@ DaveC
No, it's where i get up at 4 or 5am and ride in the dark to the start of the sportive, ride over 100 miles and ride back home from it again.
I know you're being light-hearted but you actually illustrate the problem between the perception of sportive versus audax.
Sportives: Expensive; molly-coddled by the inclusion of organised feed stations; everyone relaxing in hotels from the night before, and ridden by shaved leg MAMILs.
Audax: Old-fashioned; clunky bikes with mandatory mudguards big old roll-up saddle bags or panniers; sitting at some random cafe for a break, and ridden by 60 year-old beardy types with questionable dress sense.
Now the truth, as I see it, is that much of that doesn't apply and much of the rest applies to both disciplines. As an example, I know that mudguards are no longer mandatory in audax but the image still persists. And interesting to note that audax is to harness sportive popularity so part of the difference is set to blur.
I can admit to feeling the need to be more educated as to what modern audax is. I like the organised feeling of a sportive and knowing there is mechanical back-up and a broom wagon should I ever need them. Having to be self-sufficient on roads you don't know can be more daunting if you find yourself outside of a chain-gang, some distance from the nearest settlement or bike shop (if open).
The lower price certainly appeals (and it's hard to have sportive facilities at audax prices, I understand that) and I might be willing to try a short audax to see what it's like before going for a longer length.
Both disciplines seem cliquey to those who haven't tried the other one so anything that can be done to dispel those views is to be welcomed.