BE stripped down, how minimal would you go?...

Chloe_GHE

Chloe_GHE

Well-Known Member
Joined
19 January 2009
Messages
4,902
Location
Wonderful Wiltshire
Visit site
Inspired by many posts about the crazy costs of BE, and the seemingly pointless effort/money thrown into things like redesigning membership cards and websites what could you live without, and what would you like to keep in an ideal world to make a cheaper more competitor friendly BE?....

Me I would be happy with....

All mags, entries, publications, paperwork, event programs etc being digital available to download and print off at my own expense

At events, I would be happy to see xmas trees, and excess decorations disappear, but more trade stands encouraged

I think fancy score/results marquees could be downgraded to borrowed army tent/lorries

basically I would try to trim the fat off that doesn't really add anythign for me but keep the important things such as medical cover, and course maintenance as they are

actually re-reading that I can't think of as much possible surplus frippery as I thought I could, can you?....
 
If it made it cheaper, I would have less fancy fences too, whats wrong with a normal looking wooden solid fence, paart from the fact that theres nothing pretty for the photographer
tongue.gif


I would run them the same but with the look of an unaff event - like you said entries in a lorry/borrowed tent etc.
 
well if they really want a pretty fence for a photo why not just decorate one?... If I walked a course and they were all plain but say there was one 'feature fence' it wouldn't bother me, the only downside I think is that maybe horses and riders would react/ride to it differently with that in mind.....
 
Now I'm probably going to go a bit against the grain here. Some of the reason I BE is because of the 'sense of occasion' it provides. I actually quite like having a decent secretary's and scoring marquee and an element of fence decoration (OK I admit some go OTT and could scale it down a bit) etc. I would feel really let down if the secretary was in the back of a lorry (and it probably wouldn't be terribly comfortable for them at the events which run over more than one day).

I would be happy to receive the paperwork electronically - but I think that pretty much happens now anyway (there is certainly the option to do that anyway).

For me those extra touches make the whole experience so much more professional and I don't really mind paying the extra for it.

Sorry.
crazy.gif
 
I would never have re-done that flippin' website for starters. It used to be the best of all the 3 disciplines and now, whilst it looks pretty, even BD's runs more quickly!
mad.gif


Just a little rant as have waited for ages to try and get 5yr old class dates only to find they haven't been put on yet anyway
frown.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
Now I'm probably going to go a bit against the grain here. Some of the reason I BE is because of the 'sense of occasion' it provides. I actually quite like having a decent secretary's and scoring marquee and an element of fence decoration (OK I admit some go OTT and could scale it down a bit) etc. I would feel really let down if the secretary was in the back of a lorry (and it probably wouldn't be terribly comfortable for them at the events which run over more than one day).

I would be happy to receive the paperwork electronically - but I think that pretty much happens now anyway (there is certainly the option to do that anyway).

For me those extra touches make the whole experience so much more professional and I don't really mind paying the extra for it.

Sorry.
crazy.gif


[/ QUOTE ]


Ditto
laugh.gif
 
I do love the 'sense of occasion' as you call it, but maybe at the lower levels that is out of proportion? I only compete at intro/pn and even I turn up at some events thinking crikey is this badminton?...
cool.gif


thinking about the impact of the price of the S.O.O. is how I'm looking at it for example if I can only afford to do 4 S.O.O. events in a season that's not really enough for me to get into the groove, or give me enough data to see where I can improve, and progress (because imho you can do all the practise you want but on the day it's a whole different story) but if I can afford to do 6-8 cheaper 'Tesco's own brand events' that gives me more room to change things, test them out see how it works and hopefully see a gradual improvement throughout the season.

Does that make sense?.... I may have gone a little ga ga with snow fever so ignore me if I am making no sense
smile.gif
smirk.gif
 
hmm... as a volunteer, i'd be happy to have no breakfast (bacon rolls that i don't eat anyway!) or lunch, to take my own, i think this is a fairly big cost. BUT i can see why they do it, it is nice to go and sit with everyone. the nosh at Little Downham is always top-notch and very plentiful btw!
as a competitor, i'd be happy with stripped down version for 1-days, snazzier for CIC and CCIs.
BUT... a lot of that snazzyness is what makes the sport appeal to Owners, Sponsors, Spectators. if it went back to looking like a glorified Hunter Trial, i don't know whether we'd get so many of those categories...
inescapable costs: medical, insurance, loos!
insurance is a bit of a thorny topic, there was a rather interesting post about this recently.
 
[ QUOTE ]
even I turn up at some events thinking crikey is this badminton?...
cool.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

But that's the whole point surely - for most of us mere mortals that's the closest we're ever going to get (to compete
wink.gif
)

I do completely take your point, and love the Tesco's analogy
tongue.gif
but I still like to dream I'm a pro turning up at a 4*!!
blush.gif
 
I'd like BE to start to run a fairer system. It's rare to have a sport when pros and amateurs compete at the same level and I like this aspect but BE are making it too hard for amateurs to reach the higher levels.
Why not have a sliding scale- if you want to compete in 1-10 events in a season pay £x for membership. If you want to do over 100 classes on different horses for paying owners then why shouldnt you pay £xx amount?
The higher levels need to be cheaper- it's totally ridiculous that and intermediate is now nearly the same price as a CIC2*! And who on earth can afford to compete in a 3 day and pay the massive stabling costs?

BE waste our money on websites, inefficient office staff, training for people I've never met and in areas I'll never have access to, pointless magazines and on making patronising safety videos.
 
Forget the events, I think BE is where the costs could be stripped back.

For example they make a big deal about you having 3rd party public liability through membership but it really is not worth the paper it is written on considering the excess is apparently £1500 IIRC!

I'd rather either add it to my horse insurance or join BHS/WHW and not have the excess - then BE could scrap it and membership could go down proportionally.

Why redesign the membership card, why not print a voucher/have something on the website in the members bit to print off for each event so if you decide to go you can cut it out/print it? I can't remember the last time I went to an event when I wasn't either riding/grooming/volunteering or writing for EWW so I can't imagine the card will get masses of use - though my OH does use the car pass approx once a year if I bully him enough to come and watch me.
 
See, when I did volunteering/organised volunteers, the offer of food was a major attraction.
smile.gif
All joking aside, it's more about the hospitality and sense that the event is honouring the volunteers a bit. One venue provided a super lunch and a small gift - that may seem money wasted but we never lacked for bodies and it spoke more to the gratitude of the organisers than anything else.

I would agree about the "attractiveness" factor, though. It goes back to that old conundrum - are events run for the mostly amateur riders who pay for their own day out or as a business to be made attractive for owners, sponsors and other members of the public. I can see the wisdom of a "basic" level of event without trappings but is that something organisers would want to put on? They'd still have all the expensive bits without the few extras that make it fun.
 
I agree with sc in that cut backs should come away from the events. The infrastructure of BE is a joke, as is what they think it's important to spend money on like the new website and membership cards etc etc.

What i love about BE is the atmosphere and ability to compete against the pros etc - my favourite events are ones that feel like mini Badmintons such as Firle and Mattingley. It's part of what i love about the sport. And as several others have said its what attracts people to watch and sponsorship etc. I think the expenses come from insurance and ground work, fence building, loos etc - vital things.
 
i totally agree with SC- the cost savings need to, and can, happen away from the events themselves.

you would have to strip a lot off the events to get the equivalent saving of getting rid of a few un-needed people at head office.

i also agree with TheMule about sliding scales for riders- how illogical is it that i pay the same membership as Oli Townend et al?
i will do max 10 events to some pros who do hundreds and hundreds- am i getting the same value for money?
 
BUT is it BE who spends the extra or the individual events and if it is the individual events then the extra may be a slightly larger start fee or a difference in prize money.

If the price is only say £10 difference and you had paid your membership etc and you had two events within 10 miles, one like a basic HT and one like a mini badminton - which would you go to?

I agree cheaper BE would be good, but in reality I don't think we would get it. The idea of lower membership for less events is good, I would certainly like the idea of that!!!!
 
I guess the easy way to work out the membership costs on a sliding scale and whether it would be worth it for amateurs or not is as follows:

1. How much revenue do BE get from horse/rider memberships per year (A)

2. How many individual horse/rider combination entries do they get each year (B).

3. Divide A by B to get the levy per entry for membership - if that times by the number of events the average amateur does (say 12 tops) on one horse equates to more than the roughly £200 it is to register a horse with no points and a rider then for the grassroots competitors it isn't worth doing.

Anyone want to bother going through the accounts and working it out? Or alternatively point out the flaw in my reasoning and tell me a better way?!
grin.gif
 
i'm going to go totally against grain here - I want it to be better than unaff stuff, so i don't mind paying to extra for it.
Yes at HQ there could be better decissions made on new websites, new membership passes etc (hopefully they did get competetive quotes for design and printing)..........

BUT i do feel that BE is moving with the times and do have to give them credit about the speed of results, rider and horse info.

What's the point of paying to affilate, if it's no better than RC or local Hunt stuff. Not that's there anything wrong with these events, as they serve a very useful service and i defo support my local ones - brilliant for educating young horse etc....

Yes, i'm sure that some fat could be cut for somewhere BUT when i turn up to do a BE event, i defo want then to be the best run event, which they are. So i bite the bullet and pay my dosh.

The only thing i would like to see is for riders that do help at events get extra ballot stick after helping at 3 events.....
 
Completely agree with Kick_On.
The reason I like BE is that you get the opportunity to compete at some super locations which you wouldn't otherwise have access to. We take part in one of the most expensive and prestigious sports there is and I think we just have to accept it will never be cheap!

That said I'm sure there is room for streamlining from BE's side.
Completely disagree about non-catering for volunteers, these people are vital to our sport and they should be treated like kings&queens for giving up their time.
I do however see the logic in creating some sort of membership tier though.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Completely agree with Kick_On.
The reason I like BE is that you get the opportunity to compete at some super locations which you wouldn't otherwise have access to. We take part in one of the most expensive and prestigious sports there is and I think we just have to accept it will never be cheap!

That said I'm sure there is room for streamlining from BE's side.
Completely disagree about non-catering for volunteers, these people are vital to our sport and they should be treated like kings&queens for giving up their time.
I do however see the logic in creating some sort of membership tier though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I agree with you guys - it will always be pricey!

I just get riled by the inequality of it all. Mind you adding up the lost money recently has not been helpful, I am on a very fine 'is it worth it' line at the moment and teetering on which side I will fall. It's not that I can't afford it, it's that I'd like to see a bit more for my money which I am not doing with the horse right now, so maybe it is time to stop with the horses...
 
[ QUOTE ]
I guess the easy way to work out the membership costs on a sliding scale and whether it would be worth it for amateurs or not is as follows:

1. How much revenue do BE get from horse/rider memberships per year (A)

2. How many individual horse/rider combination entries do they get each year (B).

3. Divide A by B to get the levy per entry for membership - if that times by the number of events the average amateur does (say 12 tops) on one horse equates to more than the roughly £200 it is to register a horse with no points and a rider then for the grassroots competitors it isn't worth doing.

Anyone want to bother going through the accounts and working it out? Or alternatively point out the flaw in my reasoning and tell me a better way?!
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

i have a very detailed spreadsheet on this, prepared by an Event Organiser, proving that BE would make more money if registrations were in line with the number of events ridden at (higher for Pros), can email you it if you want...
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess the easy way to work out the membership costs on a sliding scale and whether it would be worth it for amateurs or not is as follows:

1. How much revenue do BE get from horse/rider memberships per year (A)

2. How many individual horse/rider combination entries do they get each year (B).

3. Divide A by B to get the levy per entry for membership - if that times by the number of events the average amateur does (say 12 tops) on one horse equates to more than the roughly £200 it is to register a horse with no points and a rider then for the grassroots competitors it isn't worth doing.

Anyone want to bother going through the accounts and working it out? Or alternatively point out the flaw in my reasoning and tell me a better way?!
grin.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

i have a very detailed spreadsheet on this, prepared by an Event Organiser, proving that BE would make more money if registrations were in line with the number of events ridden at (higher for Pros), can email you it if you want...

[/ QUOTE ]

Also to add, that for us amateurs membership comes directly out of our own pocket. For the pro's it's a business expense and off set against tax, so doesn't impact them as much.
 
How true B&J! I had not thought of that point, nor the fact that doubtless the pros can claim back the VAT on vatable events whereas us amateurs cannot. Oli T for one must have a vatable business, you only need to turn over 68K a year to be forced into the vat system and he must have turned that over in winnings/sales etc last year, surely?
 
Again i would strongly disagree against making an amateurs fee against a pro fee, as both folks get same event, so why have different fee. And i strongly want to compete against pro (and beat them, very occasionally!!! is a huge pat on back).

IMHO it the one of the best things about eventing that's we all pay same, we compete on same courses males and females pros against amateurs.

I do understand about w/d from events and not getting a penny back is one of most annoying things (yeap i've loss hundreds of pounds!!) And i do wish their could be fair systems but i don't want it at expensive of losing right to compete against the named pros in our sport.
 
Definitely not a pr/am event entry fee difference.

But I would support a tiered membership fee along the lines TheMule suggested
 
Most tradestands are free (food ones definitely are, because we've never paid for the events mum's run...) so taking those off would be pointless. Lots of venues have their own marquee, and the cost isn't too massive. I think what really costs is insurance and upkeep, two things its really not worth skimping on...
 
[ QUOTE ]
But I would support a tiered membership fee along the lines TheMule suggested

[/ QUOTE ]

just read.................. sorry still not covinced, plus i think extra memebership level would add extra admin cost at HQ!
blush.gif


Competeting at higher level is expensive, it would be good to help theses levels, but NOT to use the lower levels as cash cows and that would be my worry........
 
[ QUOTE ]
i have a very detailed spreadsheet on this, prepared by an Event Organiser, proving that BE would make more money if registrations were in line with the number of events ridden at (higher for Pros), can email you it if you want...

[/ QUOTE ]

Regarding the bit in bold. Surely if BE would be making more money, it would be due to the pros/riders doing a large number of events per season who would be paying more that would make up this increase? Hypothetically the staggered fees would most likely be set so that the average rider doing the average no. of events per season was still paying the same as they do currently. It's just those doing in excess of this no. of events who would pay more and vice versa.

Would be interesting, but you're always going to have the amateur, 1-horse riders (like moi!
tongue.gif
) saying this is a great idea and the multiple horse riders/pros saying it's a rubbish idea!
wink.gif


I agree with those who have said to trim down a little of the flowers/excessive decoration but keep the more professional atmosphere- that's why we pay more to go to BE events in the first place. Also agree that the biggest savings could be made at the top of the tree, not the bottom. (as is usually the case!
smirk.gif
)
 
This is the problem I have I really want to join BE this yr, but I feel abit cheated as I will do a Maximum od 10 events (if Im lucky) so that works out at £25 (or more) for each event I do, I could just do un-aff and some on tickets, but I like the sense of occasion and the excitment of a BE event, I just wish it didnt cost the EARTH!!!!
 
[ QUOTE ]
Again i would strongly disagree against making an amateurs fee against a pro fee, as both folks get same event, so why have different fee. And i strongly want to compete against pro (and beat them, very occasionally!!! is a huge pat on back).

IMHO it the one of the best things about eventing that's we all pay same, we compete on same courses males and females pros against amateurs.

I do understand about w/d from events and not getting a penny back is one of most annoying things (yeap i've loss hundreds of pounds!!) And i do wish their could be fair systems but i don't want it at expensive of losing right to compete against the named pros in our sport.

[/ QUOTE ]

but the sections wouldn't be pro/am divided so you would still get to compete against them?

and do you think Mary King et al would quit eventing if they had to pay £1000/year for membership?
they may moan for the first year and then it would be the norm and all forgotten.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top