http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/2012/jun/20/charity-bike-ride
It would seem that no money from the entry fee goes to the Marie Curie...
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Events, rides etc.
Charity Bike Ride? - It Appears Not...
(13 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
100% of your entry fee for an audax goes towards pie, beans, soup, good cake and a hot mug of tea at the finish line :)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Etape clearly an IMG event. It does not look like the charity, in this instance Marie curie gets very much out of allowing IMG to use their name and claim charity status. Bit like the fee paying schools of Edinburgh which are charities!!
Posted 11 years ago # -
Wow, that's a bit eye-opening. You'd think the charity would be able to put the event out to tender and find someone at least who'd be willing to lay on a slightly more complicated audax for less than £300,000!
Posted 11 years ago # -
It's interesting. I'd expect an event named after the charity to get the bulk of the 'gate receipts', although it's not all bad.
The article does mention 500 spaces that are reserved for MC. The author goes on to say, however, that the entry fees from these places don't go to MC either - however, he almost grudgingly points out that those 500 places come with a caveat that £250 (minimum) must be raised for MC with that place - that amounts to £125,000 (minimum, and before gift aid), which isn't exactly a small sum.
If MC were to get the entire gate receipts from 3,000 Etape Pennines riders that would amount to £180,000 (the £500,000 turnover that is mentioned in tha article is for BOTH the Pennines and the Caledonia events combined, slightly misleading of the author given the explanation of places available for MC and so on later in the piece is about the Pennines ride).
Undoubtedly IMG are in this to make money, but I'm not sure MC are being as hard done by as the article makes out - after all, why would MC put their name to it if they weren't getting any benefit? Presumably they've done an analysis and it's easier/better for them to let IMG run the events than do it themselves.
The author needs to remove the bee from his bonnet.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I never considered that the entry fee that I paid to enter the Caley Etape was going to Macmillan. The sponsorship money yes. The entry fee, no. Non story IMO.
Posted 11 years ago # -
to me, the issue is not so much 'which money goes where' but how much (a) revenue and (b) profit this company makes from running the event for the charity, and why they choose to contract it to a company. Surely there are non-profits out there doing this sort of work too?
Posted 11 years ago # -
" Several veterans of the Etape Caledonia I spoke to were surprised when I told them this was the case. "None of it went to charity? And all I got was a crappy water bottle?" said one."
Really? You have a choice when you enter whether to raise money or not. If you choose not, then you have not raised money for the charity. Where is the difficulty?
Posted 11 years ago # -
Look at it this way for the Etape Pennines.
IMG takes £180,000 'gate receipts', and all of the costs. May give them... *finger in air*.... £100,000 profit. So if MC ran the event they'd get £100,000.
At present MC gets a minimum of £125,000, plus gift aid. To get the £180,000 gate receipt equivalent they just need those 500 place reserved for them to make an extra £100 and a bit each. Some people are capable of raising loads of cash so *finger in air again* I'd be willing to bet MC crest £200,000 from the event as currently structured.
The profit of the private company is irrelevant, MC makes more money with this arrangement (unless they were to use a non-profit AND insist on sponsorship money, in which case they'd have to have a blanket sponsorship rule which may, or may not, put people off).
£100,000 versus £200,000 pretty much probably explains why MC contracts out. Why not ask MC? (which the author appears to have avoided doing, concentrating instead on IMG).
Posted 11 years ago # -
I've always thought it was pretty clear that it was a commercial event with a charity attached. IMG organised the event then found a charity naming partner in a mutually beneficial arrangement - Macmillan or Marie Curie secure income from the event that they wouldn't otherwise have got, IMG get a charity figleaf.
"All I got was a crappy water bottle" and event organisation, marshalls, closed roads, feed stations, timing chips, a route planned for you, a mass of other cyclists to draft and measure your own performance against (if that's your bag), etc, etc.
Posted 11 years ago # -
There's quite a long discussion thread about sportives and who gets the entry fee on YACF, started in 2010:Sportives - where does the money go?
They don't appear to have noticed the Grauniad bike blog article.
Sportives don't appeal to me personally. I think I prefer the non-profit, "it's not a race" ethos of Audax.
Posted 11 years ago # -
When I did Kinross Sportive last year I think they said £5 of the entry fee was going to their charity, whatever it was.
Posted 11 years ago # -
If MC or Macmillan are paid €100000 by IMG for their name then I see no problem, I missed that in the article it looked like all they got was 50 entry fees once it had sold out and a chance to get 450 people raising £250. Do they raise that much? I think there is quit a bit of charity fatigue out there?
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
