in the former all we do is is raise our price to account for Active’s cut, so in reality the consumer is paying for Active, it’s just not as obvious in the former case.
the issue you guys are debating is drip pricing. it might not be a problem for you, but for some folks (me, for example) drip pricing is offensive. it’s even illegal in some countries (australia).
now, you take that australia example, it’s been a huge ironman success over the last half-dozen years, and drip pricing isn’t allowed. you have to disclose the entire price in the beginning of a transaction, and even in your advertising. so, that hasn’t seemed to keep ironman from flourishing. what it may do is keep companies from loading up the “fees” at the end.
are you implying that the lack of drip pricing is (even somewhat) responsible for IM’s success in Australia?
in the former all we do is is raise our price to account for Active’s cut, so in reality the consumer is paying for Active, it’s just not as obvious in the former case.
the issue you guys are debating is drip pricing. it might not be a problem for you, but for some folks (me, for example) drip pricing is offensive. it’s even illegal in some countries (australia).
It probably should be illegal. There’s a fair amount of evidence in behavioral economics that suggest that hidden fees increase consumer demand because of the initial perception of a lower price. Of course here in the US we routinely use the ultimate in drip pricing: the sales tax.
are you implying that the lack of drip pricing is (even somewhat) responsible for IM’s success in Australia?
i’m saying the lack of drip pricing doesn’t seem to be hurting in australia. some of the folks here seem worried that if they absorb the fees into their price it will appear as if they’re higher priced. i wrote about my local tire shop a few months ago, that sweeps almost all competition in our half-million population area away, and throws all convention aside while doing so (including drip pricing).
So what’s the benefit of RDs going with Active? Do they do it purely so they can take a cut of the Registration fee? I’m particularly interested in why independent races would use Active, when as consumers, we will enter a particular race regardless of who runs the online registration. Is it simply that quid pro quo?
i’m saying the lack of drip pricing doesn’t seem to be hurting in australia. some of the folks here seem worried that if they absorb the fees into their price it will appear as if they’re higher priced.
thanks for the clarification - that is compelling reasoning for letting go of anxiety for the mere appearance of a price increase.
reminds me of a friend’s father who owned a grocery store in WY. The father never offered sales, because he found it insulting to pretend to offer a lower price up front, but then for that discounted price to get absorbed by other products in the store, so the customer was paying more at the counter - not perfect logic, but I can respect his bucking of preying on consumer psychology/behavior - this was a guy who in 2002 was using the reasoning that if a volcano went off tomorrow that released more CO2 than all fuel burning in history, that this somehow proves that climate change is not man made. I think owning property in WY and scientific reasoning are correlated (in one direction or another; moderated by ego).
While I can’t list every advantage some I noticed a few things from my friends’ race production company last summer.
Ease of payment - whatever online company he used cut him a check - their fee. It was auto deposited weekly iirc
Database management - with a ton of races who ever enetered which race was auto populated to that race. He just woke up, logged on and had a list of everyone entered, which age group, name, email, address, USAT # & exp date, emergency contact etc. He could easily send event specific info out to all the racers. They also didn’t have to hand enter any data except for onsite registration (mainly 5k-half marathons)
He could merge all his entrants into a common data base and slice it many different ways. Made analytics & marketing stuff way easier.
Save (his) time so he can focus on permitting, new venues, etc
There were other things but I don’t remember all the benefits
Perhaps I’m not understanding what you’re saying, but it sounds like the athlete still pays the fee, it’s just rolled into the registration cost. I run registration for a swim program and we use Active. Active gives us a choice. We can “absorb” Actives fee so that the registrant just pays for one line item, the swim-team registration. Or we have two line items at check-out: the swim-team registration and the Active fee. But in the former all we do is is raise our price to account for Active’s cut, so in reality the consumer is paying for Active, it’s just not as obvious in the former case.
Yep, I love when some try to say they do not charge fees, or do not hide them or or or. What you do is what I also did was I was an RD for a race. Since we allowed mail registration, we did not stick everyone with the hidden registration fee.
Most of the USAT races I do have zero officials, and I am totally fine with that.
Not even a USAT Race Referee based around transition? Seems unlikely.
Every race I have done this season locally, minus Auburn, had zero and I mean zero officials. And that is fine with me.
So the races you do have no way to enforce the USAT rules? Seems like those races should not be USAT sanctioned then.
Also - Given the lack of officials, I wonder what happens when there is an insurance claim? If I were the insurance carrier, I’ll decline on the stop if no one was enforcing the rules.
As an example - Lets say a bike doesn’t have the bar plugs in and that rider crashes and punctures their body on that bar. USAT official should have caught that. If they are not there, who could. Why would the insurance carrier pay out if the race didn’t enforce the rules…
in my opinion, we have 2 problems, and i’ve expressed this many times. people don’t always make decisions based on “fair percentages” based on the calculation. i put on a race in 1997 bringing back the US Triathlon Series after a 5 year hiatus. we tried to bring in a whole new crop of first timers. worked our asses off to do that. the USAT head ref penalized 25 percent of my athletes. “they’ll know better next time.”
okay. but being told you’re a cheater is offensive. having that kiss at the end of registration, when you THINK you know the cost, but it turns out that’s NOT the cost, that’s offensive. thankfully USAT has moved past that kind of thinking, but they haven’t entirely moved past it.
what LTF has decided to do may work out well. it may work out badly. barry makes valid points. but USAT has a responsibility. it is failing (in my opinion) to address the problems LTF is addressing.
one real way, one good way, to keep the LTFs of the future from making the decision LTF made is to address the issues.
Dan, that was your choice to have USAT officials!! Most of the USAT races I do have zero officials, and I am totally fine with that.
Dave:
This was 20 years ago,1997, and Dan was bringing back the USTS series by putting on one race in Oceanside CA, using our Quintana Roo staff to get it going. In those days, there really wasn’t much in the way of self-insurance, and the City of Oceanside required a big insurance policy. Quite frankly, all of us at QR and everybody we got to help, were pushed to limit and didn’t have time to deal with re-inventing the insurance wheel. USAT sanctioning (insurance) came along with their refs. We had pros, we had a prize purse, and at that point, the officials were a pretty good idea. We didn’t need them DQ’ing all the rookies, but that’s a lesson we learned along the way.
Most of the USAT races I do have zero officials, and I am totally fine with that.
Not even a USAT Race Referee based around transition? Seems unlikely.
Every race I have done this season locally, minus Auburn, had zero and I mean zero officials. And that is fine with me.
I’ve also been at multiple USAT sanctioned events that didn’t appear to have any USAT officials present in transition or on the course. I’m not fine with that, but I tolerate it at events which I know to be generally safe and where the majority of my peers attempt to follow the rules even though there are likely no officials to bust them.
I don’t have a problem paying the USAT annual membership. It’s insignificant in my total yearly budget for endurance sports. I do have an issue if I believe that USAT isn’t paying attention to members like me.
So a couple of thoughts/issues. A) I dont think there are enough usat officials to actually officiate every usat event. B) Now should that be a requirement to get race sanctioning…i would say yes. C) So then it becomes a game of race/sanctioning body juggling how to handle that situation.
Now I think the problem with forcing a race to have officials is actually the officials themselves. Or more directly, the community of triathletes that simply doesn’t step up and fill that officials void. And I get why many don’t officiate. If I was not an coach, I would actually officiate, as I’ve sat through the class. I’ve just not wanted to go through the conflict of interest. Maybe we could get more bike mechanics/runners to do it, etc. But officiating is freaking hard, and then of course you as the athletes NEVER break a rule. You were never in their draft zone, etc., so you get to argue/discuss the issue, and so officials have to have a thick skin to do the job effectively (which I think is likely the biggest reason why people dont do it).
Most of the USAT races I do have zero officials, and I am totally fine with that.
Not even a USAT Race Referee based around transition? Seems unlikely.
Every race I have done this season locally, minus Auburn, had zero and I mean zero officials. And that is fine with me.
I’ve also been at multiple USAT sanctioned events that didn’t appear to have any USAT officials present in transition or on the course. I’m not fine with that, but I tolerate it at events which I know to be generally safe and where the majority of my peers attempt to follow the rules even though there are likely no officials to bust them.
I don’t have a problem paying the USAT annual membership. It’s insignificant in my total yearly budget for endurance sports. I do have an issue if I believe that USAT isn’t paying attention to members like me.
It is up to the RD if they want to pay to have USAT officials at their race.
But since MOST athletes never help, just take, well, …
It is up to the RD if they want to pay to have USAT officials at their race.
But since MOST athletes never help, just take, well, …
Our paying $$$ for events is not helping? I (we) shouldn’t be expected to volunteer our time nor should would be expected to become race officials. Isn’t that why we pay $$$?
It is up to the RD if they want to pay to have USAT officials at their race.
But since MOST athletes never help, just take, well, …
Our paying $$$ for events is not helping? I (we) shouldn’t be expected to volunteer our time nor should would be expected to become race officials. Isn’t that why we pay $$$?
Wow, you really must not know how our sport works. I guess all the volunteers should stop helping at races since none of us ever get paid directly.
I assume there is likely a shortage of USAT officials but I also assume that some USAT sanctioned RDs don’t want USAT officials at their events because they don’t want their participants, particularly newbies, being penalized for unfamiliar rules or rules they don’t think they are important. They are worried that a penalized participant may decide not to sign up for another one of their races.
I’d be interested in what USAT’s stance is on this and, as mentioned by B. McMaster, what happens if there is an injury claim at a sanctioned race where there weren’t any USAT officials present? Do USAT’s insurance lawyers represent the RD if a lawsuit if filed regarding the injury or do they tell the RD that the insurance coverage is void because there wasn’t an official on site?
I assume there is likely a shortage of USAT officials but I also assume that some USAT sanctioned RDs don’t want USAT officials at their events because they don’t want their participants, particularly newbies, being penalized for unfamiliar rules or rules they don’t think they are important. They are worried that a penalized participant may decide not to sign up for another one of their races.
I’d be interested in what USAT’s stance is on this and, as mentioned by B. McMaster, what happens if there is an injury claim at a sanctioned race where there weren’t any USAT officials present? Do USAT’s insurance lawyers represent the RD if a lawsuit if filed regarding the injury or do they tell the RD that the insurance coverage is void because there wasn’t an official on site?
I do not believe having officials at a race has nothing to do about insurance or issues.
Officials cost the RD more money, and folks are complaining about the 15 buck one day license. Would folks like to pay another 15 bucks for the officials?
The officials get a few bucks to be at a race but it is NOT something anyone would do if it were a job putting food on their tables. AND, for the abuse an official gets
from an athlete that gets a penalty, well, until you have been in an officials shoes, … As was stated, no athlete thinks they ever break the rules. I have loved it this
year how many times I was passed on the right by folks illegally.
