Thoughts on new BE day pass membership?

avthechav said:
.....and if this all is necessary to get the safety and quality of events how can Nigel Taylor run pretty much identical affiliated and unaffil around the same tracks
Click to expand...

Possibly because BE have footed the bill for course design/building and the groundwork to prepare the course?

At the risk of being controversial, everyone seems to feel they have the "right" to compete these days, whether that be affil or UA but like much in life, hard though it may be and a tough lesson to learn, sometimes one has to go without. The current younger generation has been very fortunate but this has come at the cost of not learning to do without or to wait for things. Waits to be shot down in flames!
 
Lol have you got your flame proof suit on :-)!!!

Whilst I do get your point here, (and again BE is not compulsory and you can choose whether to compete or not). I do feel that BE need to decide which direction they are going in. I posted a thread earlier about entry level competing in 'the good old days' and the consensus seemed to be that you only really affiliated when you got good enough to jump the bigger tracks. This is fine and tbh there seems to be a large unaffiliated network nowadays so maybe this would be better. But I think that BE are trying to go in two directions, getting everyone involved from the bottom up, being inclusive to all levels and creating revenue, but at the same time increasing the costs so that it is not financially inclusive. Re the 'right to compete', well I think that is due to BE putting on more and more levels to make it inclusive for all, so they have kind of created that beast themselves.

However I do agree that if you don't like it you don't have to join and event under BE....but I do say that in a blasé manner from the glos/worcs border where you can get to pretty much 10 decent unaff events, and as I am not planning on going advanced in the near future ;-) I can not BE and still event quite happily......

It is interesting because despite people feeling that eventing costs a lot they certainly seem to get the entries still so BE prob don't care that much! Are there published figures on membership numbers from year to year? Have the membership numbers remained stable?
 
It does seem like BE are trying to squeeze out every pound, shilling and pence from its riders. But by competing at BE most will acknowledge it is an expensive hobby, whether we like it or not. If you don't like it, vote with your feet
 
avthechav said:
Nigel Taylor actually makes more out of UA as he has no BE levy to pay and as pointed out runs over courses developed for BE. You may not have noticed but his entry fees are not that much different from BE.
Maybe you want to enter BE for less but thats a choice you make if this is your wish become a full member,us that are members are not a registered charity for those who dont wish to.
Try it from my point of view as an owner I pay full membership the same as riders is that fair ! No but thats my choice the same as everybody else if I wish my horse to compete.
In a previous post you asked about entry level years ago,well it did start off at a higher level but then again people could not afford it as today! Plus riders got seriously injured or killed more regularly .
All this comes with a cost and once again if you cant afford it dont do it ,its simple.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
popsdosh said:
Try it from my point of view as an owner I pay full membership the same as riders is that fair!
All this comes with a cost and once again if you cant afford it dont do it ,its simple.
Click to expand...

Completely not fair! Completely different topic but I have never understood why there is not a different rate for a BE ownership membership level, and would have thought that as an owner you should be 'looked after' better than that, after all where would British eventing be without its owners?

And completely agree about it being a choice to join or not, and as I said I simply cannot afford to affiliate in the near future and therefore will stick at unaffiliated, however this does not mean as an earlier poster suggested that I take it less seriously than someone who can afford to BE :-). If the cost of entries is not affecting membership numbers it's all moot anyway as why should and would BE as a Company care if their revenue is not affected? It will be interesting to see the effect that this new day pass membership has on numbers taking next season I guess :-D
 
I think we all know that it will make no difference!!! Events will still be full!
However I will no longer be a member and hence a rider loses the income from another horse.
 
avthechav said:
Completely not fair! Completely different topic but I have never understood why there is not a different rate for a BE ownership membership level, and would have thought that as an owner you should be 'looked after' better than that, after all where would British eventing be without its owners?

And completely agree about it being a choice to join or not, and as I said I simply cannot afford to affiliate in the near future and therefore will stick at unaffiliated, however this does not mean as an earlier poster suggested that I take it less seriously than someone who can afford to BE :-). If the cost of entries is not affecting membership numbers it's all moot anyway as why should and would BE as a Company care if their revenue is not affected? It will be interesting to see the effect that this new day pass membership has on numbers taking next season I guess :-D
Click to expand...

Like I've said twice already, deciding BE is too expensive is one thing - but deciding that an extra £2.50 per event is the breaking point is ridiculous!! The thread is about the new membership fee, not the cost of BE - but I think anyone saying the new membership fee is enough to put them off isn't dedicated enough!! Making the decision to go unaff in general if you can't afford BE doesn't mean you aren't committed to your sport, but I do think an extra tenner a year making such a huge difference is ridiculous!!

About the cost, am on my phone so can't double quote, but will try and explain. When dealing with clients, you aim to have lower paying, high quantity clients over more higher paying low quantity clients. I offer a significant discount with my business to people who will hire me for a full day compared to a half hour or an hour, as despite the fact they pay less per hour, they pay more altogether and you are receiving a reliable income from them. When someone pays a membership, BE not only has that membership money upfront but knows they will get more entry fees from that person.

When you end up with more low quantity clients, as a business you have to spend more money on admin and more man hours in organisation time than you do for high quantity clients. For BE, having a limited number of people competing on tickets as a sort of intro thing works fine economically, but with more and more people opting not to join, and to compete as high as Novice on tickets, they are losing the extra income - not on a per event basis but overall. Most businesses if they find themselves moving away from a high quantity client model then tend to move more towards a low quantity model, with less incentives for high quantity clients - hence the more people who compete on tickets the more expensive it will get for full members. It's pretty standard.
 
khalswitz said:
Like I've said twice already, deciding BE is too expensive is one thing - but deciding that an extra £2.50 per event is the breaking point is ridiculous!! The thread is about the new membership fee, not the cost of BE - but I think anyone saying the new membership fee is enough to put them off isn't dedicated enough!! Making the decision to go unaff in general if you can't afford BE doesn't mean you aren't committed to your sport, but I do think an extra tenner a year making such a huge difference is ridiculous!!

About the cost, am on my phone so can't double quote, but will try and explain. When dealing with clients, you aim to have lower paying, high quantity clients over more higher paying low quantity clients. I offer a significant discount with my business to people who will hire me for a full day compared to a half hour or an hour, as despite the fact they pay less per hour, they pay more altogether and you are receiving a reliable income from them. When someone pays a membership, BE not only has that membership money upfront but knows they will get more entry fees from that person.

When you end up with more low quantity clients, as a business you have to spend more money on admin and more man hours in organisation time than you do for high quantity clients. For BE, having a limited number of people competing on tickets as a sort of intro thing works fine economically, but with more and more people opting not to join, and to compete as high as Novice on tickets, they are losing the extra income - not on a per event basis but overall. Most businesses if they find themselves moving away from a high quantity client model then tend to move more towards a low quantity model, with less incentives for high quantity clients - hence the more people who compete on tickets the more expensive it will get for full members. It's pretty standard.
Click to expand...

Khalswitz, do you perhaps compete above Novice? I only ask as you are making a lot of comments around people being dedicated/committed to the sport, not taking it seriously etc when, in reality, the large majority of the entries at 90/100 are made up of people who do this as a hobby, around their family, full time job etc. Of course these people are not going to be as committed as those people who rely on BE for their living. Those people are funded by the lower levels and I would argue that it was the introduction of these high volume lower levels that has allowed BE to develop the presentation and professionalism of the events that they run. If you are competing professionally then I suspect you will take a different view to the average amateur.

Of course an extra £2.50 per event does not make a huge amount of difference in the grand scheme of things, what I would take issue with is the way that they are presenting this fee, most of what they are offering for this £10 was previously included with the day ticket in the past.

And with respect to BE trying to encourage people to join, the reason that day tickets are there is to bring in revenue from people that would not have joined in the first place! For instance, I will have a 4 yr old next year that I may wish to do young horse classes on, these can only be done on horse tickets so why would I join myself to do 1 or 2 events?

Now, again, obviously competing is a luxury not a right and if I feel it is worth it at the time I will probably pay up, but I do feel that BE are trying to be a little disingenuous in the way they have introduced this.

With regard to comments on cost, I would imagine that the admin involved is very, very little as almost all of the membership functions can be done online. I would also suspect there are very few people competing at Novice on a ticket - and that those people would not have joined anyway. Most people are competing on a ticket for very good reasons that make sense to them over and above paying full membership.

Whilst I am fully aware of the business model you quote above I am not entirely sure that it would be relevant in this case.

On a related subject - does anyone know if the BE sounding board is still in existence? I know a couple of people from HHO were on this at one point and I just wondered if it was still used?
 
TheMule said:
As I am sure you understand, it is quite rare to find an unaffiliated which tests you in the same way as a BE does, for example with flower pots, decorations etc around the dr and sj arenas and on the xc fences. I'd like my young horse to see it and to know she is ok with it!


Which is why you pay the extra !


Also, as I'm sure you know, the rule book is all online so no need for a paper copy at all.
Click to expand...

Point taken. I do keep a copy in the wagon though, for quick reference.

NB. Just wanted to add that the comment 'which is why you pay the extra' as read above in The Mules quoted post, was somehow added by me when trying to quote ! Apologies to The Mule ! I didn't mean to put word in your mouth !
 
Last edited:
khalswitz said:
Thinking that over £100 is expensive for one event is a completely different thing to objecting to a £10 per year membership fee. My point is that if the breaking point for you is an extra £2.50 per event when you already spend over £100 excluding petrol, stabling etc then yes I do think you are being ridiculous.

If the money bugs you that much, go unaff. BE compared to unaff has higher costs for a reason - BE has a minimum of three BE officials per event who are PAID to be there and trained to run to a standard, and then money has to go the BE, who not only maintain all records etc but have individuals dedicated to training, and developing the sport. That is why their events are double the price.

Personally I think BE gets it from both sides - people moaning the events are expensive and with no prize money, yet people are quick to blame and expect BE to do more and campaign for things and do more tests whenever anything happens. They have to pay for these things.

Also, to whoever said about day ticketers making it more expensive - of course they do!! The more people that opt out of membership but still compete, means that BE has to make their money elsewhere than memberships - they have to raise entries etc to cover it. Simple economics.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with this post
 
Matafleur said:
Khalswitz, do you perhaps compete above Novice? I only ask as you are making a lot of comments around people being dedicated/committed to the sport, not taking it seriously etc when, in reality, the large majority of the entries at 90/100 are made up of people who do this as a hobby, around their family, full time job etc. Of course these people are not going to be as committed as those people who rely on BE for their living. Those people are funded by the lower levels and I would argue that it was the introduction of these high volume lower levels that has allowed BE to develop the presentation and professionalism of the events that they run. If you are competing professionally then I suspect you will take a different view to the average amateur.

Of course an extra £2.50 per event does not make a huge amount of difference in the grand scheme of things, what I would take issue with is the way that they are presenting this fee, most of what they are offering for this £10 was previously included with the day ticket in the past.

And with respect to BE trying to encourage people to join, the reason that day tickets are there is to bring in revenue from people that would not have joined in the first place! For instance, I will have a 4 yr old next year that I may wish to do young horse classes on, these can only be done on horse tickets so why would I join myself to do 1 or 2 events?

Now, again, obviously competing is a luxury not a right and if I feel it is worth it at the time I will probably pay up, but I do feel that BE are trying to be a little disingenuous in the way they have introduced this.

With regard to comments on cost, I would imagine that the admin involved is very, very little as almost all of the membership functions can be done online. I would also suspect there are very few people competing at Novice on a ticket - and that those people would not have joined anyway. Most people are competing on a ticket for very good reasons that make sense to them over and above paying full membership.

Whilst I am fully aware of the business model you quote above I am not entirely sure that it would be relevant in this case.

On a related subject - does anyone know if the BE sounding board is still in existence? I know a couple of people from HHO were on this at one point and I just wondered if it was still used?
Click to expand...

A bit short on time so can't reply fully but no, I'm not a pro - haven't even competed above BE100 myself. However I do work in the horse industry, and aside from having a lot of professional clients I also have two friends who did the whole Ponies/Juniors/YR and are now semi-pro with their own strings, I I probably have a different view to Most.

I understand to most people it is a hobby to fit in around busy lives, but that doesn't mean they don't take it seriously! One of my friends made it to Badminton Grassroots last year and she worked her butt off for it. I just think you have to take it more seriously if doing BE rather than unaff - your horse has to be fit enough, you both have to have done all the prep training, so when you have to put all that work and spend all that money, there is a level of commitment. So even at grassroots level I think commitment and dedication are fair words to throw around!!

Personally, I have seen more and more riders turn to tickets instead of membership. I know loads of people who, if tickets were limited say to two, would buck up and join, but feel that they can stick to four and fill up on unaff through the season. I know several at BE 100 who do this, and one at Novice, and I do think that by the time you've passed BE80/90 you really should buck up a bit. And the more people who do it, the more pressure it will put on BE to change the grassroots system to lower membership costs and raise event fees. I don't see how it can't.

And yes, there will be higher admin costs - every passport to be checked, every set of results to put online, this makes these costs higher per event if the majority of people only ticket.
 
I'm not opposed to this rule but only if they remove the cap on prize money! I think it is completely unacceptable to win back less than your entry fee for 1st place in a class of 40! I appreciate that organisers have ever increasing costs but they wouldn't do it if it wan't highly profitable!!
 
Well then, maybe BE should just scrap tickets at BE100 and novice?! I guess thats up to them- if they're worried about it....
 
I agree that if people are not joining because 4 tickets are enough to get them through the season then this additional membership makes sense and has a lot of benefits. However a lot of people use a ticket as a way to test the water and see if their horse is cut out for affiliated eventing. In this scenario I think it is unfair to expect them to pay an extra £26 on top of entries just to try it out. Maybe instead of adding this additional membership they should have changed the ticket system - perhaps allowing only two tickets per season or not allowing people to compete on a ticket above BE90.
 
Personally I think BE should've left the ticket system as it stands but reduce the amount you can have to 2 (surely after 2 events you have some idea if affiliated is for you)
Then I think they would've been better to bring in a 'taster' membership eg) a membership which registers the Horse & Rider for 12 months, gives them the same membership advantages as this £10 membership. Allows them to run at 4 events & gives 2 ballot stickers. For a cost of say £170.
A rider can only ever have 1 of these taster memberships & gets the £15 discount when they become full members.
Personally I think this model would convert more day ticket riders to full members IMO without this feeling that BE are trying to keep squeezing us for pennies!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top