Has racing been hijacked by charities?

21 to 40 of 62 messages
seren nos    pirate
09/10/2012 at 09:01

one of our local races last year added a £1 onto every entry for a local charity.and the guy form the charity doid the work then for the enteries etc..........It was a sell out at about £700................

I thought was great because it if you didn't like it you didn't need to enter but it raised a nice few pounds for the charity without anyone having to get their sponsorship forms out........

it also raised the awareness of the charity..........I know we sent out christmas donation instead of sending cards to that charity last year

another erace sends out sponsorship forms but with no hardsell or asking if yiou have raised money.

I'm happy with all these types of fundraising

 

09/10/2012 at 09:10

Looking at that list, im actually more inclined to run for the charities with the fewest income now lol

cougie    pirate
09/10/2012 at 09:40
Wouldn't it be better running for a charity that means something to you ? Not the Orkney Refuge for battered Weasels - just because it doesn't get that much money ? It probably doesn't need millions.

And of course charities pay people. They're big organisations - they need competent staff who raise more money than they are paid.
Would you be able to work for nothing NLR ?

All of the charities have to file their accounts anyway do you can see what overheads they have.

I'm always impressed by the salvation army building in London though - that must have cost them millions in a prime site.
cougie    pirate
09/10/2012 at 09:45
Edit - just got round to reading about the Salvation Army hq. they owned the land and sold 2/3 of it for offices and the profit just about covered their new building.
You learn something every day.
LIVERBIRD    pirate
09/10/2012 at 10:05

100K is not a lot of money for a quality CEO. It is going to depend largely on his ability to perform at the highest level. If he is bringing significantly more money in for his charity because of innovative ideas and fresh approach, wouldn't you say that was money well spent? Or should he work his bollocks off for minimum wage, simply because his employer has charitable status? He is WORKING for them, not volunteering.

Edited: 09/10/2012 at 10:05
LIVERBIRD    pirate
09/10/2012 at 10:06

Cougie - is that the one by the Millennium bridge? I went for a run round there not long ago and it caught my eye too.....

09/10/2012 at 12:03

My view - charity involvement in some races has reached a point where it's almost impossible to take part without being attached to a charity. I have no idea about percentages, but it does seem that a lot of places are reserved for charity runners, and those places are pretty damn expensive (to the charity as well? I don't know) and often with the addition of high sponsorship targets. My experience of fundraising doesn't go much beyond putting up a Justgiving page, handing round a sponsorship form and running the odd cake sale. I've not got a hope of raising hundreds/thousands of pounds. Nor the time to be more inventive - job, training, etc. So I simply can't take part if I miss out on a standard entry.

On the other hand, if I can get my own place I'd be happy to raise a bit for a charity.

09/10/2012 at 12:15

I'm a charity fundraiser and yes I do get paid for that.  We have to pay quite a lot for places and the number we can get is often restricted, so we only have five VLM places while we have many more potential runners.  We have learned the hard way, I am very worried about the Royal Parks Half team, they don't seem to have raised anything and they didn't fill in the entry forms until literally the last possible hour, or people not running and not telling us so we can transfer the place (one company asked for more British 10k places than they used but we still had to pay £35 for the unused entries, another had a VLM drop out and didn't tell us in time to defer or replace).   So from now on we're going to have to charge a registration fee which is a shame.  As a runner myself I know there is a limit to how much money one can raise anyway and enter all my races on my own place.

cougie    pirate
09/10/2012 at 12:54

LB - thats the one - my first thoughts were that it was a tad excessive - but looking into it - its a huuge charity and they'd had the site for many years so its not as extravagant as I thought. 

09/10/2012 at 14:02

Yes, I think the 'big' races have been seen as a cash cow by charities, but there are ways to avoid it.

Enter local club-organised races - not much sign of charities there.

My local half marathon is organised by the Rotary club, to raise money for charity.  They do suggest you get sponsorship, but there's not pressure at all to do so (unlike R4L).

Another local race is organised by a PTA to raise money for school funds.  Again, however, no pressure for sponsorship.

Charities have a duty to raise the most money they can for their causes - running seems to work for them.  Complaining about it won't change it.

 

09/10/2012 at 14:40
I'm worried now about beat up Weasels wandering Kirkwall with nowhere safe to rest up ......
09/10/2012 at 15:37

Perhaps a donation of some tuppenny rice and some treacle might be a good idea.

 

cougie    pirate
09/10/2012 at 15:57
09/10/2012 at 15:57

NOOOO!!! They'll explode!!!

09/10/2012 at 17:38
We once convinced my sister to feed her tadpoles semolina. They made a hell of a mess
10/10/2012 at 11:28
I think potto has some valid points. People aren't raising the amounts that are expected. Is this unrealistic expectation on behalf of the charity?

I think if the charities started charging an 'administration fee' of ??400 for the VLM that would be a slippery slope. I think people might just pay the ??400 and leave it at that, although many would try to raise that ??400 back I suppose. Certainly an interesting concept. Don't know if that would be good or bad?
10/10/2012 at 11:42

Charities have hi-jacked the bigger events but then half the publicity that has made them that large is the stuff the charities have done.

No-one is forced into these events, run a quiet local / far marathon just pay your entry fee and run, then you don't have to worry.

I do like the idea of paying say £5 more to enter and that goes to a specific charity, if you don't like it don't enter... I also wonder if more events cannot have tick here if you want to make a £5 donation to our charity of choice for this year when you pay your entrance fee?

10/10/2012 at 11:44

I think i'll run for Cancer research next year and take my pay out of my fund raising, since i'll be working a damn sight harder for 4 months than the CEO, what do you think would be fair cut, 20%?, 40%? ...After all, apparently £100k for sitting on your arse is fine.

10/10/2012 at 11:48

I ran the London Marathon in 2000 and pledged to raise £1700 for a charity that i'd never heard of. It was my 3rd application and I had never been accepted on ballot (despite the promise taht you would always get throught the second time). The charity was Ugandan Society for Sick Children. I'm lazy, and while I raised a little money, I had to pay well over a £1000 from my own pocket.

I haven't done the London Marathon since - partly because it left a bad impression, and partly because I think teh whole things way too commercial now.

I run for fun, and I don't do any running for charity anymore. You must have noticed that as soon as someone start srunning, when they take part in their first race there seems to be a pathological need to be sponsored by everyone they've ever met! Drives me crazy!

Smaller organisers with whom I run regualrly, like Trionium and Raw Energy, generally donate a proportion of entry fees to smaller local charities. I'm much more comfortable with this.

Unfortunately it's a sign of the times - charity money is harder to come by so all big charities employ quite unfair and in some cases dishonest practices. 

Rant over - in essence, I agree with the opening question, but sadly some people don't care enough to vote with their feet.

LIVERBIRD    pirate
10/10/2012 at 11:51
lardarse wrote (see)

I think i'll run for Cancer research next year and take my pay out of my fund raising, since i'll be working a damn sight harder for 4 months than the CEO, what do you think would be fair cut, 20%?, 40%? ...After all, apparently £100k for sitting on your arse is fine.

How do you know how hard the CEO of Cancer Research UK works? Have you shadowed them? You're talking a lot of rubbish today Lardarse.

21 to 40 of 62 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums