Endurance.Net Ridecamp Archives

I plain don't see your logic here.  You are still paying for the vets time 
whether or not they have to service LD's along with the 50's.    Usually 
here there are definitely more 50's than the LD's.  You either stagger the 
LD timing or have them start with the 50's.  You are still paying for the 
vets no matter what.  Logistically, most of the time you have two or more 
vets anyway to cover the out vet checks and the ridecamp finish.  Most of 
the 50's here are not luxury rides so you aren't paying for extra luxuries. 
When you buy bungee cords for prizes, you still have enough left over from 
that big jar.  So what if you have to provide an extra bale of hay or big 
bag of carrots for their 1/2 hour lunch stop - and maybe people water..... 
maybe $25 max extra?  Compared to the $100/per entry that LD's are charged 
at some rides here.... still smells of profit to me.  Especially without the 
banquet.  And we still go to these rides!

K.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "k s swigart" <katswig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Ridecamp" <ridecamp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 9:16 AM
Subject: [RC] Not necessarily (was: LD's etc.)


> Sandy said:
>
> > First, LD rides DO INDEED pay for the
> > events in many cases,
>
> As a business management professional both by training and job
> experience, I think it important to set the record straight about this
> particular question, since I am willing to bet that more often than not
> holding an LD ride in conjunction with an endurance ride is more trouble
> and expense than it is worth.
>
> Please note that I am NOT saying that the AERC should not sanction LD
> rides, nor am I saying that I think ride managers should not hold LD
> rides (although I do think that LD rides should be formatted more along
> the lines of a CTR with minimum time requirements, and greater emphasis
> on judging horses on their condition during the ride; however, this is a
> separate topic).
>
> What I am saying, that the "LD rides make the ride more profitable" (or
> less unprofitable as the case may be), is oft times a fallacy.
>
> If ride managers are hosting an LD in conjuction with their ride because
> they want to provide a venue for people who don't want to ride 50+
> miles, then this is a good thing.  If ride managers are hosting an LD in
> conjunction with their ride because they think it is a way to get more
> entrants and therefore help pay for the ride, they need to take a good
> hard look at the numbers and assure themselves that this is really true.
>
> It may make for more entrants, but more entrants require more resources
> and because of their very nature (they are half as long so they take
> half the time to finish), they impose organizational stresses with
> respect to time management that can really put a spanner in the works.
>
> I am not telling ride managers, "Don't do it."  I am just saying, "Don't
> count on it improving your bottom line because it probably won't."  More
> people at your ride may not be what you want in order to make it more
> profitable.  Sometimes smaller IS better.  Smaller and single focused
> OFTEN is better.
>
> kat
> Orange County, Calif.
> :)
>
>
> "Le meilleur que je sais les hommes le plus que j'aime mon
> cheval."--Catherine the Great
>
>
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
> Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
> Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp
>
> Ride Long and Ride Safe!!
>
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Ridecamp is a service of Endurance Net, http://www.endurance.net.
Information, Policy, Disclaimer: http://www.endurance.net/Ridecamp
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://www.endurance.net/ridecamp/logon.asp

Ride Long and Ride Safe!!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=