simply explained, merely a recognition of the differing activities carried on, for example the sale of merchandise, and explained either by limitation in company articles or else setting up a cost centre.
Parkrun is a magnificent organisation that has done wonders in providing opportunity for exercise for all. To suggest pockets are being lined is simply not evidenced and distasteful.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing"
Not something I'll be putting on my cv. I could go through this, but can't be bothered (all I will say is that mentioning the assets was in direct reference to a comment that ParkRun wasn't able to monetise anything - as you say, cash in/cash out, which means it is managing to monetise, which was the point).
Anyway, as someone who has dealt directly with ParkRun, who continues to be involved in a organisation which is trying to get a real connection going with them, which receives all of the complaints about ParkRun directly from other park users, and which I'd happily suggest in total knows more about the particular park then pretty much anyone else in the city.... I'm probably too intertwined to comment further.
I'll leave the debate to those more intelligent, thoughtful and informed.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I will say is that mentioning the assets was in direct reference to a comment that ParkRun wasn't able to monetise anything - as you say, cash in/cash out, which means it is managing to monetise, which was the point
It depends on your definition of monetize, but £350k is almost nothing for such a huge scale of operation. I take the point that it's not shoestring volunteers meeting down the pub, but nevertheless.
If the swimming pool comparison needs to be followed, then what we're talking about here is an organisation that encourages people to go down the pool on a Saturday morning, but instead of just charging participants the normal pool entry fee, the council are imposing an extra entry fee on top.
You can't get away from the fact that the council are double charging the public for a good that they've already paid for. In an ideal world they might win a legal challenge but I'm not sure I'd bother - just cancel the event and pay for some negative media coverage of the councillors.
Perhaps Park Run could recognize GPS traces from cancelled events to work around the underlying issue (i.e. people might still do some healthy exercise despite park run not being able to organise there?)
Posted 8 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
