does bikereg charge both the racer and the promoter?
Well, we are doing merchandising this year. We sort of finalized some details yesterday.
So let's say we have 4 ST races, the Stewart race, and a cross race. Let's run this example with these numbers:
ST: 4 races, $17 each, 75 people per event, 300 total
Stewart: 1 race, $60 each, 250 people
CX: 1 race, $30 each, 200 people
Cost of this:
$25 a month, so $300 for the year
30 cents per transactions = $222
2.9% of your total income = $756.90
TCO = $1327.90
That comes out to $1.79 per transaction to run this. I just looked at my Westwood CX race receipt and it was $2.80 to BikeReg. Now, the more expensive races are going to have more of a service charge, correct?
Did I screw up my math? Looking at this model, we could increase all our fees $2, do away with the need for BikeReg, make at least 20 cents more per racer, and eliminate all hidden service fees.
If you eliminated bikereg, do you think you'd incur some kind of marketing cost or else lose riders who only know of the events because they see them on bikereg? Or do you think enough people would know about it independently to fill your fields?
using your $2.80 and numbers we will give them $2,100 this year.
and by we I mean the racers.
I find this obnoxious. gmail is a much broader program that's way better and it's free.
I'm going to start charging 7c per post on mtbnj.com
give? the goog peeks at everything - even the metadata of your email is important, even if they don't look at the contents (sound familiar?)
again, bikereg gets about $1 per racer per event over what each individual organization could do by itself.
Find 10 - $100 sponsors for the year, and keep using bikereg.....make some nice banners (we know a guy) - hit up the local businesses - who has contacted Salt to let them know this is happening? there's a bunch of drinkers with an athletic issue.
the cost side of these equations could be small compared to the potential income side.
We would lose racers, yes. How many? Hard to say.
* For ST I don't think it would be that many
* For Stewart, it would be non-zero for sure
* For CX, yes our numbers would drop a bit
So does that take our projected 750 racers in 2015 and drop it to 650? Maybe. If so, in the end, we would lose revenue for MTBNJ, and have fewer bells & whistles at the events.
shops, clubs, social media - there are plenty of marketing opportunities.
one other thing - if merchandise is going to be available, then maybe a square-up account? 2.75% and no transaction fee for swiped cards - this would help move items at events rather than requiring cash. Yeah, it is going to cost $1 on a $30 sweat shirt, but you should be making $8-10 per...
they have order/ship order/pickup (ie at event) capability.
they have a nice online inventory/cart system, including pre-orders.
once set-up for merchandise, adding races would be "if advantageous"
no monthly fee (i don't think) -
we should take conversation somewhere else....
As an aside, we're almost surely bagging USAC entirely for 2015.
I'm gonna get to BikeReg in a sec, but first...WHAAA???!! This is so crazy exciting! YES PLEASE!!!
Okay, BikeReg: as a brand new racer last year, I spent a LOT of time trying to find races. I heard about H2H somehow, and that helped, but BikeReg definitely made it easier. If you go outside BikeReg, you are almost certainly limiting new blood. Sure, the people who already know it exists will keep coming, but losing newcomers is a risky venture. I'll be totally honest - I'm always a little suspect of races that aren't on BikeReg (not little stuff like ST that frankly I kinda expect to be day-of, but "real" races like Stewart or the H2H races or whatevs). As bizarre as this sounds, I think being on BikeReg brings more "legitimacy" to your race than being USAC.
But if you could find sponsors to offset the fees, I would very happily grab their pastries, lunch, construction equipment, whatever to support them.