BE costs (and prize money) going up for 2014

wench said:
Suzi, if anyone has any idea how much it costs to put on an event, they will no that noones pockets are being lined...

Just imagine how much it costs to hire an xc course builder to design and build a xc course, it doesn't just spring up out of no where. These are professionals and need to earn a living. How much do you think wood for a new xc jump costs?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm saying. I have some idea (having assisted the organisation of unaff and rc events) how much things cost hence why I am sympathetic to events position.

But reading forums, era remarks, and talking to people out and about there are people who don't have the same insight.

I'll happily say in an ideal world that cash prizes should be given and that if you win you should cover your fees because that's what I think....but it doesn't mean it feasible and a transparent showing of what money went where would help everyone understand how financially vulnerable the sport is.
 
I can see both sides but do disagree with the lower levels supporting the top end of the sport. Those at the bottom do not owe anybody higher up a living.
Most of the profit made at lower levels by BE is channeled towards the top3/4% to cover team training etc.Then most of the moaning about prize money etc comes from this same crowd,they should get real if they cannot make a living do something else like mere mortals have to.
Just to comment on some other points, Lolo it is not the pros who drive the sport just check out how many horses actually run Int + plus every year and your assumption is blown out of the water. It is the owners and not the pros who stand the cost anyhow I personally have stopped owning horses that compete BE as I dont agree that owners should have to pay full membership fees(even worse if joint ownership LOL) when they actually only receive little of the benefit(plus they are supplying the commodity the sport works with) .
I also agree with Militiger the refund system is a total farce and nobody at BE has any intention of changing it!!!!! The pros dont care about this as either the owner shoulders the cost or the pro just subs another horse.
In my humble opinion the lower levels have been sucked in by BE to help keep the top end viable. When things get tight financially they chuck in another lower level, a lot of us remember when novice was the lowest level at BE and there were two seasons every year .
I really think that there would be a market in the sport at lower levels outside BE but it needs an organizer to have the balls to drop BE,A lot of unaff make more money than BE even with lower entry fees as BE take a big split from the entries aswell.
Rant over but have given up after 12yrs of trying to make the powers that be recognise the issues facing the lower levels.
 
Last edited:
With respect popsdosh, BE does not take a 'big split' from the entry fees. I say this as a BE organiser, who has also run unaffiliated events. We have just finished Frickley and the total net payment to BE was £1800 - for which they provided the event, and hence lower level competitors, with valuable support.

We receive event publicity via the web, the magazine, material for sponsors, a programme for rewarding volunteers, a championship for BE90 and BE100 competitors, centrally organised sponsorship for BE80(T), TA and Steward support both before and during the event, a comprehensive public liability insurance, an abandonment insurance scheme (without which 50% of events would not run), we get access to specialist ground equipment at reduced cost, the support of the BE office and lots of other benefits.

There are issues, for example around prize money at the lower level, but BE events are highly popular. Some of the difficulties surround the lack of information about how events run and the cost of the same (each event is very different). BE are running a question and answer session with a panel of organisers to try and answer competitors' questions on this issue - from a personal position I hope that lots of questions are asked as I think it would be highly beneficial for all concerned
 
You've all been spoiled! :D

This is probably the only country in the world where anyone could even think of being 'in profit' at the end of the day. There is a thread on COTH about this and one poster sings the praises of eventing because she can keep her costs around $350/day! She goes on to say how a trip to the AEC cost $2500 but at least there was the possibility of winning more than the entry. (Friends of mine drove 18hrs to get there. . ..) I would be very surprised if ANY pro covered costs, even with owner support, at an event, hence them all having flocks of students.

None of this is germane to the UK model, of course, but there is at least the possibility that things are changing because the world has changed. Perhaps expectations are outdated?

There is a 'richer' model in North America in hunter/jumper showing, which is appealing on the surface with more money to be won, but there are also many unattractive features, including the fact that it is ruinously expensive for the average competitor.

That said, transparency and decisions about allotment do seem to need work. The question about supporting the high end of the sport is tricky though. If Teams don't do well then people scream and there is no doubt winning takes money. Lots of it. I'm not always convinced that top end success drives lower level interest but it does attract sponsorship. Also, in a country used to winning in the sport and with a set up that includes a huge number of 'riding pros' relatively speaking, making the argument that this is no longer a priority would be very difficult!!
 
Also, re unaffiliated. . .a lot is made of how great it is to run around BE tracks but not pay the costs. But if you look at posts from organisers it's partly BE that subsidises the building and care of these tracks! Not to mention training officials, creating and maintaining rule books etc. So all very well to say the organisation doesn't bring anything to that level but simply not true!
 
I dont question it really but most organisers say they make more from unaff.I do have a pretty good idea of running cost for events and have no gripe with organisers at all. If I may pick up on the abandonment ins scheme that is the competitor picking up the tab not BE! Apart from last year that account has been in credit since started!
Like I say I do not have horses running BE anymore mainly due to what I see as unfair in the system so that is a reduced income for BE and for the riders!!! The strange thing is I dont miss it!!! All the issues over refunds and membership fees made it so I did not enjoy it anymore. I actually have no issue with the cost of running events it is not cheap but if you cant afford it dont do it!!!
 
Last edited:
TarrSteps said:
Also, re unaffiliated. . .a lot is made of how great it is to run around BE tracks but not pay the costs. But if you look at posts from organisers it's partly BE that subsidises the building and care of these tracks! Not to mention training officials, creating and maintaining rule books etc. So all very well to say the organisation doesn't bring anything to that level but simply not true!
Click to expand...
They do bring things to that level but also a lot is creamed off to subsidise the top end which should in a fair world support itself I feel.
 
Re abandonment insurance, yes the competitors pay for this, but I was referring to the fact that it is a collective scheme organised by BE, thus allowing all events to be covered. This is in circumstances in which some events would simply not be able to obtain any cover and thus would not run. The scheme thus allows for more events to be part of the BE calendar, often in the north of England and Scotland.

Re UA events, these can make a profit running over BE tracks, but the reason these tracks are in place, and are of a certain standard, is because of the BE affiliated event(s) run over them. In my personal experience, the XC courses at venues that don't do BE are generally much inferior to those that host BE. Frickley ran UA in July this year and even with full entries there was no surplus - the cost of putting on a properly organised ODE with a correct level of medical and other cover, whether UA or BE, is huge
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top