Look, you're coming at me with aggressive, off-topic questions/attacks. Are you in agreement that only 25% off next year's race is adequate? In my opinion, it's not. It's also just that, my opinion, so take it as that.

It's not off topic and it's not an attack.

I'll restate one question:

You train for a 10k race that is 100 miles away. Cost is $40 plus the gas for the drive, maybe a hotel if you are tired after the race. You drive up, and day of the race it gets cancelled because of mudslides on the road. Race director offers a $10 credit to one of his other races.

Are you going to be as indignant and insulted about that as you are about this race? (And I'm still curious as to which race you entered).

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

Who cares what distance I was going to do. Just because you changed the amount of money and the sport doesn't change anything. Yes, if the Race Director wanted to do the right thing, they should let the customer race in another 10k, full credit.

This post needs repeating.

This thread is so full of assumptions and suppositions, and not one person here (safe to say) knows the specifics of THIS race's finances, THIS race's expenses and profit margins, and what 25% off a future race entry does to THIS race company's bottom line.

Heck for all we know, they're bending over backward, financially, to extend the 25% discount they are. Regardless of anyone's opinion of fairness, they're not going to put themselves out of business by offering more compensation than they can absorb. And as an athlete, you shouldn't want them to.

The most important issue is the interpretaion of contract. And you want your interpretation to be the correct one.

That is an issue for the courts.

The race director would have a reasonable position if the roads were closed by the authorities or if permits were revoked.

The safety argument seems to go out the window as race promoters tend to deny responsibility for deaths or injuries during their events. Cannot have it both ways.

Just because they state no refunds up front doesn't make it right. I got screwed out of NYC marathon last year and still feel anger for losing out on that cash.

Let's say, hypothetically, offering a full-credit entry to an upcoming race would put this RD/race company out of business, thus ending this race and any/all others they put on. Is that still the right thing?

The whole communication process was poor at best. Coupled with the fact that many people had hotel rooms which also are tied to cancellation policies. Some even flew in to use this event for IMLT. Sponsors off set most of the costs.
In full disclosure what was his output of funds. Present the case in full transparency and then we can evaluate if 25% was reasonable.
Given given the way it was presented the 25% comes off as insulting and he had promised resolution on Monday which he was late.
He may have won the war but he will lose the battle by losing athletes. His short term gain equals long term loss of athletes who will never do another event of Big Blue Adventure. These are for profit businesses, and if you believe otherwise you are being mislead.
Support companies like Total Body Fitness and USA Productions as they have the athlete in mind when they put on their triathlons/duathlons. Go support those companies. They are not perfect however they do know who the customer is and that is the athlete.

If a race organization can't provide a refund in these type of scenarios, is that basically the inherit problem itself?
ETA: but I guess the waiver forgives then from having to offer any assistance.

But it seems like this race has other races it supports as well, so it doesn't seem money is all that bad off, does it?


Like I said, I'm sure how a race can say it's so financially strapped to give refunds while then having other races at a later date. Doesn't seem to add up to me.

---

------------------
@brooksdoughtie
USAT-L2,Y&J; USAC-L2
http://www.aomultisport.com

Recently a marathon in Banff, (apologies if this one has been discussed already in this thread - it's a bit long to go through all the posts), was cancelled at the 11th hour due to the Calgary flooding.
By the time the call had to be made, more than 90% of the money had already been spent to put the race on.
The race organizers donated all the gatorade and food to the flood relief - and I believe gave each athlete a 30% coupon for next year. They also agreed to mail each athlete the finishing jersey.
After all that there was about 5K left and they donated that to flood relief.
The director told me they would lose money on each athlete who took them up on the 30% coupon.

They received 12 letters threatening to sue. I'm not sure how many entrants they had but I believe it was close to 700.
Too bad it would have been a beautiful marathon.

Based on the tone, anger, disgust and vitriol directed to potential customers (and apparently your existing customers) ... your "getting out of being a RD" is something that warrants celebration.

It is all in the details. I don't know how the flooding affected the course or the emergeny efforts. It is possible that running the event would have caused problems with handling the flood issues. Those are important issues.

That is why a court is needed to resolve the issues.

---

As race promoter I would have sent anyone who compained a full refund. The other actions seemed reasonble. Except for saying that the 30% off would lose money.

That wasn't the question. The question was, would you feel insulted that they offered 25% off another running race?

Doesn't matter if you answer or not, your sense of self entitlement has been gloriously shining this entire time.

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

The one road leading into Banff from Calgary, where more than 80% of the athletes were coming from, got washed out. It was a real state of emergency. People were in trouble and in the end the race was simply not possible.
I thought the race organizers handled it well.
Of course, you'll not convince everyone.

 

Wow, I guess I have to join the Fray. KNY seemed to be one of the few who was actually providing a reasoned logical argument to this thread. I can't see one comment that I would characterize as anger or disgust - just facts. I've never competed in one of his races, but look at the threads and how much people have loved Savage man. KNY it's a true loss to this sport I love, that someone like you has burned out and is moving on to other ventures. Wish I was on the west coast and had the chance to experience one of your races.

I find it amusing that over the last few weeks we have the threads about we accepting the "WTC way", the bankruptcy of a cornerstone marketplace which most of us have bought from, all the whining that this sport is losing numbers and fading away, and then the expectations of the OP of this thread that the small events should refund every racer his/her money and go broke while doing so.

This thread is revealing more and more why I may have to take up golf over the next decade because there will just be WTC events at $1,000 a race.

"Sponsors off set most of the costs."

you know this? i've produced a lot of triathlons and in no case is your statement even close to true. you want a t shirt in next year's race that says 2013? who's going to pay this RD's bills while he's going around to tahoe city, placer county, u.s. forest service, tahoe regional planning agency, caltrans, CHP, getting all his (your) permits? it's not just you who have non-refundable deposits and registrations. you think the award company is going to just take the loss on awards printed for a 2013 race? you think the sponsors are going to give him his money back on the banners he had made with their names and logos? you think he's going to get his sponsor money at all?

yes, 50 percent would have been better than 25 percent. but that's about the only thing you can fault this RD on. this is triathlon. this is the way it is in endurance sport participation. this happens to you once every 100 races. maybe 1 in 500. it's the occasional, and very low, in the grand scheme of things, price we pay for the avocation we've chosen.

if you excoriate this guy, and choose to enter another RD's races, know that this very same thing could happen to that RD, and pretty much the very same policy will be in place. you either check the box and pay the $7 athlete insurance when you enter a race on active.com, or you just stop entering races, or you just suck this one up and understand that bad things happen to good races - and to those who enter them. those are really your only 3 reasonable, realistic, real world options.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I think I answered your question already, as I answered yes. Resorting to personal attacks is not necessary.

x2 on that. I was wondering where kny said anything remotely like that, other than the one quoted statement of "attitudes like this are why I'm quitting".

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

fair enough.

Again with the personal attacks!!!

All I am asking for as a consumer is do what's right and have good communication. As Lock_N_Load stated: "My point is you should do everything you can to provide consideration for the participants loss. Rather this triathlon decided to simply say: Sorry suckers, you all agreed to this and you are out of luck. The participant is left thinking: Umm, all their costs are covered, I'm screwed, and they just threw in my face the fact that I agreed to be screwed."

I'd like for the RD to tell us why only 25%. Let me enjoy one of your races since I paid for one that didn't occur. $225 is a lot of money to me.

If KNY is the person/business that also puts on the Garrett County Gran Fondo and is getting out of the business that is a real shame.. The GCGF this year was awesome!!!! Never did savageman.

It states in every race sign-up all the legal stuff. as people have said before ....suck it up. It definitely blows not to be able to race/participate in something you have trained months for but in grand scheme....its a drop in the bucket in what most everyone has invested in this..ie races, travel, equipment, etc... Would have to assume the RD feels worse than everyone.

Perhaps we should have all ran the NYC Marathon instead just because they had a better cancellation policy.......according to news sources:
"Runners prevented from racing in this year’s New York City Marathon due to Hurricane Sandy will get a full refund or entry into the race in one of the next three years, organizers announced today."

Do you think a race should take from another race's budget to pay for it's refunds? That is how Madoff got himself into trouble. "Let's just dip into this customer money over here real quick to make up a shortfall. I'll make it back up later."

I'm doubt that's what you're saying, so you must then be saying that race promoters have enough rainy day money set aside at all times to issue full refunds for an entire race. And, that's doubtful for most organizations.

Let's say a race has a 10% profit margin, which is in the ballpark for moderately priced, small to mid-size races. Let's say that this profit then sits available as rainy day fund and doesn't flow to the race charity or to the owners and/or investors of this business. It then takes 10 races to build up the cushion necessary to absorb the loss of a single race issuing refunds. For most outfits that is more triathlons than they put on in a year. For many small outfits that is the profit from 5 or 10 years worth of races that have been coughed up. Take WTC out of your mind for a moment, who operate on a different scale of registration fee they can command and number of participants they draw, and I think you may find that triathlon promoters operate on a smaller financial scale than you realize. And, even if an event has built up the savings over a year or two or ten, is it fair for one bad luck event to drain all of that savings?

Again, I think promoters have an ethical obligation to make a good-faith effort to "make right" and 25% credit in this case is marginal at best, but "what's right" is highly dependent on the circumstances and, unless cancelation occurs many months in advance (see IM National Harbor), would rarely be 100% cash refund.

Your single post illustrates everything wrong with this sport, the internet, and the world at large, all in one inane, ignorant stream of blather.
A hat trick! You really are a multisport visionary.

Chapeau! Brilliantly done.

---

float , hammer , and jog